Orbit Post Sitemap
“Annualizing today’s transaction fees assumes the market will stay hot forever.”
DeFi researcher Ignas made a sharp point: projecting long-term returns from peak trading activity ignores how quickly markets cool down.
The model is simple:
Trading volume → fees → buybacks/burns → token demand → higher price → more trading.
But the volume has to keep coming.
Coinbase’s trading volume fell 74% from Q4 2021 to the following year. Meme tokens can suffer even deeper drawdowns.Oracle places $638 billion in fulfillment obligations squarely on the board, and the countdown timer is already ticking—this is not the opening, but one of the most dangerous midgame positions: all the pieces are pressed on one flank, the pawn chain hasn't materialized, and the opponent has already started calculating the cost of every move you make.
The truly profitable players don’t just take it one step at a time; before making a move, they have already accounted for the endgame twenty moves ahead. Whether OCI can maintain its growth essentially boils down to whether the central pawns can withstand the exchange; that $600+ billion in unfulfilled contracts is a passed pawn hanging on the sixth rank—looking imposing, but if it can’t promote, it’s just a burden. That Canadian institution cutting the target price yet still maintaining an outperform rating—I get that move: they don’t deny your offensive, they just question the cost of each move. You can afford to exchange pieces, but the position may not improve; the market shifting focus from demand to capital efficiency is a shift from watching the offense to analyzing pawn structure.
The real killer moves are never written on the demand curve but in the exchange ratio of every unit of computing power spent.
Looking at Adobe again. Firefly and GenStudio are new diagonal lines that must be opened in a closed position; subscription growth is the pawn structure, and profit margin is the king’s safety. If the diagonal opens without pieces following up, it’s just empty; a moat is never a product list, it’s retention and pricing power—that’s pawn structure, not pieces. On the software flank, the competition is about whose pawn structure is more cohesive and whose king completes castling earlier.
Apple launching its first foldable model pushes the front line from the software diagonal to the physical squares. Hardware is the square; whoever controls the squares defines the rules—this move is not a check, but a fight for the center, forcing everyone to recalculate on the new board.
As for that linked target, I see it as a passed pawn in the endgame. The market is the king, it’s the pawn. Once the king is in check, no matter how fast the pawn runs, it can’t promote. Watching its volume and support is equivalent to watching whether there’s a rook protecting this passed pawn—without a rook, a passed pawn is just someone else’s target.
The most expensive lesson in endgame technique: advantage does not equal winning position; time advantage not converted into actual control ultimately results in a draw.
Having the first move is not an advantage; it’s just an obligation. #OracleAdobeToday On the reinforced concrete foundation, a $46.6 million crack is spreading across the load-bearing wall. The $101 million poured in the previous three days is still fresh, and the crack has appeared. As someone who has worked in the construction industry for decades, I am very familiar with this signal—it’s not a structural collapse, but definitely a stress concentration point.
First, look at the design drawings. BlackRock's IBIT has absorbed about 70% of the flow. What does this mean? It means the entire building's gravity load is concentrated on a single column. I once worked on a supertall building in Dubai where the owner insisted on offsetting the core tube. When the wind load was calculated, the lateral displacement exceeded limits, and everything had to be redone. The current ETF structure is just like an offset core tube: IBIT is the main load-bearing wall, while GBTC and FBTC are the two infill walls that have already cracked. On September 8, GBTC led the decline and outflow, essentially indicating that the settlement joints of the old structure are continuously opening—the renovation cost of Grayscale’s old building is too high, and the fee load is too heavy, so funds are moving into the new framework.
But the real structural problem lies deeper. Bitcoin still fell below $79,000 during net capital inflows, which is a rare case of foundation and superstructure moving in opposite directions. The newly poured concrete (ETF new demand) is continuously solidifying, while the foundation soil layer (on-chain profit-taking and macro sell pressure) is continuously sinking. As a structural engineer, I must say: when the upper load increases but the foundation settlement accelerates, the problem is never in the upper structure.
CPI, oil prices, and interest rate expectations—these three factors are additional stresses pressing on the groundwater layer. Oil prices fell from 141 to 91; in construction terms, this drop is like a sudden decline in the site’s groundwater level, changing the friction distribution of all surrounding pile foundations. The Fed’s interest rate expectations act as a continuous thermal load, causing expansion and contraction that no one can avoid.
Now look at linked assets like XBMNR, tokenized US stocks. This is a typical steel structure with an external curtain wall—the main framework relies on US stock profits and liquidity, while the crypto attribute is just the reflective glass layer. The glass looks good and doesn’t bear load. The real wind pressure test hasn’t come yet.
That $46.6 million net outflow seems small in absolute terms, less than a fraction of the previous daily pouring volume. But its significance lies in direction. The first shrinkage crack after three consecutive weeks of positive pouring is often not the endgame but the start of the first stress redistribution. IBIT and BITB still maintain positive inflows, indicating the main load-bearing structure hasn’t reached its yield point; only the secondary structure is unloading.
What do I fear most when reviewing drawings? Not obvious limit exceedances, but deviations that are "small in value but fatal in position." A two-centimeter difference at the bottom of a beam might be fine, but a two-centimeter difference at the top of a column is a disaster for the entire floor slab elevation. Today’s figure is exactly that position.
In the engineering log, I will write: main structure intact, local stress adjustments ongoing, recommend increasing monitoring nodes, especially at the CPI pouring window and oil price foundation settlement readings. Any construction party ignoring foundation changes and only focusing on the upper structure’s appearance will face the same outcome—not a collapsed building, but a leaning one that can never be straightened again.
Currently, the site’s dewatering wells are being rearranged. Whoever first understands the settlement curve deserves to continue building upward. #BTCETFFlipsNeg BTC has been hovering around $78,000,
A CryptoQuant indicator has already dropped below 1.
This indicates that people who have been making money and holding BTC are now starting to sell at a loss. Many are saying this is a signal of the bottom. The real bottom isn’t when people are desperately buying, but when no one is willing to sell anymore.
Think about it. Someone has held BTC for years, originally at a very low cost, and has made a lot of profit before.
Now even these people are starting to accept losses and sell. What does this mean? It means the market’s patience has been worn down almost completely. And once the old players start to let go, the chips naturally move into the hands of new people.
Look, there are very few people seriously studying BTC on X now. Many don’t not know BTC will rise in the future; it’s just that they have no money to buy now.
So a rather strange situation has appeared: the most faithful are losing, those without money aren’t watching, and the truly wealthy are waiting.
Here’s my view,
This kind of time is actually the phase I prefer to observe.
Now is not the time to bottom-fish,
let alone a reasonable or optimal time.
I only watch one thing: when this indicator climbs back above 1. (You can check it yourself on CryptoQuant, I’m not promoting it)
If the old players have started to surrender, but the market slowly pulls this indicator back above 1, then the situation will look completely different.
So don’t rush to guess where the bottom is now. First, see how many of those who have held BTC for years still haven’t sold.
Do you think this time is really the bottom being formed?$BTC and the Hang Seng Index both weakened in the morning session, a synchronization that was uncommon in the past but has now become the norm.
Previously, when Hong Kong tech stocks pulled back, capital would rotate into crypto. Now both rise and fall together, indicating that the driver for both is the same macro variable rather than a sector substitution relationship. The Hang Seng Index traded over 100 billion HKD in the morning session, with names like Zhipu and MiniMax falling even harder than Alibaba, showing risk appetite is contracting toward the most expensive end.
A more likely explanation is that liquidity expectations are tightening, rather than specific industry issues. One piece of evidence is still missing in this chain: whether funds are withdrawing or just relocating.
Watch the correlation between the US tech sector and $BTC tonight. If both continue to fall in tandem, the rotation logic can be officially abandoned.
#BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负
#伊朗允许BTC与USDT外贸结算 #BTC与黄金90日相关性升至+0.50 $BTC Wait, XRP being a "qualified commodity" does not mean the SEC has officially classified it as a federal commodity.
The Federal Register published on September 9: The SEC accelerated approval for Nasdaq Texas to amend Rule 5711(d). The change involves the general listing standards for commodity trust shares—up to about 15% of assets may not meet the qualification criteria, and active management is allowed. Examples list BTC, ETH, SOL, and XRP as "currently qualified" under this rule; the threshold requires ISG market futures trading for about 6 months and at least about 40% ETF exposure.
Common misunderstanding: interpreting this as "federal law officially recognizing XRP as a commodity" or "a certain XRP ETF is immediately approved." A safer reading—this is alignment of a single exchange's listing rules, not a nationwide legislative endorsement. Publicly organized, related contracts can be viewed on OKX XRPUSDT perpetual, DYOR, not investment advice.#EIP‑8141 In-Depth Analysis｜Pay Gas Fees Directly with USDT/USDC Without Holding ETH?
Ethereum's 2027 Hegotá upgrade introduces the EIP‑8141 frame transaction proposal, allowing users to pay Gas fees directly with USDT or USDC, even without touching ETH at all, significantly lowering the on-chain usage threshold. Note that the underlying network still settles Gas fees in ETH, but the Paymaster service provider advances the payment, so users only spend their stablecoins.
Currently, Ethereum supports nearly $147 billion in stablecoin liquidity, close to half of the entire network's scale. The underlying logic of this upgrade is clear: first attract and retain massive stablecoin funds within the Ethereum ecosystem, then in turn capture value for ETH as the foundational infrastructure. The core competition is for users and liquidity.
✅ Benefits
1. Retail user experience transformation: Newcomers no longer need to separately purchase ETH for fees; holding stablecoins is enough to directly interact with on-chain applications, greatly lowering the entry barrier and facilitating external capital inflow into Ethereum.
2. Meets institutional demands: Institutions strongly dislike ETH price volatility; pricing fees in stablecoins allows stable cost accounting, removing a major obstacle for enterprise entry and potentially bringing incremental institutional funds.
3. Completes positioning transformation: Drives Ethereum from a speculative asset to a true dollar-denominated crypto financial infrastructure, consolidating its position as the main venue for stablecoins. Some brothers criticized me saying that a privacy coin ZEC now has a higher market cap than Dogecoin, asking what I'm still fantasizing about? They called me an old stubborn relic of the past era.
People who argue based on market cap rankings mostly haven't understood the rules of this market. The ranking list is a snapshot, not a moat.
Currently, $ZEC indeed stands ahead of Dogecoin. But if you break it down: it climbed up riding the wave of privacy narrative, the shock from the development team resigning at the beginning of the year hasn't settled, the Orchard vulnerability damaged trust, and the EU's MiCA regulations will ban exchanges from listing anonymous assets starting July 2027, with ZEC's classification still undecided. Such market cap is built on narrative; once the wind stops, it has to find a new foundation.
Look at what $DOGE holds: the SEC classifies it as a digital commodity, its spot ETF is listed on Nasdaq, its payment network covers over six thousand merchants, Revolut issued a co-branded card, it shares hash power with Litecoin, and the DOGE-1 satellite is waiting to launch. These are not stories, but licenses, channels, and use cases.
ZEC took ten years to reach Dogecoin's position, which is worthy of respect. But surpassing market cap and stabilizing market cap are two different things—back in 2018 it also reached a high point, then went silent for seven years.
Rankings change every cycle, but channels remain. People who use a ranking screenshot as an argument are the ones with outdated thinking.Earlier, KLA surged 11.9% at one point, Micron also followed with strength, while SanDisk instead fell about 0.5%. If someone did not take profits around $1,820, now that the price has returned to $1,756, the unrealized gains have significantly shrunk, inevitably causing hesitation: should they continue holding or take profits/stop losses first? If you ask me—currently I have no position, so I can only say: missing the rise is okay, but don’t let unrealized gains eventually turn into unrealized losses. From a technical perspective: 📊 K value is about 40, J value about 49 📊 RSI is about 48, overall in a neutral zone 📍 SAR support is around $1,726 📍 EMA21 resistance is around $1,754 In other words, the price is currently stuck near key moving averages. There was a test around $1,721 today, but no effective breakdown yet, though the rebound strength is not strong either. On the news front, the big logic for the storage/memory sector has not disappeared for now. Recently, AI data center demand continues to support NAND and DRAM, and the market is also watching the tight memory supply and price rising trend. Micron’s latest trades continue to be supported by expectations of memory shortages, and the market expects the DRAM and NAND supply-demand environment to remain tight. On the other hand, SanDisk’s NAND market share has recently declined from about 13% to 11%, and competition from Chinese storage manufacturers is also increasing,The current $BTC battle around the 80,000 mark is quite interesting: on the surface, it's a tug-of-war between bulls and bears, but in reality, 1.05 million trapped positions are pressing down above 80,000, and with every slight rise, some people unload and dump the market.
Let's look at the data first. The 83,000 to 86,000 BTC was the intensive trading zone in the first half of this year, with about 1.05 million BTC locked up. These chips are all waiting to be unlocked, so every time the price hits around 80,000, there is early sell-off. But below 75,000 to 78,000, there is strong support. ETFs have seen net inflows of 3.8 billion for three consecutive weeks. Institutions and whales have been accumulating at this level, so long-term funds are not afraid of trapped positions at 80,000.
From the futures market perspective, open interest remains high at $93 billion, but funding rates remain low. Bulls are reluctant to chase at high prices, and bears are reluctant to smash below $78,000, all waiting for tomorrow's CPI.
Simply put: above 80,000, trapped in heavy positions, push through requires volume increase or strong positive news. If CPI is good, bring volume above 80,000 and target 83,000; on negative news, first push back to 77,000 or even 75,000. Don't hold heavy positions before data; insert needles back and forth to harvest leverage. Hold spot positions without touching, keep contract positions light with stop-loss and wait for the direction to follow. #BTC加速拉升, can funds continue to pass the market? #以太坊草案EIP-8363 sparks controversy #OKX预言家: Come to Planet to play predictions Tonight at 20:00 Beijing time 30. The latest US inflation data will be released. Currently, market expectations for the Fed's follow-up policies have clearly risen, and BTC is likely to experience a round of sharp short-term volatility. 📊 Here is how to observe core CPI: 🟢 Core CPI ≤ 0.1% → Inflation cooling is greater than expected → Market concerns about rate hikes or tightening further eased → US Treasury yields may be under pressure → Risk assets and $BTC are biased 🟡 Bullish CPI about 0.2% → basically in line with market expectations → bullish and bearish may fluctuate rapidly → BTC is likely to fluctuate first, then wait for FOMC to give a final direction 🔴 Core CPI ≥ 0.3% → inflation pressures resurfaced → Probability of the Fed maintaining tight stance increases → USD and US Treasury yields may strengthen → BTC and highly volatile assets face ⚠️ pressure More importantly: CPI is only the first checkpoint. Recent employment data, wages, and inflation expectations are all influencing September policy pricing, and the market has already priced in a significant portion of interest rate risk in advance. Therefore, even if CPI meets expectations, it does not necessarily mean BTC will rise directly. My baseline judgment is: core CPI may fall to around 0.2%. If the results do not significantly exceed expectations, BTC may show a pattern of "data release → quick insertion → bullish and bearish cycles," and the real key to determining the next phase will still be the September 16 FOMC meeting and Powell's speech. 🎯 Short-term trading1. A typical "hot money one-day tour" ($NES, $VINE) · $NES: +27.6%, trading volume 810,000. · $VINE: +17.78%, trading volume 720,000. For coins with trading volumes of several hundred thousand USD, the main force can easily push it up by 20 to 30 points with a few hundred thousand USD. This is called "pushing up and selling in reserves"; retail investors rushing in envious will be instantly buried. No fundamentals at all, pure sentiment games. 2. AI sector's "low-level catch-up" ($SAHARA, $SENT) · $SAHARA: +6.2%, turnover 1.9 million. · $SENT: +3.9%, turnover 1.25 million. The AI narrative remains, but mainstream AI coins (like TAO) have stalled, and funds are starting to seek presence in low-value, small-cap AI projects. But the moderate gains indicate insufficient capital confidence. 3. Traditional financial tokens ($xIBM, $xHPE) IBM rose 3.02%, HPE Technology rose 2.27%. Established U.S. tech stocks have become haven capital, but their trading volume is only tens of thousands of USD, with extremely poor liquidity and no value for participation. 4. Miscellaneous public chains ($CSPR, $ZBCN, $CVC, etc.** Established public chains, privacy coins, DePIN concepts...... All are chaotic rallying trends, liquidity drying up. $CVC trading volume is only 60,000 USD, and a few tens of thousands can rally two points, which is basically useless. 💎 Summary: Today's gainers list is a true reflection of "liquidity exhaustion." According to market reports, Iran's restrictions on exporters using digital assets for settlement are loosening. Some companies can receive assets like USDT, BTC through local crypto platforms and then use export revenue to directly pay for import needs. What does this mean? The fund flow that previously had to go through the traditional foreign exchange system is now seeing a new path: export receipts → crypto assets → import settlement. Moreover, this method is gradually evolving from a "special operation" into a conventional tool accepted by some traders. 📊 The scale is also noteworthy: • Blockchain data agencies estimate that by 2025, Iran-related crypto transaction volume will approach $10 billion • Local trading platforms under sanctions or regulatory scrutiny contribute about three-quarters of this volume • USDT/Tron remains an important dollar substitute settlement tool because it does not require a traditional dollar bank account • Iran itself also has a certain scale of Bitcoin mining industry But the real contradiction arises here. 🇺🇸 The U.S. is intensifying tracking and sanctions on Iran-related crypto funds. U.S. regulators have taken actions against multiple Iranian crypto trading platforms and have frozen, seized, and sanctioned addresses related to digital assets suspected of association with the Iranian regime. The most critical point is: USDT, while having dollar liquidity, also has the issuer's ability to freeze assets. BTC is different. Bitcoin has no centralized issuing institution, and there is no single company's button to📰 What happened?
On September 9, Canary Capital officially launched the Canary Staked TRX ETF (TRXS), becoming the first ETF in the U.S. to combine spot TRX exposure with on-chain staking rewards. This product trades on Cboe, allowing investors to gain TRX exposure and potential staking rewards through traditional brokerage accounts without managing wallets themselves. 📌 Why is this important?
This signifies that U.S. crypto ETFs are evolving from "holding assets" to "earning yields generated by the asset network." Previously, the market focused more on capital inflows from BTC and ETH ETFs, while TRXS further attempts to incorporate staking yields into traditional financial products. If this structure gains market acceptance, ETFs for other PoS assets may also be impacted in the future. 👀 What should we watch next?
The key is not the first-day price movement of TRXS, but whether the market is willing to pay for "spot exposure + native yield."
If the answer is yes, the competitive logic of crypto ETFs may be changing.
Do you think this is a unique opportunity for TRX, or the start of the next round of "staking ETF" competition? $BTC $ETH $SOL #CLARITYActSept15 #RobinhoodChainRevenue #BTCGoldRatioHigh $BTC BTC consolidates at 79K, CPI is the real protagonist this week
📊 Market Analysis:
BTC continues to consolidate around $79,000, with bulls and bears in a stalemate. Macro pressures and supports coexist—oil prices have broken $100, and the probability of a rate hike remains around 60%, but spot ETFs have seen a cumulative net inflow of $3.8 billion over the past three weeks, with institutional buying still providing bottom support.
Derivatives market shows divergent signals: open interest increased by about $2.3 billion, but spot demand turned negative—this high-level consolidation is driven by futures, not spot buying. If CPI exceeds expectations, crowded long positions closing will amplify the decline.
📈 Key Levels:
🟢 Support: 78,300-78,500, weekly close must hold above
🔴 Resistance: 80,000-81,000, breakout target 82,300
⚠️ Risk level: 76,000, breaking below will trigger about $1 billion long liquidation
🧠 My Thoughts:
September 11 CPI is the only directional catalyst this week. CPI cooling → rebound window opens, target 82,000+; CPI exceeding expectations → rate hike confirmed, possible retest of 76,000 or even lower. Base positions remain unchanged, wait for data before moving.
⛔ Risk Reminder: The probability of a rate hike by the Bank of Japan in September has surged to 99%. Once yen carry trade unwind resonates, the impact of global liquidity tightening will be amplified. Avoid heavy directional bets before CPI. #OKX预言家：来星球玩预测 #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 #伊朗允许BTC与USDT外贸结算
Bitcoin's Opportunities and Challenges
Iran's central bank recently eased foreign exchange controls, allowing traders to use cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and USDT for cross-border settlements, in response to U.S. sanctions blocking traditional banking channels.
The impact on $BTC is mainly reflected in mining in the short term. Iran accounts for about 4.5% of global Bitcoin mining activity. With electricity subsidies, mining costs are only about $1,300 per coin, creating huge profit margins that allow Iran to directly convert energy into hard-to-trace forms of currency. However, USDT remains the main force in actual trade settlements, with Bitcoin playing a more valuable store role.
Looking ahead, Bitcoin is expected to be positioned more as a "value transfer medium." Its decentralized nature sets it apart from USDT, which can be frozen by issuers—Tether has repeatedly frozen Iran-related assets at the request of the U.S. This "anti-confiscation" attribute has become increasingly prominent amid geopolitical tensions. However, the U.S. has placed Iran's digital asset industry as a whole under sanctions, and the cat-and-mouse game will continue to boost Bitcoin's long-term value as a "censorship-resistant settlement layer," while price volatility still limits its role as a daily settlement tool. $BTC $ETH $SOL #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 #伊朗允许BTC与USDT外贸结算 #加密财库分化: Buy coins or buy back? #OKX Prophet: Come to the planet to play prediction #CLARITY Bill faces a critical vote on September 15, 60 votes are key
UNI (Uniswap), $UNI #2020‑09‑17 launch, the leading DeFi coin, is one of the core tokens in this round of altcoin rotation.
1. Complete historical major wave review (daily level)
✅ First major bull market: 2020.09‑2021.05 (DeFi frenzy)
- Launch opening price ≈ 3 USDT; hit all-time high 44.92 USDT on 2021‑05‑03 (ATH)
- Background: 2020 DeFi summer wave, Uniswap was the king of DEX, liquidity mining craze peaked;
- Feature: One-sided explosive surge, increased more than tenfold. This is the highest point UNI has ever reached so far.
✅ Bear market decline: 2021.05‑end of 2022
- After peaking at 44.92, it declined continuously; the 2022 bear market bottomed around 3.3‑3.4; after the FTX crash, it consolidated long-term between 3‑5.
- Core feature: Nearly 92% drop from the peak, a typical destructive retracement marking the end of the altcoin bull market. Many were trapped at 20-30 range and remain unrecovered.
✅ 2023‑2024 consolidation recovery
- Throughout 2023, mainly oscillated between 4‑8 USD in a box range;
- In 2024, followed the market uptrend, reaching near 19 at the highest; but failed to retake previous highs, pulled back after the surge, ending the year near 13.
✅ 2025: Significant decline
- Yearly high near 15, then a one-way downtrend, ending the year around 5‑6.
✅ 2026 to present, this is the segment shown in your chart (most important)
1) First half of 2026: continuous slow decline, lowest at 2.317 (the lowest point at the bottom left of your screenshot); this low is the starting point of this main upward wave;
2) Mid-August started a vertical surge: 2.317 → highest 7.484 (marked high point on the chart)
In just two to three weeks, a 220%+ increase, an extremely steep vertical rise, which is the wave we discussed earlier;
3) After reaching 7.484, volume increased and price pulled back, retested support, currently oscillating around 6, battling near the 20-day moving average.
2. Combining historical trends, extract two very key rules (useful for your current judgment)
1. Historically, whenever UNI experiences such a short-term steep surge, there are almost only two outcomes
- First: slight high-level consolidation with sideways movement, then continuing upward (this case is very rare and usually requires sustained BTC strength);
- Second: after the surge ends, a deep retracement occurs, returning to the pre-launch platform. The 2021 wave is a precedent.
⚠️ Key point: This vertical surge lacks a mid-way chip accumulation platform. Once bullish momentum is exhausted, the decline will be very rapid, which is the path two we deduced.
2. UNI medium to long-term resistance zones (historical trapped positions)
- Short-term resistance: 7.16‑7.48 (the newly surpassed high zone)
- Medium-term strong resistance zones: 8‑9, 12‑13, 15‑19 (large trapped positions left from 2024‑2025)
That is to say, even if this wave continues upward after consolidation, the higher it goes, the more historical trapped positions there are, and selling pressure increases. Do not expect a quick return to 20-30 USD range.
3. Medium to long-term important supports
- Around 5, the long-term horizontal platform from 2022‑2023;
- Around 2.3, the major bottom of this year's wave.
In summary of UNI daily history: big rises and falls are its inherent label. It is not a slow bull token; most of its trends are: long-term low-level dormancy, then a short-term violent surge, followed by a long decline and slow bottoming. $BTC $UNI The market is entering one of the most important macro windows of the month. 🇺🇸 August U.S. CPI arrives on September 11, just days before the Fed's September 15–16 meeting. Traders are currently pricing roughly a 60% probability of a 25bp rate hike, so this inflation report could significantly reshape expectations. My view hasn't changed: I'm still bullish on $BTC and the broader crypto cycle. But being bullish doesn't mean I need to run maximum leverage. 1️⃣ Spot and futures are completely diCrypto companies are engaged in the most brutal "civil war"
On one side, they are still buying coins; on the other, they have started buybacks.
Same market, same track, completely opposite ways of living.
The "die-hard bulls" only have eyes for Bitcoin.
Strategy made a move again at the end of August. After stopping purchases for a full seventy days, Saylor tweeted just two words — "We're ₿ack". The probability of "buying coins this week" on Polymarket soared from 18% to 96%. Then on Monday, SEC filings dropped: 4,603 BTC, $369.7 million, average price $80,318, total holdings increased to 845,050 BTC. After buying, there’s an unrealized gain of $2.398 billion, with an average cost of $75,412.
But the devil is in the details. He bought at prices 6.5% higher than his average holding cost. When BTC dropped to 58,000 two months ago, he didn’t buy a single coin; instead, he sold. Selling when cheap, buying when expensive — has the biggest bull in crypto gone mad?
Not mad. His previous flywheel relied on a high premium: stock price was nearly 4 times the holding value, issuing new shares, exchanging for cash, buying BTC, pushing up "coins per share", and repeating the cycle. This year, the premium compressed to just 1.16 times. At this speed, issuing shares to buy coins is dilution, not value creation. So he spent seventy days locking down the balance sheet, reducing net leverage to 0%, keeping a cash pool of $6.71 billion, then pulled the trigger again.
The "pragmatists" calculate more coldly.
Metaplanet, Asia’s largest Bitcoin treasury company, holds 40,177 BTC, but its stock price has fallen to a 52-week low of 197 yen, evaporating 88% in a year, with a market cap only 0.9 times the holding value. The CEO declared: if mNAV is below 1.0, actively repurchase shares; "the lower the mNAV, the greater the potential value increase." Buying back at 0.9 times mNAV mathematically equals buying their own Bitcoin at a 10% discount.
Looking further down, the tone gets harsher.
Empery Digital sold 1,167 BTC in the first half of the year, raising $80.1 million, of which $54 million was directly used for stock buybacks and debt repayment. London’s Satsuma Technology was even more straightforward: shareholders approved with 90.63% votes to liquidate all 668 BTC, return the money to shareholders, and delist. France’s Sequans Communications also announced exiting the Bitcoin treasury strategy, gradually selling remaining holdings to return to their IoT chip business.
In July 2025, DAT could buy about $20 billion in crypto per month. In Q1 this year, that number dropped to $3.7 billion.
What exactly are the two sides arguing about?
On the surface, it’s "buy coins or buy back shares," but the underlying question is more painful: is the money in your hands a bet on the future or a safeguard for the present?
The "die-hard bulls" bet that as long as Bitcoin returns to $100,000 or $150,000, all discounts will become jokes, and all persistence will become foresight. The "pragmatists" calculate: the stock price has fallen to this terrible state, and throwing money into an asset with 40% volatility — can shareholders sleep at night?
But reality never takes sides.
When the market is good, buyers are called "heroes." When the market is bad, those doing buybacks are praised as "conscientious." But money is limited; if you choose to buy coins, the stock price may continue to collapse; if you choose buybacks, and a bull market really comes, you’ll only have yourself to blame.
Standard Chartered says the bottom is at 59,375, expecting $100,000 by year-end. Galaxy Research says the second half might test $40,000 to $46,000. Two completely opposite scripts, two completely opposite ways of living.
So the question isn’t who’s right or wrong. The question is — if it’s your turn to decide now, which side do you choose?
See you in the comments.Tomorrow night at 20:30, the US August CPI will be officially released.
For this CPI, I actually don't care much whether it's 0.1 higher or lower.
What I want to see more is: whether the market still dares to continue ignoring inflation.
The current background is different from a few months ago.
Oil prices are high, US Treasury yields are also pushing up, and the market has already started to reconsider a tighter interest rate path. In other words, this CPI will not just provide an inflation number; it may directly change how funds bet on future interest rates.
So after the data comes out, my first reaction won't be to go long or short $BTC directly.
I will first watch two things: US Treasury yields and the US dollar.
If CPI is hotter than expected, yields continue to surge, the dollar strengthens simultaneously, and BTC fails to hold key levels, then the pressure on risk assets can be truly confirmed.
Conversely, if CPI is lower than expected, yields quickly fall back, and BTC can reclaim key levels, then I am more willing to trade this expectation gap.
So tomorrow night at 20:30, don't just focus on the CPI number.
The data is the first shot; how the market prices it is the real answer.#CLARITY法案9月15日闯关，60票成关键 #伊朗允许BTC与USDT外贸结算 The unlocked shares keep falling one after another on SpaceX, how can it not drop sharply?
Yesterday SPCX closed at 147.55, down 3.86%, dropping 5.92 dollars in one day, almost erasing the 3.7% rebound candlestick from Tuesday.
Mainly the first reason, yesterday was the 90th day since SPCX was listed, the third batch of lock-up expired.
Up to 319 million shares were unlocked yesterday, this batch of early unlocked shares potentially puts the highest insider selling pressure at 47.2 billion dollars, insiders are selling their stakes batch by batch.
Second, profit-taking selling.
Those who bought between 105-115 to bottom-fish and profit knew yesterday was a lock-up selling day, so more people cashed out than bought in, naturally causing a decline.
Third, macro factors hitting the US stock market.
The three major US stock indexes have fallen for three consecutive days, the US Treasury repo plan was rejected by the market, causing high valuations in US stocks to be hit. SpaceX, which just went public, is burning cash and still telling AI + rocket stories, is the easiest target.
Fifth, fundamentals are weak.
Annual revenue is 18.67 billion dollars, but the company is still overall losing money, AI business is burning cash, Starlink is the only profitable segment.
The rocket narrative continues, the story can be told, but the selling pressure won't stop. As long as rockets rebound, short selling can be done, short selling humanity's future, short selling the Mars colonization plan. I don't believe anyone but Musk can achieve it.Private messages literally exploded 😂 Everyone is asking the same question:
Is 1348 a good level to short ZEC?
Brother Ci will break it down from three angles: technical, fundamentals, and capital flow.
What does 1348 mean?
ZEC has rallied from around 250 to 1250, nearly a 400% move in just four months, pushing its market cap into the top 10.
Now at 1348, the situation is getting interesting.sd $ETH Night session analysis: rally meets resistance
Failed to effectively hold above the upper boundary of the converging triangle
The market was originally building momentum with upward breakout potential
But once the US Treasury repo news came out, it directly reversed short-term sentiment
The market expected a larger US Treasury repo scale
But the final cap was only $6 billion
The easing was less than imagined, turning a bullish factor into bearish
ETH failed twice to break the key resista#伊朗允许BTC与USDT外贸结算
Opportunities and Challenges of Bitcoin
The Central Bank of Iran has recently relaxed foreign exchange controls, allowing traders to use cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and USDT to complete cross-border settlements, in response to the blockade of traditional banking channels due to US sanctions.
Impact on $BTC is mainly reflected in mining in the short term. Iran accounts for about 4.5% of global Bitcoin mining activity. With subsidized electricity, the mining cost is only about $1300 per coin, yielding huge profit margins, enabling Iran to convert energy directly into a hard-to-trace form of currency. However, USDT remains the main force in actual trade settlements, while Bitcoin plays more of a value storage role.
Future outlook: Bitcoin's positioning will lean more towards a "value transfer medium." Its decentralized nature makes it different from USDT, which can be frozen by the issuer—Tether has repeatedly frozen Iranian-related assets at the request of the US. This "anti-confiscation" attribute becomes increasingly prominent amid geopolitical tensions. However, the US has included Iran's digital asset industry in overall sanctions, and the cat-and-mouse game will continue to boost Bitcoin's long-term value as an "anti-censorship settlement layer," while price volatility still limits its use as a daily settlement tool.Massive sell-off in the early morning! $BTC $ETH and altcoins all plunge, four major causes explained at once
#September rate hike probability rises to about 60%, Federal Reserve faces a dilemma
#US-Iran conflict escalates, $100 oil price and negotiation signals coexist
A wave of decline in the early morning, BTC, ETH along with a host of altcoins all took a heavy hit. This time it’s not a single factor, multiple negative factors overlap and resonate, directly dragging the market down.
① Rate hike expectations continue to weigh
According to CME data, the probability of a rate hike in September has surged to 60.4%. UBS predicts two more rate hikes this year, macro headwinds may continue until December. In a rate hike environment, the opportunity cost of holding interest-free assets like BTC and ETH rises, so funds naturally prefer to avoid risk.
② Oil price surge fuels inflation concerns
US-Iran conflict escalates, Brent crude breaks through the $100 mark. Rising oil prices further push up inflation expectations, which in turn continue to raise rate hike expectations, putting risk assets under pressure first.
③ ETF shows capital outflow signals
Bitcoin spot ETF saw a single-day net outflow of $46.65 million, ETH spot ETF also outflowed $24.29 million. Institutional funds that had been flowing in continuously are starting to realize profits and exit in phases.
④ Leverage liquidations amplify the decline
About $250 million worth of liquidations occurred across the network in the past 24 hours, with $155 million in long positions liquidated. A large number of long leverage positions were liquidated, triggering passive sell orders, further amplifying the decline.
Now the CPI data is about to be released, macro uncertainty has not been resolved, high leverage must be approached with caution. Yesterday, I caught myself several times thinking that the market looks stronger than it should have. Bitcoin failed to take $80K normally and closed near $78.3K, but sellers couldn't seriously push it through either. ETH dropped to about $2.47K, and SOL closed the day around $102.4, while still staying at about +9% for the week. At first glance, nothing special. But that's where I got interested. Because in parallel, Brent exceeded $100 again, US stocks went down, and the yield on 10-year Treasuries #BTCETFFlipsNeg 🟠 截至9月4日当周，美国现货BTC ETF累计净流入约 9.87亿美元，连续第三周录得资金流入。其中，BlackRock 的 IBIT 贡献了约七成资金，说明机构需求并没有完全消失。 但进入9月8日后，资金出现约 4660万美元净流出，主要压力来自 GBTC 和 FBTC；与此同时，IBIT 与 BITB 仍保持净流入。 所以现在真正值得关注的，并不是“ETF变成负流入”这一个标题，而是不同资金之间开始出现明显分化。 更重要的是，BTC在ETF持续吸金期间依然一度跌破 7.9万美元。这说明现货ETF买盘并不足以完全抵消链上获利了结、杠杆调整以及宏观资金的卖压。 接下来市场还要面对 CPI、油价和美联储利率预期等变量，短期波动可能继续放大。 我的看法是： ETF资金 → 提供需求底盘 宏观环境 → 决定风险偏好 价格与成交量 → 决定趋势是否真正确认 因此，与其看到单日流出就恐慌，不如继续观察资金流向、BTC关键支撑以及成交量是否同步改善。 没有确认之前，不追涨、不FOMO，耐心等待市场给出答案。 👀 $BTC $ETH $SOL #BTCETFFlBreaking news! $xAAPL Apple announced the foldable screen iPhone Duo today
The stock price fluctuated wildly during the session, dropping pre-market and rebounding post-market, while xStock is currently at 317, up 1.34%
But such a major event as the foldable screen iPhone Duo didn't cause much stir, indicating it was priced in early.
Apple's current problem is "good news doesn't lead to significant gains"; iPhone upgrade cycles are average, service revenue is stable but unimpressive, and when macro conditions tighten, growth stocks get hit first—Apple can't avoid this.
The foldable screen is incremental, not disruptive; the market wants AI hardware or a new growth curve, which today's event didn't deliver.
My take: 7 days of volatility. 310 is support, 319 is previous high resistance; parity xStock follows AAPL, and if AAPL doesn't break 310, it will consolidate. Those looking for an Apple catalyst should wait for confirmed sales from the event; right now, there's no surprise in the price.连续三天净流入，说断就断了。 美东时间9月8日，比特币现货ETF总净流出4664.64万美元——过去三个交易日连续净流入的势头，就此终结。以太坊ETF同步流出2429万美元。两天前还是单日逼近7亿的凶猛买盘，转眼就变脸了。 这次流出，谁在砸？ 打开资金明细一看，问题很清楚。 灰度GBTC单日净流出6551万美元，是全场最大的卖压来源。自从ETF上线以来，GBTC就像一个漏水的桶，历史累计净流出已经达到277.19亿美元。这个数字跟灰度的费率结构有关，跟市场情绪的关系反而没那么大。 富达FBTC流出1705万美元，Invesco BTCO流出468万美元。真正的大头，还是灰度。 但另一边，有人在买。 Bitwise BITB单日净流入1447万美元，贝莱德IBIT净流入1065万美元，Ark ARKB净流入806万美元，摩根士丹利MSBT净流入741万美元。 净流出的真相是——不是钱在全面撤退，是钱在不同基金之间搬家。 灰度在失血，贝莱德和Bitwise在吸血。整体算下来勉强转负，但结构上远没有标题看起来那么吓人。 ETH ETF流得比BTC还多。 以太坊现货ETF同日流出2429万美元Right now, what I fear most in this market is not a drop, but mistaking "resilience to decline" for "being able to chase freely."
$BTC is still holding around 78,000, and $ETH showed a clearly stronger move earlier. Looking only within the crypto space, the structure isn't actually bad. The problem is when you look outside, the environment isn't as comfortable anymore.
Oil prices have surged back above $100, and the 10-year US Treasury yield has topped 4.8%. These two together essentially trade the same thing—the possibility of inflationary pressure returning. With upcoming PPI and CPI data likely to add more pressure, expectations for Fed rate hikes will continue to fluctuate.
So I won’t simply interpret BTC not falling as a sign of a strong breakout coming.
Instead, I focus on a more critical factor:
All external risk assets are under pressure; can BTC still hold the 77,000–78,000 range?
If it holds and then retakes 80,000, I would interpret that as active capital absorption; but if the macro environment continues to worsen and BTC can’t break through 80,000, this looks more like high-level digestion rather than a new one-sided rally.
My current trading approach is simple:
Don’t guess breakouts in advance, and don’t short just because the macro is weak.
Wait for the market to give the answer itself.
At this stage, direction is less important than position. #财报观察员：甲骨文与Adobe今晚交卷 #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 #9月加息概率升至约60%，美联储面临两难选择 1. The Houthi forces have blockaded the Mandeb Strait (southern entrance of the Red Sea), and fighting has broken out between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis, this time reaching inside Saudi territory. The Mandeb Strait and the Strait of Hormuz, two major channels, affect about a quarter of the world's oil supply. Now crude oil has broken through 100, and inflationary pressure is soaring. 2. The current US strategic petroleum reserve has dropped to about 286.6 million barrels (data as of August 28). If the coordinated OECD/IEA plan to release 39 million barrels continues, the reserve will further drop to about 243 million barrels, a level below the industry's considered safety line for maintaining normal operation efficiency of salt cavern facilities. Considering all factors, this inflationary pressure may not be as easy to resolve as it was in March this year. 3. The current long-term bond yield in Europe has reached 3.89%, roughly back to 2010 levels, and the 30-year US Treasury yield has recovered to 5.29%. Without a rate hike, the Federal Reserve loses credibility, and the market will vote with its feet. The 30-year US Treasury yield continues to soar, and BTC and gold prices surge. 4. Waugh needs to restore the Federal Reserve's credibility, which is a consistent belief in his public speeches. Therefore, the probability of a rate hike in September far exceeds the current approximately 60% data. The main issue lies in whether Waugh can persuade the Federal Reserve's moderates to agree to a rate hike. If there is no hike in September and the Middle East situation continues in October, a rate hike at the end of October is inevitable. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 施。 据《金融时报》报道，伊朗央行对部分出口商的外汇结算规则出现松动。企业如今可以通过本土加密交易平台，以 USDT、BTC 等数字资产接收出口收入，再直接用于进口融资，而不必完全依赖传统的官方外汇渠道。 这意味着一个重要变化： 加密货币正在进入真实贸易，而不仅仅是金融市场。 数据显示，TRM Labs 统计的2025年伊朗关联加密货币交易规模约达 99亿美元。其中，被美国财政部制裁的 Nobitex、Bit Pin、Wallex 和 Ramzinex 等平台占据相当大的交易份额。 其中，USDT on Tron 依然具有明显优势——速度快、流动性高，而且可以在没有传统美元银行账户的情况下获得美元计价敞口。 但这里存在一个非常关键的矛盾： 🔹 USDT：结算效率高，但存在发行方冻结机制 🔹 BTC：无需中心化发行方，但价格波动更大 🔹 传统银行：合规体系成熟，但更容易受到制裁和跨境限制 与此同时，美国持续加强对伊朗相关加密资金的打击。美国政府公布的相关行动涉及大规模加密资产扣押与冻结，Tether 也曾配合执法部门冻结与伊朗相关的 USDT 地址。 所以真正值得关注的，并不是“伊🚨 BTC ETF net inflows do not necessarily equal genuine long-term buying pressure.
Many people watch ETF net inflows daily and see billions of funds entering, immediately interpreting it as "institutions are frantically buying BTC." But what truly deserves study is the AP (Authorized Participant) and arbitrage mechanisms behind the ETF.
APs handle ETF share creations and redemptions, and now that crypto ETPs allow physical creations and redemptions, arbitrage between spot BTC, ETFs, and futures has become more flexible.
📌 When price differences appear between spot and futures, institutions might gain ETF/BTC exposure on one side while hedging risk with futures or other derivatives on the other.
So you will observe an interesting phenomenon:
ETF net inflows look great, but BTC doesn’t necessarily rise.
This doesn’t mean ETF data is useless; rather, it indicates: net inflows ≠ all directional long funds.
To truly assess fund quality, I look at ETF flows, CME positions, funding rates, open interest, and whether on-chain BTC continues flowing to long-term holding addresses together.
📌 Don’t just look at "how much money came in," but also whether that money truly stayed.
The market’s easiest deception is a number that looks very attractive.👀
#BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 #CLARITY法案9月15日闯关，60票成关键 #OKX预言家：来星球玩预测 SOL has been mainly following the overall market sentiment these past two days; its own narrative can't override the macro environment for now. The price is currently around 101 to 102. The upgrade didn't cause a rally on the day it happened yesterday; instead, it slid down from around 105, even touching a low near 100. This indicates the market doesn't see Transaction V1 as an immediate catalyst for speculation.
The real variable in the next two days is Friday's US CPI. Bitcoin is hovering around 79,000, and whether interest rates rise or stay put depends on this data. For altcoins like SOL, if CPI is high, there's a high chance it will test 100 again, maybe even glance at 98 or 96; if inflation is moderate and funds flow back into risk assets, SOL has a chance to bounce from 102 back up to 105.
The upgrade itself is a medium-to-long-term positive, and the short-term impact has mostly been priced in. Don't expect it to break out independently these two days; it will likely grind alongside BTC between 100 and 104. Don't over-leverage; volatility could be significant during the hour the Friday data is released $SOL Today let's discuss a topic:
"Is the US Treasury repo failing + accelerating inflation"
On August 19, the Treasury Department announced that the long-term debt repo scale would "at least double" to $4 billion, causing BTC to surge in response.
Today, September 10, it has increased again to $6 billion.
But strangely, after each increase, the 10-year yield rises instead of falling, currently breaking through 4.85%.
This is the bond market questioning the sustainability of US debt with real money—combined with the existing US deficit of over $2 trillion, annualized interest payments exceeding $1.2 trillion, and inflation above 2% for 60 consecutive months, the fiscal space is being squeezed.
At the same time, the Iran war has lasted 193 days, oil prices have broken through $96, and energy costs are rapidly transmitting to the CPI.
If this Friday's CPI data is high, the Federal Reserve will find it difficult to justify pausing rate hikes.
The pressure is already reflected in capital flows.
BTC ETFs have ended continuous net inflows and turned to net outflows for two consecutive days on September 8-9; ETH ETFs similarly shifted from positive to negative and then stagnated (Figures 1 and 2).
#BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负
Tony's view:
This is a direct reflection of the negative impact of soaring US Treasury yields on non-interest-bearing assets, with institutions shrinking risk exposure in the short term.
But don't rush to be bearish.
The increasing ineffectiveness of US Treasury repos essentially exposes structural pressure under fiscal dominance.
Historically, the endgame of such dilemmas is often forced easing or debt monetization.
This is precisely the core argument of BTC's medium- to long-term narrative.
Short-term pressure exists, but the long-term argument is accumulating rather than being falsified.Whenever oil prices rise, Trump gets anxious.
Because it involves his position and approval ratings.
He recently discovered an embarrassing fact: he no longer controls oil prices by just saying so.
Before taking office, Trump campaigned on "$2 gasoline."
But now, the average gas price in the U.S. is still around $4.15, even hitting one of the most expensive Labor Days in history.
What's more embarrassing is that the Iran war has completely triggered the oil price bomb; the original plan to attack Iran was to control oil.
You see, Trump repeatedly calls for lower oil prices, not just for the people's wallets but also to maintain his strongman narrative.
In the past, when he said something, the market had to listen. Now, when he says oil prices should drop, they stubbornly go up.
Being contradicted isn't scary; what's truly scary is losing the power of speech. The story of "the boy who cried wolf" has been told too many times, and no one believes it anymore.
This matter is also very important for BTC investors.
Because rising oil prices mean more than just more expensive gas stations.
Oil prices → inflation expectations → Fed rate cut expectations → U.S. Treasury yields and the dollar → global liquidity.
Once this chain tightens, highly liquid assets like BTC often experience amplified volatility.
So whether Trump calls for rate cuts or not is less important now; what really matters is watching oil prices, as they are the barometer for Bitcoin's market.
If the Iran issue drags on and oil prices keep rising, BTC may still face short-term pressure.
Unless oil prices crash dramatically, $2 gasoline is hard to achieve. Those who say the Bitcoin bull market is coming probably don't rely on oil or pay attention to oil prices.On September 9, spot ETF funds showed a clear divergence: 🟠 $BTC ETFs: net outflow of about $100.71 million 🔵; $ETH ETFs: net inflows of about $2.1 million. This does not necessarily mean funds are fully withdrawing from the crypto market; what is more noteworthy is that BTC is weakening, while ETH has not lost momentum. From a technical perspective, $BTC is currently below the MA10/MA20, with a cautious short-term trend; while $ETH remains above the Supertrend, indicating relative strength is temporarily more stable. Considering recent market sensitivity to US inflation data, interest rate path, and the September FOMC, funds may be shifting from "chasing the market" to seeking more certain local opportunities. What is truly worth watching is not a single-day ETF inflow and outflow, but whether this divergence between BTC weakness and ETH strength can continue. If BTC continues to fluctuate while ETH maintains its structure and increases trading volume, then the next round of market momentum may gradually shift toward $ETH. 👀 Funds have not disappeared; they may just become more selective $BTC $ETH #CryptoTreasuryDivides #CLARITYActSept15 #ZECGoesInstitutionalToday BTC is stuck at 78,000, altcoins feel even worse than BTC, funds are shrinking, and no one wants to hear stories in this kind of market.
But the stories are still being told.
The hottest narrative in the circle recently is called "buyback with fees" — sounds especially sexy. The project earns fees, uses the money to buy back its own tokens on the market and then burns them, reducing circulation, naturally pushing the price up. The logic is a closed loop, perfect.
DeFi researcher Ignas poured cold water on this: this narrative relies on trading volume and fees, not fundamentals. Once trading volume shrinks, dividends, buybacks, and burns immediately decrease, holding incentives drop, and selling pressure follows.
He is right. But he only said half of it.
Because the projects relying on "buyback with fees" differ wildly. Some are burning real money, some are just burning your FOMO.
The same term "buyback," three types of projects, three different fates.
First type: UNI — burning Robinhood’s real money
Let’s look at the hardest one first.
Uniswap has cumulatively bought back and burned $28.4 million worth of UNI this year. Where does the money come from? Protocol fees. After the fee switch officially activated in July, 17% of all on-chain swap fees flow into the TokenJar contract to buy back and burn UNI.
The key increment comes from Robinhood Chain.
This public chain, launched just this July, specializes in tokenized stocks. On September 1, its single-day trading volume hit $1.43 billion, a record high. Of Uniswap’s $1.55 million revenue from July 27 to August 12, 60% came from Robinhood Chain.
What does this mean?
UNI’s buyback funds don’t rely on the crypto market playing with itself. The stock token trading volume on Robinhood Chain connects to demand from the traditional financial world. As long as US stocks are traded, as long as people want to buy and sell stocks with tokens, this revenue stream won’t go to zero.
Geoff Kendrick from Standard Chartered calculated that at the mid-August burn rate, UNI’s annualized burn rate is about 4% of circulating supply. He thinks it’s "clearly unsustainable," but even by his conservative target price, the annualized burn rate is still 2.2%.
4% is unsustainable, but what about 2.2%? An asset with 2.2% annualized deflation is already quite aggressive in traditional finance.
UNI is burning real money. The money comes from Robinhood, from tokenized stocks, from real trading demand.
Second type: RAY — burning Solana’s Meme heartbeat
Next, look at Raydium.
The fee distribution mechanism is very clear: 12% of trading fees are used for open market buybacks and burning of RAY. By the end of August 2026, cumulative buybacks have exceeded 30% of circulating supply.
30%. This number is much more aggressive than UNI.
But RAY’s income source is fundamentally different from UNI. Raydium is one of the largest DEXs on Solana, and its trading volume heavily depends on the Meme coin launch hype in the Solana ecosystem. After the StonkFun integration news on September 6, RAY surged 70% in one day, from 0.91 to 1.43.
The rise is fierce. But the fall hurts too.
Because once the Meme launches on Solana cool down and trading volume shrinks, the 12% buyback fund pool will shrink accordingly. Less buyback → weaker deflation narrative → lower holding incentives → selling pressure.
Ignas groups RAY with ZCAT and PONS in the same category, the logic is isomorphic: old-school DEXs relying on fee buybacks, once volume disappears, incentives stop.
RAY is burning Solana’s Meme heartbeat. As long as the heartbeat is there, the fire burns strong. When the heartbeat stops, the fire goes out.
Third type: ZCAT, STONK — burning your imagination
The last type, the most dangerous.
ZCAT, an anonymous cat wrapped in a paper bag, a Meme coin on Solana. The mechanism is simple: each transfer charges a 3% fee, converted to ZEC and distributed to holders.
It has no protocol income. No DEX fees. No lending spread. Its "buyback" funds come from holders’ own transfer behavior.
You transfer, it taxes. You don’t move, it has no money.
What about STONK? StonkFun’s platform token claims to use 60% of platform trading revenue for buyback and burn. But cumulative burn is only about 10%, and 30-day buyback amount is lower than PONS and PUMP. Also, StonkFun itself is a tokenized stock launchpad — its income depends on "how many people are still willing to play coin-stock Meme."
PONS, INDEX, SHROOM, CASHCAT, all the same. Their dividends, buybacks, burns, liquidity incentives are all tied to trading fee income.
Ignas’s harshest comment was: "Using the current wave of fees to extrapolate annual returns basically predicts the market will never cool down, which is absurd."
The third type isn’t burning money. It’s burning your imagination.
According to DefiLlama’s Token Rights section, as of August 27, among 106 protocols included, 55 are marked as Active Buybacks.
More than half.
Sounds like buybacks have become an industry standard, right?
But there’s a galaxy between "having a buyback mechanism" and "buyback scale enough to impact token price."
Among those 55, how many have buyback funds from real, diversified, sustainable income?
How many just use "buyback" as a marketing term written into whitepapers to trick you into clicking "buy"?
Don’t buy just because there’s a "buyback."
First question: where does the buyback money come from?
Is it protocol fees? Launchpad income? Or holders’ own transfer tax?
Second question: is this income sustainable?
Does it depend on Meme hype? On Solana ecosystem launch volume? On US stock token trading volume on Robinhood Chain?
If trading volume halves, how much buyback remains?
Third question: what proportion of circulating market cap is the buyback scale?
Cumulative burn $10 million, circulating market cap $1 billion. Annualized buyback rate 1%. That’s not deflation, that’s just for show
$UNI $RAY $HYPE 🚨 What ETH really needs to be wary of now is not just the technicals, but the "interest rate hike expectations."
A few days ago, the market once pushed the probability of a September rate hike to 66%, and it is still hovering around 60%. UBS has even set a baseline scenario of a 25 basis point hike each in September and December this year.
This directly suppresses ETH.
📌 The higher the interest rate → the more attractive US Treasury yields become
📌 Tightening liquidity expectations → high-beta assets come under pressure
📌 ETH is highly dependent on DeFi, on-chain activity, and risk appetite
So now, trading ETH is not just about the "upgrade narrative," but whether the market still dares to continue valuing risk assets.
But don’t take the "September weakness" as a guaranteed sell signal. Historical data shows that ETH’s average performance in September has indeed been weak, but seasonality has never been the sole factor determining the market.
What’s more noteworthy is that ETH is still oscillating in a key area and hasn’t directly broken down due to rising US Treasury yields.
So the real watershed moment ahead is only one:
If CPI continues to fuel hawkish rate hike expectations, ETH may look for support downward; if inflation cools and rate hike expectations fall, ETH may instead see a rapid recovery.
For now, I still don’t chase the highs or guess the lows.
Waiting for data, waiting for structure, waiting for the market to give its own answer. 📉⚠️
#OKX预言家：来星球玩预测 #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 #9月加息概率升至约60%，美联储面临两难选择 $ZEC ZEC has recently experienced a rare independent surge, but there is significant disagreement in the market about its nature — this is a capital-driven rally fueled by compliance channels and structural short squeezes, rather than a fundamental value reassessment.
1. Severe disconnect between valuation and usage: ZEC's market cap is approaching Solana's scale, but shielded transaction adoption and on-chain activity are far from matching, posing severe correction risks when speculative funds retreat.
2. ETF subscription slowdown: The current rally heavily depends on continuous net inflows into ZEC; once subscriptions slow down, the liquidity squeeze logic will quickly collapse.
3. Regulatory tightening continues: The EU will implement a ban in 2027, multiple countries have already delisted it, and ZEC's accessibility in regulated markets will only narrow further.
4. Technicals extremely overbought: RSI over 80, with short-term bearish divergence signals appearing.
The current price above $1,200 mainly prices in the ETF compliance narrative plus short squeeze, rather than actual on-chain demand realization. This is a capital-structure-driven rally, but when sentiment fades and there is no substantial support, the price will sharply retract.
Do not consider going long; light short positions can be attempted.#加密财库分化：买币还是回购？
Is this IOST rally a real takeoff or just a fake move?
Brothers, I have to say a few words about this IOST market move. It surged over 70% within 24 hours, reaching a high of $0.00156, then started to pull back. This pattern is too typical.
Why the sudden surge? Simply put, it's a short squeeze plus a burn story. The foundation announced burning 70 million tokens, which sounds impressive but actually only accounts for 0.2% of the total supply, so it can't explain the price jump. The real driver was shorts forced to cover, plus the follow-up buying on Binance Square, a classic reflexive rally.
Can it last? I doubt it. The funding rate is still very low, indicating longs aren't fully crowded yet. After the short squeeze ends, new buyers need to step in. This kind of pulse rally in a low circulating supply asset comes fast and goes fast.
What about the direction? Don't chase the highs in the short term; wait for a stable pullback. This market is a game for short-term traders. For those thinking long-term, be cautious—no fundamental changes mean don't mistake the rebound for a reversal. $IOST The current $BTC battle around the 80,000 mark is quite interesting: on the surface, it looks like a tug-of-war between bulls and bears, but in reality, there are 1.05 million BTC trapped above 80,000, and every small rise triggers some holders to sell to break even.
Let's look at the data first. The 83,000 to 86,000 range is a dense trading zone for the first half of this year, with about 1.05 million BTC trapped there. These coins are all waiting to break even, so every time the price approaches 80,000, there is preemptive selling pressure. However, there is strong support below at 75,000 to 78,000, with ETFs seeing a net inflow of 3.8 billion for three consecutive weeks. Institutions and whales have been accumulating at this level, so long-term funds are not afraid of the trapped coins above 80,000.
From the futures market perspective, open interest remains high at 93 billion USD, but funding rates are low. Bulls are reluctant to chase high prices, and bears are hesitant to aggressively sell below 78,000. Everyone is waiting for tomorrow's CPI data.
In simple terms: there is heavy trapped volume above 80,000, so breaking through requires strong volume or major positive news. If CPI is positive, expect a volume-backed breakout above 80,000 toward 83,000; if negative, a pullback to 77,000 or even 75,000. Avoid heavy positions before the data; the market will likely spike back and forth to harvest leveraged traders. Hold your spot positions steady, keep futures positions light with stop-losses, and follow the trend once it emerges. #BTC加速拉升，资金还能继续接力吗？ #以太坊草案EIP-8363引争议 #OKX预言家：来星球玩预测 #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负
Previously, the US BTC spot ETF had sustained large net inflows, but the capital flow direction suddenly reversed from positive to negative, indicating a phased withdrawal of institutional buying. ETF funds are an important incremental source in this bull market; inflows represent continuous institutional allocation, and once it turns into net redemptions, the market will lose its core spot support.
Personal view: When funds shift from positive to negative, it is necessary to distinguish between short-term portfolio adjustments and trend reversals.
1. A single day of outflow does not mean institutions are completely bearish; it could be short-term profit-taking or quarterly capital retrieval. However, continuous outflows over multiple days is a clear bearish signal that will directly weaken the bulls and put BTC under pressure.
2. ETF funds have a lagging effect, and the market often reacts in advance. By the time outflow data is published, prices have often already fallen through a cycle, so do not rely solely on this data to short.
3. Macro interest rates remain the underlying logic. Rising US Treasury yields and delayed rate cut expectations are the main reasons for institutional redemptions. As long as high interest rate expectations persist, ETF funds are unlikely to sustain inflows.
Practical approach:
Use ETF fund flows as a medium- to long-term observation indicator, not directly for short-term positions.
Spot: Do not blindly bottom-fish; wait for dual confirmation of fund inflows and market stabilization;
Futures: When ETF outflows coincide with BTC breaking key support, reduce long positions, strictly control leverage, and guard against chain liquidations.On August 21, 150,000 UNI tokens were burned in a single day.
Tokens worth $5.9 million were permanently destroyed within one day. Everyone said: the UNI flywheel is spinning.
Nineteen days later, on September 9, Robinhood Chain's revenue dropped to $1.42 million, overtaken by HyperLiquid and Pump.
The flywheel is still turning. But the fuel is starting to run low.
Let's lay out this transmission chain.
Trading volume → Protocol revenue → Buyback and burn → Token price.
Four gears meshed together. Robinhood Chain's daily trading volume once surged to $1.43 billion, with chain fees reaching $2.13 million in 24 hours, surpassing the combined fees of Solana, Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Base.
Uniswap's protocol fees naturally rose accordingly. In the past 44 days, Robinhood Chain contributed about $8.7 million to UNI buyback and burn, exceeding the total of all other chains.
On August 21, 150,000 UNI were burned. The annualized burn volume reached 31 million tokens, valued at about $113 million.
Geoff Kendrick from Standard Chartered raised the 2030 target price from $100, saying it might be "too low."
Everything seemed perfect.
The problem is hidden precisely in these numbers.
Kendrick also said something many chose to selectively ignore: the 4% annualized burn rate is "clearly unsustainable."
He wasn't pouring cold water. He was stating a fact: the burn rate depends on protocol revenue, and protocol revenue depends on trading activity.
The fuel for UNI's burn flywheel is not code, governance, or narrative.
The fuel is the fact that "everyone is still willing to keep speculating."
And this "thing" is precisely the most unreliable element in the crypto world.
Then, September 9 arrived.
Robinhood Chain's revenue in the past 24 hours dropped to $1.42 million, overtaken by HyperLiquid and Pump. Seven-day cumulative revenue was $21.4 million.
Note the timeline.
August 21: single-day burn hits record, market is boiling.
August 25: weekly burn hits all-time high, founder posts personally.
Early September: trading volume still high, $1.43 billion, $1.89 billion, growing fiercer day by day.
September 9: revenue starts to slide.
Not a crash. Just "starting to slide." And those four words are colder than a crash.
Because this transmission chain has no buffer.
If trading volume drops 10%, protocol revenue won't just drop 10%. It drops the new buying pressure. Buyback and burn need to buy UNI daily, but now they buy less. Holders originally held because "burn is accelerating," now that reason weakens.
Then what?
Selling pressure.
Coinbase's trading volume in Q4 2021 was $547 billion. One year later, $145 billion. A 74% drop.
For Meme tokens, once volume halves, a market cap drop of over 95% "is not an exaggeration."
This is not just UNI's issue.
PONS, with a buyback wallet balance approaching $3 million, uses 80% of fees for buybacks, has already burned nearly one-third of supply. The data looks unreal.
Raydium, on September 9, bought back $640,000 RAY in a single day, the highest in 19 months. Total buyback exceeds 30% of circulating supply.
ZCAT, STONK, INDEX, SHROOM, CASHCAT—all isomorphic. Tokens driven by fees, same logic.
Ignas puts it bluntly: the essence of the current "coin-stock" concept Meme tokens relies on trading volume and fee income. Once volume shrinks, dividends and buyback funds decrease, holding incentives weaken, ultimately triggering sell-offs.
All flywheels share the same fuel pool: market heat.
When heat is on, everyone is a value investor. When heat fades, everyone is an escape expert.
To end with a number.
Projecting annual returns based on current fees is like predicting the market will never cool down.
This is not my words. It's Ignas's. Quote: "It's ridiculous."
UNI's burn flywheel is beautiful. Beautiful numbers, beautiful narrative, beautiful candlesticks.
But the flywheel's fuel is trading volume.
When the fuel cuts off, the flywheel is just a piece of scrap metal.
And your position is just a component welded onto that scrap.
$UNI $RAY $HOOD $IOST burned 70 million tokens yesterday and rose 87%, but today it dropped back to 0.0012 — is this truly scarcity, or just a pure long-short squeeze?
Here are a few key points:
1. On September 8, the IOST Foundation permanently burned 70 million old tokens, originating from the early ERC-20 issuance. Sounds impressive, but it only accounts for 0.2% of the total supply. The real price driver was shorts being forced to cover — short liquidations were about $720,000, perpetual contract turnover surged to $361 million, and the funding rate was only 0.01% every 8 hours, indicating the longs were not yet fully crowded and there was still fuel.
2. The 7% annual inflation is ongoing, the burn is one-time, and this contradiction will have to be faced sooner or later.
3. Fundamentals: the world's fourth largest DApp public chain (only behind Ethereum, EOS, TRON), backed by Sequoia and ZhenFund, currently pushing in the RWA and PayFi directions.
0.00082 is today's bottom, 0.00245 is today's resistance; 0.0012 is the rebound support, if it breaks 0.0012 this wave is over. $94 million in trading volume supports an $180 million market cap, and this ratio itself indicates extremely fast position turnover.
The rise of platform tokens usually isn't due to more users, but because the issuance pace is expected to accelerate, with buyers betting early on fees and exposure slots. Currently, this link only has price without the support of new on-chain token issuance.
The truly passive ones are the late buyers: the market cap is built on single-day volume, and when the tide recedes, depth disappears first, followed by a price correction. The anxiety doesn't come from the drop itself, but from not knowing who is trading on the other side.
Watch the next day's volume-to-market cap ratio. If volume continues to expand but market cap doesn't rise, it indicates distribution is underway, and the rebound assumption is overturned.
#OKX预言家：来星球玩预测
#加密财库分化：买币还是回购？ #LAPTOP首发跌近99%，Meme市场争议升温 $ETH The momentum of net inflows into Bitcoin spot ETFs for three consecutive weeks was halted yesterday.
On September 8, the entire market saw a net outflow of about $46.6 million. But looking closer, this wasn't a full retreat—BlackRock's IBIT was still buying in, Bitwise's BITB also added $14.46 million, while the main outflows came from Grayscale's GBTC ($65.5 million) and Fidelity's FBTC.
What's more interesting is that during the days when ETFs were continuously attracting funds, Bitcoin actually fell below 79,000. This indicates that the volume bought by ETFs was offset by on-chain profit-taking, derivatives hedging, and macro selling pressure. ETF inflows do not necessarily mean the price will rise; there are several layers of filtering in between.
Now looming overhead is Friday's CPI. The market expects an overall 3.4% and core 2.4%, but Bank of America and Citi's forecasts differ by 0.04 percentage points—one predicts enough for a hawkish rate hike, the other enough for a dovish pause. Waller's stance is key: he supports a rate hike only if core PCE month-over-month exceeds 0.3%; below that, he tends to wait.
Regarding Bitcoin $BTC, the $46.6 million outflow is small compared to the hundreds of millions inflows in previous weeks, so no trend reversal is apparent for now. But the real variable is Friday's CPI—if the data is hotter, the probability of rate hikes will rise, putting the 80,000 level at risk. Let's wait for the data first. #BTC现货ETF大额流入后转负 $CORE CORE official X latest updates, the community is all focused on this matter
As of September 10,
The most recent major official announcement is a technical review of the node validator reward vulnerability:
At the end of August, a flaw was discovered in the reward distribution logic, causing a few nodes to receive excess CORE rewards; the project team executed a hard fork upgrade, completed on-chain reconciliation, and recovered about 186 million CORE. The official emphasized: the total token cap of 2.1 billion has not been breached, it is just that future rewards were released early.
The official repeatedly stressed two points:
1. User personal asset security, the network was not hacked; the vulnerability was only in the node reward distribution accounting module.
2. This hard fork is a forward version upgrade and will not roll back historical on-chain transactions.
However, community controversy remains intense:
Although the loophole for further over-issuance has been closed, some excess tokens had already entered the secondary market before the vulnerability was fixed and cannot be recovered. This is the core reason why major exchanges temporarily suspended CORE deposits and withdrawals; exchanges need to prevent large amounts of abnormal token withdrawals dumping on the market to protect price stability.
Now everyone in the community is waiting for the official next steps:
1. A complete technical incident review report;
2. When exchanges will resume deposits and withdrawals;
3. The follow-up plan for handling excess tokens that have entered the market.
Many overseas influencers continue to discuss this matter on X, with polarized opinions.
Optimists believe: the vulnerability has been sealed, the hard fork implemented, and the event risk is controllable;
Cautious voices believe: trust is damaged, once exchanges reopen deposits and withdrawals, potential selling pressure will be released in concentration, the 0.01 observation level needs vigilance.
Bitcoin is now repeatedly tugging at a high level, and overall market liquidity is relatively weak.
No matter how the official tweets try to soothe the narrative, the moment deposits and withdrawals resume will be the real pressure test.
Friends holding positions should not be blindly optimistic and should protect their positions; those not yet in the market should not rush to bottom-fish or speculate.
No matter how good the story is, the selling pressure risk caused by code vulnerabilities cannot be ignored 🫡This looks more like fading risk appetite than a BTC-specific problem. BTC is down 1.0%, while ETH and SOL are falling faster. That relative resilience gives me little reason to read the dip as broad market strength. My bias stays defensive until weakness stops widening beyond BTC.
Not advice, just analysis.
#DailyOrbit I believe Txs activity is only one metric and cannot determine the value of $ZEC alone. $ZEC What's more interesting is that it doesn't lock users into a single mode: 🔹 you can choose a nearly 100% transparent mode 🔹, choose highly private transaction methods 🔹, or use audit tools to find a balance between privacy and compliance. This actually solves a very practical problem—both extreme privacy and extreme transparency have their own usage thresholds and risks. Offering multiple options means Zcash can cover a broader user base and application scenarios, and TAM no longer has to be limited to a single privacy market. What's more noteworthy is that as institutional funds, privacy narratives, and ETF products continue to attract market attention, Zcash's valuation logic is gradually expanding from "how many trades there are" to: network usage + privacy needs + compliance flexibility + institutional investability + ecosystem growth. If a native $ZEC ETF does emerge in the future, it would itself be a repricing of its market positioning and potential capital capacity. So, rather than focusing solely on the number of Tx tokens, it's better to look at multiple indicators together. Trading activity determines how hot the network is currently, and product selection determines how large the market it can cover in the future 👀 #DailyOrbit #ZEC #Zcash