大嗯BNB

BTC is trading around 84,500–84,875, reaching its highest level in the past week.
First, an on-chain data point: the number of whale addresses holding more than 100 BTC has hit an all-time high of 20,338.
What does this number mean? It doesn’t mean that a single whale is buying. It means the total number of addresses with “whale-level” holdings has reached a record high. While BTC was pulling back from 87,000 to 79,676, a large number of addresses holding 100 BTC or more emerged, suggesting that beyond institutions, a considerable number of high-net-worth individuals and small-to-medium-sized institutions continued to accumulate during this period.
Meanwhile, a single whale withdrew 1,162 BTC from market maker Wintermute on October 14 and another 1,090 BTC on October 21, for a total of 2,252 BTC (about $187 million). These coins didn’t go to an exchange; they went to new addresses, effectively being quietly stashed away.
On the price front, BTC has rebounded about 6.2% from its October 15 low of 79,732, and the daily RSI is nearing 90 in the short term.
One thing needs to be made clear here: an RSI near 90 is a signal of extremely strong momentum, not a signal to “short immediately.”
An RSI above 90 means buying pressure is far outstripping selling pressure in the short term. Historically, this has usually corresponded to an accelerating trend phase. In October 2020, for example, BTC rose from 13,000 to 20,000 with its RSI around 90. An RSI of 90 doesn’t mean the top is in; it means “bulls are in control during this period, and momentum is very strong.”
But it also means the price has moved quite quickly in the short term, increasing the likelihood of a pullback to test the area around 83,000.
Key figures right now: 84,540 is the resistance at the one-month moving average, as well as the average cost basis for ETF holders (around 84,340). BTC needs to hold above this level to challenge the October high of 87,300. With five days to go until the October 27 FOMC meeting, any unexpectedly hawkish signals during this period could disrupt the current momentum.
But the all-time high in the number of whale addresses is a structural signal—not noise for today, but an indication of the medium-term direction.
Whether BTC can hold above 84,500 before the FOMC is crucial over these next five days.
How are your positions looking right now—have you added or reduced? Let us know.
$BTC

On October 21, BTC is hovering around $82,500–$83,000, with the FOMC meeting just six days away.
I dug through the ETF flow data from the past week, and one number made me take a second look:
On October 20, BlackRock’s IBIT saw a net inflow of $665 million in a single day—the largest daily inflow since October 2025.
Pay attention to the timing: BTC had just pulled back from $87,000 to $79,676, both CPI and PPI came in above expectations, and market sentiment dropped from a high of 74 on the “Fear and Greed Index” to 59. Retail traders were asking, “Can $80,000 hold?”
And right then, institutions came in with $665 million in buying in a single day.
What does this tell us? While retail traders are pricing in macro risks—rate-hike odds, inflation data, and FOMC uncertainty—institutional investors are working from a different set of assumptions. In their eyes, prices around $80,000 are worth investing heavily in.
Looking at other figures along the same lines: Strategy currently holds around 848,000 BTC, more than 4% of Bitcoin’s total supply; whale addresses accumulated 85,000 BTC over the past three weeks; and the average cost basis for BTC ETF investors is about $84,340. At $82,500–$83,000, the current price is roughly $1,500 below that level.
Put these four data points together, and they paint a picture of institutional holdings with a lot of cost basis concentrated between $82,000 and $85,000. These investors aren’t likely to sell out quickly after making just 1%–2%—their exit prices should be much higher than today’s.
Of course, the FOMC decision six days from now is the biggest single variable of the year, and any structural analysis should treat the outcome with due caution.
But based on the data we’ve seen so far, it’s already clear who has been buying the dip: not retail traders, but institutions.
Anyone here add to their positions during this pullback, or are you waiting until after the FOMC meeting? Let us know.
$BTC

After market close on October 20, SpaceX released its Q3 earnings report—its first quarterly profit since going public, with net income of about ¥700 billion (approximately $4.7 billion).
That figure needs some context to understand why it matters.
SpaceX went public this June at an IPO price of $135, raising about $85.7 billion in the largest IPO in history. Its market cap briefly topped $2 trillion on the first day of trading, but then fell by nearly half over the next two months. The reason was simple: Q2 revenue beat expectations ($7.8 billion, up 92% year over year), but the company still posted a net loss of $541 million and spent $18.4 billion on capital expenditures in a single quarter, most of it on AI infrastructure.
The market’s thinking at the time: the company was burning through cash too quickly, and profitability was nowhere in sight.
Q3 broke that assumption.
The main driver of SpaceX’s first-ever profit was its AI business. In Q2, the AI division generated $2.6 billion in revenue, up 247% year over year. Analysts’ Q3 estimate then jumped straight to $6 billion, as the contract for Anthropic to rent the Colossus data center for $1.25 billion a month began to be fully reflected in the results in July, alongside new contracts with customers like Google. The description “AI business revenue 9x” refers to this growth curve.
The business model is straightforward: buy Nvidia GPUs, build data centers, then rent them to companies like Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. It’s the same logic as Starlink—build capital-intensive infrastructure and recoup the investment through rental income.
But one detail is worth noting: these AI computing contracts have 90-day termination clauses, so customers can choose not to renew at any time. The revenue surge is real, but whether it can continue will depend on future renewals.
One other variable: about 1.3 billion shares will be unlocked after the Q3 earnings release—more than the entire IPO offering. Even with strong earnings, that potential selling pressure shouldn’t be ignored.
What position is SPCX holding now?
$SPCXB

Is today the first day? How should I play?
Which track has the highest chance of winning?

#BinancePick

Japan was one of the earliest countries to take action on stablecoins, but progress was slow—until it began to accelerate over the past couple of years.
It all started in 2023. That year, Japan amended its Funds Settlement Act, separating stablecoins from crypto assets and defining them as “electronic payment instruments.” Only banks, money transfer service providers, and trust companies are allowed to issue them, and they must be backed 100% by yen deposits or government bonds.
Once the legislation was in place, things started heating up. In October 2025, Japan’s first compliant yen stablecoin, JPYC, went live. Issued by JPYC Inc., it is pegged at 1 yen = 1 JPYC, settles in seconds, and costs less than 1 yen in fees. The country’s three megabanks—MUFG, Sumitomo Mitsui, and Mizuho—have also announced plans to jointly issue a stablecoin by March 2027, with the Financial Services Agency officially backing the initiative.
The Digital Agency is now discussing an even bigger idea: using stablecoins for public benefit payments.
The logic is straightforward. In July 2026, the Japanese government’s “Priority Plan” set out a clear direction: use My Number (the personal identification number system) to create a system for the government to pay citizens directly. Integrating stablecoins into this system would solve the last mile of benefit payments: programmable on-chain payments that are traceable, arrive 24/7, and incur almost no fees.
Compared with traditional bank transfers, the efficiency gains from using stablecoins for benefit payments are clear. The challenge lies with users: cash and credit cards are still the norm in Japan, and stablecoin wallet adoption remains extremely low. In January 2026, SMBC ran a pilot that enabled direct JPYC payments using My Number cards, without requiring users to install a separate wallet app. This approach aims to overcome that final hurdle.
Yen stablecoins are still at an early stage, but the Japanese government is now discussing them as part of its public infrastructure framework. That sends a very different kind of signal.
Do you think yen stablecoins can become a mainstream payment method in Japan within five years?
$USDC

#日本国交相将研究稳定币退税

Last October, NEAR cut its annual issuance rate from 5% to 2.5%. The way it was carried out was interesting: the community vote failed to reach the 66.67% threshold, but the core team pushed the code into an upgrade package anyway, leaving validators 30 days to decide whether to accept it.
It passed in the end. But validators including Chorus One publicly criticized the move: If the vote didn’t pass, what do you call it when you push it through anyway? Governance?
This history matters because the same scenario is now unfolding for a second time.
On September 30, Sal Ternullo, CEO of NEAR treasury company SVRN, proposed a new plan on the governance forum: cut the maximum annual issuance rate from 2.5% to 1.6%, phased in over 24 months, while lowering the annualized staking rate from about 5.4% to 3.5%.
The reasoning behind the numbers: NEAR issues about $140 million worth of new tokens each year, while its TVL is only about $157 million and annual transaction fees are under $3.2 million. Put simply, the network is using high inflation to subsidize security costs, even though there isn’t enough usage to justify those costs. Halving issuance would mean issuing about 970,000 fewer NEAR each year.
But this proposal signals something more far-reaching: SVRN also mentioned the idea of a “fixed supply” on the forum. It’s not part of this vote, but co-founder Illia Polosukhin has already publicly endorsed similar ideas. If NEAR really moves toward a fixed supply, that would mean a completely different valuation model.
The vote is still underway. Clearing the 66.67% threshold is the first hurdle; if it passes, validators will still need to go through another round of the upgrade process.
History tells us that even if the vote fails, the core team might still push it through—but that would provoke a backlash over governance.
The outcome of this contest is worth watching more closely than the “inflation cut” itself.
If you hold NEAR, what impact do you think this vote will have on the price?
$NEAR

#near投票拟将年增发率降至1.6%

In my previous post on ZEC, I analyzed the NU7 upgrade and the controversy over 22,000–25,000 coins frozen in the Sprout pool. I initially thought this would create bearish pressure.
Unexpectedly, it surged 8.5% in just 24 hours on October 21.
Looking back at this rally, there are a few clues worth piecing together.
First, the broader privacy narrative is still alive. Naval Ravikant kicked off the first wave last year when he called “ZEC insurance for BTC.” Arthur Hayes later followed with a $10,000 price target, and ZEC climbed from just over $20 in October 2025 to an eight-year high. That narrative hasn’t faded.
Second, Grayscale has already renamed its ZEC trust “The Zcash ETF,” and its NYSE Arca listing application is still awaiting SEC effectiveness. Expectations of institutional investment have continued to build.
Digging further back, ZEC gained 16% in a single day on July 26—the catalyst was Binance announcing its support for the NU7 upgrade and hard fork. Then, just a day later, we saw the same recipe: news of a network upgrade paired with a technical-breakthrough narrative, and ZEC took off.
After the 30% crash in June triggered by the vulnerability scare, the mainnet was fixed within eight weeks, and the price soon reached an eight-year high. The market has been more forgiving of ZEC than expected.
Today’s 8.5% gain was most likely driven by the same combination: the privacy narrative, upgrade expectations, and progress on the Grayscale ETF. It wasn’t a single catalyst—several factors were playing out at once.
Now around $480, with a year-to-date low of $34 and a high of nearly $700—do you think it can hold this level this time?
$ZEC
#zcash24小时上涨8.5%

JPMorgan has made a clear shift in its stance on BTC this year.
In February 2026, JPMorgan Chief Strategist Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou published a report setting BTC’s long-term target at **$266,000**.
The reasoning isn’t bullish sentiment; it’s a very specific quantitative framework: the volatility ratio of BTC to gold has fallen to a historic low of 1.5, suggesting that BTC is maturing as an asset class—its volatility is approaching gold’s, while the gap in market capitalization remains substantial.
Gold’s current market cap is around $28 trillion, while BTC’s is under $2 trillion.
If this volatility gap continues to narrow and institutional investors keep adding BTC to their portfolios, BTC’s theoretical upside is a linear extrapolation based on gold’s market cap—with $266,000 as the figure produced by this model.
Following this line of thinking, in September JPMorgan updated its outlook again: Bitcoin ETFs still have a large amount of open downside-hedging positions (put options), while similar hedges in gold ETFs have largely been unwound. Once this “insurance” weighing on BTC’s price eases, the odds of BTC outperforming gold could rise significantly.
BTC is now trading around $80,000, leaving 230% upside to $266,000.
Of course, this is a long-term target, not a prediction for tomorrow. JPMorgan itself has made that clear: this isn’t a forecast for the next 12 months, but a theoretical value “once volatility has converged,” and the time horizon could be several years.
But what’s interesting is the shift in the underlying logic: from “BTC is a speculative asset” to “BTC is an undervalued store of value.” This change in perspective is more noteworthy than the price target itself.
At the current price of $80,000, do you think this is a chance to get in, or is there still room to fall?
$BTC

#摩根大通预测比特币十年领跑

SpaceX has released its Q3 2026 earnings report, with revenue beating analyst expectations.
This is SpaceX’s second quarterly report since going public. To understand the significance of these numbers, we first need to understand how its businesses are structured.
In June this year, SpaceX listed on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX. Its IPO was priced at $135 per share and raised about $85.7 billion—the largest IPO in history. On listing day, it briefly made Musk the world’s first trillionaire.
Two months later, on August 4, SpaceX released its Q2 earnings: revenue of $7.8 billion, up 92% year over year and nearly $1 billion above expectations of $6.9 billion. All three business lines beat expectations, but the company reported a net loss of $541 million, and quarterly capital expenditure reached $18.4 billion. The stock instead fell more than 8% after hours.
After Q2, analysts raised their Q3 revenue forecasts to around $13 billion. The reason was straightforward:
Starting in July, Anthropic began paying $1.25 billion per month to rent SpaceX’s Colossus data center. The contract only began to be fully reflected in revenue in Q3. The CFO said it directly on the Q2 earnings call: the AI business could overtake Starlink to become SpaceX’s largest revenue source in Q3. The $6.7 billion in new cloud-services contracts signed in Q2 also began contributing to revenue in October.
Another key factor in Q3 is the lockup expiration: about 1.3 billion shares will become eligible for sale after the Q3 earnings report—more than the entire IPO offering. That means early employees and investors can start selling their shares, no matter how good the earnings numbers are. This was one of the major reasons the stock fell after the Q2 report, and the same pressure applies in Q3.
SpaceX’s story has never been about whether it makes or loses money in a single quarter. It comes down to one question: can the company get from its current quarterly revenue of $13 billion to the $1 trillion in annual revenue Musk has talked about?
Can its three engines—Starlink, AI computing rentals, and Starship launches—all hit their stride at the same time? This Q3 report is the first relatively real data point.
Do you have a position in SPCX at this price?
$SPCXB

An underestimated regulatory signal: Google has opened up crypto advertising in the UAE.
Not for everyone—the bar is clear:
To run crypto ads on Google platforms targeting users in the UAE, you must hold a license from one of these three authorities:
FSRA (Financial Services Regulatory Authority), VARA (Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority), or DFSA (Dubai Financial Services Authority).
You also have to pass Google's own advertising certification and comply with all local UAE legal requirements. Violations won't result in an immediate account ban; you'll first receive a 7-day warning.
This update has two key changes compared with the 2023 version: first, the DFSA has been added to the list of recognized regulators, covering licensed entities under the Dubai International Financial Centre framework; second, the scope of eligible advertising has expanded from “exchanges” to “exchanges + software wallets.”
Major platforms like Binance, OKX, and Crypto.com, along with local players BitOasis, M2, and CoinMENA, can now officially run ads on Google to reach users in the UAE.
The deeper logic behind this:
More than 30% of the UAE's population currently holds cryptocurrency, making it one of the countries with the highest adoption rates in the world. The country's sovereign wealth fund, Mubadala, also invested $436 million in BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF this year. By opening up advertising access, Google is essentially acknowledging that this market is mature enough, and its regulatory framework clear enough, to warrant an official channel for compliant players to reach users.
From a regulatory perspective, this “build a licensing system first, then open advertising channels” approach is much like MiCA's path in Europe: compliant entities get their permits first, and then the ecosystem's infrastructure follows.
Whether crypto advertising is allowed is essentially a reflection of how mature the local regulatory framework is. The UAE has cleared this hurdle. Which major market will be next?
$BTC
#谷歌更新阿联酋加密广告规则

BitMine (NYSE: BMNR) bought another 12,535 ETH this week.
The number is considerably lower than before—the two purchases on October 8 and 10 totaled nearly 44,000 ETH, while this one was just 12,535. Tom Lee had said they would slow the pace, and this figure is in line with that forecast.
But the significance isn’t the size of any single purchase. It’s that BitMine has been buying every week for more than 60 consecutive weeks, without interruption since launching its ETH treasury strategy in June 2025.
Let’s take a closer look at the logic behind BitMine’s approach:
The goal is called “Alchemy of 5%”—Tom Lee’s target is to hold 5% of Ethereum’s total supply. Its current holdings are about 6 million ETH, or roughly 4.9% of the total supply. It needs approximately another 60,000–80,000 ETH to reach 5%.
The holdings are worth about $14.6 billion (based on the current ETH price of around $2,400), making it the world’s largest corporate ETH treasury. Its total digital asset reserves are second only to Strategy’s (Michael Saylor’s BTC treasury).
About 85% of its holdings are staked through MAVAN, its in-house institutional staking platform. Annualized staking rewards are estimated at around $300 million or more, turning staking itself into a revenue stream.
There’s one notable opponent to watch:
In October 2025, short-selling firm Kerrisdale Capital publicly shorted BMNR, questioning BitMine’s business model. The market reaction was significant at the time, and BMNR plunged in a single day. But BitMine continued adding to its holdings afterward, and Tom Lee hasn’t changed his position—he believes ETH will ultimately become the settlement layer for tokenized Wall Street. He has cited a long-term price target of $62,000.
Whether this thesis plays out will depend on the FOMC, the direction of interest rates, and whether on-chain demand for ETH itself can keep pace with the narrative.
A company that dollar-cost averages into its 6-million-ETH treasury every week—do you think this is smart money, or a highly leveraged bet?
$ETH

#bitmine增持12535枚eth

The Treasury Department’s comment period on the GENIUS Act has closed.
This date is worth marking: the first U.S. law dedicated specifically to stablecoins is now entering the crucial rulemaking stage.
The Blockchain Association has several key positions in this round of rulemaking that are worth clarifying:
First, KYC obligations must not be extended without limits.
The GENIUS Act requires stablecoin issuers to establish Customer Identification Programs (CIPs). The Blockchain Association’s position is that this obligation should apply only to direct, primary-market relationships between issuers and their customers—not extend downstream to secondary-market transactions or smart contract interactions.
The reasoning is that transactions on the blockchain are executed automatically through smart contracts, without any involvement from issuers. Requiring issuers to bear KYC responsibility for every on-chain transaction they have no part in is technically impossible and exceeds the authority granted by the GENIUS Act.
Second, the definition of stablecoins must be narrow.
The Association wants the Treasury Department to strictly limit the GENIUS Act’s regulatory scope to “payment stablecoins”—rather than allow regulators to use vague definitions to bring all kinds of tokens under the stablecoin framework.
Third, the ban on interest/yield must not be expanded too far.
The GENIUS Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest directly to holders—a measure intended to distinguish stablecoins from money market funds. But the banking industry has been pushing to extend this ban to platform-level rewards and yield programs. The Association is firmly opposed: the law bans issuers from paying interest, not platforms.
Fourth, advance a “passporting” regime.
Whether a platform approved at the state level can operate nationwide is currently a gray area. The Association is calling for a federal passporting mechanism to prevent states from fragmenting the stablecoin market with their own licensing requirements.
Since the GENIUS Act was signed in July 2025, the debate has moved from legislation to the details of implementation. How the rules are written will determine the true scope of opportunity in the stablecoin sector.
$USDC

#美国区块链协会提交genius法案意见

Perpetual futures are the largest derivatives market in crypto. In 2025, global trading volume exceeded **$61 trillion**—more than the combined volume of Bitcoin spot and traditional futures.
Despite the market’s enormous size, until now it has operated exclusively on offshore platforms like Binance and Bybit. On May 29 this year, the CFTC approved KalshiEX’s BTC perpetual futures contract (BTCPERP) for listing, marking the first time in U.S. history that perpetual futures were brought under a compliant regulatory framework.
CME (the Chicago Mercantile Exchange) promptly sued the CFTC on June 18.
CME’s core argument: perpetual contracts have no expiration date, so under the Dodd-Frank Act they should be classified as swaps, not futures—meaning the CFTC’s approval of Kalshi was illegal.
This may sound like a technical legal issue, but it strikes at the heart of the business logic: if perpetuals are classified as swaps, new platforms like Kalshi would have to register as swap dealers, dramatically raising the compliance bar. CME’s existing futures business would then face no competitive pressure.
On September 2, the CFTC asked the court to dismiss CME’s lawsuit, responding bluntly:
First, CME itself says its customers don’t need perpetual products. And since Kalshi was approved, trading volume in CME’s BTC/ETH futures has actually increased—so what specific harm have you suffered?
Second, the CFTC says perpetual futures are futures; CME just doesn’t like the “label.”
Third, the CFTC characterized CME’s lawsuit as “lawfare”—rather than compete by innovating, it’s using litigation to tie up its rival.
The outcome of this case will directly determine the shape of the U.S. perpetual futures market. If CME wins, compliance costs for new platforms will skyrocket, and perpetual futures will remain restricted in the U.S. If the CFTC wins, the way will be cleared for Kraken, Coinbase, and Bitnomial, while DeFi perpetual platforms like Hyperliquid could also attract more compliant capital.
The court hasn’t ruled yet, but the CFTC’s “you haven’t been harmed” argument hits the mark. Whether it can get CME thrown out on procedural grounds is the key question right now.
Whose position do you support in this case?
$BTC
#cftc反驳cme永续期货诉讼立场

TSMC delivered the best quarterly results in its history.
Net income surged 68.7% year over year, revenue hit **$46.7 billion**, and the company set a new record for the sixth consecutive quarter. Demand for AI chips accounted for 68% of revenue, its 2nm process has entered mass production and started contributing to revenue, and its full-year outlook was raised.
By all accounts, this was good news. But on the day of the earnings release, TSMC’s U.S.-listed ADRs initially fell nearly 2%.
The reason wasn’t the earnings themselves, but the broader environment: the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield approached 5.23% around the same time, its highest level in nearly 24 years. High interest rates weigh on valuations, and tech growth stocks are no exception. Add in the previous day’s CPI of 3.7% and the earlier PPI reading of 6.3%—both higher than expected—and overall market risk appetite was under pressure.
The earnings news rippled through the market, and chip stocks as a group began attracting buyers. Stocks like AMD, Intel, Navitas, and Wolfspeed rebounded in succession, helping the Nasdaq recover from last week’s lows.
What does this mean for the crypto market?
BTC’s weekly correlation with the Nasdaq has long remained between 0.5 and 0.7. When pressure on the Nasdaq was at its worst, BTC was also trading around $80,000. As chip stocks began to rebound and sentiment toward tech recovered, downward pressure on BTC eased accordingly.
However, there’s a structural paradox worth noting: TSMC reported a blowout quarter with exceptionally strong demand, yet its stock still fell that day. This shows that in the market’s current pricing logic, macro interest rates have taken precedence over fundamentals themselves. As long as inflation doesn’t come down and Treasury yields don’t retreat, even the strongest results will be weighed down.
The same logic applies to BTC.
The FOMC meets on October 28, and the probability of a rate hike is still 28%—that’s the real turning point.
What do you think will happen next?
$BTC

#芯片股反弹带动美股上涨

Two data streams are growing in parallel. Let’s break them down.
First: deposits on crypto cards surpassed $10 billion on July 1 this year.
That $10 billion isn’t transaction volume—it’s the balance users have loaded onto crypto debit card programs, a bit like an Alipay balance, except it’s funded with stablecoins and spent over the Visa/Mastercard networks.
Deposits are up 82% year to date and about 250% year over year. Monthly spending exceeds $900 million, with 88% settled in stablecoins.
Looking back at the growth: average monthly deposits were just over $100 million in 2023. By the end of 2025, they had exceeded $1.5 billion per month—a compound annual growth rate of 106%. Visa now operates more than 130 stablecoin-linked card programs in over 50 countries worldwide.
Second: DeFi yield vaults had reached $9 billion in assets by August.
This money is deposited for a different reason—not to be spent, but to earn stablecoin yields on-chain. With BTC fluctuating around $80,000 and macroeconomic inflation heating up, some capital has moved out of speculative positions and into stable on-chain returns. Bitwise expects this figure to double before year-end.
Both trends reflect the same underlying shift: stablecoins are moving beyond being a trading tool within crypto and becoming financial infrastructure with real-world use cases.
On the crypto card side, everyday users in more than 60 countries are using stablecoins to pay for daily expenses. On the yield vault side, institutional capital is sitting on-chain and earning interest. One gets spent, the other gets saved—and both are driving up the total stablecoin market.
The combined circulating market cap of USDT and USDC has now surpassed $200 billion. Compared with the $10 billion in crypto card deposits, there’s still a long way to go in terms of adoption.
Where do you think this trend is headed?
$USDC
#加密金库存款超100亿美元

JPMorgan Chase has gone further on blockchain than many people realize.
JPMD—the deposit token from JPMorgan Chase.
First, let’s clarify what it is, because the term “deposit token” is easily mistaken for a stablecoin. There’s a fundamental difference:
Stablecoins are issued by private companies and backed by external reserves. USDT and USDC work this way.
JPMD is different—it’s issued by JPMorgan Chase, a licensed bank, and represents a claim on your bank deposits at JPMorgan Chase, transferred on-chain for circulation. The logic of FDIC insurance remains, as does the regulatory compliance framework; only settlement has shifted to near real-time on-chain.
In November 2025, JPMD officially launched on Base (an Ethereum L2) for institutional clients. B2C2, Coinbase, and Mastercard have all completed live transaction tests.
Following this same path, JPMorgan Chase has also done something else on the Ethereum mainnet:
Two tokenized money market funds—MONY (launched in December 2025) and JLTXX (launched in May 2026)—hold U.S. Treasuries and repurchase agreements as underlying assets, represented as tokens on Ethereum. Together, the two funds have reached approximately **$800 million** in assets.
The roadmap ahead is also taking shape: the euro version, JPME, has been trademarked; expansion across multiple chains, including Polygon, Arbitrum, and the Ethereum mainnet; and work with Singapore’s DBS Bank on a framework for cross-institutional token transfers.
What this means for ETH is that the largest traditional financial institutions are moving real-world assets onto the Ethereum network. This is structural demand, not a speculative narrative. JPMorgan’s institutional clients settle transactions with JPMD using Ethereum’s underlying infrastructure.
As traditional banks move on-chain, ETH’s role is changing—what do you think this means for ETH’s long-term value?
$ETH
#JPMorganChase #存款代币

On October 20, a risk that had been hanging over BTC since the start of the month was finally removed.
Mt. Gox announced that it was extending the deadline for creditor repayments, originally set for October 31, to October 2027.
This means that the potential sell pressure from 34,387 BTC—worth around $2.8 billion—that the market had been pricing in will not turn into actual selling for the rest of this year.
Let’s break down the logic a little. Every time Mt. Gox has moved its wallets in the past, the market has priced in panic—not because those coins were certain to be sold, but because the possibility existed. Once creditors receive their repayments, they can choose what to do with them, and some may sell. That uncertainty alone has weighed on market sentiment.
Extending the deadline to 2027 is like removing the bullet that had been hanging over October and November.
When the news came out, BTC was trading around 82,000–82,500, down 0.59% over the past seven days. ETH, meanwhile, fell 4.4%, while BTC dominance remained above 60%. In relative terms, this shows BTC’s resilience in a month full of pressure.
Several structural supports are currently in place at the same time: whales have accumulated 85,000 BTC over the past three weeks; the share of BTC moved to exchanges by holders who had held for 6–12 months fell from 40.4% to 4.4% (signaling a sharp drop in willingness to sell); and when the Nasdaq fell 2.15% in a single day, BTC fell just 0.77% (a sign of decoupling).
Now there’s one more factor: Mt. Gox’s sell pressure has been pushed back to 2027.
The FOMC meeting is in seven days, on October 27, and it’s one of the most important single events of the year. Over these seven days, no Fed officials are scheduled to speak, and there are no major data releases (the next CPI report is in November). The only sources of information will be price action and on-chain data.
The Mt. Gox extension is one of the few certain events over these seven days that provides a positive narrative for BTC.
Key levels: 82,000–82,500 is current support; 87,300 is the breakout confirmation level; and the October 27 FOMC decision will be the moment that determines direction.
What’s your call for the October 27 FOMC meeting—hold or hike? Let’s hear it.
$BTC
#BTC

On September 15, the U.S. Senate vote on the CLARITY Act failed.
The bill could have given the CFTC greater authority to regulate crypto, but it stalled in Congress. Less than three weeks later, CFTC Chair Michael Selig put forward a framework of his own.
On October 5, the CFTC issued an ANPRM (Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking), introducing Reg CTX and Reg CAM.
Selig described the regulatory tiers for crypto exchanges as a three-step ladder:
The first tier is spot-only exchanges. The CFTC would oversee only fraud and market manipulation, while state licensing would cover everything else—and this tier would be unaffected by the new framework.
The second tier is the main target of this proposal: retail crypto exchanges that offer leverage, margin, or financing services. Reg CAM is designed for these platforms. They can apply to the CFTC to register as a "Crypto Asset Market (CAM)," a lighter-touch federal registration category than traditional futures exchanges.
The third tier is exchanges offering perpetual contracts and other derivatives, which fall under the existing Derivatives Clearing Organization (DCM) framework.
Coinbase, Crypto.com, and Robinhood all offer leverage-related products, making them potential second-tier candidates.
But there’s a fundamental limitation: participation is voluntary.
Selig himself acknowledged that requiring all relevant exchanges to register would take an act of Congress, and he doesn’t have that authority. CAM registration is a "federal alternative": platforms can choose federal registration or continue operating under state licenses.
A framework built on interpreting existing statutes—without the authority Congress didn’t grant—and with voluntary registration means its market reach depends entirely on how many exchanges decide that "federal endorsement" is worth the compliance costs.
The public comment period runs through December 14.
Will this framework ever actually take effect, or will we have to wait for the CLARITY Act to be reintroduced? What do you think?
$BTC
#cftc推进regcam自愿监管框架

On October 19, something caught my eye.
The Nasdaq fell 2.15% in a single day, and the S&P 500 dropped 1.09%—AI-related tech stocks came under pressure across the board.
BTC: down 0.77%, trading around $82,000–$82,500.
High-risk assets usually fall along with stocks during a panic. This time, BTC outperformed the Nasdaq by nearly 1.5 percentage points. BTC dominance also rose to 60.25%, its highest level this year.
Is there any real support behind this decoupling? On-chain data offers one answer.
Data from Santiment shows that over the past three weeks, whale addresses holding 100 to 1,000 BTC quietly accumulated 85,000 BTC—worth around $7 billion—continuing to buy as the price pulled back from $87,000 to $80,000. Meanwhile, CryptoQuant data shows that the share of BTC moved to exchanges by holders who bought 6 to 12 months ago plunged from 40.4% in June to 4.4%. This group has almost completely stopped sending BTC to exchanges (potential selling supply), suggesting a sharp decline in their willingness to sell.
Both signals point in the same direction: prices are falling, but fewer holders are willing to sell, while larger investors are buying.
At the same time, two wallets dormant for 12 years were activated today and transferred 416.69 BTC (about $33.82 million). Historically, movements from old wallets can sometimes signal selling pressure, so they’re worth tracking. But relative to the total market cap, this is a small amount, and for now it’s not a directional factor.
The biggest question today remains the FOMC meeting on October 27, eight days from now. During the blackout period, no Fed officials will speak, so the market’s only sources of new information are price action itself and on-chain data.
From both perspectives, BTC has found support around $80,000 twice, while whales have continued accumulating during the pullback. The fact that both are happening at the same time is a more direct signal of a bottom than any analyst forecast.
Of course, if the FOMC decides to raise rates on October 27 (the current probability is around 13%), all the accumulation logic above will need to be reassessed.
Do you think BTC’s outperformance of the Nasdaq today is a temporary or structural decoupling? Share your thoughts.
$BTC

Less than 24 hours until a key decision on Zcash NU7—on October 20, developers will decide whether to activate it on mainnet as planned on November 5.
One of NU7’s core changes is laid out in ZIP-2003:
Disable the v4 transaction format.
In plain English: Zcash’s earliest privacy pool, “Sprout,” uses the v4 format to spend funds. Once NU7 activates, v4 will no longer be accepted, meaning funds in Sprout will have no way to be spent.
Let’s be clear about two things:
First, the funds have not been destroyed.
There are around 22,000–25,000 ZEC in Sprout. The proposal does not burn them, and the on-chain records will remain. But “having money on the books that you can’t spend” isn’t all that different from having no money at all. The proposal explicitly says that restoring access in the future “may be possible,” but makes no commitment to any timeline. To put it more plainly, holders “may never be able to spend these funds.”
Second, the Sprout pool is already a stagnant pool.
Zcash’s first-generation privacy architecture launched in 2016. It was later superseded by Sapling (2018) and Orchard, and Sprout transactions now account for less than 0.1% of all activity on the network. Users have been repeatedly urged to migrate over the years, but a small group still hasn’t—NU7 is their final window.
Co-founder Zooko Wilcox personally issued a warning on X: check your old wallets.
Beyond Sprout, NU7 includes other changes: block times will be cut from 75 seconds to 25 seconds; a “Network Sustainability Mechanism” (NSM) will be introduced, allocating 60% of each block’s fees to a reserve and 40% to miners; and the old node software, zcashd, will be phased out.
October 20 is the turning point.
If the testnet results are good, mainnet activation will take place on November 5, and any funds left untouched in Sprout will be frozen—with no guarantee of when, or if, they’ll be unlocked.
Have you already moved your Sprout ZEC, or are you only just thinking to check now?
$ZEC

#zcashnu7提案拟冻结sprout支出