SVIATOSLAV GUSEV

I have one fundamental issue with $TON.

Its biggest advantage is also its biggest drawback: Telegram.

$Gram is often marketed as a blockchain with potential access to a billion users. But those billion users don’t belong to TON. They belong to Telegram. And that’s a pretty important distinction.

If a restaurant is the only one past airport security, a large number of customers doesn’t necessarily make it the best restaurant in town.

Decentralization is much the same story. You can have hundreds of validators, open-source code, and a beautiful architecture. But if one private product is also your main source of users, your main distribution channel, and largely determines the rules of the game for developers, the dependency doesn’t go away. It’s just a little further up the stack from the blockchain.

The second problem with TON is that it’s quite complex technologically. Sharding, asynchronous messages, contracts interacting through chains of transactions. On paper, it’s a powerful architecture for scaling. In practice, someone always pays for complexity. Usually the developer, and then the user.

And the third issue is reliability. TON has already run into network problems during sharp spikes in load. That’s normal for a young blockchain. But if your main thesis is that a billion Telegram users will join the blockchain tomorrow, high load stops being a stress test. It becomes a regular Tuesday.

So I’d evaluate TON with a very simple thought experiment.

Take Telegram out of the picture.

Would developers still choose this blockchain over Ethereum, Solana, and other networks purely for its technology, liquidity, tools, and ecosystem?

That’s where the answer is no longer so obvious.

The owner of the NYSE is taking stocks onchain itself. OKXICE—a joint venture between OKX and ICE—has notified the SEC that it is launching 24/7 trading in tokenized U.S. stocks.

What we know: 60+ companies (Nvidia, Apple, Tesla, JPMorgan, Coinbase, Circle, SpaceX), permissioned trading on X Layer, and issuers have 30 days to opt out. It’s based on the SEC’s five-year innovation exemption from September: platforms like these can operate without registering as an exchange.

My take: this is no longer crypto knocking on Wall Street’s door—Wall Street is taking the rails for itself. A permissioned network with KYC isn’t DeFi; it’s the same exchange in a new wrapper. There’s no direct inflow into $BTC here: weekend traders’ money could go into Nvidia instead of coins. Meanwhile, $BTC at ~85.8k has failed to break 87k for the second time this week.

Question: Would you trade Apple late on a Sunday night—or will tokenized stocks eat into some of crypto’s trading volume?

$BTC #Tokenization

$SOL ~121 and four green days in a row — but inflows into spot ETFs have nearly vanished. Key levels.

The numbers: Solana ETFs saw +2,4$ million from Sept. 28 to Oct. 2, versus 188$ million the week before (SoSoValue), with two sessions in the red. OI ~7,2$ billion, funding neutral. Still ~59% below the ATH of 293.

Upside: A daily close above 123–125 (September high: 124.95) opens the way to 132–133. But we need $BTC above 87k — overnight it once again reached ~86,950 and pulled back.

Downside: Losing 119 (the 50 EMA on the 4-hour chart) points to 116.4, then 112.5–113.5.

My take: A rally on thin volume and with no money flowing into ETFs is a short squeeze, not fresh demand. While $BTC is up against 87k, I’m expecting a retest of 119, not buying the breakout.

Question: Will $SOL hit 125 or 116 first?
$SOL $BTC #Solana

Anthropic targets an IPO above 2$ trillion — and $BTC still isn’t holding 87k. Money for risk is flowing into AI obligations, not spot.

Figures (Reuters from the prospectus / CMC). The placement price is being discussed above 2$ trillion — more than twice the May private valuation of ~965$ billion. For 2025 net loss: 42$ billion; for cloud/compute/infra, at least 518$ billion is budgeted for ~a decade, ~80% of which is non-cancelable. Only compute in 2025: 7,33$ billion (three times vs 2024) with opex 12,65$ billion. Confidential S-1 is still in June; marketing — mid-October, listing is being discussed after midterms in November. For comparison: SpaceX previously closed ~1,7$ trillion in 2026. $BTC on Sunday morning is around 84.7–85.4k — after Friday’s failed breakout above 87k.

My take: it’s not “AI ate crypto,” but a test of where long capital is willing to go now. 518$ billion in obligations “even if you don’t use it” is a bet on compute scarcity, not on free liquidity. While the market digests these checks, risk-on in $BTC looks secondary: the hike is priced out by the morning, and spot is still in range. If Anthropic clears the upper band, that’s a signal of appetite for huge equity stories; if they cut the valuation — expect cooling and in alt-bets.

Question: will $BTC break 87k before the Anthropic roadshow — or will the market first show how much it’s really willing to pay for AI equity?
$BTC #Bitcoin #Anthropic #IPO

In a week, the market has almost completely unwound the October hike—yet $BTC is still sitting below 87k. They cut the rate, but didn’t buy the price.

Numbers (Glassnode Macro Special 3 Oct / BLS / futures). Probability of a hike at the Oct 28 meeting: from ~66% on Monday down to ~22% by Friday—after Williams (“no urgency”), softer core PCE, and NFP +29k vs. consensus ~84k. Three-month hiring ~51k/month—less than a third of the 2010s average (~183k). The 2s10s curve widened again to ~42 bps (from ~20 bps around the September hike), but the 10y is still around ~5.2%. $BTC over the same week is about +1% and early Sunday is around 84.7–84.8k—after Friday’s fail above 87k. Through December, futures still price in roughly ~24 bps of hikes; the next check is CPI on Oct 14.

My take: the market bought “no urgency,” not risk-on. As long as the long end of the curve doesn’t let go of 5.2%, spot $BTC stays in a range: hike priced out ≠ cheap money. Friday’s squeeze in shorts into NFP and the pullback after the release showed the same thing—movement driven by positioning, not by new demand. The real test isn’t the 22% for October; it’s CPI on Oct 14: a hot print will bring the hike back into play faster than any Fed speech.

Question: Will $BTC break 87k before CPI on Oct 14—or do we first wait for 10y to let go of 5.2%?
$BTC #Bitcoin #Fed #CPI

Blast — Paradigm-backed L2 on $ETH — shuts down the network: costs > revenue, «no credible path» to sustainability. Once there was >2,3$ bn in the bridge to mainnet launch. Now they’re asking to move assets to Ethereum by October 26. This isn’t a «pause», it’s a wind-down.

Figures (Decrypt / Cointelegraph / The Block, Oct 2–3). Peak TVL >2,3$ bn by February 2024; Paradigm seed ~20$ m (Nov 2023, Blur team). Now TVL is around tens of millions (~32$ m per The Block). By Oct 26 — a regular withdrawal interface; first a pause of ~a week for unwinding Lido assets, then a 24h delay. After Oct 26 — only direct bridge contracts on Ethereum. This year, alongside Zero Network and Silicon — L2 is also shutting down.

My take: native yield + an airdrop collected deposits, but not the chain’s economics. When DA/sequencer and support cost more than fee revenue — a «major L2» turns into a bridge with a deadline. For $ETH this isn’t a hit to L1; it’s a filter: networks with a real fee base will survive, not those with TVL from points. BLAST has already responded with a sharp sell-off — the market is pricing in the shutdown before the bridge.

Question: by the end of 2026, how many more mid-tier L2 on $ETH will close using the same formula costs > revenue — or has the market already passed the peak of cleanup?
#Ethereum #L2 #Blast

Citi has again raised its 12-month $BTC target to $113,000$ —from $82,000 in July. The bank expects roughly +34% from current levels. On Saturday, the market is sitting around 84.6k and for the second time in two weeks it failed to hold 87k. The target is there, but a breakout isn’t.

Figures (CoinDesk / Decrypt / crypto.com weekender / SoSoValue, snapshot 1–3 Oct). Note: Citi: $BTC 82k→113k, $ETH 2,240$→3,028$; base case: about 5$ billion in inflows into crypto products over 12 months—“slower, but stickier” via advisers and broker allocations. Spot-$BTC ETF: from ~5,8$ billion in net outflows by mid-July → roughly +800$ million YTD by the end of September; in September alone: ~2,65$ billion. On Thursday, the 10-year Treasury yield briefly touched 5.34% (highest since 2002); after a softer NFP it pulled back to ~5.2%. On Friday, $BTC briefly traded ~87,100$–87,200$, and by Saturday it was ~84,600$; the ceiling is the same as the one that capped the September move around ~87,400$.

My take: Citi is selling a scenario where yields calm down and advisers calmly add more. While the 10-year is paying >5% with no price risk, “stickier” money in $BTC is a promise, not something confirmed on the chart. 113k is still below ATH >126k— the bank isn’t calling for a new high; it’s simply returning to the mid-case after the summer sell-off. Without a sustained close above 87k, this is a client slide, not a market signal.

Question: which comes first—$BTC closes the week above 87k, or the 10-year yield heads back toward 5.3%+ and eats the bank’s optimism?
$BTC #Bitcoin #Citi

The SEC has rolled out a draft of custody rules for advisers and funds — and $BTC already failed to hold 87k and is once again sitting below 85k. The market is taking on structural deleveraging for now; it’s not buying the price yet.

Numbers (SEC.gov / Investing.com / CME FedWatch, morning Oct 3). On Oct 1, the SEC proposed an update to custody rules under the Advisers Act and Investment Company Act: conditional self-custody if there’s no available qualified custodian (checked once per quarter), plus state trust companies as permitted custodians; then there’s 60 days for public comment after the Federal Register — this is not a final rule yet. $BTC briefly moved above 87 219$ (first attempt above 87k since ~Sept 23), but by evening it was already around 84 612$; on Saturday morning, about 84.5–84.6k. FedWatch: October hike ~22% (hold ~78%), December hike still elevated — roughly 75%+.

My take: for institutions, this matters more than any NFP-type blip. While RIAs and funds were living in a gray area of custody, spot demand via regulated wrappers ran into compliance—not just the Fed rate. But the proposal ≠ the rule: the final text of “qualified custodian” will determine whether bitcoin-native trusts win or whether the big banks regain control. Until $BTC holds 87k on the structural headline, this isn’t an “institutional breakout” yet—it’s a bet that the rule will reach the finish line without being watered down.

Question: Will $BTC return to 87k before the end of the comment period—or is the market waiting for the SEC’s final text first?
$BTC #Bitcoin #SEC

$BTC after a weak NFP holds near October highs — the market is no longer “waiting for the report,” but deciding whether this is a breakout or a false exit.

Figures (The Block / Crypto Briefing / CoinGlass, Oct 2). September’s NFP — about 29k jobs added versus a consensus around 90k; unemployment 4.2%. FedWatch: probability of a hold in October ~82% (a week ago ~36%). Price after the peak stays above 87 000$ moves around 86,700$–86,900$. The next ask cluster on Glassnode — about 87,000$, roughly twice as thin as the old wall at 85k. QCP: resistance ~87,400$ as the gateway to 90k; nearest support — the 85,000$–85,200$ zone; below that 84k and ~83,500$.

Futures turnover over 24h — about 70$ bn versus ~6.3$ bn spot.

Scenarios. Up: a close and hold above 87 400$ opens the way to 90k with a thin ask. Down: a selloff back to 85k after the squeeze will return 84k / 83,500$ — the same empty order book turns faster.

My take: a weak payroll removes the hike rate, but by itself doesn’t buy above 87k. As long as futures are 10x fatter than spot, that’s leverage and cover, not proven spot demand. Don’t focus on the NFP headline— watch whether 85k holds as the floor after the impulse.

Question: does $BTC close the day above 87k — or pull back to test 85k as the new support?
$BTC #Bitcoin

$BTC breaks through the ask-side liquidity wall around 85k — it’s not only “the market priced in the NFP.” At the same time, shorts were deflated: part of the move toward October’s local high — a classic short squeeze on an empty order book.

Figures (Cointelegraph / CoinGlass / Crypto Briefing, Oct 2). In 24h, short positions on $BTC — about 122$ mln liquidations; across the whole crypto market — roughly 210$ mln. On Bitstamp, the day’s high is around $86,857. Earlier in the week, around 85,700$ , more than 30$ mln sell orders were hanging — buyers removed that wall. CoinGlass shows a new cluster of potential liquidations above ~87,300. Separately: within a single window of about 10 minutes, roughly 110$ mln shorts across the market were burned.

My take: forced cover is the fuel for the impulse, not proof of sustained demand. As long as the ask above the price is thin, the move up looks easy; once the cluster above 87k starts getting defended, or macro (NFP) hits back — the same mechanism will flip downward even faster. Don’t look for “who’s right on the NFP,” but whether the open interest in shorts below the price is still there or has already been burned out.

Question: Does $BTC hold 86k after the shorts got squeezed — or was that just a one-off squeeze without a second buyer?
$BTC #Bitcoin #liquidations

There are still a few hours until the NFP, yet $BTC has already moved up to the day’s local high—against the backdrop of yields that have been weighing on it all through September. This isn’t “the market already knows everything,” but rather a bet that today’s US employment report will determine whether the October hike is still alive.

Numbers (CoinDesk / FXStreet / CNBC, morning of Oct 2): $BTC is briefly above 86,885, around 86k—about +1.5% on the day and roughly +3% since the start of October. September NFP consensus is ≈90k (August was +162k); unemployment rate 4.1%; AHE +0.3% m/m. Some surveys are closer to 84k. Early on, 10y is around 5.24% after the week’s peak of ~5.34%; 30y is ~5.62%. DXY is briefly above 102—an 18-month high. CME FedWatch: roughly 72% for a hold in October (earlier in the week the odds for a hike rose to ~70%, then pulled back after softer Core PCE at 3.0% y/y). Market thresholds: above 100k—talk of a hike and a strong dollar returns; below 50k—pressure on the USD; 50–100k—doesn’t change much for the price of the October meeting.

My take: $BTC broke the top of the weekly range of 82–85k up to the figure, not after. If NFP is weak and yields move below—then that confirms that the risk asset has already priced the risk correctly. If payrolls >100k and 10y pulls back toward 5.3%+ again—today’s bounce to 86k looks like a classic pre-data squeeze. Don’t just watch the headline; look at AHE and revisions: soft jobs alongside sticky wages is still hawkish for the Fed.

Question: does $BTC hold 86k after 14:30 Warsaw time—or does NFP pull us back into the 82–85k range?
$BTC #Bitcoin #NFP

Open USD (OUSD) launched on Sep 30 — and today, Oct 1, access opens via Coinbase. This is not another DeFi yield stablecoin: it has a payments consortium behind it and >1$ bn in seed liquidity. The question isn’t “is the teaser pretty?”, but whether real volume will move outside of crypto exchanges.

Numbers (Stripe / CoinDesk / Unchained, Sep 30 → Oct 1). Open Standard: Coinbase, Mastercard, Shopify, Stripe, Visa founders — equal shares. Issuer Bridge (Stripe). Networks: Ethereum, Solana, Base, Tempo. Reserves at BlackRock, Lead Bank, and BNY, with monthly attestations. Founders set aside >1$ bn for seed supply; Tempo showed >400$ m on day one in OUSD liquidity. Mint/redeem for businesses is 1:1 with no mint/burn fee. Partners already >200. Trading: Coinbase, Kraken, Uniswap; Stripe/Mastercard/Visa — already now, Coinbase — from Oct 1.

My take: payments giants are building “money for business,” not yet another basis-trade stable. Free mint/redeem and distribution via Stripe/Visa/MC matter more than any slide deck target. But >1$ bn in seed and >400$ m on day one on Tempo is just the start of the offering, not proven demand. Until we see actual mint/redeem volumes and share of activity outside CEX, OUSD remains an infrastructure launch rather than a leader swap in the stablecoin market.

Question: by the end of October, will OUSD build sustainable turnover through payment rails, or will it remain liquidity on Tempo/CEX without real business flow?
#stablecoin #OUSD

Standard Chartered has unveiled Ethena’s coverage: USDe from ~4,9$ bn to 40$ bn by the end of 2028, and ENA to $2. A pretty 8× chart — but supply was already compressing from the peak above 10$ bn. The question isn’t “do you believe the bank?”, but what must become true for the buyback math to hold.

Numbers (The Block / Cointelegraph / CryptoSlate, note SC as of Sept 30). USDe now ~4,9$ bn → target 40$ bn end-2028. ENA ~0.26–0.28$, target 2$ (~7×). Fee switch: 95% of net revenue goes to the ENA programmatic buyback. At 40$ bn USDe and ENA price as it is now, SC estimates annual buybacks at ≈23% of circulating mcap — and they themselves write that this is unsustainable, meaning the price “must” rise. UNI benchmark: after the fee switch, buybacks settled at ~3–4%. Blended yield ~5.2% — the basis trade weakens, while the protocol pulls in RWA / DeFi / institutional lending. Ethena is the 4th stablecoin issuer and the 2nd among yield-bearing after Sky; yield-bearing is still ~5% of the market. At 25$ bn USDe, Ethena itself assessed ~375$ million/year buybacks.

My take: the bank is selling scale and buyback, while the market has already seen how USDe deflates from >10$ bn to ~4.9$. An 8× move from the current base isn’t a continuation of the trend, but a reversal of shrinkage. Until RWA and yield-bearing prove growth, a 23% mcap buyback isn’t a bull case — it’s a stress test of the model: either ENA gets more expensive “out of necessity,” or the USDe supply won’t reach 40$ bn. For crypto, it’s more important whether Ethena can regain scale without an endless basis trade than whether the $2 target is hit.

Question: Will USDe return closer to the previous peak by the end of 2026, or will the SC forecast remain a slide without execution?
#Ethena #stablecoin

Nine green days for the spot-$BTC ETF ended on the last trading day of September—and on the same day $ETH and $SOL also flipped to red. This is no longer a “pause on a single shelf,” but a synchronized outflow day across three of the main crypto ETFs.

Numbers (Farside / FinanceFeeds / Altcoin Buzz, session Sep 30 → publication Oct 1). Spot-$BTC ETF: −148,7$ mln — the streak ended, from Sep 17 to Sep 29 (~3,1$ bln in total). Within the day: Fidelity FBTC −125,6$ mln, Bitwise BITB −13,6$, BlackRock IBIT −9,5$. The week of Sep 21–25 produced ≈2,39$ bln on its own; the peak on Sep 21 was +999$ mln. Spot-$ETH ETF: −59,6$ mln (earlier in the day it was only −2,8$ — the seven-day streak was already broken; the decline accelerated). Spot-$SOL ETF: ≈−12,5$ mln after seven green days. Together ≈221$ mln net outflow. $BTC, after the PCE pop, is back above 85 500$ again at about 83.4–83.7k; 10y ~5,28%, 30y ~5,62%. Cum $BTC ETF since launch ~57,6$ bln—one red day doesn’t negate that.

My take: −148,7$ mln versus 3,1$ bln over nine sessions is a test, not a cycle reversal. But what’s more important is the composition: almost the entire hit to $BTC was FBTC, while $ETH and $SOL went negative at the same time. A soft PCE lifted the price and didn’t hold it, while yields remain near multi-year highs. If, before Friday’s employment report, the $BTC ETF returns to the green—then the September institutional bid wave is still alive. If the minus repeats and $ETH remains on acceleration—that’s a shift in the flow regime, not “just one red day.”

Question: Will the $BTC ETF manage to turn green again by NFP on Oct 2, or is the triple outflow on Sep 30 the start of a red week?
$BTC $ETH $SOL #Bitcoin #ETF

PCE came in softer than consensus — and the morning filter worked: 10y yields pulled back, FedWatch kept October under the coin, $BTC broke through the 85k zone. Not a “victory over inflation,” but a removal of urgency for October.

Figures (BEA / CNBC / CME FedWatch / Invezz / CryptoBriefing, Sep 30). Headline PCE August: +0.3% m/m → 3.4% y/y vs. Dow Jones consensus 0.3% / 3.7%. Core: +0.2% m/m → 3.0% y/y (expected 0.3% / 3.3%). Spending +0.9% with income +0.2%. After the release, FedWatch: keeping the rate in October at ~52.9%, hike +25 bps ~47.1%; for December the market is still dragging it out. 10y fell from the morning ~5.28–5.29% to ~5.23%. $BTC above ~85 500$ (up from ~83k in the morning). Q2 GDP final was revised up to 2.2% from 1.5%.

My take: by morning, JOLTS and Williams already knocked FedWatch off the coin from ~70%; PCE didn’t flip the narrative — it cemented it with a number. A soft core with spending still alive = the Fed may not rush in October, but the 2% target is still far, and December hasn’t been ruled out. For $BTC, a shift in timing and a 10y pullback matters more than “deinflation is ready.” The institutional bid in the ETF this morning (+66$ m) now lines up with macro easing — hence the jump over 85k, not a “new cycle” from a single print.

Question: will soft PCE and 10y below 5.25% be enough for $BTC to hold 85k until Friday’s payrolls, or will the market bring back urgency for October?
$BTC #Bitcoin #PCE #Fed

Seven days of green spot-$ETH ETF inflows were cut off — and on the very same day, $BTC and $SOL are still up. A discrepancy within the institutional shelf, not a general “exit”.

Figures (SoSoValue / Farside / FinanceFeeds / Lookonchain, Sep 29–30). Spot-$ETH ETF on Sep 29: −2.81$ m — the end of the seven-day streak of inflows that started around Sep 18. Within the day: Grayscale ETH +12.83$ m, BlackRock ETHA −8.94$ m, Fidelity FETH −6.7$ m. Group NAV ~17.79$ bn (~5.4% of $ETH’s market cap), cum ~13.95$ bn. A day earlier it was still +17.1$ m. At the same time, the spot-$SOL ETF +5.4$ m (BSOL +5.7$) — the seventh green one; the $BTC ETF had already been breaking down in the morning (+66.2$ m, ninth day). $ETH is around $2,650–2,690.

My take: in the morning I checked the macro and the bid in $BTC — by daytime, it’s a different shelf. The break in the $ETH series at −2.8$ m after a heavy week (~+690$ m as of Sep 25) — that’s a slowdown, not a reversal. ETHA and FETH pulled out, Grayscale took it — the net is tiny. As long as $BTC and $SOL keep posting green days, a weak $ETH looks like rotation within crypto-ETFs rather than an escape from risk. PCE is still ahead — it will determine whether this is a “pause in accumulation” or the start of a red week for alt-ETFs.

Question: tomorrow will the $ETH ETF swing back to positive together with $SOL, or will the downside spread across BlackRock/Fidelity and continue?
$ETH $SOL $BTC #Ethereum #ETF

JOLTS cooled off, and in a single day FedWatch cut the odds of an October hike to almost a coin’s worth — yet $BTC is still around 83k. The market has already repriced the Fed’s odds, but the price of money and spot still haven’t.

Figures (BLS / Farside / CME FedWatch / Reuters, Sep 29–30). JOLTS for August: vacancies 7.079M versus consensus 7.23; July was revised to 7.335M. 10Y Treasuries ~5.28–5.29% — the highest since 2007; 30Y up to ~5.6% intraday. FedWatch: the probability of a +25 bp move at the October FOMC fell from ~70–74% to ~47–50% after Williams’ remarks. Spot-$BTC ETF on Sep 29 still added +66.2$ M (IBIT +51.1$); on Sep 28 +31.$ M — the ninth straight green day since Sep 17; cum ~57.7$ B. $BTC ~83,000–83,200. Today’s filter is PCE.

My take: softer labor and the FedWatch shift lower are not a “ready-made reversal” for $BTC as long as the 10Y holds the zone above 5.2%. Institutional bid in the ETF is alive, but it’s thin (+66.2$ M) — it absorbs rather than accelerates. If PCE doesn’t reignite the inflation narrative, the odds of a return above 85k increase; if it does, 82.5–83k is the line of defense again.

Question: what matters more for $BTC today — confirming FedWatch below 50% after PCE, or holding 10Y below 5.3%?
$BTC #Bitcoin #Fed #JOLTS

The spot-$XRP ETF is already holding almost as many coins as Ripple can release from escrow on October 1. Institutional wrappers are accumulating, and the spot is around 1,48$ — up from last week’s high.

Figures (Bitcoin.com / SoSoValue / The Crypto Basic, Sept 25–28). Seven spot-$XRP ETFs in the US: 1,179.62 million XRP (~1.18% of the fixed supply of 100 billion), AUM ~1.77–1.82$ billion. Top custody: Bitwise ~413 million, Franklin XRPZ ~293 million, Canary XRPC ~250 million. Week Sept 21–25: +75.59$ million inflow (Bitwise +58.99$, Franklin +16.60$). Franklin XRPZ crossed 500.99$ million in cumulative inflows. Ripple escrow: another 31.98 billion XRP; the Oct 1 window — up to 1 billion XRP (~1.5$ billion). A single monthly high is about ~85% of the entire ETF stack since launch. Spot ~1,48$ versus the Sept 23 high ~1.66$; AUM is slightly below cumulative inflows (1.77 vs 1.79$ billion).

My take: in the morning, $BTC was getting squeezed by rates; during the day, $ETH was being accumulated via ETFs and staking. In the evening, a different shelf—$XRP: demand in regulated wrappers is real (75.$ million for the week, Franklin at 500$), but the ceiling for a single unlock is comparable to the entire ETF stack. Historically, most of it gets pushed back into escrow, but the price no longer follows inflows. The question isn’t “will they unlock or not”—it’s how much will be returned to lock, and how much the ETF tape will manage to absorb after October 1.

Question: On October 1 will $XRP be a non-event again, or will we see the first unlock where ETF custody no longer outweighs the float?
$XRP $BTC #XRP #ETF

$BTC around 83k on the fifth consecutive red session—especially considering that spot BTC ETFs just took the best week since October 2025. Flows are there, but prices aren’t: the market is trading not “who bought,” but the cost of money.

Figures (Proactive / SoSoValue / CME FedWatch, Sep 28–29). $BTC ~83,100–83,500$ after the low ~82,600; a week ago it was above 87k. $ETH ~2,680–2,690. Spot-$BTC ETF for the week ending Sep 25: ~2,4$ b — highest since Oct 2025; Friday was still +134,5$ m, together with $ETH/$SOL products ~308$ m; Sep 28 +31$ m (8th straight day in the green). 10y treasuries ~5.23% — highest since 2007. Brent ~105–107. FedWatch: chance of a +25 bps move on the October FOMC around 65–70%. Today JOLTS, tomorrow PCE, and Friday payrolls.

My take: institutional bids are alive, but with 10y above 5.2% they are absorbing drawdowns—not fueling a rally. As long as yields and oil hold the inflation narrative, $BTC is trading the data week and the October FOMC, not “ETF again green.” The 82.5–83k zone is the first line; a return above 85k will signal that flows have again outweighed rate-hike expectations.

Question: what matters more for $BTC this week—holding 83k on JOLTS/PCE, or pushing FedWatch down from ~70% hike?
$BTC $ETH #Bitcoin #Fed

Strategy surpassed its June stack record: $847,666 BTC. They bought on the dip to ~83k, and again, slightly more money went into buying back preferred shares than into Bitcoin itself.

Figures (The Block / 8-K Strategy, purchases Sept. 21–27, report Sept. 28). +1,665 BTC for ~142.7$ million at an average of $85,681. Stake: 847,666 BTC (~70.6$ B market value) with an average stake of 75,437$ and total costs of ~64$ B — more than 4% of the 21M cap. Paper plus of about 6.6$ B. Funding: ATM on MSTR (~1.47M shares sold in a week for ~246.2$ M); 103.5$ M was spent on $BTC from ATM + 48.1$ M cash. At the same time, the STRC buyback is ~151.7$ million – again exceeding the coin check. As of Sep 27: USD Reserve 5.02$ billion, Cash 1$ billion; ATMs still have ~18.84$ billion of limit.

My take: in the morning, GEO and rates were putting pressure on spot, while during the day, institutions were accumulating $SOL via ETFs. In the evening, the corporate bid is more important: a stack record at a price below the average weekly buy is not a "buy on the high," but rather a drawdown. But the capital structure is the same as last week: preferred and ATM funds are sharing the flow with $BTC. For the market, it's more important that 847k has been broken and the ATM is even bigger than the size of a single check.

Question: Will Strategy accelerate its climb above 850k over the next two weeks, or will STRC/dividends again take more cash than spot $BTC?
$BTC#Bitcoin#Strategy