比特白

34.892 coins, repeated 30 times. A new address placed 30 BTC non–position-reducing limit buy orders today at 14:22 that were all priced between 75,000 and 76,000, totaling about 1,046.78 BTC. Nominal value is nearly $79 million.

This address has zero existing position; all the orders are non–position-reducing. It looks like it wants to go long rather than close old shorts. However, the current price is 78,494, and all the orders are sitting 3% to 4.5% below the current price. It’s not chasing the market price—it's waiting for a pullback.

My guess is either it believes price will revisit this range in the short term, or it’s just posting to probe the market; if it can’t get filled, it will cancel. Each of the 30 orders is exactly the same size and parameters, more like programmatically split orders rather than manually placing them one by one.

Next, I only watch for: whether the price can actually reach into 75,000–76,000, and whether these 30 orders are filled, partially filled, or simply cancelled. Orders resting on the book don’t count as position, and cancellations leave no trace. Whether this $79 million in nominal orders is real money only becomes clear when price touches it.

An address, 40 minutes, backflips more.

7:32 He was still adding to the short position against the trend—2.84 million shares of WTI, $2.4 million, topping up in the direction of oil prices rising.

9:01 Fully closed: 107.4 thousand short shares, average price 84.86, realized loss of $131.5 thousand.

About 10 minutes later, flipped to go long: 64.7 thousand WTI shares, 20x full position, $5.531 million.

At the same time, on Polymarket, he added to the position in three tranches for “Yes, the U.S. invades Iran before 2027”—trades executed at probabilities of 14%, 15%, and 16%. He put in $41.7 thousand, increasing his position size by 74.7%.

This isn’t impulsive chaos trading—it’s a continuous story with a stop-loss logic: on 8/28 he just closed his short on crude oil at a loss; three days later, the U.S. military actually moved in, and he immediately switched sides.

Data source: TradingBeats on-chain monitoring, republished by BlockBeats

Jiang Zhuoer says BTC will face its first test since 8/19; when it dropped on Friday, the first thing he took action on was ETH—selling 50% of his ETH spot holdings.

The test is for Bitcoin, while the reduction is in Ethereum. This mismatch is more worth watching than the words “test.” The fact-checking clip didn’t provide position details, so I won’t guess why he didn’t move BTC; I’ll only confirm one thing: he reduced ETH risk.

Today the market hasn’t kept falling: BTC is $78,002, up 0.46% in 24 hours; ETH is $2,453, up 0.77% in 24 hours.

Next, it’s only about the specific size of Friday’s ETF net outflows. A 9-day streak of inflows just ended. If the outflow is small and inflows return next week, then the “test” is only an emotion; if the outflow expands, then cutting that 50% of ETH is what counts as taking the reduction seriously.

ENA surged from 0.077 to 0.19 in a month, up 119%. Even more eye-catching is this one line: a certain giant whale laid in advance, with a return rate of 776%. But that message didn’t provide an address or an amount—just the return rate.

This is the most annoying kind. There’s a signal but no route, and you can’t verify whether it’s still on the trade now. ENA has since fallen back to 0.16, already dropping from the 0.19 peak. Trading volume is 138 million, and open interest is 73.77 million. On the contract side, some people are taking in, while others are exiting.

I’m not going to guess who that whale is. I just want to ask one thing: if it really did set up early and achieved a 776% return, would it not have started distributing near 0.19 by now? Without an address, this question can only remain a question mark forever.

Next, I’ll watch two things: whether TradingBeats later releases that address, and whether ENA’s open interest will continue to decline as the price falls.

Korea’s top five CEXs’ weekly trading volume jumped from 108.0 trillion won to 311.0 trillion won—about $23.0 billion—an increase of 188.04% month-over-month, the highest in nearly 10 months. Upbit accounts for 59.61%, and it’s still the absolute leader.

But today’s market didn’t give this volume any credit: BTC 77,644, 24h -2.07%; ETH 2,434, -2.18%; SOL 103.29, -2.40%.

With volume this large yet prices moving down, it feels more like turnover than aggressive accumulation. Out of the $23.0 billion, how much was buy-side versus sell-side? This card doesn’t reveal it. The next thing to watch is the won-side: if the kimchi premium narrows even to negative, then this move is local funds borrowing liquidity to exit; if the premium can still hold up, then that’s a different story.

“Maji” still holds 41,000 ETH in his address, about $100 million, making him the largest ETH long on-chain right now. But when the market dipped, 7 hours ago he first closed part of his position, taking a stop-loss of about $1.96 million.

He still has 75,000 HYPE (about $6.03 million) and 45 BTC (about $3.5 million) in his wallet.

On the other side, two giant whales withdrew 318,000 SOL from exchanges within 10 hours: 5p6zPz withdrew 281,000 SOL from Binance (about $29.68 million), and 3WzfuP withdrew 37,000 SOL from Kraken (about $3.87 million).

On one end, the biggest long is getting stopped out; on the other, whales are withdrawing and locking funds. The directions are opposite, but both are real on-chain actions with real money. Next, I’m watching two things: whether Maji’s remaining 41,000 ETH will continue to be reduced, and the address 5p6zPz—after going quiet for four months following March 18, it re-entered by adding SOL again. At the time it was sitting on an unrealized loss of over $8 million, yet it kept buying. Now it has withdrawn another 280,000 SOL.

Data sources: TradingBeats, Lookonchain, as reported by BlockBeats

Gold drops more than $120 in a day; spot price at 4,480, touched a low of 4,464 during the session—its lowest level in a week.

Vosch said, “There is still work to be done.” Rate-hike bets quickly heated up; the U.S. dollar strengthened, and gold was sold off. At the same time, the crypto market is also falling: BTC -3.21%, ETH -2.98%, SOL -5.13%.

This doesn’t look like a small adjustment in a single asset. Next, I’m only watching one thing: net flows into stablecoins and the major ETFs—to see whether money is exiting or if it’s just rotating into a different asset.

The one who moved first was 0x40f.

TradingBeats (crypto data monitoring) reported that Polymarket (prediction market) trader xm39’s associated address 0x40f yesterday liquidated 175,900 WTI crude oil long contracts, with a transaction value of about $14.253 million, resulting in a loss of $282,000. Yesterday he closed his longs; this morning he flipped and opened a short of nearly $10 million in crude oil.

Originally, he was placing two bets at once: an invasion of Iran by the U.S. before 2027, and a rise in crude oil. Now that crude has flipped to bearish, he has also cut the Polymarket position related to the Iran-invasion bet by 75%.

My guess is that he isn’t adjusting a specific price level—he’s canceling the entire “escalation of the war” trade.

Next, we’ll see whether 0x40f will continue adding to his shorts, and whether the remaining Iran position on Polymarket will be held or liquidated right away.

What really made my hands itch wasn’t that it earned +178% in two days, but the fact that when it added to its position, I treated that drop as just ordinary fluctuation.

0xaa53, two days ago LITE fell to around 819. It went 10x long, opened at an average entry of 819.9 with a position size of $1.836 million. Today LITE is up to 966, with an unrealized profit of $278k, for a margin return of 178.6%.

At this level, I shouldn’t need to move again. But my hands act faster than my brain by half a beat.

I’ll don’t move first. The itch is real.

Six addresses that have slept for more than ten years have recently begun to wake up, moving out 553.59 BTC in the process.

The earliest one from 2011—never touched for 15.1 years—woke up and moved 8.54 first, tiptoeing around as if afraid to wake someone.

I’m not guessing who it is; I’ll just squat and watch first.

I originally thought that after stealing the $114.7 million worth of crypto, the first thing to do would be to run. Turns out, when they checked, 87% of it is still lying in place.

According to Alex Thorn of Galaxy Research, in this case involving the Coldcard hardware wallet, a total of about 1,789.28 BTC were stolen, spanning 8,865 addresses. At the value when stolen, that amounts to roughly $114.7 million. Of that, 1,561 coins—87.3%—are still in addresses controlled by the attackers and have not moved.

What’s even stranger is that none of the coins taken in the first three waves were touched at all. Only later did some of the activity start involving CoinJoin and stripping chains for obfuscation.

This is beyond me. If they wanted to cash out, they should have moved it early; if they planned to hold long-term, why would someone start mixing it later? It feels like two groups of operators with completely different habits.

So what is this 87% waiting for? The data doesn’t give the answer. I shrug.

0x6046, the new address that recently opened 559 BTC short positions with 20x leverage on Hyperliquid.

Today it closed them.

It fully closed all 559.36 BTC short positions, realizing a loss of $8.101 million. Yesterday, this position was only 2% away from liquidation.

Ten minutes after closing, it flipped long. 428.287 BTC, $34.59 million injected, with an average entry price of $80,761 for the position.

Now the long position is floating at a loss of $0.6771 million. Add the $0.8101 million already lost from closing the shorts…

First time shorting—wrong. Second time going long—currently also at a floating loss.

A newly active address: deposits, opens positions, pushes it to the brink of liquidation, liquidates at a loss, and then after ten minutes flips into a heavily sized position. The rhythm feels a bit off to me.

I’m not drawing a conclusion. The numbers are right there.

Here’s the question: a triple-leveraged semiconductor ETF that dropped from $302 to $111.16 and has seen over a 60% drawdown—yet, in just two months, it still managed to pull in nearly $7 billion. Is this money going to bargain-hunt at the bottom, or to serve as fuel?

As of August 24, SOXL is at $111.16. In July through the first two weeks of August, net inflows were nearly $7 billion. The more it falls, the more they buy. If you put the same behavior on the underlying stock, people call it “faith.” But put it on a triple-leveraged ETF, and all I can say is: I hope they can calculate the daily costs of decay.

Even better (or stranger), it’s buying the index—not Nvidia or Micron themselves. After chip stocks corrected for two months, the funds didn’t retreat; instead, they increased leverage and surged in. I don’t care whether this is “the bottom.” I just want to see what happens when those nearly $7 billion finally realize that a leveraged ETF can’t simply be held and will inevitably bounce back the way they’re expecting—when the redemption button gets pressed, what kind of stampede it turns into.

Let’s keep watching the show.

Yesterday evening, a newly active address, 0x6046, appeared on Hyperliquid for the first time. It first received 992,000 USDC from the 0x6b9e address—roughly 1.5 minutes later—and then opened a BTC short position. It was followed by two additional top-ups of about 1.6 million USDC as margin, bringing the total to $2.592 million.

Last night, it shorted 559.4 BTC in batches, establishing an average entry price of $79,318.4, with 20x full-position leverage.

Today, BTC is up to 80,840 (24h +4.3%). The short position is currently worth $45.218 million, with an unrealized loss of about $851,000. It has been pushed to a spot only 2.5% away from the liquidation price of $82,896.5—making it, on Hyperliquid right now, the closest-to-liquidation and largest short.

As of now, it has not placed any public stop-loss, take-profit, or position-reduction orders. All 559 short orders remain fully open.

New money, heavy leverage, and no defenses. In historical data, the script of getting blown up on this kind of high-leverage short on Hyperliquid and then flipping to chase longs has been played out repeatedly in February, April, and May.

That’s all the on-chain data can tell—identity and intent are silent; the data won’t speak.

August 25th SOL market analysis $SOL

SOL key support: 96.47

It can’t drop any further here—buyers continue.

Support zone: 96.47 82.93 90.69

Resistance zone: 106 114 119

SOL very likely won’t be able to break down further~~

If it breaks above 106 and doesn’t come back down, it’s recommended to focus mainly on buying dips.

August 25 ETH market analysis $ETH

Key support for ETH: 2388 2395
It can’t drop below here—bears should continue

What we can see for the pullback is around the 4-hour high. But the structure is very strong.
There is a possibility of high-level consolidation: prices won’t fall, and the MACD rebound directly breaks above the previous high once it resets to the zero line.

Key resistance zone: 2525-2555. A breakout could push to 2620.

Intraday outlook: mainly look for low-buy opportunities.

BTC market analysis on August 25

BTC weekly opens higher. Key support below: 77644
Intraday support at: 78300-78057

Currently the 4-hour chart is at a high level, with a risk of pullback
But overall the structure is very bullish. There’s a high chance of moving in a correction without changing prices significantly
Sideways consolidation at the highs; MACD returns to the zero line; immediate rebound

So for the day, focus mainly on going long on dips:
Support levels provided in the live room below:
78309 78057 77644

Key resistances above: 81700 82217

82000 is the BTC key weekly meridian line. If it breaks through, the market may reverse—ending the bear market

QCP says this round is driven jointly by U.S. Treasury long-end repo activity and ETF inflows, followed by another line: “This week, the focus shifts to three macro variables.” So what are the three?

Here we go again. Stocks have already surged, and the money has already come in—now you’re saying there are three variables this week, but you won’t name a single one.

What’s the difference from “a major news item is coming in a couple of days”? If there really is a clear main storyline, you’d have laid out the variables in advance. First, name the three variables.

S&P is down only 0.06%, and it looks like everything’s fine.
The problem is: SanDisk -6.05%, SK hynix -5.41%, Micron -3.26%—the three memory players are lined up and getting smashed downward. The index is holding up because someone is propping it: gold +1.37% clinging to its intraday high, Coinbase +1.14%, and MicroStrategy +1.29%.

Just a couple of days ago, these three memory stocks were being touted as the AI core narrative, with funds moving in aggressively. Today, SanDisk has tumbled from 1626 to 1491—an intraday swing of over 8%. This isn’t a pullback; it’s someone using the commotion to dump.

The money hasn’t disappeared—it’s just no longer in memory stocks. It’s moved to gold and crypto. The question is: how long can the index rely on this prop? When the prop can’t hold, that 0.06% in the S&P won’t be able to contain it either.

Bitcoin jumps 20% in a week. The Ministry of Finance raises the cap on long-end bond repurchases to 4 billion. Which one is actually propping up the other?

Here we go again. Whenever it rises, the explanations line up—ETF inflows, Treasury buybacks—everything sounds right, yet it all looks like it’s added after the rally. The 30-year yield briefly topped 5.3%, the highest since 2007. Then the Ministry of Finance stepped in, lifting the long-end repo cap from a maximum of 2 billion to at least 4 billion, and yields promptly fell. Long-end rates finally “relaxed,” and risk assets got someone to scramble in.

The annoying part is that you can’t tell what’s primary and what’s secondary at all. Did the ETF buy first, or did the long-end yields break down first—so that Bitcoin prices came next? QCP says it’s a “joint driver,” which is basically saying nothing.

The repo size is directly doubled, and this isn’t money from the crypto market itself. From the fiscal side, water is being released into the long end—arguably more worth paying attention to than those modest ETF inflows. And this week there are still three macro variables waiting in line; it’s endless.