PIZZA看加密

$0.50 to $0.1659, eighteen hours.

Yesterday afternoon at 4 p.m., I pressed the send button on the $0.50 line. Looking back, that line was the day’s top.

In the exact words I wrote in $HEI : I was watching to see when that batch of shorts with an average price of $0.2191 would capitulate—once it disappeared from the order book, this round would be over. Turns out, the ones who capitulated were the longs. With the current price at $0.2014, those shorts are sitting on unrealized profit right now. The scene I was waiting for never happened even once.

I’ve figured out where I was wrong.

When I saw open interest doubling over seven hours, my brain automatically translated it as: longs are still piling in. But an increase in open interest only means more people are willing to bet at this price; both long and short sides get added at the same time. What it measures is how big the disagreement is—it never tells you which side will win.

I use an indicator that measures disagreement, and I’ve used it for a whole day when reading the directional indicator.

Now the same set of numbers is placed in front of us, but what you read from it is the opposite.

Open interest dropped from $33.11M yesterday afternoon to $10.53M now—two-thirds of the positions have already left. The funding rate’s last three settlement values were -0.0020%, +0.0017%, and +0.0011%—all hovering right around zero. That extreme -0.0566% from yesterday afternoon hasn’t shown up again. The long/short accounts ratio is 1.0008; longs are 50.02% and shorts 49.98%—basically even.

The disagreement is gone. This fight has already ended.

So my judgment is very clear: the move upward near $0.2 is shorts closing positions and buying back—don’t treat it as the start of a new cycle. $HEI 24 hours: -42%. Spot trading volume is $104M, ranking third in the whole market—only behind BTC and ETH. The crowd in the bowl hasn’t dispersed yet. But on the derivatives side, $1.14B in trading volume against only $10.53M of open interest means money is rapidly churning in there; nobody wants to hold overnight.

If I have to give a level, it’s $0.2191.

That batch of shorts’ cost line is still hanging there. If price climbs back above it, that’s when they start to feel uncomfortable—then the rebound will have fuel to burn. Before that, I treat every upward move as closing-position noise.

Open interest only tells you there are more people, not who is right.

If I had understood this sentence yesterday, I could’ve saved an entire day.

Binance has modified the contract settings for $HFT . At 8:01, the funding-rate settlement interval was reduced from 8 hours to 1 hour.

There’s only one trigger for the exchange to do something like this: the funding rate hits the ceiling it set for itself. In the 8 o’clock settlement, the number was exactly 2.0000%—no more, no less—precisely the cap Binance set for this contract.

Yesterday I wrote about $HFT here, saying longs are paying rent for a building scheduled to be demolished in 11 days; the funding rate was 0.3035%. Within less than 24 hours, the rent payment topped out at the ceiling. Then I went through the contract info and found the building would never make it to 11 days—Binance’s contract delivery time for HFTUSDT is written as today 17:00. The spot market is still open; the delisting is scheduled for August 17, but this contract layer gets sealed at 5:00 this afternoon.

After changing it to settle every hour, the 9:00 settlement was 0.3268%, the 10:00 one was 0.3421%, and what’s currently hanging is 0.3273%.

At 10:30, there are just over six hours until 17:00—meaning there will be about 6 to 7 more settlements. If it keeps absorbing at this level all the way to the close, the funding-rate cost alone will be more than 2%.

There’s an even more hidden piece. The contract mark price has been staying above the index price. Earlier this morning it was as high as 2.8%, and now it’s still around 2%. Settlements are based on the settlement price, so this premium gets automatically zeroed out right at the checkpoint. Put the two together: with longs holding until 17:00, the opening is roughly -4%. The price would need to rise that much just to break even.

So in this market right now, most people going long have little to do with believing in $HFT . The long/short accounts ratio is 0.3417, with 74.5% of accounts on the short side. Yet the price has still been driven from the $0.00886 closing level on Aug 2 all the way to the $0.0302 now. In the Binance contracts, that’s +71% over 24 hours. Over on the spot side, total traded value for the whole day was $34.89 million, and the amount traded in the contract order book is roughly ten times that. The longs are buying the shorts’ liquidation tickets.

I demonstrated it again at 8:29. Open interest dropped 8.5% in five minutes—from $16.84 million to $15.41 million—wiping out a batch of longs; then in the next three five-minute windows, fresh longs kept adding in. Now open interest is 556 million coins, $16.73 million.

This script already played out five weeks ago with $NFP. On July 1, the $NFP contract went from $0.00469 to $0.02480 and closed up more than four times in a day—the day’s traded value was dozens of times its previous day. The next afternoon at 5:00 settlement, it closed at -69.4% for the day. Its last twenty funding-rate periods also settled every hour. The candlestick chart is still up on Binance—anyone can go back and check.

For the same $HFT , on an exchange that hasn’t arranged the delisting, the funding rate is negative. On Binance, longs pay money; on the other place, shorts collect it. This price move has little to do with the project itself—it's all about the venue that’s about to be shut down.

I’ve seen this kind of “pre-delisting” market a few times; in the comments every time, someone says it’s different this time. When the settlement time hits, the only thing that changes is who ends up trapped in it.

I don’t touch this segment. I can calculate this bill: no matter which way the price moves, longs start by paying off around 4%. If you want to bet that the shorts will collectively capitulate, go ahead and try—but you need to know what you’re holding: a ticket that becomes invalid after a bit more than six hours, with an hourly late fee of 0.33% printed on it.

SK Hynix’s stock token on Binance exchanged $1.7 billion worth of orders today on the futures contracts. On the same day, BTC spot trading volume was $740 million. The largest pile of money on Binance’s screens today didn’t go into crypto assets at all.

Among the same batch of storage-chip stocks, Samsung’s stock token fell 5.22% today, while SK Hynix dropped 8.05%. These two companies supply the memory needed for AI servers and are usually the ones everyone queues up to get. Today they both moved downward together, and the market is repricing the AI theme.

And BTC’s daily move today was -0.087%, which rounds to basically no change.

In crypto, the one taking the hit for AI is $FET . Down 9.59% in 24 hours, at a current price of $0.1357—basically hovering just above the 24-hour low of $0.1352. Binance spot trading volume is $12.96 million.

$FET is the AI-agent chain from Fetch.ai. It later merged with AGIX and OCEAN to become the ASI alliance—arguably one of the most straightforward AI narrative targets on Binance. It has no business relationship with SK Hynix at all, yet the same pile of money that’s hitting them is hitting it today.

My view is: don’t step in now.

The reasons are funding rates and positioning. For $FET , its funding rate was still positive yesterday at 0.0068%. Today it turned negative three times in a row during settlements; the most recent one was -0.0031%, and the next one is expected to be -0.053%. This negative value is shallow—it only shows that the longs are starting to loosen their grip; the shorts haven’t truly pressed in yet.

At the same time, the long/short ratio is 1.36, meaning 57.7% of accounts are still on the long side. The price has already broken through all the lows of this week, but people haven’t run.

After a 9% drop, nearly 60% of accounts still hold long positions—this cut hasn’t finished yet. A real bottom usually arrives when the long/short ratio drops below 1, funding clearly turns negative, and the price stops making new lows. None of those three conditions appeared today.

For the short term, I’m watching $0.1352. That’s today’s 24-hour low. If it breaks, it’s a new leg of downside; only if it can hold would we be able to talk about stabilization.

But what truly determines the direction of #AI板块 isn’t in the crypto market. Right now, the one calling the shots is the stocks side. And on Binance, SK Hynix and Samsung’s stock tokens are exactly the ones being used as the tells. Once these two stop bleeding, $FET will have something to work with. If the chip stocks stay red for another two days, the AI coins in crypto won’t magically grow legs on their own.

$490.4k, enough for a used car. This is $CTSI ’s spot trading volume on Binance for the entire day—everything.

Today that number is 4.946 million.

No transition in between. Three days ago: $63k, the day before: $27k, yesterday: $49k. The price just lay there for three full days between 0.0209 and 0.0217—day-to-day movement of less than a single point. A coin that’s still listed on Binance’s spot market can die like this, which means there’s basically nobody left on the order book.

Cartesi was part of that 2020 wave of old infrastructure. What it does is let developers write on-chain applications in a normal Linux environment, without being locked into Solidity. Back then the concept was pretty solid, but later it slowly lost momentum. On Binance’s listings, there are a lot of old projects that are still alive but have no trading.

Today it’s up +50.4% (Binance 24-hour 기준). Current price is 0.03245, and the intraday high touched 0.0365.

So where did that 4.946 million come from?

The 4-hour candle before noon Beijing time had a trading volume of $2,730. From 12:00 to 16:00 it was 1.176 million. After 16:00 it was 3.741 million. The ignition timing was so clean—it was that one spike around noon.

The volume difference between spot and perpetuals is wildly disproportionate. Spot is 4.946 million, while perps are 46.357 million—more than 9 times. This ratio says that most of the $$CTSI moved today went into the contracts, betting on direction; very few people actually went to spot to buy the coin with real money.

Open interest backs it up too: at around 2 p.m., open contracts were $1.81 million; by 7 p.m. it was $3.528 million—nearly doubling over five hours.

What’s interesting is the funding rate. Right now it’s -0.1391%, settled every 8 hours. A negative number means shorts are paying longs. In theory, for a coin that just pumped 50%, the funding rate should be positive—people chasing longs should pay shorts.

But in Binance’s “contract unusual moves” feed, in the afternoon at 17:30, 18:32, and 18:35 there were three consecutive long liquidations, and open interest dropped each time by 6% to 11%. Shorts were paying rent, while a batch of longs were getting lifted out—both things happened at the same time this afternoon.

My take is that this rally was pushed from the derivatives side, and spot didn’t catch it. The 9x volume gap already says everything: fewer than $5 million was truly buying spot; the rest is leverage inside trading against each other. When the price went from 0.0365 back to 0.03245, during the most active one-hour period the longs were being cleared one after another; the buying support above had already been used up at least once.

For anyone wanting to participate, this negative funding rate is a genuinely cheap deal—you’re the one collecting money holding longs at this moment. But it only affects your position cost; it doesn’t change direction. A move grown on a liquidity base like #CTSI comes fast—and fades fast.

I wrote down 0.02877 on a sticky note. That’s the starting point of today’s afternoon 4-hour candle, and it’s where the real acceleration begins. If it falls back there, then everything that happened after noon counts as if it never happened.

$950 million, today I went through the order book of contract $HEI . The only position actually being pressed down in this book right now is just 32 million.

The two numbers are 29 times apart. Put bluntly, in this one day, the same batch of positions got rotated back and forth nearly 30 times—almost nobody plans to hold through the night.

$HEI is Heima, formerly called Litentry. It’s the Polkadot-chain doing cross-chain identity and chain abstraction—the name changed earlier this year. In mid-July, it carried out a community vote-approved burn that destroyed 16.5 million tokens, about 17% of the circulating supply. I’m laying out this background first, because what comes next has little to do with fundamentals.

By Binance contract data, the last 24 hours are up 256%, with the current price around $0.50. A week ago it was still lying at $0.083. Daily trading volume was only five or six hundred thousand dollars—one of those “cold” coins where you can open the order book and just see bids and asks hanging there while nothing happens.

I watched another set of numbers all afternoon.

Open interest climbed from $16.78 million at 9:00 a.m., all the way up to $33.11 million by 4:00 p.m.—doubling in seven hours. At the same time, Binance big-account long/short ratio was 0.36, versus 0.43 for the whole market. Translated into plain language: the higher it rises, the more shorting accounts there are. Now, for every 1 large account going long, there are nearly 3 large accounts shorting on the other side.

Funding rates also flipped negative. That morning’s settlement at 8:00 a.m. was still positive; it turned negative at midday, and at 4:00 p.m. it was -0.030%. Shorts started paying longs.

I’ve seen this combo too many times. In 2021, I shorted a similar token for the exact same reason as this crowd now—when something pumps this wildly, surely it has to come back, right? The result was being carried out on a stretcher; the very next day after my stop-loss was hit, it surged again.

My view is that the shorts still have fuel left. When all three happen at the same time—funding flips negative, account ratios tilt one way, and open interest keeps climbing—then the market usually doesn’t end before the shorts finally give up.

On Binance’s “smart money” side, the long positions increased from $3.56 million to $5.93 million, average entry price $0.2765, with unrealized profit still around 80% while they continue adding. The shorts’ average price is $0.2191; they’re already down more than double and still holding on. The moment they can’t hold any longer is when the fuel gets ignited.

And I have to say the whole thing: you can’t chase this with your eyes closed. Just after 4 p.m., there was a 5-minute drop of -5.4%; open interest instantly fell by $2 million—that was longs being pulled.

$950 million in contract trading volume paired with $82 million in spot volume: the leveraged positions are more than 11 times spot. In this kind of structure, everything is a meat grinder on both sides.

I don’t touch its contracts myself. If I really wanted to participate, I’d do a small spot position instead. The fundamentals of #Heima can’t support a 6x move—I’m clear on that—so I didn’t bother calculating what it’s “worth.” I only watch when the batch of shorts with the $0.2191 average finally capitulates.

I’ve noted that number. Once it disappears from the order book, this round is probably about at an end.

Pay the rent for a building that will be demolished in 11 days—and it has to be the most expensive unit in the whole building. $HFT ’s longs are doing exactly that right now.

Binance’s Aug 3 announcement said that trading for $HFT will stop at 03:00 UTC on Aug 17. Also delisted from the same batch are ACX, PIVX, PYR, VANRY, and VIC—six in total. In theory, once the announcement drops, the coin should just lie flat and wait to be buried. Instead, from the closing price of 0.009343 on the announcement day, it has climbed all the way to the current 0.017556—nearly doubling in the meantime. Over the past 24 hours, spot +61.2%, and it even hit a high of 0.021.

The truly expensive part is the funding rate.

For the $HFT contract, the funding rate settlement at 08:00 today was 0.3035%. I pulled down the entire USDT perpetual funding-rate leaderboard and cross-checked it—this is the highest positive funding rate in the field. Second place is only 0.1829%, far behind. The current real-time funding rate is 0.30429%, and the next settlement is at 16:00. On Aug 4, that number was still sitting around the 0.01% baseline. In just two days, it’s multiplied by 30.

A positive funding rate means longs pay shorts. It happens once every 8 hours—three times a day. There are still 11 days left before trading halts on Aug 17, so how this holding-cost gets spread out is something you need to算清楚 in your own mind.

Two more numbers also make the situation pretty clear.

When converted into contract open interest, it’s only $7.48 million, while the spot trading volume for the day is $18.30 million. The position pressure in the contracts’ order book isn’t even as active as the turnover in spot within a single day. The money is just passing through—nobody’s planning to live there.

The $18.30 million is supported by 1.58 million spot trades—an average of $11.6 per trade. Once spread out at this level, basically anyone entering is chasing with small orders.

The long-vs-short account ratio is currently 0.4861, and the number of short accounts is about twice that of longs. At 9 a.m. it was still 0.5026, and within an hour another batch flipped to shorts. But the price is still sitting here—whoever is on the long side is the one paying this #funding rate.

For this round, I’m not backing the longs. The price has already dropped 16.4% from the 0.021 peak, but the funding rate is still being pushed higher. That combination usually means longs are too crowded and the trend itself isn’t that strong. Between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., open interest fell from $8.15 million to $7.41 million—a 9% position reduction within an hour, and the price was also moving downward at the time.

If you’re really holding the coin, at the very least you need to be clear that every 8 hours you’ll have to pay out, and the number of days you can pay is only 11.

I’m planning to watch the 16:00 settlement before deciding. If the funding rate is still pressing above 0.3%, then before the building is demolished, there’s probably still something to watch—I’ll just set up a seat next to the window and observe. This time, I really won’t be the one who goes in to join the noise.

$107 million in trading value—on August 2, it passed through the order book of $ERA . For comparison, from July 29 to August 1 across those four days, it only moved a total of $17.86 million.

Tonight, take another look: $0.0653, 24-hour -0.15%, trading value $3.62 million. The closing price of the Aug 2 daily candle was $0.0647.

An entire $100 million turnover, and the price moved by less than one percentage point.

Two days ago I wrote this as a two-choice question: either the big holders are using the volume to distribute (sell), or behind it there’s a structural event that hasn’t been made public yet. In the middle I even changed my judgment—on August 4, the volume was still $83.7 million; at the time I leaned toward distribution and said it had already been disproven.

Today, neither of the two answers holds.

First, look at the shape of the volume. On Aug 2 it was $107 million; the next day it collapsed to $7.76 million, only 7%. On Aug 4 it came again with $83.7 million; now over the last 24 hours the rolling trading value is down to $3.62 million, just 4%. Two rounds of massive volume, and in both cases more than 90% evaporated the next day. At this moment, this trading value ranks outside the top 70 on Binance USDT spot.

Next, look at the closing direction on the high-volume days. On Aug 2 the daily candle was -4.01%; on Aug 4 it was -4.63%. Both times, on the day of the spike in volume, it was down. Meanwhile, those quiet days in between were closing green: Aug 3 was +3.40%, and today this daily candle opened at $0.0639 and is now $0.0653—still green.

When volume is high it falls; when volume disappears it rises—this combination eliminates a lot of possibilities. A continuously distributing order book doesn’t look like this. When big holders truly are distributing, they will hang big volume for several straight days, with the price stepping down one level at a time. A book with genuine structural buy support also doesn’t look like this; if there’s a real event, the coin volume would build upward and the price would hold a new floor.

So the two-choice question I gave on Aug 3 already missed one option. There’s a third possibility: pulse-like sell pressure. A batch of shares gets dumped all at once, gets eaten on the same day, and the next day the order book goes empty.

If you move this pattern to other coins, I personally now only watch two numbers: the closing direction on the high-volume day, and the next day’s volume residue rate. If the high-volume day closes red, the next day the volume is still more than half, and the price continues to fall, then it’s still distribution—don’t catch it. If the high-volume day closes red, the next day the volume collapses to below 20%, and the price rebounds, that indicates the sell pressure is one-off and it’s been dumped out. Only when the high-volume day closes green and the next day the volume holds, does it become worth discussing whether anyone is building a position at this level. $ERA hit that middle slot perfectly twice.

Having the sell pressure released doesn’t mean the price must rise. The volume collapse back to $3.62 million also carries another implication: at this price, there doesn’t seem to be much supervision/management. It closed at $0.0678 on July 29, and today it’s $0.0653—net down 3.7% over the week. It oscillated back and forth twice in between; people who did T during this period probably only earned roughly the fees.

Over the next 48 hours I’ll watch two numbers. The third day: single-day trading value over $50 million and closing green that day—if that happens, it means someone really is willing to pick up near $0.0653. The low point since Aug 1, $0.0628, has been broken, which means I judged that too early above—the pulse hasn’t been fully dumped yet.

Until those two numbers come out, $ERA is just a single slot on my charts. The very bottom row of the watchlist—specifically reserved for coins that come in with money and then leave.

A coin worth less than five cents; in the past 24 hours it ate up $50.48 million in spot trading volume, ranking tenth on the coin safety market. The coin in eleventh place is $XRP , with $44.79 million.

$BANK is currently trading at $0.0488, up +22% on the 24-hour board.

But there’s a problem with that +22%—it didn’t happen today.

Before 5 p.m. yesterday, $BANK was still hanging around $0.041. From 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. at night—six hours—it surged to $0.0598. This morning, the daily candle opened at $0.0525 and is now back at $0.0488. Anyone who entered after today’s open is already underwater, while the +22% is still being shown on the 24-hour board.

The shape of the volume matters more than the price. The one hour at 10 last night had a trading value of $5.68 million—the densest candle in the entire wave. By noon today at 12 p.m., that hour was down to $1.55 million. The figure in tenth place on the board is just a number in the rear-view mirror—money is ebbing out.

Now look at who’s trading. 290k trades support $50.48 million, averaging only $174 per trade. $XRP is 207, and the ERA with the highest ten by trading value is 711. A bunch of small change is doing high-frequency wash trading inside.

The real money isn’t on the spot side. $BANK ’s contract turnover over 24 hours is nearly ten times that of spot. The funding rate is 0.005%, and neither longs nor shorts managed to gain an advantage. This doesn’t look like someone is stockpiling—it looks like a whole room of people betting on direction, and once the bet is done, they leave.

There are no matching catalysts this time—no announcements, no unlocks, no new listings.

When a coin suddenly shows a very high trading value during a deep drop, most of the time it’s just turnover, not related to building a position. The trading-value ranking measures how many people are pressing the buy/sell buttons; it doesn’t distinguish buy-side from sell-side. $BANK even hit a midday high of $0.595 on the 27th. Then on July 30, that daily candle was smashed from $0.1722 down to a low of $0.0546, and today it’s $0.0488. In ten days it took this whole route—the bag holders have changed more than once.

For the next two days, watch whether the volume is enough. So far, this daily candle today has only produced $7.66 million; yesterday’s daily candle produced $46.83 million for the whole day. If there really were funds building a position at this level, the spot trading value should keep staying above $30 million over the next two days, while the price does not break below yesterday’s daily open of $0.0442. If either of these fails, then the six hours last night was only a turnover party in the dark.

I wrote down two numbers in my notebook—check them when it returns on August 7. Honestly, I’m more inclined to believe it won’t hold. I’ve seen this kind of chart for three years, and every time I still end up wondering whether this time will be different.

The person who took over $VIC at the $0.0673 spot opened their account this morning and saw a price of $0.0336. Half of it is gone—just a little over thirty hours in between.

Looking back along the road, you can see much more clearly than if you watch it straight ahead.

The last segment happened at 8:38 this morning. In just three minutes, $VIC fell directly from $0.0378 to $0.0320. The open interest within the same five-minute window was smashed from $2.92 million to $2.30 million—every bit of it was long positions being liquidated.
That hour’s trading volume of $670,000 was the largest single candle so far today.

Go back one more day. On August 4, $VIC reached a high of $0.0673 and closed at $0.0392. The trading volume for that day was $15.74 million; the previous day was $17.29 million—almost no change at all.

This day was the real day the signal appeared. Volume was still there, but the price fell from $0.0524 all the way down to $0.0392. Many people see that the trading volume didn’t shrink and think there are still people down there buying it up. But actually, that volume was just turnover, and the direction of the turnover was downward. I’ve been watching charts like this for a few years now. The next day, if volume holds but price can’t, you can basically pack up and leave.

Go back further, to August 3. $VIC surged from the intraday low of $0.0245 to $0.0619, with a full-day trading volume of $17.29 million.

Then on August 2—the day before the pump—$VIC ’s entire day trading volume was just $76,000. Seventy-six thousand dollars. In Binance spot, there aren’t many coins that are even more ignored than that. It closed the day at $0.0341.

Now it’s $0.0336, even lower than the point of the rise. In the past 24 hours it’s down 47%; in the past 24 hours, trading volume was $12.97 million. In two days, one pin goes up and one pin comes down—between them, nothing happened except turnover.

My verdict is set in stone. This kind of vertical pump with no unlocks, no new listings, and no announcements that can explain it—the fact that it’s #1 on the gains leaderboard in itself is a sell signal. I flipped through all the news on $VIC from start to finish: it’s all price anomalies and liquidation warnings, not a single thing related to the project itself.

What’s interesting is that this morning at 8:42, the Binance perpetuals whales’ long positions actually increased—they added up to $533,000, with an average cost of $0.0376. With the current price at $0.0336, that batch of people entered already underwater. They’re betting on a rebound; I’m betting that nobody is coming to rescue it here.

There are only two levels to watch. $0.0341 is the breakout point, and $0.0320 is today’s low. If it can’t get back above $0.0341, then this pin is just a pin—leaving a shadow on the chart and a hole in the account.

To be honest, when I saw it rank #1 on the gains leaderboard yesterday, my fingers were hovering above the keyboard for a few seconds too. In the end, I didn’t move. It has nothing to do with being smart. Back in 2021, I paid tuition in a bunch of K-lines that looked exactly the same. Muscle memory is faster than the brain, that’s all.

The shorts have to send money into the long accounts every four hours—1.3% each time.

This money belongs to $HOME , the one with the most negative overall funding rate in the entire market. The next one after it, $TBT , is -0.60%—more than double the gap. It’s not even in the same ballpark.

What really got me sitting up straight was the way this funding rate moved. The one at noon was still -0.07%. By 4 p.m., it had immediately turned into -1.34%. There was no transition in between—one step jumped eighteen times. When the funding rate slowly slides downward, that’s emotion; but when it suddenly jumps by a single step, it usually means someone has been cornered.

As for price: in the futures contract view (24 hours), it’s +44.0%, and in spot it’s +48.2%. Intraday, it climbed from $0.0062 all the way up to the high of $0.00993.

The volume distribution says a lot. The 24-hour contract trading value is $270 million, while spot is only $29.03 million—nine times lower. On the spot side, there simply aren’t that many buyers. This rally is basically the contracts fighting among themselves.

Open interest (OI) gave the most direct answer. At noon, OI was still $7.58 million. Just now, at 19:00, it had already reached $13.39 million—nearly doubling in seven hours. As price rises, open interest also rises, which means the shorts haven’t conceded or exited. There are even people adding shorts in. The long/short account ratio is 0.88, so in terms of account count, shorts still outnumber longs.

So my view is that this squeeze still isn’t over.

The funding rate shows absolutely no sign of converging. Positions are still being pushed higher, and shorts are still the majority by account count. When all three of these conditions hold at the same time, there usually has to be another round of pushing before you see the classic moment: the funding rate suddenly turns positive, and OI drops off a cliff.

But I need to finish the thought. The current price is $0.00925. The intraday high was $0.00993, and that middle section hasn’t been retraced yet. Even if your direction is right, it doesn’t mean this is a good level to enter. For a coin that’s risen more than 40% over 24 hours and also fell from its intraday high, the risk-reward ratio of chasing it is ugly. I’m currently flat myself, and I don’t plan to build a position at this price.

I haven’t researched the fundamentals of $HOME . I’m watching it today purely because this funding-rate curve is too extreme.

The next settlement is at 20:00 tonight. When you see this post, that window should still be open. Nothing needs to be done—treat it as a free observation: if the 20:00 funding rate is still below -1%, it means the shorts are really holding the line and there’s more to come; if it suddenly converges back into around the -0.1% range, then the shorts that should be closed have already been closed, and the story ends here.

After 8 p.m., I’ll come back with the answer.

Open the成交额 leaderboard—position number 4 was originally supposed to be $BNB or $SOL . Today is $ERA 。

The成交额 is $106 million, which is 143% higher than the $43.75 million for $BNB , and 80% higher than the $59 million for $SOL . This token at $0.0636, with the current price of #ERA , has a 24h成交额 that exceeds most of the mainstream assets that most people are watching.

But the price is down -6.88%, falling all the way from today’s open at $0.0683 to now, hovering right at the 24h low of $0.0634.

This set of numbers is the most unusual combination today: volume ranks 4th in the entire market spot, while the price is down nearly 7%.

Volume-price divergence isn’t rare by itself, but this level of volume can’t be pushed out by retail sentiment alone. A daily成交额 of $106 million likely means either big players are unloading in concentrated fashion, or some kind of structural event brought in batch operations—such as token unlocks, an airdrop being claimed, or large-scale contract hedging. All of these can create a scenario where volume spikes while price falls.

The unloading scenario looks like this: an address holding a large amount of chips finds a window to dump. The buy-side can’t absorb it, so the price drifts down step by step with the成交 volume. The larger the volume, the more thorough the unloading—and the subsequent selling pressure may not be over yet.

The structural-event scenario is different: in trading driven by an unlock/airdrop, some people claim and sell, others claim and hold. Both bulls and bears are simultaneously in play—volume expands, but the direction is more chaotic, and it isn’t a signal of one-way liquidation.

From these two numbers alone, it’s hard to tell which scenario is closer to today’s reality.

So I’m waiting for one thing: in 48h, can the volume from $ERA stay elevated? If volume shrinks back to normal daily levels, it suggests today’s surge was a one-time, short-term release, and we’ll likely move into a digestion phase afterward. If volume remains abnormal, it means something is still driving it continuously—and it’s worth continuing to track.

At the current price of $0.0636, it’s down -6.88% from today’s open and sitting right on the 24h low of $0.0634. If you’re interested in this asset, whether the volume/energy can be sustained is a more critical observation point than the price itself. The numbers are clear, but who’s behind them is still unknown.

21%, this is the spot price gain of $HYPER today. Open the contract funding rate: -0.9534%. Shorts are sending money into the longs’ wallets.

It’s up 21%, but the people who are short are still in there, paying a protection fee every 8 hours. This is the most ridiculous entry on the funding rate leaderboard tonight.

When the building starts to collapse, the landlord isn’t in a hurry—first, here’s your rent-collection invoice on schedule.

Starting from noon today at 12:00, the rate turns negative. -0.35%, still relatively calm. By 16:00 in the afternoon it drops to -1.02%,吐 out a point in one settlement cycle. At 20:00 at night it’s still -0.97%. All afternoon long, the shorts didn’t run—someone even added more positions.

At this point, you’ve given up normal trading logic. You’re holding on with pure conviction.

The price action of $HYPER today is also kind of hard to explain: low of $0.0565, high of $0.077, a 36% swing, with a 24h contract trading volume of $75.63 million. No particularly obvious news catalyst—this is just being pulled up like that.

The shorts might really be waiting for an explanation: why did it pump? Wait until the explanation comes out, the move ends, then it pulls back—and then I’ll be right.

No problem with the answer. The only issue is you have to pay for the waiting process.

Let’s do the numbers for today: after 12:00 it’s already been deducted three rounds—-0.35%, -1.02%, -0.97%—total 2.34%. Tonight at 00:00 there will be one more deduction, about another 0.95% at the current rate.

From this afternoon onward, shorting and holding through to early tomorrow morning, the protection fees total about 3.3%—and that doesn’t even include the loss from the price direction.

Holding on for a reversal that doesn’t come—this is the most expensive trade.

On the long side: up 21%, plus protection fee income delivered by the other side every 8 hours. On the short side: they pay the protection fee, while the price is still over there with the longs.

I don’t have a position in $HYPER , but I’m a bit curious what those shorts tonight are thinking.

Hold on for another 8 hours? Or—forget it.

28.22 million in trading volume, ranking 12th in the whole market

The volume held steady.

Yesterday’s question has an answer.

Yesterday I mentioned $GIGGLE exploded in volume and broke into the top 10, leaving a suspense: could the volume be maintained?

Today the result is out: it held up—12th place. Right behind it is DOGE at 13th, TRX at 14th.

Among the first 11 ranks, they’re all mainstream large-cap coins; squeezing in with $GIGGLE isn’t easy.

The fact that it’s ahead of DOGE suggests its hype hasn’t died down yet.

But the volume held—does that mean today was a good day?

K-line high: 46.47, low: 37.07, range 25%.

It closed at 42, with an all-day increase of 1.6%.

In other words, it went in a circle and nothing really happened.

But the people who got tossed around in the middle might not feel that way.

Those who chased the highs bought at $46 and are now at a loss.

Those who caught the lows entered at $37 and are up 14%.

For those who didn’t change their positions yesterday, basically nothing much changed.

That 28.22 million is how it got spent.

“Volume-price divergence” is exactly this.

The trading value is high, but the price doesn’t move in a clear direction.

Lots of people enter; buyers and sellers are in a battle of positions, with no obvious winner—so the volume gets consumed like that.

Those who can’t hold get shaken out. Those who can hold are still waiting for direction.

When volume is large, it’s actually the easiest time to be “washed out.”

Compare $EPIC today: +9.5%, trading value 11.63 million.

Its volume is half of $GIGGLE , but the price direction moved upward.

The volume of $EPIC is used to lure people in; the volume of $GIGGLE is used to wash out positions.

Sometimes the bigger the volume, the deeper the water.

Before you enter, figure out what this volume is doing.

Otherwise, the more you enter, the more you’ll lose.

Once the washing is almost done, the volume naturally changes direction and starts running.

That’s when the direction becomes real.

208,330,000。

This is the number of tokens that $PROVE will unlock on August 5. It’s approximately 104% of the current circulating supply.

Right now, each #PROVE on the market will be followed by another nearly one more after August 5. The supply will be close to doubling, in three days.

Let’s look at the actual liquidity numbers.

Just pulled the live data: PROVE 24-hour trading volume is $205,560, current price is $0.1697, the 24h range is $0.1688 to $0.1752, and volatility is under 4%.

Converted size of this unlock batch: 208,330,000 × $0.1697 ≈ $35.37 million.

$35.37 million vs $205K—unlock size is 172 times the current daily trading volume.

The unlock day may not necessarily crash the price. But consider the math problem: when a new batch of chips 172 times larger comes out, it has to be absorbed by existing buy orders. Based on that daily average trading volume, in theory it would take 172 days to eat through it. Structurally, this order book just can’t handle it.

The funding rate on the contracts has just moved up: -0.00005654, basically zero. There’s almost no long/short tug-of-war— the market is waiting. The calm right before the unlock is mostly due to this.

Who is receiving this unlock batch— the foundation, institutions, or team addresses? This question determines how many tokens will find a way out once they enter the market.

Foundation/project incentive wallets typically have an allocation plan, so they may not sell immediately. Institutional wallets—if their original cost was very low and they have plenty of unrealized profit, their motives are completely different. Team wallets vary across situations; it depends on the project stage and any public commitments. I don’t have the specific receiving information for this PROVE batch, so I won’t guess and plug in numbers.

For each of the three groups, everyone has their own accounts to balance.

Holders: Supply is nearly doubling, and liquidity can’t support fast absorption. This risk has already been quantified and needs to be included in position-management calculations—not postponed until you think about it on August 5.

Empty/short-side positions: Low liquidity combined with a large unlock provides a structural advantage for the short thesis. But the $205K daily trading volume also implies that scaling into or out of positions is difficult on the contracts. Even if your directional call is right, you may still get stuck when trying to enter or exit due to liquidity.

Watchers: Waiting until August 5 to judge based on the actual price reaction is the most worry-free option. For an unlock of this size, the data on unlock day is the most truthful signal.

The 172x volume difference is a real structural pressure. There is directionality, but nobody knows the magnitude. In a low-liquidity market, both sides can go to extremes: prices can fall into a much deeper hole than expected, and rebounds can be much more aggressive than expected.

In three days, the numbers will speak.

69%。

Open the drop leaderboard—this number ranks first, corresponding to $PHB.

BTC is up only +0.6% today; the overall market has barely moved. $PHB, by itself, managed this plunge. Twenty-four hours ago the price was still at $0.049; it touched a high of $0.059, then kept getting smashed all the way down to the current $0.015. I wanted to take a look and see if I could enter and catch a trade, but this pair has been suspended. Binance shows a BREAK status, so once you try to enter now you can’t place any orders.

Not even a bottom-fishing opportunity—this is just too ruthless.

I’ve seen this kind of chart before. It usually happens in two situations. One is a very thin-liquidity small coin—someone dumps hard in one go, causing panic selling, then more people follow the stampede and the price drops straight down. The other is that something big happened with the project—news hasn’t been made public yet, but the smart money already fled early, while retail traders don’t know what’s going on. $PHB matches both: in the past 24 hours the trading value is only $1.47 million, which on Binance falls into the worst liquidity tier. With even a slightly sized sell order, you can punch through multiple price levels.

From early yesterday morning to this morning at 9 a.m., it fell in a stepwise pattern—every one or two hours another step down, from $0.045 down to near the halfway point. Around 10 a.m., the price held at the lows for a bit, then it was smashed straight down to $0.015. The volume on that one candlestick is about ten times the average of the prior hours—classic stampede behavior: once it was dumped, it lands right where it hits. After it broke through, trading was suspended immediately.

The suspension carries more information than the drop itself. Binance doesn’t just pause a trading pair at random. Either the project has had something major and is being handled, or it’s already in the process of being delisted. Based on past experience, suspensions can be as short as a few hours, or—who knows—sometimes longer. Some coins, after they suspend, just disappear.

People holding this coin now don’t even have a chance to stop-loss. That’s the most unbearable part. Loss is one thing; being unable to move is another.

Can $0.015 bounce back to $0.02? Who knows. During the suspension period, you can’t make any judgment. Just wait until it reopens, look at what the receiving address does, then decide.

62 million US dollars’ worth of chips, all cashed out within 48 hours.

The current price of #SUI is $0.6874, up 0.248%, with $7.67M in trading volume.

This is the answer after the unlock ends—calmer than everyone expected.

Roll back 48 hours. On August 1, $SUI executed a cliff unlock, releasing in one go about 0.91% of the total supply—approximately 91 million tokens—which were converted at the then-current price to roughly $62 million and arrived at the receiving address in full.

The essential difference between a cliff unlock and linear vesting is the time density. Linear vesting drips out slowly each day, giving the market time to digest it; a cliff unlock dumps everything into a wallet on a single day. A sudden $62 million in chips is simply there.

On the unlock day, $SUI fell 1.07%. The market tightened slightly, but nothing broke.

I’ve been watching the receiving address closely ever since.

So far, I haven’t seen any record of large transfers from the receiving address into Binance or OKX. The 91 million tokens are basically still in place. There’s no obvious movement toward an exchange—everything on the address looks quiet, as if nothing has happened.

Two possibilities.

First, the recipient is a foundation or a long-term holder that doesn’t plan to cash out in the short term. For a project foundation, $62 million isn’t something they need to dispose of immediately within 48 hours. They likely have the patience to choose the right timing. The other possibility is that the $7.67M trading volume suggests retail traders already digested the unlock expectation in advance—there were no people chasing the price down, so there wasn’t a concentrated sell-off.

But I haven’t truly relaxed either. The recipient can also wait until $SUI ’s volume picks up and the market gets hot, then sell in batches. It doesn’t have to be rushed within these two days. On-chain inaction doesn’t mean it will never happen—it just means the selling pressure hasn’t landed yet.

The data detective’s takeaway is: this cliff unlock didn’t trigger immediate sell pressure, and the receiving address is still in a wait-and-see mode. The real window worth watching is the next 10–14 days—to see whether sizable batches get transferred to exchanges. Once that signal appears, that’s when the selling pressure truly steps in.

Reconcile again in mid-August.

18%.

This is today’s spot gain for $EUL . It rose from the intraday low of $1.307, peaked at $1.780, and is now hovering around $1.627.

If you were holding longs this morning, you should have already left with a smile.

But there’s one thing I want to point out: tonight’s contract funding rate is -0.3807% per 8 hours.

Among all contract trading pairs in the entire market, this negative value ranks No. 2, only behind MMTUSDT (-0.41%). In the EUL contract market, short positions are heavier than long positions—every 8 hours, shorts pay a toll to longs.

The price is up 18%, yet the funding rate is still extremely negative. Shorts either didn’t run, or new shorts are still chasing the move.

In the past 24h, contract trading volume is $43.06 million, and spot is $19.16 million. Contract capital is 2.2 times that of spot—the main battle is happening in the futures layer, not in spot.

Behind EUL is Euler Finance, which was hacked for nearly $200 million in 2023. The team negotiated with the hackers to get the money back, then restarted the protocol—basically a project that crawled out of the rubble. I didn’t find a clear announcement for today’s move; it feels more like contract speculation is driving it, with little to do with fundamentals.

Two interpretations: either veteran shorts are holding on, betting this rally is a fake breakout and waiting for the price to fall back so they can pay the rate differential; or new shorts are chasing the top to open shorts, keeping the funding rate extremely negative.

Either way, costs are flowing out. Holding a short position isn’t free—funding is settled every 8 hours. This account balance is real.

Cold-blooded take: shorts’ time cost is accumulating. The longer the funding rate stays extremely negative, the greater the pressure to admit a mistake. But if tomorrow the price drops, today’s longs will still be just as happily wrong.

At this level, there’s no winner confirmed—only who’s the first to lose.

$EUL

$62 million, fully settled in one go today.

This is the Cliff-style unlock executed by $SUI today: 0.91% of the total supply—about 91 million tokens. At the same time today, the tokens arrived in full at the receiving address, all settled and paid off at once. It’s completely different from a linear unlock.

With linear unlocking, tokens are released evenly every month. The market can see a fixed daily ceiling of selling pressure, then gradually digests it and effectively price-in the expectation ahead of time. Cliff unlocking is a different story entirely: the counterparty gets the entire allocation at once today. If they want to sell tomorrow, they sell tomorrow; if they want to hold for half a year before selling, they can do that too. The market has no way to fully digest this expectation in the first few months. This is the biggest source of uncertainty with a Cliff unlock.

So the price on the day of a Cliff unlock is never the most important signal.

At present, $SUI is priced at $0.6828. Over the past 24 hours it’s down 1.07%, trading within a range of $0.6768 to $0.6910. No major selloff and no large bearish candle. Trading volume over 24 hours is $7.45 million. The perpetual contract funding rate is +0.0059%, hovering almost right at the zero line. There are no big clusters of short positions building up to bet on unlock-related downside, and no longs jumping in with leverage either—both sides are watching.

The fact that the day of the unlock produced this calm, quiet market suggests that holders aren’t in a hurry to exit for now, and market sentiment is relatively neutral. But this calmness can’t be directly read as a bullish signal. The signal that actually matters is what the receiving address does next: if these funds are transferred in large quantities to exchanges within the next 48 hours, that would be the real sign of selling pressure; if the address stays completely inactive, then this $62 million is simply just stored somewhere else, and the temporary overhang has not yet been released.

Now the numbers are already there—what’s left is waiting for the address to move.

Tomorrow I’ll check the behavior of the $SUI receiving address.

Trading volume $57.73M, 8th in the whole market—right next to BNB.

This token is called $GIGGLE .

Behind it is a Binance educational public-welfare initiative called Giggle Academy. They build an online school for kids around the world who don’t have money for education—and then, as a bonus, they issued a token, $GIGGLE .

And today, its trading volume is almost catching up to BNB. In the past 24 hours it’s up 13.7%. Current price is $47, with a low of $35.59 and a high of $55.71. The range is 56%—it’s moving harder than most mainstream coins.

I looked all over for a catalyst: announcements, partnerships, big-V shouts—nothing. It’s just going up, just trading. $57.73M is money that actively chased in.

On the same day, BTC was -1.26%, ETH -1.15%, SOL -0.94%, and the overall market was slightly down. This money actively went to buy a kids’ education charity meme coin.

Honestly, I understand this kind of logic. When the broader market isn’t moving, there’s always a batch of funds looking for small coins with a fun name, a clean background, and a narrative to bet on for a quick shot. The literal meaning of $GIGGLE is “giggling”—it sounds like a meme. With Binance support directly behind it, it has a bit more credibility than random projects that just appear out of nowhere.

But some details can’t be ignored. $GIGGLE is tagged with the Seed Tag—Binance’s own high-risk warning label. Liquidity is thin and volatility is extreme. A 56% single-day intraday range already confirms that. In addition, GoPlus on-chain scanning shows the contract creator retains permissions to pause selling, modify fees, and mint new tokens. When these three things stack together, that’s the standard rug-pull risk setup.

At the current price, $47, with ATH at $274, it’s still 83% away from the top. It isn’t a low entry—it’s more like slightly above mid-range chasing.

I didn’t get in. Today’s $35 low is short-term support. If tomorrow’s volume can hold up, the story may keep going. But without a catalyst, the volume on the next day usually shrinks. Whether it’s a real rotation or just a one-day trip—tomorrow’s trading volume will tell.

Will it still be giggling tomorrow? I don’t know. We’ll see.

$2.403。

$DEXE is still drifting down today, down -4.3%, with $19.41 million in 24-hour trading volume。

On July 25th, I left two questions: can the $4 support hold, and can the funding rate converge from extreme negative values back toward zero? The results are one good and one bad.

First, the bad news. The $4 level didn’t hold—at all. When I last wrote, the price was $3.89. After the liquidation squeeze, there was a rebound push, and I thought the $4 line could hold for a while. Turned out to be an illusion. By the end of July it kept sliding down; now it’s $2.403, down nearly 38% compared to then. $4 never even got a chance to be tested.

The good news is that the funding rate really has been converging. When I last wrote, the rate was -0.034% per hour. The shorts were piled up at extreme levels—every hour they were paying the longs. That kind of condition definitely couldn’t last long. Now when you look at it, the contract funding rate is -0.0378% per 8 hours, which is nearly 7 times lower than that extreme level back then. Most of the shorts have already exited, and it’s no longer that frantic shorting state.

So the answer to the two questions: on the funding-rate front, the shorts have exited—that breath has finally eased. On the price front, $4 didn’t hold, and the move down has been ugly.

The problem is, when the shorts left, the longs didn’t come in.

With the funding rate nearing neutral, it suggests the extreme tug-of-war has ended. But the $19.41 million volume isn’t big—it’s more like a state of lingering positioning, with nobody looking to build a major position here. $BTC is down -1.5% today; overall market sentiment is weak. $DEXE is being dragged down along with it. There isn’t any particularly special reason for it to keep falling, but I also can’t see any force that would pull it back up.

I don’t even know what I’m waiting for.

With the funding cleared, the price is still at the bottom. The next question is: will $2.403 be able to hold here, or will it keep searching for support downward?

At the $2 integer level, I’m a bit curious whether it will test it.