PIZZA看加密

$122 million, 40x leverage, liquidation at $61,605, and a complete closeout at the end—leaving with not a cent lost.

That was what a whale did on Hyperliquid last Sunday.

At the time, his long position in $BTC was 40x leveraged, holding a total of 1,897 BTC worth $122 million. The market price was $64,149, and the liquidation line was $61,605, leaving less than $2,600 between them. Every small drop in BTC brought it one step closer to that line.

He acted in two steps: first he sold 903 BTC at an average price of $64,666; nine minutes later, he fully closed the remaining 994 BTC at an average of $63,931. The two trades totaled $122 million out the door, without hitting liquidation.

And just like that, he was gone.

In the same time period, 102,332 accounts were liquidated, with total liquidations approaching $1 billion.

Every day on Hyperliquid, people open high-leverage positions. Most of the time, the story only has two endings: either they make money and take on a bigger position, or they blow up and start over. Being able to proactively close a position near liquidation is really rare.

I guess among those 100,000-plus liquidated accounts, quite a few people were facing a similar situation at the time: prices weakening, positions hanging by a thread, liquidation lines right in view.

And then they chose to add more.

The price fell a little, the average entry went down a bit, and if they held on, they’d win.

What happened next doesn’t need to be said.

That whale chose a different path: he simply closed the position and ran. He didn’t wait for BTC to rebound, didn’t add to lower his cost basis, and didn’t rely on luck while sitting just $2,500 away from liquidation.

To do that, you only need one thing: before the unrealized loss becomes real, press the close-position button, and then watch the price keep moving.

Most people can’t do it, because the moment they press it, one thought comes to mind: what if it comes back?

BTC is now at $64,726, more than $400 above that whale’s exit average price.

In hindsight, he left too early.

Or you could say: he’s still alive.

15 days.

The Senate entered a recess period on August 10, and there’s only this one window left: #ClarityAct . After that, deliberation won’t resume for at least another half year.

$BTC is currently at $64,531, up 0.7% over the past 24 hours. Trading volume is $394 million. The overall market hasn’t shown any obvious disruptions.

Fear & Greed Index: 26 — Fear.

These three numbers together are kind of interesting. A regulatory milestone could come within 15 days, or it might again miss the mark. The market’s response is: uncertainty, slightly fearful, but not panic-driven liquidation.

After the Senate Banking Committee voted 15:9 in May to pass the Clarity Act, $BTC has generally been weakening over this period, and the FGI has followed a steady decline—sliding from the greed zone into the current level of 26. I don’t want to attribute it here: is it waiting anxiety caused by the committee passing the bill but the full body not voting, or is it macro pressure piling on—it's hard to say. But the two things are happening at the same time: the regulatory framework is moving forward, the price is weakening, and the FGI is moving downward.

The real question is: how will $BTC move over these next 15 days?

My personal decision framework: during the window for regulatory negotiations, big coins rarely telegraph their plans early. What’s more common is that they keep things pinned down before the shoe drops, then judge direction after it drops. The fact that trading volume is $394 million hasn’t clearly shrunk doesn’t look like a liquidity-dry-up situation, but FGI at 26 still isn’t an optimistic signal.

Two anchors I’m watching: the $64,000 round-number level—today’s 24h low at $64,043 is holding around here, and it’s a key reference point in the near term. The other is the pace of progression. The most critical bottleneck is whether they can secure enough votes in the Senate—60 votes—to clear the long-debate threshold. Right now, both parties still have disagreements. If there’s fresh progress on talks by late July, funds may front-run earlier.

On the other hand, if the Senate is still stuck before August 10, this upside expectation could collapse immediately. $BTC ’s structure is currently on the weak side, so it’s hard to rely on the market itself to prop up the move. It’s not impossible for the FGI to fall further to below 20.

On August 10, the countdown begins.

0.361.

4 days ago, that post left a suspense: can $0.20 hold? What’s the probability of a deeper dip to 0.15? Is anyone actually accumulating real positions at the bottom, or is it just a fake “catch” caused by insufficient liquidity?

Today #BANK provided the answer: it rose nearly 12% in 24 hours, with trading volume of $50.12 million.

When I wrote that callback, I wasn’t fully confident in my heart. In those days, BANK’s price action looked ugly—intraday swings were more than half. The price got slammed down quickly from the highs, and the order-book support looked weak. I’ve seen too many patterns like this. Usually the follow-through is a small rebound, then it falls again when it hits resistance; it consolidates on declining volume, and then drops for another round. In this setup, seven or eight times out of ten end this way. So when I posted, I actually left room in my mind to get “slapped.”

But today’s data shows that the bottom-funding was real.

The low was 0.2966—it didn’t break 0.30. From there upward, the intraday high reached 0.3971. Now it’s pulling back around 0.361. Trading volume above $50 million is genuinely high for a token of this size—it’s not a fake volume propped up by just a few large orders. Anyone who bought near 0.20 can look back at their books today and should be pretty satisfied.

I wouldn’t chase here now. 0.361 is not far from today’s high of 0.3971. The overhead pressure hasn’t been digested yet, and if you enter now, setting a stop-loss won’t be easy. If you’re interested, waiting for the 0.32–0.33 range would be a more comfortable timing—there’s more room above, and if you’re wrong, the loss is still controllable. And if it doesn’t give a pullback chance and just keeps rallying, then so be it. In this market, there are similar opportunities every day; it’s not like we’re short on this one.

The callback that left the deepest impression on me this time is the group of people who entered when the market was most panicked. They didn’t post or call trades. Four days later, you can see on the K-line what they did back then. This kind of judgment isn’t based on luck.

It’s been three days.

Every day at the scheduled time, I check the price of $WLD .

I’m not especially concerned, but… I wrote those two articles, so I have to give an explanation.

On July 23, the official announcement adjusted the supply: from 5.1 million per day down to 2.9 million, a 43% reduction. By market logic, reduced supply means scarcity, and the narrative should move upward.

D+1, around $0.35—nothing much happened to the price, and trading volume didn’t pick up.

D+2, it just went sideways, and trading volume shrank even more. The market’s attitude was very clear: not interested.

D+3, today. I opened the app: $0.336, down 2.5%, with $12.3 million in trading volume. It’s already lower than the price on the day of the reduced-supply announcement.

Here’s my conclusion: this reduced-supply narrative has failed in the short term.

My guess is that the reduction affects incremental issuance, but the existing circulating supply remains. The sell pressure accumulated earlier, the chips held by early holders, and any airdrops that haven’t been sold yet—none of that suddenly disappears just because 2.2 million fewer are released each day. Reduced supply is a slow variable; it may take three to six months to truly show up in the price. Three days is nowhere near enough.

Is it appropriate to enter around $0.336?

I don’t think so. The reduced-supply narrative has just been disproven, so the longs have no ammunition in the short term. If it breaks below $0.33, the next observation level is roughly around $0.30, where there has been fairly clear support. Only if $0.33 holds is it worth continuing to watch; if it breaks, then wait for another signal.

This is the third installment of this series. It’s time to wrap it up.

The prediction hasn’t fully played out, but the direction may not be wrong—it just turns out the time frame is longer than I estimated. The fundamental improvement from reduced supply is real. It’s common for the market’s rhythm not to follow the narrative, and it’s not surprising at all.

Next time I write about $WLD , it should be when the price shows a clear directional move, or when there’s a new catalyst.

197,000,000。

The amount of USD stolen by Euler Finance in March 2023—one of the largest single attacks in DeFi history. Even more strangely, the hacker returned all the money 20 days later; as of now, no one has explained the reason.

$EUL is up nearly double today. The high was $2.73, and it’s currently around $2.22—96% higher than yesterday’s close. Daily trading volume is $36 million. For a DeFi token of this size, that’s not normal trading activity.

The underlying structure is pretty clear.

Over the past three days, the contract funding rate for $EUL has stayed negative. Yesterday it reached as low as -0.049%. Shorts pay a toll every 8 hours, but the price basically moved sideways, sometimes dipping slightly. This suggests the shorts are heavily stacked and have no intention of being cleaned up.

Starting early this morning, someone began forcefully pushing the price up. The shorts were squeezed, and the funding rate returned to -0.002% at the 8:00 AM settlement—almost neutral. But now the next expected settlement funding rate is -0.689%, even more negative than at the peak.

This means new shorts have just entered. They may think the double-up rally is excessive and are shorting above $2 in anticipation of a pullback. The long-vs-short battle isn’t over yet.

Euler Finance has made some real progress this year: the Euler V2 modular lending module is live, Securitize’s compliant assets can be used as collateral there, and TVL is slowly recovering. This isn’t the direct reason for today’s sudden surge, but it gives bulls a fundamental shield and makes the narrative hold up.

Rallied from yesterday’s close of $1.13 to the high of $2.73—nearly a 1.5x gain. The current price has already pulled back by almost 20% from the high. Funding rates staying consistently negative indicate the market is still skeptical about prices at this level; the newly entered shorts continue to apply pressure.

If bulls haven’t finished the fight yet, with an expected rate of -0.689%, the next settlement fee would be another bleed for the shorts.

$STX fell 5.2%, while $BTC is basically flat

This combo leaves me a bit baffled.

Stacks is a well-known L2 on the BTC chain. In theory, it should track BTC’s price action closely. BTC is moving sideways—it’s down more than 5%, and it doesn’t look like it’s following BTC; it looks like it’s dropping on its own.

Trading volume: $1.76 million.
Write it clearly: $1.76 million—where the “ten-thousands” digit matters. That’s a full 100x difference from $176 million.

This number is more direct than the price itself. For people watching #STX , the activity is truly strangely low.

Then I started to think randomly.

The narrative for BTC L2 was hottest around late 2023 and early 2024—the period when it came up alongside Ordinals inscriptions. Back then, the market was saying BTC also needs to build active L2 networks. Stacks rode that wave and its price action was pretty good.

But now it seems like nobody brings it up anymore.

I’ve always felt the logic behind BTC L2 is a bit awkward. The value of an L2 is to let users do things on it—swaps, lending, DeFi, and so on. But BTC users’ needs are actually not to “do” things; holding is enough. Most people basically don’t need to mess around with DeFi on BTC.

Stacks has the sBTC mechanism: it locks BTC and uses it as an asset on the Stacks network. The logic is smooth. But how many people really need this? I still think it’s not many.

Ethereum’s L2s took off because Ethereum users already have on-chain activity needs. L2s only make sense because gas fees are expensive. BTC is completely different.

So how does the BTC L2 narrative stay alive? I’ve never figured it out. Unless some big event changes BTC users’ behavior patterns; otherwise, it’s hard to keep telling this story.

Of course, I might be completely wrong. Maybe it’s just that there isn’t enough liquidity—no big capital is coming in—and the disconnect from BTC is that simple, with no deeper narrative issue.

Funding rate: -0.079%. Slightly more shorts.
Daily low: $0.1349. Now: $0.1367—still not far from the low.
If this support can’t hold, things below will feel flimsy.

A bit bleak. Staring at that $1.76 million trading volume, wondering when the BTC L2 story will be picked up again—or whether it’s just going to slowly sink to the bottom like this.

$AERO ’s trading volume is higher than SOL, higher than XRP, and higher than BNB, but the price only moved 2%.

$192 million—today it’s the second-highest spot trading volume across the whole market. Number one is DEXE at $201 million; that volume was driven by a massive surge—there was an event catalyst, and it’s completely different from the situation of $AERO . The 24h range for $AERO is $0.4097 to $0.4252, and it closed at $0.4146, down 2.2%.

Trading volume: SOL $96 million, XRP $52 million, BNB $50 million. $AERO pushed all three of them to the back. But during this period, $AERO hasn’t had any major news—no listing announcements, no major protocol events.

$AERO is the token of #Aerodrome Finance, the largest DEX on the Base chain. Its token mechanics are similar to Curve: after holders lock up, it affects the incentive weight of the liquidity pool. So large AERO liquidity often mixes real adjustments from protocol LP positions, not purely speculative order flow. But even with that, a volume of $192 million is still above normal cadence.

There are two ways to read a divergence between volume and price: (1) big buyers are accumulating, and the price is being held down by sell orders from existing holders; (2) big sellers are reducing positions, and buy orders are propping it up so it doesn’t fall. Both are turnover at a large scale—just in different directions.

With the current data, we can’t confirm who is acting. The observation window is the next 24–48 hours: if the volume starts to shrink while the price moves upward, it suggests the prior surge in volume was accumulation; if the volume stays high while the price starts to move downward, it means the buy side that was propping it has started to withdraw.

Around $0.41 isn’t a particularly clear support/resistance level. I won’t enter in the direction until confirmation—I'll wait for a signal before deciding.

-0.2630%。

This is the funding rate for contract $ACE right now—it’s negative.

For shorts, every 8 hours they pay 0.26% of the principal to the longs.

But contract $ACE is up 17% today.

The shorts have already lost in terms of direction, yet they still have to pay again every 8 hours.

Three times a day, by calculation they’re paying out nearly 0.8% of the principal each day, just from the funding rate alone.

Going short for a week, they lose 5.5% purely from the funding rate—before even counting the losses if the price moves against them.

Today, the absolute value of $ACE ’s negative funding rate ranks third in the whole market, behind $GWEI at -1.09% and $TNSR at -0.37%. One of the coins right now that makes shorts feel the most pain.

Contract 24h trading volume is $110 million—this isn’t some obscure small coin; there are quite a lot of people trading it.

Spot price is $0.0954, up +17% in 24h. Contract price is $0.0941, moving in the same direction.

Next funding rate settlement: Beijing time tonight at 20:00, with about 4 hours left.

Before and after settlement, shorts may close positions early to save this payment, while longs may take their profits and leave. Not a hard rule, but worth watching the prices before and after settlement.

I don’t hold any positions in $ACE . But if I were going long, this kind of funding rate would mean collecting rent while lying down.

Shorts pay my salary—I don’t have to do anything.

The question is: when will shorts finally be unable to hold on?

If the negative funding rate keeps going, more and more shorts will choose to close. Closing requires buying; buying pushes the price up; that forces more shorts to close as well—the logic of a short squeeze is built this way.

Whether it happens or not isn’t guaranteed, but the conditions are building.

After settlement tonight at 20:00, if the funding rate doesn’t converge, it means shorts are still stubbornly holding on. If it converges to within -0.1%, it suggests someone has started to withdraw. Then compare the price trend afterward—looking at that is far more reliable than guessing direction from the candlestick chart alone.

There’s also another kind of player doing funding rate arbitrage: they buy the spot to hedge the contract long, locking in price risk, and specifically take that -0.2630% yield.

This money coming in by itself won’t push the price higher, but it will make the funding rate converge faster. Once the arbitrage capital exits, the number of longs decreases, and some of the support is lost.

Two symmetric stories: shorts capitulate and push the price up, or arbitrageurs leave and suppress the price.

After 20:00 tonight, you tell me which one shows up first.

With 43% less supply pressure, #WLD still fell by 10%. In D+2, the answer went the opposite of expectations.

A few days ago, in that post, the expectation was that the daily unlocked amount for $WLD would drop from 5.1 million coins to 2.9 million, meaning there would be 2.2 million fewer coins of sell pressure per day. With supply-side contraction of 43%, in theory, it should have been able to give the market some breathing room and wait for prices to be re-priced.
At the time, I thought—at the very least—it shouldn’t keep falling anymore.

Today’s actual data is $0.3445, down 8.4% from the D-night benchmark of $0.376. The 24-hour price change is -10.26%, and the trading volume is $20.8 million.
The broader market BTC is also down nearly 2% today. It’s all bleeding—nobody can escape.

There’s less supply, but the price doesn’t feel it.

When faced with systematic sell pressure, the “reduced supply” narrative can’t hold up. That’s the most superficial explanation—and the most convenient excuse.

But even without the broader-market drag, I’m actually not sure the logic holds. $WLD ’s daily unlocked amount dropped by 2.2 million—but what proportion of the total circulating supply is that 2.2 million? If the main force driving sell pressure doesn’t really come from these scheduled unlocks, then the reduced amount is only a marginal variable, and the price wouldn’t perceive it at all.

More fundamentally, reduced supply is a slow variable. In textbook theory, you announce it and the next day it’s priced in. In the real market, the impact of supply contraction takes time to accumulate—at least weeks, sometimes months—before it’s felt in prices. And it’s also possible that in the end, nobody cares, and the narrative quietly dies like that.

That’s the possibility I’m most worried about right now.

Funding rate: -0.0478%. Not extreme. The shorts aren’t really pushing—it’s just falling with no one stepping in to take the bids. At the low end $0.3389, current price $0.3445—the support is within the distance of just that breath.

In the $0.34–$0.35 range, should I bet here that the “slow realization” of reduced supply will play out? I haven’t decided. I bought this coin back when it was above $0.4, cut my losses out, and now it’s still falling. It’s not that I’m not uncomfortable—it’s definitely uncomfortable.

I just can’t figure it out: supply is down 43%, yet the price has zero reaction. Keep watching this narrative through late July to see if it still has a chance.

$DEXE is now $3.89. Over the past two days, the short sellers have cleared this account balance.

Go back three days. The post on 7/23 said: the $9 support failed, the $5 level is questionable, and the contract funding rate exceeded -1%/h for 4 consecutive times. Back then, $DEXE was still trading just above $3. Lots of people saw the extreme negative funding rate and thought it was a sign that the shorts were strong. In reality, the short positions were already extremely crowded.

The price kept falling. It didn’t stop at $5, and it didn’t stop at $3. On 7/24, it smashed out this cycle’s low. But throughout the entire process, one thing never stopped: the shorts were paying. A funding rate of -1%/h means every hour, the shorts pay 1% of their position’s value to the longs. The coin was still dropping, and the shorts thought they were winning—but the bills kept running, and the wear and tear kept accumulating.

The 7/24 post from #DEXE focused on the 14:00 settlement window, checking whether new shorts would push the funding rate above -0.5%+. The move didn’t wait for observation—the price was pulled up directly, triggering a chain of stop-losses. Trading volume exploded: in the last 24 hours, $126 million, ranking 5th overall—after $BTC and $ETH . For a coin at the size of $DEXE to produce this number of volume, it indicates a large number of shorts were forced to liquidate.

Now it’s $3.89, up 84% from the 24-hour high. Behind this rally are two things layered together: the chain stop-losses from the 7/24 low point + the continued pressure from short liquidations today.

The funding rate shrank from its peak of -1%/h to today’s -0.034%/h. The most aggressive short positions should already have been cleared. But the funding rate is still negative, suggesting that someone still believes $DEXE at this price level is worth shorting.

$4 is the current pressure point. If the funding rate keeps drifting toward 0, the shorts will be retreating—this round of the squeeze/forced liquidation should be basically completed. But if new shorts enter around $4 and push the funding rate back negative, the trigger conditions for the next round will be building again. Watching the direction of funding rate changes can get you one step ahead of watching the price chart.

$BANK is up 15%, $0.2916

Last week’s post left a bit of suspense. After a -64% drop, the lowest it touched was around $0.20. The question was: has it stabilized, or will it keep going lower?

Now we have the answer.

Trading volume is $70 million, and the volume has picked up as well.

From the low around $0.20 on July 22 until now, the increase is nearly 46%.

If you placed a bottom-fishing limit order back then, you probably won’t lose.

As for me…

I didn’t enter.

When I looked at that chart, seeing it drop along the way all the way down -64%, my first thought was: it hasn’t finished falling yet.

Then it quietly climbed back.

It’s not the first time something like this has happened.

Back then, the volume didn’t pick up, and there weren’t clear signs of buyers stepping in. The rationale for entering really wasn’t strong enough.

This is the truth—not some hindsight rewrite.

Sometimes coins that dump hard and coins that are truly at the bottom look similar, but in reality they’re very far apart.

But later I thought: if it happened again, I might place a small bottom-fishing order around $0.20.

Position size no more than 1%. If it fills, great—I’ll hold. If it doesn’t, that’s fine too; it won’t affect my mood or mindset.

The logic back then was to wait for the signals to be clear before entering.

But that low-point volume did quietly contract. At the time I felt it wasn’t enough. Now it looks like that might have been the signal.

Sometimes the bottom won’t announce itself.

Oh well. If I didn’t enter, then I didn’t enter.

Now it’s $0.2916. Today’s high is $0.3074.

Should I chase?

Personally, I won’t.

After a nearly 46% rise from the low (from $0.20 on July 22 to today’s $0.2916), following up now would mean chasing the emotion that I didn’t get in at the time.

You can’t use this as a basis for trading.

Wait for the next opportunity.

If $BANK has another similar drop, and the volume shrinks all the way down, I’m going to watch that closely.

Last time I didn’t enter—this time I’ll remember it.

$BTC Clarity Act passed committee vote day, the price was $81,000.

I still remember that day—I saw everyone in the group chat sharing the news. Some said the regulatory picture was getting clear, that institutions were coming, and others that $100K was just a matter of time. It was all optimism.

Then $BTC fell from $81,000 to today’s $65,020.

Let’s do the math: down $15,980, a drop of roughly 20%. That’s the cost of waiting for a U.S. regulatory framework. You bought optimism, and the market discounted it by two-thirds—then handed you the change.

No one wants to bring it up, but the numbers are right there.

Now the countdown begins.

With the Senate adjournment still 14 days away, the window is August 7. This is the final checkpoint for the CLARITY Act of this session to run its full course.

The bill is stuck on three points of disagreement—none of them have been resolved. Whether stablecoins count as securities; who would regulate on-chain protocols and DeFi; and where to place consumer protection provisions. If any one of them stalls, it’s gone this year and reopens next year.

Each individual issue alone is enough for a three-day hearing. Let alone shoving all of them into one bill.

Your friend promises to take you to dinner next week. You get your haircut, buy a new outfit, and you secure a good seat early.

Then they keep saying “soon, soon,” and that they have a bit more to take care of.

By the time you’re starving, front to back, they say: “Not today. Some other time.”

#BTC dropped from $81,000 to $65,020. After waiting through this dinner, each coin is down by $16,000. Your friend’s no-show cost you time in the first place. Our cost is in dollars.

In 14 days—August 7—the Senate adjourns as scheduled, or this vote really does pass.

I’m not betting on either outcome.

I just want to put a timestamp here: right now, $BTC $65,020, down slightly 1% over 24h, 14 days left, three disagreements unresolved, and the market isn’t waiting for any consensus.

After August 7, we’ll see whether this post was right or not.

The intraday trading volume of $KITE has been staying around $80 million for these two days.

For an AI payment chain with a circulating market cap of less than $200 million, a daily trading volume of $80 million means that, purely from transaction volume/flow, it could rotate the entire float—about 40%—in a single day.

But what worries me more is the price.

With $80 million in volume, what do you get? Over the last day, $KITE ’s price barely moved—less than 1%. It closed around 0.1105. The high and low were 0.117 and 0.109, respectively—there’s basically none of the big volatility you’d expect when a small- to mid-cap token suddenly prints a massive volume.

I pulled the daily charts for the past two weeks: most of the time, this project’s daily trading volume is between $1 million and $5 million—quietly, without much happening. But starting this week, the volume suddenly surged by dozens of times, yet the price has been nailed firmly in the 0.10 to 0.12 range by something. There were multiple spikes in volume, and multiple times the price barely moved from roughly the same spot.

When retail investors chase, the price gets pushed up. When retail investors run, the price gets knocked down. But volume and price are disconnected—this suggests these trades aren’t driven by retail. Massive activity is happening on both sides as positions are being absorbed.

Market makers, unlocked tokens being absorbed, or some other mechanism? I don’t have the answer—only that this pattern is abnormal, and it keeps repeating this week.

KITE is a project launched on Binance Launchpool in November 2025. It’s building autonomous payment and settlement between AI agents, which falls under the “AI x on-chain infrastructure” direction. Total supply is 10 billion tokens. Circulating supply is 1.8 billion tokens, and at the current price the market cap is around $200 million.

I don’t know who is operating behind this kind of trading volume, and I also don’t know when the next big surge will appear. But if this pattern continues, after running a few more cycles, you might get a clearer outline. For now, I’m noting it.

$DEXE The short side’s most expensive time today was at 9:00 AM. Every 8 hours, shorts pay 1.97% to longs.

Now this figure is 0.22%.

The funding rate dropped by 9x, but the price hasn’t risen. At open it was $3.769, now it’s $1.956—down 48%. Today’s contract is number one on the biggest decliners list, pulling ahead of second place by roughly 20 points.

The rate falling isn’t related to the shorts conceding; cheaper shorts have moved in.

Today’s funding-rate route: 9:00 AM -1.97% → 10:00 AM -0.88% → 11:00 AM -0.25% → 12:00 PM -0.34% → 1:00 PM -0.22%.

Each segment trends downward, but the contract open interest of 8.18M DEXE hasn’t shrunk significantly. If the shorts collectively closed out, open interest should drop noticeably and the price should bounce—neither happened. This suggests the shorts are rotating: the high-rate old shorts are coming out, and new shorts with lower rates are taking over.

24-hour trading volume is $55.6M—an unusually active move for a coin that’s never made much of an appearance on the gainers list. There’s still someone actively trading at this price; it hasn’t reached the stage of being ignored.

At 2:00 PM, the next funding-rate settlement.

Watch two directions: if the funding rate stays near -0.2%, the new shorts are holding firm, absorbing daily costs of about 0.66% as they bet on another leg of decline; if funding suddenly moves above -0.5%, that signals bigger short orders entering, or that longs have started to fight back—the risk of a short squeeze rises along with it.

Every 8 hours at 0.22%, that’s about 0.66% per day. The current shorts can hold—there isn’t pressure to leave right away.

On the long side, there’s no clear data support for a rebound. At $1.956, this is still the shorts’ domain.

Wait for the 2:00 PM numbers to see whether the shorts will continue guarding their position cheaply.

$RIF top-gainers list #2, +49.7%. Current price: $0.1153. Three days ago, it was at a low of $0.045.

RIF is Rootstock’s infrastructure token. Rootstock is an old L2 on Bitcoin that takes a sidechain route, allowing Bitcoin to run smart contracts. The token usually has extremely low trading volume—typically under $1 million per day. It’s the kind of thing that just sits there for the long term with little attention.

This time, there are clear catalysts. Rootstock recently released a batch of operating data: the network has run continuously for over 3,100 days, has secured more than 84% of Bitcoin’s hash power, and accounts for over 40% of the entire Bitcoin DeFi TVL. On-chain tokenized real-world asset (RWA) issuance has reached $44M. In addition, more than 35 million $RIF tokens have been locked into the staking DAO, and Binance Pay integration has been enabled.

The Bitcoin L2 track has started to get attention this year. $RIF is one of the oldest tokens in the segment, with a long track record—but the price hasn’t really been properly “priced in.” Now it’s coming out with data, which is logically reasonable.

Last week, $RIF was still trading between $0.12 and $0.14. Starting around July 20, it crashed hard, falling to a low of $0.045—more than a 60% drop from the prior high. This rebound is coming out of that pit; it wasn’t launched from a stable bottom. In the past 24 hours, it surged from a low of $0.075 to a high of $0.1327, then pulled back to $0.1153 for consolidation.

Trading volume is $26.2M—more than 30 times its usual daily volume. Real money is moving. Whether volume can be maintained over the next few days is the key answer to whether this rally is real.

Bitcoin DeFi is worth watching this year, but personally I want to wait a bit longer—let’s see how the trading volume changes over the next two days, then decide.

$WLD Starting tomorrow, release 2.2 million fewer tokens every day. Then tonight, the price dropped 2.6%.

It’s a bit strange.

The daily unlock amount of 5.1 million/day officially becomes 2.9 million/day starting 7/24, a cut of 43%.

Based on tonight’s price of $0.376, that translates to roughly $830,000 per day less theoretical sell pressure hitting the market. Over a month, that’s nearly $25 million—not a trivial number.

This direction should be bullish. Supply decreases, and sell pressure is lighter—there are more reasons for the price to move up.

But tonight it’s still falling.

It’s down 2.6%. Spot 24-hour trading volume is $18.22 million. There’s no abnormal surge in volume—just a steady, smooth decline.

I can think of two possible explanations.

One is that someone is exiting today, betting that after the “halving” narrative gets兑现 (is realized), it’s bullish for a limited time, and they’re getting out early.

One is that someone is building a position today, betting that after tomorrow’s reduced supply, the price will catch up and rise—so they get on the train first.

The funding rate is 0.005%, close to neutral, with no one-sided extreme positioning. The longs haven’t completely overwhelmed the shorts, and the shorts haven’t completely overwhelmed the longs—both sides are in the game.

I personally don’t hold $WLD , so I’m looking at this objectively.

WLD is Worldcoin, the eyeball-scanning project Sam Altman is behind. The narrative is in the lane of AI and biometric identity verification. This year, there have been a few intermittent spikes in trading volume. This time, the unlock adjustment is the largest by far.

Going from 5.1 million/day to 2.9 million/day is basically a halving.

I plan to look at two things on 7/25: whether trading volume expands, and whether the price moves up with it.

If both happen, it means the market has accepted the halving narrative.

If neither happens, then yet again this bullish news turns out to be the top.

I’ll come back and tally it up then.

$DEXE shorts pay bulls 1% per hour.

First, admit a mistake.

Last week I said here that I thought $9 was an important support for $DEXE , and that the bulls should be able to hold their ground there. Today the result is that spot has fallen to $3.45—down 23% already.

$9 held for a moment, then did nothing. My call was completely wrong. There’s nothing to argue.

Alright, after admitting it, let’s talk about the current data.

Spot price: $3.45, 24h change: -23.5%
24h high: $5.03, low: $3.40
Funding rate: -1.02%, settled once per hour

This funding rate has been staying at those levels for several settlement cycles in a row. The 14:00 settlement was -1.14%, 15:00 was -1.26%, 16:00 was -1.04%, and now it’s still expected to be -1.02%. All four settlements were worse than -1%.

The shorts are pressing against a hard ceiling. They believe $DEXE will keep falling, so they’d rather pay 1% of their position every hour just to maintain short exposure at flat risk. This cost pressure is real—not a small number.

But there’s a reversal risk here. Whenever price stops falling—just a sideways pause, even—these shorts that have been paying high “rent” become the target for a squeeze.

Today the 24h low touched $3.40 and then stopped, but I can’t tell whether this lower wick was truly a test of support or just a handoff/rotation.

$5 is the next key level.

From the spot price of $3.45 to $5 requires a +45% rally. If price gets there, the shorts’ stop-loss chain gets triggered, and the rebound can move very quickly.

If $5 can’t hold, then below $3 is a blank on the map—shorts will keep being smug.

I have no position. I’m standing on the sidelines, watching. I’m not confident in either direction, so I won’t bet.

The only thing that’s certain is that a funding rate of above -1% for four consecutive times tells you that the long-versus-short battle is still ongoing here—no clear winner yet.

I got $9 wrong. Come back on 7/26 and look at how it trades around the $5 level—let the data answer.

Open the decliners’ list. The top six names—I cross-checked them against Binance’s most recent delisting announcements.

Spot on.

$PHB is down 69.4%; the current price is $0.0150. Next to it are NFP, BETA, VIB, WTC, and $DEGO—each down between 50% and 66%.

Six coins, six lines stabbing into the floor—like someone is pressing and holding the heartbeat of the market in unison. The game rules are winding up.

Most people don’t pay much attention to the role of market makers, but they determine whether a trading pair can function normally. Once the delisting notice comes out, market makers start to exit. No one is obligated to maintain order for a coin that’s about to be removed. Liquidity gets thinner and thinner; there are fewer and fewer buy orders. One sell order of a normal size can directly smash through the entire order book. There’s no limit to how far it can fall. On delisted coins, it’s literally true—not metaphorically.

I used to think that -50% was already the limit. Later, I saw a coin drop from a few dozen cents to not even enough to buy a sheet of paper within the two weeks before delisting. By percentage, that’s -95% or more. Back then, I even caught a bottom once. My reason was: it’s fallen that much—where else could it go?

That was one of the stupidest things I’ve ever done.

Holding coins from the delisting list is psychologically completely different from holding a coin that has just fallen 50%. With a normal 50% drop, you can still wait for a rebound—wait for sentiment to recover, wait for the macro picture to improve. In the delisting countdown there’s no logic for a rebound. Anyone who buys is just becoming the bag holder; liquidity is disappearing; fewer and fewer people are willing to buy—only those who are willing to sell.

This batch crashed today, but the delisting list isn’t only these six. There are others that haven’t triggered yet, and some are quietly sinking at ranks 15 and 20 on the decliners’ list—down 10% to 15% every day. Not noticeable enough for anyone to care much, until one day it also makes it into the top six.

If you still have coins from the delisting list in your bag right now, how much room is left in the stop-loss window?

515,200,000 $NIGHT tokens were emptied in 8 minutes.

This happened two days ago: the attacker targeted Midnight Network’s cross-chain bridge on Wanchain. By exploiting a contract vulnerability, they transferred 515 million NIGHT tokens in just 8 minutes—worth about $10 million.

Midnight Network is a sidechain of Cardano, backed by the Input Output Global team—the same people behind Cardano. The project focuses on zero-knowledge proofs (ZK privacy technology). Its positioning is to help enterprises and developers process sensitive data on-chain while protecting privacy. In simple terms: your data can only be seen by you, but on-chain it can still prove that you’re not lying.

Sounds pretty safe.

Then the bridge was gone in 8 minutes.

After the incident, the coin price immediately crashed. That same day, the team came out with a statement: it was a single-point vulnerability in the bridge, the core protocol was not affected, and the exchanges also cooperated by freezing part of the stolen funds. That sounds familiar—every time something goes wrong in DeFi, they say the core protocol is fine.

But this time, the exchange side acted faster. Now $NIGHT is rebounding. The current price is $0.02142, up +8.1% from yesterday’s low of $0.01976. Spot 24h trading volume is $12.19 million, while the derivatives market is close to $69 million.

The logic behind the rebound is: the bridge is an isolated vulnerability, the core chain has no systemic issues, there’s room for recovery after a deep sell-off, and the prior high of $0.025 is a natural reference point. This logic holds up on its own—but you have to judge this project. Just because the name is Midnight doesn’t mean you should jump in.

There’s also some background you need to know: $NIGHT is a Binance HODLer Airdrop token launched in March this year—the 61st airdrop. Many people who received the airdrop are still holding. In this rebound, it’s hard to tell who is truly buying versus who is taking the opportunity to offload.

$NIGHT , the dead of night—the name couldn’t be more timely.

$RE has climbed to the number 4 spot by trading volume across the whole market.

The top three are USDC, BTC, and ETH. The fourth place is usually SOL. Today, the seat belongs to a #RWA protocol—one that I’ll be honest I don’t understand deeply enough.

24-hour trading volume is $389 million, up 28.6%, with 872 million tokens changing hands. On the derivatives side, the funding rate is -0.194%. In the past 8 hours, shorts have been paying tolls to longs.

On the same day, within the same RWA sector, $ONDO was only up 2.3%, with trading volume of $20 million.

One exploded; the other barely moved. The difference in trading volume is nearly 20x.

$RE and $ONDO are doing things in different directions. $ONDO mainly connects with institutions, tokenizing treasuries and money-market fund tokens—its users are on the traditional finance side. $RE , by contrast, is tied to real-estate RWA, closer to on-chain DeFi, and ordinary users can directly interact with it. With different audiences, even under the same narrative, the timing of the move is different.

Recently, as the Clarity Act has progressed, the U.S. has taken a step toward a clearer regulatory framework for digital assets. Overall compliance expectations for the RWA sector have risen, and capital is starting to position in advance. But under the same policy backdrop, the market chose $RE to move first, while $ONDO has been completely still.

I lean toward $ONDO . The long side on the $RE derivatives contract is already packed today. A funding rate of -0.19% suggests a large amount of leverage is piling into longs. In that situation, chasing in now carries risks of getting squeezed and experiencing pullbacks. Meanwhile, $ONDO is only up 2.3%. If the RWA narrative is real, the “catch-up rally” part hasn’t finished yet—entering now is like getting in early before others move, so it feels steadier.

Of course, I don’t understand the underlying fundamentals of $RE well enough. This view is based only on today’s trading data and funding rate, so I could be wrong.

Today, SOL was pushed down to fifth place by $RE in trading volume—SOL has held that position for quite a while.

My mainline view on these two coins: the upside catch-up opportunity for $ONDO is more certain, while entering $RE today is like chasing a train that’s already full of passengers.