I tried once: I treated my own positions as an “interest-rate sensitivity curve” to adjust them. Back then, when interest rates went up and cash became more attractive, I first cut all the small tail coins and high leverage, leaving only two layers. One layer held stablecoins to earn a little interest as a buffer; the other layer only held the mainstream assets whose dependency relationships I can explain clearly (the kind where you can draw who is providing the “blood” to whom). In plain terms, when risk appetite falls, no matter how many narratives there are on-chain, they get pinned down by “funding costs”—the price initially reflects the looseness/tightness of the position.

Recently, I’ve been seeing news that a certain region is tightening its tax increases/regulatory stance (or suddenly loosening them). The most obvious change isn’t that the project’s fundamentals have changed, but that everyone’s expectations about whether deposits and withdrawals are smooth—and whether they might get blocked—have shifted. Sentiment directly feeds into whether people dare to add more positions. Right now, I’m watching two things: whether financing costs are rising or falling, and whether the friction in deposits and withdrawals has increased. If either of them tightens, I’ll make the geometry of my position diagram simpler—fewer lines, fewer “chains” of contagion. That’s it for now.