ShizukaKazu

#OneGate见证计划 Global Asset “Mass Exodus”: U.S. and European Stocks, Gold, Silver, and Cryptocurrencies Plunge Together—What Happened?
Overnight, from Wall Street to the City of London, and from gold to Bitcoin, nearly all assets fell.
From October 7 to 8 Beijing time, global financial markets experienced a rare “collective plunge.” All three major U.S. stock indexes closed lower, major European stock indexes fell across the board, gold and silver prices plunged sharply, and the cryptocurrency market was even more devastated—more than 124,000 people were liquidated, with total liquidations exceeding $700 million.
This was no longer an isolated move in any single asset class, but a systemic decline spanning markets and asset types.
What exactly happened? Was it short-term panic or a trend reversal? Let’s break it down one by one.
I. How bad was the market?
Let’s start with the data
In U.S. stocks, at the close, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.66% to 51179.87, the S&P 500 fell 0.22% to 7801.77, and the Nasdaq fell 0.22% to 27538.69. The S&P 500 and Dow ended four consecutive trading days of gains, while the Nasdaq fell for the first time in six trading days.
European stocks suffered an even sharper decline. Germany’s DAX 30 fell 1.35%, France’s CAC 40 fell 1.22%, and the Euro Stoxx 50 fell 1.47%. Italy’s FTSE MIB plunged 2.51%.
Gold and silver also plunged in tandem. Spot gold fell below the $4,100 per ounce level, hitting a new low since August 5, with its intraday decline reaching 2.26%; spot silver fell below $60 per ounce, down 3.50%.
The cryptocurrency market was even more brutal. Bitcoin plunged more than 3% in a straight line to a nearly one-week low, trading at $83,511; Ethereum fell nearly 5%, XRP dropped more than 6%, and Solana fell more than 4%. According to CoinGlass data, 124,000 people were liquidated globally over the past 24 hours, with total liquidations exceeding $700 million, more than 90% of which were long positions.
Asia-Pacific markets were also unable to escape. Japan’s Nikkei 225 fell 1.01%, while South Korea’s KOSPI fell 0.56%.
II. Who was the culprit?
The Fed meeting minutes strike a hawkish tone
The direct trigger for the collective decline in global assets was the Federal Reserve’s release of the minutes from its September monetary policy meeting.
The minutes showed that all 19 Fed policymakers broadly agreed to raise the benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points to a range of 3.75% to 4%, marking the Fed’s first rate hike since July 2023. More importantly, most participants believed that “another increase in the target range for the federal funds rate by year-end may be appropriate.”
According to CME FedWatch, the probability of the Fed cumulatively raising rates by 25 basis points by December has reached 64.1%.
But what truly caused the market to “break down” was not the rate-hike expectations themselves, but the sharp rise in long-term U.S. Treasury yields.
The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose as high as 5.364% intraday, reaching its highest level since 2002; the 30-year Treasury yield hit 5.732%, also setting a new high since May 2002. A survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York showed that the median U.S. consumer inflation expectation for the next 12 months rose 0.3 percentage points to 3.9% in September, the highest level since May 2023.
As Mike Dixon, head of investment research at Horizon, put it: “Given the current level of interest rates and this upcycle, it is fair to say that the margin for error in corporate earnings has narrowed.”
U.S. Treasuries are the anchor for global asset pricing, and their steadily rising yields are triggering a chain reaction ranging from pullbacks in highly valued technology stocks to tighter corporate financing costs. Assets across the globe are facing a systemic repricing.
III. A few more “straws” have broken the camel’s back
In addition to the Fed’s hawkish signals, several major factors are piling on the pressure:
First, tensions in the Middle East remain high. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that a few “illegal waterways” in the Strait of Hormuz would soon be closed. Iran reiterated that the strait would remain closed unless its “legitimate” demands were met. The world’s most important oil transit route faces the risk of disruption, and Brent crude at one point broke above $100 per barrel, reigniting inflation concerns in the market.
Second, global bond markets have fallen into a “vicious cycle.” The $32 trillion U.S. Treasury market has entered a “vicious cycle” of forced selling, with no marginal buyers stepping in so far. As the war in the Middle East pushes up energy inflation expectations, strong U.S. economic data have also extinguished market hopes for rate cuts, sending global bond markets into a rare selling storm.
Third, France’s fiscal problems have intensified market anxiety. Markets fear that France’s fiscal predicament could drag the European Central Bank into a direct confrontation with financial markets, and some analysts have even begun comparing the current situation with the eurozone debt crisis of the early 2010s. The CAC 40’s decline of more than 1% was a direct reflection of this concern.
Fourth, the high leverage risk of macro hedge funds. Some macro hedge funds have warned that leverage levels among hedge funds are currently far higher than during the previous period of high interest rates, with the situation evolving into a vicious cycle in which “falling prices trigger forced liquidations, and forced liquidations accelerate the decline.”
IV. A tale of two markets: These sectors rose against the trend
Although the broader market was bleak, the market was not entirely uniform.
Memory chip stocks followed a trend of their own. Micron Technology rose 4.06% against the trend, SanDisk gained 1.92%, and Super Micro Computer rose more than 3%. Against the backdrop of pressure on the semiconductor sector overall, memory chips benefited from strong demand driven by AI infrastructure construction and became a safe haven for capital.
The healthcare sector rose 1.06% against the market, with weight-loss drugs and vaccine concept stocks leading the gains. Roche, Eli Lilly, and Amgen rose more than 2%, while Novo Nordisk and Pfizer gained nearly 2%.
Popular Chinese concept stocks also strengthened against the trend. The Nasdaq Golden Dragon China Index turned positive late in the session, rising slightly by 0.12%; JD.com rose more than 2%, while Zhihu, NIO, and NetEase gained more than 1%. More notably, a new Bank of America report showed that global active long-only funds’ allocations to Chinese stocks had risen from “underweight” to “benchmark neutral,” ending a four-year period of underweight positions.
In addition, technology giants showed divergent performance. Amazon led the gains, rising more than 1%; Google and Apple rose more than 0.8%, while Meta fell more than 2%, and Tesla also declined.
V. What is the outlook?
In the short term, the market remains in a “news vacuum,” with the direction of U.S. Treasury yields serving as the core variable.
Guy Miller of Zurich Insurance Group said: “We are now in the quiet period before earnings season, and the market lacks clear catalysts, so it is easily affected by various pieces of news.”
Bank of America strategist Michael Hartnett warned that investors may continue to avoid high-risk trades until clear signs emerge that the dollar’s current rally has peaked. He recommended that investors gradually increase their bond allocations, describing the strategy as “buying humiliation.”
In short, the Fed’s hawkish signals + surging Treasury yields + the Middle East powder keg = global assets collectively “surviving a tribulation.” Next, the market will remain focused on one question: When will bond yields peak? Until the answer becomes clear, volatility will likely remain the norm.

#GateMoney正式上线 Daily payments
🌍 Cross-border payments
🏦 Global bank accounts in your own name
📊 Unified asset management
My first unlock: 🏦 Global bank accounts in your own name—the “shaky hands” I’ve had for eight years can finally be cured
Among the four scenarios, I’d choose “global bank accounts in your own name” with my eyes closed, for one reason: it cured the “condition” I developed eight years ago.
My “condition” is called C2C stress response: when I bought crypto on Gate for the first time in 2018, for a 500U order, my palms were sweaty and my fingers were shaking. The moment I pressed confirm, I could barely breathe—back then, “buying crypto” meant first finding a stranger willing to sell U, then transferring the money over with my heart in my mouth. This psychological trauma has followed me for eight years: every time I deposit or withdraw funds, I feel the insecurity of “doing a transaction with a stranger.”
So the appeal of Gate Money’s “global bank account in your own name” is that going forward, the recipient of your payments will be a bank account under your own name, not “some OTC merchant”—cross-border payments will change from “trusting a stranger” to “using your own account.” It is planned to cover the US, Europe, Dubai, and Australia, and support receiving payments in more than 60 local currencies.
By the way, once this account is available, the first thing I’ll do is—openly receive a payment for that “historical commemorative order” of 500U I bought with trembling hands back then, and see whether my hands still shake this time 😄
The vote is yours: which one would you unlock first? I bet “bank account” will get the most votes—after all, longtime users know the pain of depositing and withdrawing funds 👇
#GateMoney #OneGate见证计划 .

#美联储9月纪要偏鹰 Fed minutes signal hawkish stance: another hike possible by year-end, but no move in October is certain
Minutes released by the Federal Reserve on Wednesday (October 7) showed that most officials believed another rate hike may still be needed before year-end to curb inflation that remains above target. However, the minutes did not specify when the next move would come, while recently softer-than-expected inflation data and cautious remarks from several officials have also cooled expectations of an immediate October hike.
The Federal Reserve will announce its two remaining rate decisions this year on October 28 and December 9. Although further rate hikes remained the policy direction expected by most officials, they emphasized that each meeting would be approached with an open mind, with decisions based on newly released information and its implications for the economic outlook and balance of risks.
Another hike by year-end remains the expectation of most officials
On September 16, the Federal Reserve unanimously agreed to raise the target range for the federal funds rate by 25 basis points to 3.75%–4%. The minutes showed that officials believed inflation remained elevated, the labor market was close to full employment, and economic activity continued to expand steadily, factors that together supported raising the policy rate. Most participants judged that another increase in the target range for the federal funds rate before year-end could be appropriate.
Many officials supported a higher interest-rate path from a risk-management perspective, hoping to provide protection against persistent inflation caused by stronger-than-expected demand growth or new adverse supply shocks.
The September economic projections also reflected this tendency. Of the 18 officials who submitted projections, 16 expected at least one more rate hike before year-end. The median rate projection pointed to one more hike this year, followed by unchanged rates in 2027.
Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh has not submitted personal economic projections since taking office in May this year. Why have expectations for an October hike cooled?
At a press conference after the September meeting, Warsh made hawkish remarks on inflation and described the hike as removing “some of the accommodation.” Wall Street interpreted the comment as a potential signal of further rate hikes, and the market at one point increased its bets on another move in October.
However, inflation data released after the meeting gave policymakers more room to observe. The Federal Reserve’s preferred personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index showed core inflation at 3% year-on-year in August and headline inflation at 3.4%. Both figures remained significantly above the 2% target, but both were below previous expectations, with part of the decline related to adjustments in the methodology used to calculate certain statistical items.
Meanwhile, several Federal Reserve officials emphasized that the central bank did not need to rush into another hike and could first observe economic developments and the effects of the September policy adjustment. Therefore, another hike by year-end remains possible, but that does not mean the Federal Reserve has decided to act in October.
Inflation expectations and Treasury yields continue to exert pressure
What has kept the Federal Reserve on alert is that inflation has remained above target for more than five consecutive years. Officials worried that if price increases persisted for too long, they could affect the public’s inflation expectations and further feed into wage and corporate pricing decisions. Short-term inflation expectations have also shown signs of heating up. A survey released by the New York Fed on Wednesday showed that consumers’ expectations for price increases over the next year rose to their highest level since May 2023.
Market-based inflation measures remain elevated, indicating that recent improvements have not yet been sufficient to eliminate price pressures completely. U.S. Treasury yields have also continued to rise, remaining near their highest levels since 2002. The minutes discussed multiple factors behind the rise in yields, including market expectations for higher policy rates, solid economic growth, and substantial financing demand generated by artificial intelligence infrastructure construction. Staff also noted that uncertainty triggered by the U.S. Treasury’s announcement and implementation of a Treasury buyback program may have contributed to the rise in yields.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced in August that buybacks of outstanding long-term Treasuries would be expanded, but the arrangement has not yet significantly lowered long-term yields.
For the market, the focus now is on whether the improvement in inflation can continue and whether new data will be sufficient for the Federal Reserve to delay action. Another hike by year-end remains the expectation of most officials, but the exact timing will depend on subsequent economic performance.

#美联储9月纪要偏鹰
Fed Minutes “Hawkish” but Market “Unhurried”: The Real Judgment Comes with the 10/14 CPI, and BTC Has Already Dropped in Anticipation
The minutes were released last night + BTC broke below $83,400 today (intraday low of $82,787), giving back all of last week’s gains in a single day.
My view: The minutes’ “hawkishness” is clear (unanimous support for a rate hike + most officials still want to add another one this year), and the market’s “lack of urgency” is also clear (October rate-hike probability <20%, with traders betting on December)—neither side is pretending otherwise. The only real decider left is the September CPI on October 14. BTC is now clinging to the $82K lifeline, waiting for this “judgment.”
I. What the Minutes Said: Hawkish, but Leaving a Back Door Open
The hawkish part: All 19 officials supported a September rate hike, and most believed that “another rate hike this year would be appropriate”
The back door: No specific timing was disclosed—“depending on new information,” effectively leaving room to hold rates steady in October
Goldman Sachs’ two-pronged preparation: A December rate hike is more likely, but “the possibility that no further tightening will ultimately be needed is equally substantial”—the path is far from set and depends entirely on the data
II. Why the Market Is “Not in a Hurry”: Three Reasons
1. Nonfarm payrolls were too weak (only 29,000 in September): The labor market has already cooled, leaving insufficient data support for consecutive rate hikes in October
2. October probability <20%: The market has already “moved” rate-hike expectations to December
3. The real focus is CPI: The September CPI on 10/14—cooling inflation means a December hike is not necessarily coming either, while sticky inflation would essentially confirm December
III. Why BTC Fell Today: It’s Not Just the Minutes
U.S. Treasury yields hit new highs: The 10-year reached 5.33% and the 30-year 5.72% (the highest since 2002), while the U.K. 30-year also broke above 6%—global interest rates are being reset, and BTC, a “zero-yield asset,” is taking the biggest hit
The dollar returned to 102: A strong dollar is the enemy of risk assets
More than $550 million liquidated: More than $550 million in long positions were wiped out in 24 hours—the leveraged weak hands have been swept away, which is itself a “good thing” (the market is cleaner after the washout), but first we need to confirm whether $82K can hold
IV. Trading Strategy: Before CPI, Position Size Is Life
$82K is the judgment seat: Holding means an oversold rebound after the leverage washout (back to $85K); breaking below means a move toward $80K or even lower
Before the 10/14 CPI: Don’t bet heavily on a direction—the CPI offers two scenarios: cooling inflation → October completely off the table, December probability also falls → risk assets rebound across the board; sticky inflation → Treasury bonds remain under pressure, and BTC continues to face pressure
This week’s move: Observe with a light position above $82K; exit if it breaks down, and don’t hold on; those with no position should wait for the CPI release before acting
U.S. stocks in sync: Micron rose 4% against the trend last night (AI hardware is strong), but the headwinds from Treasury yields above 5.7% and the dollar at 102 have not eased, so U.S. stocks are also merely “surviving in the cracks”
The minutes are hawkish, the market is unhurried, and CPI is the judgment—BTC falling to $82K is not the “end of the world,” but “pre-exam nerves.” What really determines the direction is not the minutes, but the 10/14 data. Don’t take a heavy position before the exam; choose your side afterward.
Are you waiting for CPI with your position intact, or have you already reduced it in advance? Let’s discuss in the comments 👇$BTC ‌

#三星Q3营业利润飙升782.5% Samsung Electronics Q3 Results Are In: Profit Hits a Record High, but Revenue Falls Short of Expectations! How Should the Memory Segment Be Interpreted?
Global memory leader Samsung Electronics announced its preliminary Q3 2026 results, and the report is highly noteworthy: Operating profit reached a record high for the company, but revenue came in slightly below the market consensus. The memory sector is the core driver of this semiconductor rally, and as the global memory industry leader, Samsung's results will directly determine short-term sentiment across the global memory segment.
I. Overview of Core Results 
✅ Actual third-quarter sales: 195.00 trillion Korean won; market consensus estimate: 201.9 trillion Korean won, with revenue below expectations
✅ Actual third-quarter operating profit: 107.40 trillion Korean won; market consensus estimate: 108.67 trillion Korean won; profit was slightly below expectations, but the absolute figure reached a record high 
In one simple sentence: Profit was explosive, but revenue failed to meet the market's optimistic expectations, making this a set of results with “strong fundamentals, but below optimistic expectations.” II. In-Depth Breakdown: Profit Hits a Record High—Where Is the Revenue Shortfall? 
1. The underlying logic behind the profit surge: Rising prices for AI memory HBM and DRAM were the biggest contributors  The vast majority of Samsung's profits came from its semiconductor memory business. Training large AI models has driven sustained shortages in global demand for high-bandwidth HBM memory. Combined with continued price increases for DRAM and NAND flash, memory chip gross margins rose sharply, directly boosting profitability in Samsung's chip segment. The market had previously estimated that Samsung's chip division would post nearly 110 trillion Korean won in quarterly profit. Continued growth in AI server memory orders has been the core driver of this upcycle in the memory sector. Consumer-facing businesses such as smartphones were broadly loss-making, leaving the company's profitability entirely reliant on its memory chip business for support. 
2. Two core reasons why revenue fell short of expectations
 ① Weak consumer-side memory demand Traditional memory demand from consumer electronics such as PCs and smartphones recovered less than expected. Although AI server memory orders were booming, relatively weak consumer-side demand for DRAM and NAND weighed on overall revenue.
Simply put: High-end AI memory sold very well, but shipments of standard memory for smartphones and computers fell short of expectations. 
② A gap in the HBM delivery mix The market had set very high expectations for Samsung's HBM shipments. Compared with SK Hynix, Samsung still trails in orders from high-end HBM customers. HBM has the highest unit prices and makes the strongest contribution to revenue. High-end HBM deliveries fell short of the market's optimistic projections, directly dragging down overall revenue. 
Key distinction: The issue is not a lack of industry demand, but that Samsung's shipments of high-end products did not meet the market's previously optimistic expectations. The underlying logic of the memory industry's long-term upcycle remains intact. 
3. Industry outlook: The memory upcycle remains intact, but expectations need to cool 
Many people may be concerned: If Samsung's results fell short of expectations, is the memory rally over?
Conclusion: The memory industry's upcycle has not ended, but the market's excessively optimistic expectations need to cool. 
- Positive factors: Capital spending on AI computing power continues, HBM supply and demand remain tightly balanced, the DRAM price increase trend continues, and major memory manufacturers' profitability remains at historically high levels;
- Negative factors: The market has already fully priced in expectations of rising prices, making it difficult to continue exceeding expectations. The sector is shifting from “mindless gains” to a focus on the realization of results and earnings-driven trading. 
III. Sentiment Impact on the Global Memory Segment
1. South Korean stock market: As a heavyweight leader in South Korean equities, Samsung Electronics' slightly disappointing results will cause short-term sentiment disruption; however, profits remain at historically high levels, making a sharp sell-off unlikely. The stock will most likely trade sideways as expectations are absorbed.
2. U.S. memory stocks (Micron, Western Digital): Short-term sentiment is neutral to cautiously bearish. The market will reassess expectations for HBM shipments, while high-priced memory stocks will see divergence and rotation.
Samsung's Q3 report reflects “strong fundamentals, but results below optimistic expectations.” The AI-driven upcycle in the memory industry has not reversed, but the market's previously excessive expectations need to be revised.
The market is shifting from purely speculating on price increases to verifying orders and earnings realization. The memory segment may experience divergence and volatility in the short term, but structural opportunities remain. The focus should be on avoiding high-priced, purely thematic stocks and concentrating on areas where industry-chain earnings are being realized.#OneGate见证计划

#美国政府地址32小时转出6.7亿美元加密资产
US government-linked addresses transferred approximately $670 million in crypto assets over 32 hours—6,215 BTC (about $520 million) + 119 million USDT + 40,285 BNB, with most flowing to CoinbPrime. The assets mainly came from the 2016 Bitf hack and assets seized from Alameda.
This is a routine "seized asset management" operation, not a sudden event—the US government still holds approximately $28 billion in crypto assets, and this $670 million accounts for only 2.4%.
There are two key points:
① Transfers ≠ sales; whether there was "selling" has not yet been confirmed;
② It coincided with new highs in Treasury yields + the dollar at 102 + BTC falling below $85K—making it the most conspicuous "last straw that broke the camel's back."
How large is $670 million
A comparison puts it into perspective:
BTC's average daily spot + futures trading volume: $30 billion+—$670 million is less than a fraction of one day's volume
​US government holdings: approximately $28 billion—the amount transferred was only 2.4%
​Historical reference: The German government sold 50k BTC in 2024 (about $3 billion)—that was a "massive dump," and BTC still rebounded afterward.
At $670 million, the amount does not even qualify as "ants moving house"—it cannot hurt supply and demand; it hurts "sentiment."
Why was the market still spooked: three reasons
One Timing
The transfers occurred on 10/7-8, exactly coinciding with the 30-year Treasury yield surging to 5.72%, a new high since 2002 + the dollar returning to 102 + BTC already struggling around $85K—BTC would probably have fallen today even without the government transfers. The transfers merely gave bears an additional piece of "narrative ammunition."
Two Destination.
Transferred to Coinb Prime—this is a custody entry point commonly used by institutions/governments. Historically, after the government transferred coins, it sometimes sold and sometimes merely changed custodians as part of the process (it also transferred $288 million in July, and the market did not collapse). "Coin transfers" are a fact; "selling" is speculation—on-chain data can only prove that the assets "moved," not that they were "sold."
Three Background.
The Federal Reserve minutes were hawkish + the 10/14 CPI release is imminent—the market is already in a state of "extreme alarm," so any "selling pressure signal" will be interpreted in an amplified manner. This is not the fault of $670 million; it is that $670 million happened to appear at the market's most tense moment.
What really needs watching is not this transfer
Zooming out, three signals are more important than $670 million:
Signal One: Will the US government "confirm the sale"? Officials previously denied selling seized BTC—if this was merely custody/process-related, the negative news has been fully priced in; if a sale is subsequently confirmed, $670 million is only an "appetizer," and how the remaining $28 billion is handled is the main issue.
Signal Two: The disposal pace of the $28 billion "overhang." The US government is one of the largest BTC holders ($28 billion ≈ approximately 0.8% of the current circulating supply)—how it disposes of the holdings (long-term holding/staged selling/one-time liquidation) is the variable that truly affects medium-term supply and demand.
Signal Three: Is BTC's own "lifeline" still intact? BTC fell below $83,400 today, reaching $82,787 intraday—the $82K lifeline is being tested. Government transfers are merely a sentiment catalyst; the real deciding factors remain the 10/14 CPI and the direction of Treasury yields.
The US government's transfer of $670 million is "routine management," not a "massive sell-off"—the amount is limited, its nature remains undetermined, and the timing was coincidental. What truly determines BTC's direction is CPI and Treasuries, not the government's wallet's "small move."
But keep an eye on three confirmation signals: whether it was actually sold, how the $28 billion will be handled, and whether $82K can hold. $BTC ‌

#Robinhood将2500万美元比特币纳入资产负债表 Robinhood Adds 25 Million BTC: Strategic Shift or a Show of Loyalty to the Community?
According to Woofun AI, Robinhood announced that it had added $25 million worth of BTC to its corporate balance sheet. The move was disclosed by John Kulbłat, senior vice president in charge of cryptocurrency and international business, whose core rationale was not to pursue direct investment returns, but to demonstrate a firm strategic commitment to the crypto community.
Although this move stands in sharp contrast to the public doubts previously expressed by the company's CFO, Shiv Verma, regarding capital allocation efficiency, management is clearly attempting to use this symbolic asset allocation to balance the tension between traditional financial compliance pressures and the expectations of Web3-native users. This strategy of turning financial decisions into an endorsement of community trust marks Robinhood's attempt to move beyond the role of a simple trading platform as it establishes its position in the crypto industry.
Looking at the evolution of executive attitudes, when Shiv Verma was about to become CFO in November 2025, he had sharply questioned the rationale for holding BTC as a use of cash, arguing that the company should prioritize capital for new product development and engineering R&D to drive growth. However, Verma, now officially in the role, said the company would continue evaluating the pros and cons of the strategy, while John Kulbłat acknowledged that the position was extremely small and could hardly affect the fundamentals of the company, whose market capitalization is close to $100 billion. Based on a BTC price of $85,582 at the time, $25 million could purchase only about 292 BTC, representing just 0.025% of Robinhood's market value. Data compiled by Woofun AI showed that, by comparison, Strategy(MSTRUS) spent $28.7 million purchasing 334 BTC between October 1 and 4, sending its total holdings soaring to 848,000 BTC—a huge difference in strategic aggressiveness.
This tiny holding ratio suggests that Robinhood's BTC purchase was more of a statement than a substantive balance-sheet restructuring. Notably, the increase came against the backdrop of divergent financial performance in Robinhood's crypto business.
Financial results showed that second-quarter revenue from the cryptocurrency business plunged 38% year over year to just $100 million; meanwhile, the company's total revenue grew 32% to a record $1.31 billion. This structural contrast indicates that traditional brokerage remains the revenue pillar, while the crypto segment faces a growth bottleneck. The market reaction was also cautious: Robinhood (HOOD) closed at $112 on Tuesday, down 1.85%. The stock remained under pressure and continued falling in premarket trading Wednesday. Investors are clearly weighing whether putting real money into BTC amid declining crypto revenue is distracting management from its core profitable businesses, or whether it is a necessary sacrifice for long-term ecosystem expansion. More importantly, the key variable is whether this BTC accumulation is part of Robinhood's broader strategy to expand its on-chain business.
Robinhood Chain, a layer-2 network built on Arbitrum technology, launched its public mainnet service on July 1. The network's current TVL (total value locked) is $1.047 billion. Although TVL surpassed $1 billion approximately 80 days after launch, growth has since slowed, fluctuating between $1 billion and $1.05 billion since the end of September. To stimulate activity, Robinhood plans to offer eligible U.S. customers perpetual futures products for Bitcoin and ETH, with leverage of up to 10x. In addition, the company launched an in-app AI agent and a new token mechanism last week to distinguish itself from traditional custodians that accumulate cryptocurrency by issuing stocks.
The next quarterly report will explicitly disclose the details of its BTC holdings and reveal whether this strategy will continue to deepen.

#每周来晒 #美联储9月纪要偏鹰 October hike? Most likely "dovish"—but no one is pricing the "tail risk" of CPI exceeding expectations
I. Will there be another hike in October? My view: most likely not—the bar for "making it two months in a row" is too high
The logic is simple:
- September just saw a hike (3.75-4.00%, the first resumption of hikes since 2023)—consecutive monthly hikes have been "extreme action" in the Fed's history, requiring a "cliff-like deterioration" in the data
- Payrolls were only 29,000 and the unemployment rate was 4.2%—the labor market does not support consecutive hikes
- The minutes said "most officials expect one more hike this year," but did not say "one more hike in October"—leaving room for maneuver
So, a CPI upside surprise → October odds jump from <20% to 30-40% → the market gets "nervous again"; but for an October hike to actually happen, we would need "hot CPI + another payrolls collapse + officials talking tough" all three together—the odds are still not high. CPI's role is not to "decide October," but to "determine the December and next year's path."

II. How will the CPI scenario play out? Two versions, opposite directions
Scenario A: CPI cools (core monthly increase ≤0.2%) → October is completely off the table, December odds also fall → Treasury yields decline and the dollar weakens → BTC rebounds to $85K+, while U.S. AI hardware stocks get a new lease on life. This is the bulls' scenario.
Scenario B: CPI exceeds expectations (monthly increase ≥0.3%) → October odds return to 30-40%, and December becomes "a done deal" → the 30-year Treasury yield surges back above 5.8%, the dollar continues strengthening → BTC tests $82K again, with $80K in sight if it breaks. This is the bears' scenario.

Oil prices returning above $100 (Brent) + the situation in the Middle East mean the probability of "sticky" inflation is not low—don't assume CPI will definitely cool.

III. Impact on crypto and U.S. stocks: BTC is waiting for judgment at $82K, while U.S. stocks struggle to survive in the "gap" under 5.7% Treasury yields
- Crypto: $82K is the courtroom—CPI cooling → hold and rebound; CPI surging → breakdown toward $80K. Today's $550 million in liquidations has already washed out leverage once; the direction depends entirely on the data
- U.S. stocks: 30-year Treasury yield at 5.72% (the highest since 2002) + dollar at 102—high-valuation assets are all under pressure. AI hardware (Micron rising 4% against the trend) has "earnings protection," but unless yields fall, any rebound is just "jumping the gun"
- Don't forget the linkage: Treasuries are the "pricing anchor" for global risk assets—if they don't turn back, neither crypto nor U.S. stocks can fly solo

IV. Has the market's expectations been "fully priced in"? The answer is: half and half
Already fully priced in: "no October hike"—with odds below 20%, traders have already lined up; "hawkish minutes"—BTC did not crash after the minutes were released (it was hit by Treasuries + the dollar, not by the minutes).
Not fully priced in: the tail risk of "CPI exceeding expectations"—the market currently assumes that "CPI will cool and December is the real focus"; if 10/14 proves that wrong, it will be a "double whammy": higher rate expectations + Treasuries making new highs.
This is the real "asymmetry": downside risk is even less priced in than upside risk.

An October hike will most likely be a "false alarm," but a CPI upside surprise would be a "real landmine"—the market has heavily priced in "no hike" but not enough "blowout" risk. Don't take a heavy position before CPI; after CPI, use $82K to determine the direction.
This week's market is like the night before an exam—everyone knows there will be a "test" (CPI), but no one knows "how difficult the questions will be." Don't guess the questions; wait for the paper. $82K is the "passing line": if it breaks, hand in the paper and leave; if it holds, wait for the results.

Are you waiting for CPI or have you already taken a side with your position? Let's discuss in the comments 👇

#Hyperliquid永续合约OI市场份额升至11.9%创新高 Hyperliquid’s rapid increase in perpetual futures market share (some statistics show that its share of decentralized perpetual futures has exceeded 70%, while its share of the overall perpetual futures market is approximately 11.9% to 13.6%) signals that decentralized derivatives (DeFi) are materially encroaching on the market share of centralized exchanges (CEXs). This phenomenon is the result of the combined effects of technological evolution, market sentiment, and capital flows. It reflects profound changes in the structure of the crypto market, while also carrying certain risks.
I. Core Drivers Behind Decentralized Derivatives’ Encroachment on CEX Market Share
1. Leap in the Technological Experience
Early DEXs were constrained by the performance of underlying public blockchains and suffered from high latency, significant slippage, and poor liquidity. New-generation derivatives DEXs such as Hyperliquid have used proprietary high-performance L1s (such as HyperBFT consensus) and fully on-chain central limit order book (CLOB) technology to achieve sub-second confirmations and matching depth close to that of CEXs, dramatically narrowing the experience gap with CEXs and meeting professional traders’ demand for low latency and high liquidity.
2. Asset Sovereignty and Trust Advantages
Frequent blowups at CEXs (such as FTX) have made the market acutely aware of the single-point risks of asset custody. The “self-custody” model of DEXs allows traders to truly control their asset private keys, eliminating the trust risks of platform misconduct or bankruptcy. This “Not your keys, not your coins” philosophy has attracted significant numbers of users and institutional capital with heightened asset-security requirements.
3. Cost and Efficiency Advantages
DEXs generally have no KYC barriers or geographical restrictions, and their fees are relatively lower. At the same time, the transparency of on-chain derivatives (such as perpetual futures), which are verifiable entirely on-chain, and their capital efficiency (such as no position limits and instant settlement) are highly attractive to some traders seeking efficiency and low friction.
4. Product Innovation and Ecosystem Expansion
Protocols such as Hyperliquid have rapidly expanded the range of tradable products by introducing mechanisms such as HIP-3 (permissionless market creation), including on-chain stocks, commodities, and prediction markets. This has attracted traditional financial traders and crypto traders, enabling cross-sector user acquisition and further expanding market share.
II. Evolution of the Market Landscape: Complementarity Rather Than Complete Replacement
1. Segmentation and Complementarity by Use Case
CEXs still possess irreplaceable advantages in fiat on-ramps, coverage of long-tail assets, complex financial products (such as leveraged tokens), and traditional institutions’ compliance requirements. The future market is more likely to exhibit a complementary structure in which “CEXs handle access and compliance, while DEXs handle on-chain trading and asset sovereignty,” rather than a simple “zero-sum replacement.”
2. Intensifying Head-Platform Effect
As DEX trading volumes surge, market resources are accelerating their concentration in leading DEXs with advanced technology, strong liquidity, and well-developed ecosystems (such as Hyperliquid). The Matthew effect is becoming increasingly pronounced, further accelerating the elimination of long-tail DEXs and driving an overall reshuffling of the decentralized derivatives sector.
III. Potential Risks and Future Outlook
1. Market and Cyclical Risks
Derivatives trading itself involves high leverage and high volatility, while DEX buyback mechanisms (such as Hyperliquid’s fee buybacks) are procyclical. When markets weaken and trading volumes contract, token prices and protocol revenue may face dual pressure.
2. Regulatory and Compliance Risks
The permissionless and no-KYC characteristics of DEXs expose them to regulatory uncertainty worldwide. Some DEXs have previously been restricted in certain countries due to compliance issues, which to some extent limits their widespread adoption by traditional institutions.
3. Technological and Decentralization Risks
Some high-performance DEXs continue to face a degree of centralization pressure in the number of consensus nodes or the distribution of validators in pursuit of extreme performance. This creates a certain gap with DeFi’s ideal of “complete decentralization” and may trigger community controversy.
Overall, decentralized derivatives’ encroachment on centralized exchange market share is an important sign of the crypto market’s evolution toward “on-chain finance.” As underlying technology continues to improve and institutional capital gradually enters the market, decentralized derivatives are likely to occupy an increasingly important position in the crypto-finance landscape.$HYPE ‌

#Gate与Visa合作推出加密资产关联卡 The crypto-linked card launched by Gate and Visa (Gate Card) provides crypto traders with a seamless bridge between “crypto assets” and “traditional fiat payments,” carrying profound real-world significance for crypto traders!
1. Seamlessly enables “everyday payments” and “fiat conversion” of crypto assets
· Eliminates cumbersome conversions: Traders no longer need to frequently exchange “crypto assets–fiat” on exchanges. When making purchases at Visa-supported merchants worldwide (online/offline), the system can instantly convert crypto assets (such as BTC, ETH, and USDT) into fiat for settlement, solving the pain point of crypto assets being “difficult to spend.”
· Reduces exchange losses and barriers: When making cross-border purchases, traders can avoid the complexity and high exchange losses of traditional currency conversion, enabling “one-click spending” and significantly improving the circulation and payment efficiency of crypto assets.
2. Connects to the global payment network and expands crypto asset use cases
· Expands spending coverage: The card connects to Visa’s global payment network and covers a large number of merchants worldwide, allowing crypto traders to make everyday purchases, shop online, and withdraw cash at ATMs globally just as they would with a traditional bank card, transforming crypto assets from “speculative assets” into “everyday payment tools.”
· Improves asset liquidity: By expanding real-world spending scenarios for crypto assets, it effectively activates traders’ assets and enhances the liquidity and practical value of crypto assets.
3. Reduces traders’ overall costs
· Lowers conversion and withdrawal costs: It eliminates the intermediary steps and fees involved in traditional fiat withdrawals. Some cards also offer cashback on spending (such as up to 8% cashback) or rewards points, directly generating additional returns for traders and reducing their overall usage costs.
· Reduces the cost of idle funds: Funds can be flexibly switched between crypto assets and fiat at any time, improving capital efficiency and avoiding idle assets.
4. Improves the convenience and security of fund usage
· Convenient fund management: The card is linked to the trader’s exchange account (such as a Gate account), making fund transfers and spending more convenient while supporting multi-currency top-ups and flexible switching between funding accounts.
· Compliance and security: The card relies on Visa’s compliant payment network and provides KYC (identity verification) and AML (anti-money laundering) compliance safeguards. Fund transfers are traceable, effectively reducing compliance and security risks when traders use crypto assets for payments.
5. Meets cross-border transaction and globalization needs
Supports cross-border payments: For traders engaged in cross-border transactions, making purchases overseas, or traveling abroad frequently, the card supports multi-currency settlement, eliminating the hassle of carrying large amounts of cash or arranging complex cross-border remittances and greatly improving the convenience of cross-border payments.
The partnership between Gate and Visa has significantly lowered the barrier for crypto traders to use crypto assets for everyday payments, improved capital efficiency, and promoted the transformation of crypto assets into mainstream payment tools.

#布局本周交易 #每周来晒 10.7 Bitcoin positioning strategy
The current market shows no significant changes compared with yesterday, maintaining the rhythm of an unsuccessful upward test followed by a pullback to build momentum. Volatility continues to narrow from the previous period, forming a converging triangle consolidation range. Neither bulls nor bears have shown any volume expansion signals. In terms of positioning, the strategy of going long at lower levels remains unchanged: consider a light entry around 85000, with the first target near 86200. $BTC ‌

#英伟达股价新高 #OneGate见证计划 NVIDIA Hits Another All-Time High: Behind Its $5.76 Trillion Market Cap, Is AI Truly Booming or Just a Bubble?
When computing power becomes the oil of a new era, whoever controls the refineries controls the pricing power.
Three months ago, Wall Street was still collectively “pouring cold water” on NVIDIA. In the summer of 2026, claims that the “AI bubble is about to burst” were everywhere. NVIDIA’s stock price retreated from its May record high, wiping out as much as approximately $1 trillion in market value. “Big Short” investor Michael Burry’s doubts, first raised at the beginning of the year, continued to gain traction, while debate over whether AI capital expenditures could generate returns grew increasingly heated.
And then?
On October 5, U.S. Eastern Time Monday, NVIDIA closed at $238.90, up 2.12% on the day. It broke decisively above its May high during the session, with the closing price reaching a new all-time high. Its total market capitalization reached $5.76 trillion, firmly holding the top spot among publicly listed companies worldwide. It is now only approximately $230 billion away from $6 trillion—the threshold no company in human history has ever reached.
From wiping out $1 trillion to returning to its peak, it took less than one quarter. This is not the first time. Over the past three years, NVIDIA has faced a trial over the “bubble” almost every six months, then responded to the doubts with an earnings report.
But this time, the focus of the debate has changed. People are no longer asking whether “AI is real,” but rather: when a company earns more in one quarter than many countries produce in GDP in an entire year, where exactly is its ceiling?
01 From Wiping Out $1 Trillion to Returning to Its Peak: What Happened Over These Three Months
To understand the significance of this new high, we first need to look back at how dramatic the past few months have been. On May 14 this year, NVIDIA had just set a record closing high of $235.74, with market sentiment still at a boiling point. But once July arrived, the wind suddenly changed.
There were several triggers:
First, “Big Short” investor Michael Burry publicly raised doubts as early as February: NVIDIA’s purchase obligations had surged from $16.1 billion a year earlier to $95.2 billion. This meant NVIDIA had placed a large number of non-cancellable orders before demand had become clear. By summer, this logic was repeatedly cited and continued to gain traction in the market.
Second, earnings reports from major customers such as Amazon and Meta showed that free cash flow had either plunged or stagnated. The market began to worry: could these technology giants actually earn back the hundreds of billions they were spending on GPUs?
Third, monetization on the AI application side had consistently lagged behind capital expenditures on the hardware side, and doubts over “circular financing” grew louder—especially after NVIDIA announced in August that it would establish a computing-power financing platform exceeding $500 billion together with Apollo, BlackRock, Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, KKR, and other institutions.
Combined with external disruptions such as heightened geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, multiple pressures drove NVIDIA’s stock below $190 at one point in late July, a retreat of approximately 20% from its May high and a loss of approximately $1 trillion in market value. At that time, the “AI bubble” thesis was Wall Street’s most politically correct conclusion. The turning point came on August 26. After the market closed that day, NVIDIA released its second-quarter fiscal 2027 earnings report—the figures were explosive, and the stock rose approximately 5% after hours at one point. Then came what we are seeing now: the stock steadily recovered its losses, broke above its May high on heavy volume on October 5, and closed at a record $238.90, with its market capitalization climbing above $5.76 trillion. The Nasdaq index also hit an all-time high that day. From “the bubble is about to burst” to a record high, the script reversed faster than many had imagined. Every row of glowing racks is an AI factory processing Tokens.
02 Earning $59.69 Billion in One Quarter: Just How Astonishing Are These Numbers?
Let’s start with a set of figures to get a feel for what an “AI money-printing machine” looks like. NVIDIA’s core figures for the second quarter of fiscal 2027, ended July 26, 2026: total revenue of $96.22 billion, up 106% year over year and 18% quarter over quarter. Net profit of $59.69 billion, up 126% year over year. Gross margin of 75%—what does that mean? Apple’s gross margin is approximately 45%, while TSMC’s is approximately 55%. For a chipmaker to achieve a 75% gross margin means its products are in no danger of going unsold, and it has complete control over pricing.
But what is truly astonishing is the structure of its data-center business. Data-center revenue was $89 billion, up 117% year over year and 18% quarter over quarter, accounting for more than 90% of total revenue. Its revenue in a single quarter exceeds the annual revenue of many technology companies.
Breaking it down: hyperscale cloud service providers—major customers such as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon—contributed $48.7 billion, up 102% year over year. AI cloud, industrial, and enterprise customers contributed $40.3 billion, up 138% year over year. Note the second figure: enterprise and AI cloud customers are growing faster than hyperscalers.
What does this mean? It means demand for AI computing power is expanding from “a handful of technology giants spending heavily to build the foundation” to more industries and more companies. Demand is not narrowing; it is broadening. The core driver of this growth cycle is the ramp-up in shipments of chips based on the Blackwell Ultra architecture. At the same time, the next-generation Vera Rubin platform has entered full-scale mass production and will be deployed by partners including CoreWeave, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, Oracle OCI, and Nebius.
Simply put: the old products are still selling, while new products are already coming online.
Even more striking is the guidance: the company expects third-quarter revenue to reach $108 billion (±2%)—putting quarterly revenue above the $100 billion mark for the first time. Jensen Huang said on the earnings call that AI has reached an “inflection point” and that “computing power is being converted into revenue.” At the Goldman Sachs TMT conference in September, he put it even more directly: “The 70% revenue growth target we provided is a supply ceiling, not a demand ceiling.” In other words: it is not that the market does not want more chips; we simply cannot manufacture them fast enough. This is the underlying logic behind the stock’s continued rise—demand exceeds supply.
03 Bubble or Golden Age? Wall Street Is Divided
Every time NVIDIA hits a new high, the debate returns. But this time, the arguments on both sides are sharper than ever.
Let’s first look at the bullish case.
Hou Wey Fook, DBS Group’s chief investment officer, said publicly on October 5 that NVIDIA’s forward price-to-earnings ratio for the next 12 months was only 17x, while the market expected its earnings growth next year to remain at 70%. He compared it with the internet bubble: Cisco’s P/E ratio was approximately 100x before the bubble burst. “If NVIDIA is defined as the representative company in the AI sector and its current P/E ratio is only in the teens, how can this be called a bubble?”
Morgan Stanley maintained its “Overweight” rating on NVIDIA in its latest report on October 5, with a $300 price target, and once again listed it as its top pick in the semiconductor industry. Morgan Stanley also estimated that the 70% growth guidance reflected supply constraints, while actual demand growth was close to doubling.
Jensen Huang’s own statement was even more direct. At the Goldman Sachs TMT conference on September 10, he directly responded to the “circular financing” doubts: “I looked at the financial statements. We put in $1 and get back a $100 return. Is that circular financing? If it is, then we should do more.” He also emphasized that before investing, the company confirms that the recipient has genuine contracts. The total value of such high-confidence contracts he had seen had reached $100 billion. By 2030, the AI infrastructure market will reach $3 trillion to $4 trillion.
The concerns on the bearish side are not entirely without merit.
The first concern: the surge in purchase obligations. Michael Burry pointed out that NVIDIA’s purchase obligations had jumped from $16.1 billion a year earlier to $95.2 billion. His logic was that such a large volume of non-cancellable orders showed NVIDIA was betting on demand that had not yet been validated. Notably, the latest earnings report showed that NVIDIA’s long-term supply commitments had expanded further to approximately $279 billion, compared with only $119 billion one quarter earlier, primarily related to memory purchases.
The second concern: major customers’ cash flow. Companies such as Amazon and Meta, which are buying GPUs most aggressively, are all facing pressure on free cash flow. If they cannot earn back the money spent on chips, how long can this demand chain continue?
The third concern: monetization on the AI application side. Billions have been invested in hardware, but how many companies have actually made money from AI applications? Most AI startups are still in the cash-burning phase.
On the surface, this debate is about whether NVIDIA is expensive. In reality, it can be broken down into two deeper questions:
First, is AI infrastructure construction a decade-long cycle or a three-year bubble? Huang’s view is that it is “one of the largest infrastructure build-outs in human history,” measured in decades. Goldman Sachs also characterizes this cycle as an “investment supercycle” rather than a bubble. But history tells us that in every technological revolution, some people ultimately mistake a long-term trend for short-term performance and pay the price.
Second, when one company accounts for such a large share of global technology stocks, who bears the concentration risk? NVIDIA’s market capitalization is larger than that of the entire stock market in many countries. Its weighting in the Nasdaq index is rising.
This means that if something goes wrong at NVIDIA, the entire broader market will be shaken. It is still too early to draw a conclusion. But one thing is certain: this is not a story that can be simply summarized as either a “bubble” or a “golden age.”
04 Why This Is More Than Just a Single Company’s Stock Price Story
Many people view NVIDIA merely as a stock or an investment asset. But if you broaden your perspective, you will find that NVIDIA’s significance goes far beyond that. Huang has recently been repeatedly discussing a concept called the AI factory. He redefines the modern data center as a factory, with GPUs as the production machines and Tokens—the smallest computational units that generate code, generate content, and power AI applications—as the factory’s products. “Every Token is profit,” he said. What does this mean? It means AI has evolved from a concept in the laboratory into an industry that is already making money. Just as electricity entered factories 100 years ago and oil powered the entire industrial system 50 years ago, computing power is becoming the basic energy of a new era. And NVIDIA is the company selling the “refining equipment.” Huang himself has compared NVIDIA’s position in the AI supply chain with that of TSMC. The analogy is accurate: TSMC does not make phones or computers, but all chips must pass through its factories; NVIDIA does not build foundation models or applications, but nearly every AI company builds its business on NVIDIA’s platform. In an industrial chain, the most profitable player is often not the end brand, but the link that controls the core bottleneck. That is why NVIDIA can achieve a 75% gross margin—it has the entire AI industry by the throat. For ordinary people, the significance is that AI is no longer an abstract concept floating in the sky. It is becoming infrastructure like water, electricity, and oil, penetrating every industry. You may not buy NVIDIA stock, but every AI tool you use, every automated process you encounter at work, and every piece of AI-generated content you see is supported by computing costs. And behind those computing costs stands NVIDIA. That is why its stock price is not merely a Wall Street matter—it is a barometer of the entire AI industry’s health.
05 What Really Deserves Attention Next
It is too early to declare that the “AI bubble has burst” or that “NVIDIA will rise forever.” The following key milestones will be the variables that truly determine the direction:
First, the guidance in the next earnings report. In late November, NVIDIA will release its third-quarter fiscal 2027 earnings report. The market is watching not only how much the company earns in the quarter, but also whether its guidance can be delivered. The company has already forecast Q3 revenue of $108 billion. If management continues to raise expectations, it would show that demand is indeed strong; if it begins to take a more conservative stance, caution will be warranted.
Second, the pace of capital expenditures by major customers. NVIDIA expects capital expenditures by the five largest cloud providers to rise from approximately $800 billion this year to $1.3 trillion next year. Whether customers such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta change their capital expenditure plans will directly determine NVIDIA’s order visibility.
Third, the production ramp-up of Vera Rubin. The next-generation platform has just entered full-scale mass production. Whether the ramp-up proceeds smoothly, how yields perform, and how quickly customers deploy the platform will determine the 2027 growth curve. Fourth, the $6 trillion threshold. It is now only approximately $230 billion away from $6 trillion. Whether it breaks through, and when, will become a landmark psychological milestone. No company in history has ever reached this level.
Fifth, the variable of the Chinese market. Export controls have always been a sword hanging over NVIDIA. The latest earnings report showed that shipments of data-center products to China accounted for less than 1%. The impact appears limited, but any policy change could cause short-term volatility.
Any inflection point in any one of these variables could alter the market consensus that currently prevails.
Every time NVIDIA hits a new high, it is accompanied by a debate over how “this time is different.” Some say it is the oil giant of a new era; others say it is the next Cisco—the king of the internet bubble era. After the bubble burst, Cisco’s stock price fell nearly 90%, and it then took a full 26 years, until 2026, to return to its 2000 high. History does not simply repeat itself, but it always rhymes.
Is NVIDIA today standing at the beginning of a decade-long supercycle, or on the eve of a bubble bursting? No one can provide a definitive answer. But at least one thing is clear: AI is no longer a question of whether to “believe in it,” but an industrial trend that is already redistributing wealth on a trillion-dollar scale. As for whether NVIDIA can remain at the top of the pyramid, time will provide the answer. $NVDA ‌

#OneGate见证计划 #BTC突破86000美元关口 BTC's fourth attempt to break $87,000 fails! But a “structural positive” is taking shape
The CFTC has officially classified SOL and XRP as commodities, increasing regulatory certainty. But $87,000 has become an “iron ceiling,” with BTC failing to break through three consecutive times.
I. First, the market: BTC is “stuck” around $86,000

Over the past 24 hours, BTC has traded within a narrow range of $86,000-$86,700. As of press time, BTC was trading at approximately $86,164, up 0.1% over 24 hours.‌
Ethereum has also moved sideways, repeatedly battling above $2,700, and is currently trading at approximately $2,714, down 0.2% over 24 hours.
But one key level has remained unbroken.
Since September 21, BTC has made its fourth attempt to break above $87,000, briefly touching the level each time before quickly pulling back. The previous surge reached $86,995, only a few hundred dollars short of the eight-month high of $87,400, but it still failed to hold.‌
$87,000 is becoming an “iron ceiling.”

II. Why can't it rise? — Three “ceilings” are pressing down
Ceiling one: U.S. Treasury yields remain above 5%
The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield remains around 5.25%, while the 30-year yield is approximately 5.69%, the highest level since 2002.‌
High yields mean extremely high opportunity costs for non-yielding assets such as BTC. As long as yields do not fall, it will be difficult for BTC to hold above $87,000.
Ceiling two: ETF flows have turned negative
Institutions are reducing their positions in the short term. The latest data shows net outflows of approximately $90 million from Bitcoin ETFs and $37 million from Ethereum ETFs on the day.‌
The wave of aggressive ETF inflows at the end of September, reaching $1 billion in a single day, has clearly slowed.
Ceiling three: Long liquidations are increasing as a share
Liquidation data over the past 24 hours shows that long liquidations accounted for as much as 73%. Open interest has recovered to $55.9 billion, but the long-short ratio has fallen to 0.941, while ETH is even lower at 0.903.‌
In other words, those chasing longs at high levels are being “cleaned out,” while bearish forces are strengthening.

III. But a “structural positive” is taking shape
The CFTC officially classifies SOL and XRP as commodities
This is the most important regulatory news today.
The U.S. CFTC has officially and clearly classified SOL and XRP as commodities, providing regulatory certainty for their derivatives and institutional access pathways.‌
What does this mean?
Against the backdrop of the CLARITY Act facing legislative obstacles, regulators are using “rules” rather than “laws” to advance the compliance of crypto assets. The classification of SOL and XRP as commodities means they no longer face the legal risk of “whether they are securities,” allowing institutions to participate with greater confidence.
This is another example of “advancing by taking a detour.” Legislation has failed, but regulators are using their own authority to open the door step by step.

IV. Federal Reserve: October rate-hike expectations “slam on the brakes”
Several Federal Reserve officials have spoken out in quick succession, sharply cooling expectations for an October rate hike.
New York Fed President Williams clearly stated that there was “no need to rush into action” after the September rate hike. There could be one more hike this year, but there is no urgency to act in October.‌
Fed Vice Chair Jefferson echoed this position: “More time may be needed” to assess economic trends.‌
Fed Governor Bowman was even more direct: There is no need for another rate adjustment this year.‌
CME data shows that the probability of an October rate hike has plummeted from 70% to approximately 25%.‌
This is a short-term positive for the crypto market. No rate hike in October means reduced short-term pressure, but the possibility of “one more this year” has not been completely eliminated.

V. Technical analysis: BTC is forming a “triangle convergence”
One analyst has observed that BTC is forming a converging triangle: lows are gradually rising, while resistance near $87,000 is almost horizontal.‌
This pattern usually means that volatility has been compressed to an extreme and a directional breakout is imminent.
• Break above $87,000: Could open up room toward $89,000-$93,700‌
• Break below $85,000: Could retest support at $82,500, or even the lower $80,000 range‌
Rekt Capital's analysis is direct: BTC is trapped between support at $82,500 and resistance at $86,700. If $82,500 breaks, it could retest the $60,000-$80,000 range from 2026; if $86,700 is decisively broken, the upside target is $93,700.‌
Trading approach
1. Do not chase gains around $86,000: $87,000 has failed to break four consecutive times, making the risk-reward unfavorable
2. Watch the $85,000-$85,500 support: This is the first short-term line of defense; holding it would maintain the range-bound pattern
3. If $87,000 breaks on strong volume: This could open room toward $89,000-$93,700, at which point consider following the trend
4. If $85,000 breaks: Look first to $82,500, the key support marked by Rekt Capital
5. The October FOMC meeting (October 27-28) is the next key event: The market expects “no change”; if Waller sends an unexpected signal, volatility could follow‌。#每周来晒 $BTC ‌

#Bitmine再增持持仓突破601万ETH Tom Lee: The crypto bull market has begun, with applications such as tokenization and AI potentially driving the market far beyond previous cycles
Tom Lee, Chief Investment Officer at Fundstrat, explained in an interview why this crypto bull market differs from previous cycles. He said: “The cryptocurrency bull market that is now beginning has been confirmed. So far in the third quarter, cryptocurrency-related stocks have undoubtedly been the best-performing assets.”
Discussing what makes this cycle different: “The 2016–2017 cycle had ICOs; the cycle during the COVID-19 pandemic had NFTs and meme coins; last year’s mini-cycle had stablecoins. These were all relatively narrow use cases, and the participants were mainly people from the crypto industry who had returned after suffering losses previously.”
Changes in this cycle: “Tokenization will develop on a very large scale; the regulatory environment is more supportive of the crypto industry; and governments are also providing support. At the same time, AI, intelligent agent systems, and related applications are being built around the crypto industry. This means that a much larger user base will participate.”
Discussing the current market environment: “The market has already undergone a very substantial price consolidation, lasting as long as five years in some cases. As this bull market arrives, it will bring not only a decisive breakout, but also a duration and upside far exceeding those of previous cycles.”#OneGate见证计划

#OneGate见证计划 Will the crypto market replay 10-10? The data says so
On Wednesday, the crypto market fell across the board, with Bitcoin (BTC) dropping 1.7% to around $84,100 and Ethereum (ETH) declining 3.5%. Leveraged traders re-entered the market, resulting in $403.58 million worth of long positions being forcibly liquidated within one hour.
This sell-off has once again raised concerns about a repeat of 10-10.
However, the data shows that market leverage has recovered somewhat, while the selling pressure behind last October's crash no longer exists.
What looks the same?
The comparison mainly focuses on derivatives, because the October 10 crash was a leverage-driven market collapse. The rally before October 10 relied on borrowed funds rather than new buying, and nearly $17 billion worth of long positions were forcibly liquidated.
The same buildup is happening again. According to CoinGlass data, open interest (OI)—the total value of futures positions that have not yet been closed—increased 4.0% this week to 650,480 BTC; before October 10, the metric had risen 4.1% over five days.
Measured against market size, the change is limited. Bitcoin's open interest accounts for 3.2% of its market capitalization, compared with 3.7% before the crash. Ethereum's stands at 10.4%, close to the previous 11.3%. The total amount in dollar terms obscures this.
From October 10, 2025, to the eve of the mass liquidations through Wednesday, Bitcoin open interest fell 38.6% in dollar terms, but only 12.7% in BTC terms. Most of this gap was caused by Bitcoin's price decline.
In other words, in terms of scale, market leverage is almost back to its pre-10-10 level.
Market overview: Bitcoin open interest rises 4.0% in seven days
Response: Ethereum leverage returns to pre-crash levels Trap: Higher leverage turns a small pullback into forced liquidations
How is the crypto market different? The cost of this leverage is much lower. Funding rates reflect how crowded long positions are; they are small fees paid by bullish traders to maintain their positions. Before October 10, BTC and ETH funding rates on bn and Byb exceeded an annualized 8% on 18 of 32 trading days. This week, they broke above 8% on just one of 28 trading days and turned negative three times.
Deribit shows the same shift: Before October 10, BTC's daily funding rate was 26.9%, compared with just 7.1% this week.
Meanwhile, a key source of liquidity has shrunk sharply. According to CoinGecko data, Ethena's USDe—a dollar stablecoin backed by hedged derivatives trading—has contracted 66% to $4.99 billion. This trend is consistent with broader deleveraging since October.
Therefore, positions are growing, but few traders are willing to chase prices higher and hold them. This leaves fewer long positions vulnerable to a single dump.
Cooling-off period: Funding rates exceeded 8% on 1 of 28 trading days
Outflows: USDe supply has fallen 66% since October 10
The reality: Traders are not chasing rallies Why has the crypto market's sell-off remained relatively small? This difference was reflected in Wednesday's wave of long liquidations.
In the 24 hours through early Wednesday, $487.02 million worth of long positions were forcibly liquidated as Bitcoin fell 1.96%, equivalent to approximately $248 million in forced selling for every 1% decline. On October 10, the same measure amounted to around $2.2 billion for each 1% shock, approximately nine times higher. By comparison, ordinary bonds maturing in 2025 had a range of $157 million to $504 million for each 1% move.
Because forced selling was smaller, this sell-off looked more like a reset than a cascading collapse.
BTC is currently trading near $84,100, with support at $82,300 and resistance at $86,000.
However, if the price falls below $82,300 and funding rates return above 8%, the October 10 pattern could be repeated. A move back above $86,000 would confirm the start of a new correction.
Metric: $248 million liquidated for every 1% decline Support: $82,300, near the September 28 low
Trigger: Funding above 8% while open interest continues to rise
Analyst view: The upcoming Federal Reserve meeting on October 27–28 will be the clearest near-term trigger. Another rate hike following the September hike could push bond yields higher and drive Bitcoin up to $82,300. If funding rates remain below 8% during this test, a chain reaction similar to 10-10 is unlikely$BTC ‌

#OneGate见证计划 #美联储会议纪要将公布 Fed minutes to be released tonight: How many rate hikes are hidden in Waller’s remark that it is “hard to characterize [policy] as restrictive”?
Is a 25-basis-point hike in September just the beginning? The minutes may reveal how the Fed determines “just how tight policy really is.” One sentence from Waller has left a key question hanging.
Why the word “restrictive” has become so important
First, let’s explain what “restrictive policy” means.
Simply put, it means interest rates are high enough to suppress demand and bring inflation down. If policy is truly restrictive, businesses will reduce borrowing, consumers will cut back on major spending, and the economy will slow noticeably. Conversely, if rates are merely “no longer accommodative” but have not actually tightened the reins, inflation can easily rebound. Waller said it was “hard to characterize [policy] as restrictive,” effectively acknowledging that current rates may still be in the stage of “pulling back from extreme accommodation,” far from the stage of “genuine tightening.” That leaves the market with a huge question mark—if policy is still not tight enough, how much more will rates have to rise?
Financial conditions indicators: Money is still relatively cheap
The market has tried to answer this question with data, but the answer is hardly reassuring. The Chicago Fed National Financial Conditions Index shows that US financial conditions have actually been easing gradually since reaching a peak in the fall of 2022. Although current conditions are not the loosest from a long-term historical perspective, they still lean toward the accommodative side of the historical range.
In other words, money in the US market is still not particularly difficult to borrow.
Now look at the corporate bond market. The option-adjusted spread on the ICE BofA US High Yield Index remains relatively narrow, with only a very small number of periods in history recording lower levels than today. Narrow high-yield spreads mean investors are willing to buy riskier corporate bonds at relatively low premiums, making corporate financing conditions quite accommodative. This points to the same conclusion: financial conditions have not truly “tightened.”
Michael Kramer, founder of Mott Capital Management, noted that if the Fed is indeed watching these indicators, current financial conditions would be difficult to define as restrictive in the strict sense. This also explains why the September rate hike may be just the beginning, rather than a “one-and-done” move.
Real rates are only 50 basis points—where is the “tightness”?
A more intuitive comparison comes from real interest rates.
Some background first. The August PCE data was released only after the September meeting, so the information available for the minutes did not include that report. However, when the BEA released the August data, it also conducted an annual revision, retrospectively adjusting data going back to 2021. After the revision, headline PCE rose 3.4% year over year in August, while core PCE rose 3.0%, both unchanged from July.
Notice one detail: Apart from a short period in 2024 and 2025, headline PCE has almost never fallen below 2.5% since early 2021, and has never reached the 2% target. This means inflation remains a considerable distance from “mission accomplished.” Now let’s do the math. The current effective federal funds rate is about 3.9%. Based on headline PCE, the real federal funds rate is only about 50 basis points; even based on core PCE, it is only around 90 basis points. Real rates of 50 to 90 basis points are hardly “tight” by historical standards.
Waller himself should be highly sensitive to this. In mid-2006, he served as a Federal Reserve governor. At the time, headline PCE inflation was about 3.3% to 3.5%, roughly comparable to today’s level. But the real federal funds rate was then about 1.5% to 2.0%; by October 2006, as inflation gradually declined, the real rate had risen further to 3.6%. In other words, with inflation at similar levels, the current real rate is more than 300 basis points below where it was during Waller’s mid-2006 tenure. Even compared with earlier levels in 2006, the gap remains enormous. This is why Waller said it was “hard to characterize [policy] as restrictive”—he was not being polite; he was stating a data-based fact.
What may be hidden in the minutes
Kramer believes the most important thing to watch in the minutes is not why the Fed raised rates by 25 basis points in September—that decision itself has already been announced. What truly requires close reading is how officials discuss financial conditions, real interest rates, and the pace of disinflation. Three questions are worth keeping in mind while reading the minutes:
First, how quickly does the Fed want inflation to return to 2%? If the minutes show disagreement among officials over “patiently allowing inflation to decline slowly,” that would indicate internal expectations for how long tightening should continue are not aligned. Second, do officials believe current policy is already sufficiently restrictive? If the minutes match the tone of Waller’s press conference and repeatedly emphasize that “financial conditions remain relatively accommodative,” it can basically be inferred that further action lies ahead.
Third, is the recent rise in market interest rates viewed as a substitute for tightening?
If officials believe that “rising Treasury yields amount to the Fed hiking rates for them,” the likelihood of holding rates steady in December will increase; if they believe the rise in market rates merely reflects inflation expectations, the central bank will still need to act itself.
Of course, the minutes also have limitations: They reflect only the discussion at the September meeting and may not include data released afterward, such as the revised August PCE results and the latest nonfarm payrolls data; they may also lack clear forward guidance. If the minutes use vague language and avoid quantifying how “restrictive” policy is, the market may continue to speculate.
What this means for the market
The minutes released early today are essentially a reference point for the market to reprice.
If the minutes acknowledge that “financial conditions remain accommodative, real rates are low, and further observation is needed,” pricing for another rate hike in December will gain support, Treasury yields may rise again, the dollar may strengthen, and gold and growth stocks may come under pressure.
If the minutes emphasize that “the recent rise in long-term yields has automatically tightened financial conditions,” that would leave the door open to pausing rate hikes. The market may interpret it as dovish, with Treasury yields falling, the dollar weakening, and precious metals and equity assets getting some breathing room.
The most subtle scenario is that the minutes neither commit to further rate hikes nor signal an end, emphasizing only data dependence.
In that case, the market will turn its attention to the subsequent CPI, nonfarm payrolls, and geopolitical developments, while the minutes themselves can provide only short-term volatility.
Based on current market pricing, expectations for a December rate hike remain above 50%, but voices saying that “September was just the beginning” are also growing louder. The minutes will become the most important “signpost” before the next directional decision.

#OneGate见证计划 #BTC突破86000美元关口 This Week Ahead: Bitcoin Nears an Eight-Month High
Bitcoin opened the week with a strong rebound, quickly establishing itself above the $86,000 mark on Monday and reaching an intraday high of $87,395, touching a new eight-month high. After facing pressure at elevated levels, bullish momentum briefly consolidated, and the price steadily retreated to fluctuate within the $85,800–$86,200 range, entering a short-term phase of high-level consolidation.
The entire market’s trading focus is currently highly concentrated on three major macro variables: the strength of the U.S. Dollar Index, fluctuations in U.S. Treasury yields, and Federal Reserve policy expectations.
Institutions and professional traders are generally choosing to wait and see, using this week’s dense macroeconomic data as the key basis for determining whether Bitcoin’s current uptrend can continue or enter a period of consolidation.
A major annual-level bullish structural signal has emerged on the technical front, providing strong underlying support for the market’s recent resilience. As of the latest market data on October 6, Bitcoin’s 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day moving averages are all trending upward.
The three core-period moving averages are about to complete their first full bullish alignment since 2025, forming a landmark pattern signaling a reversal in the medium- to long-term trend.
Key moving-average support is currently clearly layered: the 50-day moving average provides support at $84,019, while the 200-day moving average offers strong support at $80,313, underpinning the price layer by layer and sharply limiting downside room. This means Bitcoin’s recovery over the past three months is not merely a short-term rebound, but a structural bull-market recovery characterized by a rising trend floor and an upward shift in the center of chip distribution.
Even if a short-term technical pullback occurs, the overall uptrend will not be easily disrupted, and the medium- to long-term bullish structure has fully stabilized.
Capital flows continue to show sustained institutional net inflows, providing a solid foundation for the market at elevated levels. Data shows that U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have recorded net inflows for three consecutive weeks, with cumulative weekly net inflows reaching $82.9 million. The pace of capital flows at the start of October has remained steady, with institutions not taking profits and exiting on a large scale at the new highs, indicating that long-term allocation capital remains firmly committed.
BlackRock’s IBIT remains the absolute leader in net inflows, continuously absorbing circulating market supply. Spot buying is solid, with no obvious signs of a sell-off collapse. Sentiment in the derivatives market remains relatively rational, with no overheated buildup of leverage.
Perpetual contract funding rates remain in a neutral-to-positive range, with no signs of extremely aggressive premiums. This new high has been driven more by genuine spot buying than by leveraged speculation. This is also the healthiest feature of the current rally compared with previous surges: low bubble risk, solid capital, and strong resistance to declines during pullbacks.$BTC

#OneGate见证计划 This week, the global macro calendar enters a super-dense window, with multiple major data releases set to directly reshape Federal Reserve rate expectations, the strength of the U.S. dollar, and the performance of U.S. Treasuries.
October 6 at 17:00 ET, the eurozone will release its August monthly retail sales data, with the market expecting 0.4% versus the previous reading of -0.6%. A recovery in European consumption data would signal marginal global economic improvement, indirectly weakening expectations for Federal Reserve easing and creating short-term pressure on risk assets.
October 7 at 14:00 ET, the Federal Reserve will release the minutes of its September FOMC meeting, the week’s biggest macro event. The market will focus on officials’ true views regarding persistent inflation, cooling employment, the timing of rate cuts, and the duration of elevated interest rates. If the minutes use hawkish language, the dollar will strengthen again, directly pressuring non-yielding assets such as Bitcoin and gold; if they are dovish, they will further open room for crypto assets to rise. At 15:00 ET the same day, the United States will release its August consumer credit data, expected at $12.5 billion, well below the previous $18 billion. Continued declines in consumer credit would signal cooling household consumption and borrowing appetite, weakening U.S. domestic demand and strengthening market bets on rate cuts.
October 8 at 08:30 ET, the latest U.S. initial jobless claims data will be released, with the market expecting 195k, slightly below the previous 197k. Initial claims have continued to show a mild upward trend, providing a consistent signal that the U.S. labor market is gradually weakening. Weak employment will continue to pressure the Federal Reserve to end its high-rate cycle, forming the core macro logic behind this rebound in crypto and risk assets.
October 9 at 10:00 ET, the preliminary October University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index will be released, expected at 48.1, unchanged from the previous reading. Consumer confidence remaining at low levels indicates continued caution about the future economic outlook, which is broadly conducive to maintaining expectations for easing-driven trading.
The crypto-native ecosystem enters a dense event window this week featuring Ethereum’s core upgrade rehearsal and a series of governance votes by leading DeFi projects. Starting October 5, Ethereum officially began a full-process rehearsal of the Glamsterdam upgrade on the Sepolia testnet.
The upgrade focuses on three core areas: the adoption of account abstraction, data availability optimization, and improvements to the gas fee mechanism. Once account abstraction is fully implemented, the barrier to on-chain interaction on Ethereum will be significantly reduced, enabling the mass onboarding of Web2 newcomers and becoming a key growth narrative for the next phase of the Ethereum ecosystem.
This testnet rehearsal clears technical obstacles for the official mainnet upgrade and represents one of Ethereum’s most important underlying technical iterations in 2026. At the DeFi governance level, multiple leading protocols have simultaneously opened key votes, directly affecting token selling pressure, treasury structures, and ecosystem expansion.
The Aave ARFC proposal vote ending October 5 plans to introduce external institution Sentora to operate the new Aave V4 lending ecosystem. The two sides will adopt a 50-50 revenue-sharing model, while Aave DAO will permanently retain contract administration rights and 50% of the revenue, substantially expanding Aave V4’s commercial boundaries. Once implemented, the proposal will move Aave from native DAO governance into a new phase of ecosystem co-development and commercial expansion, benefiting the protocol’s long-term valuation.
The AirSwap community signal vote also ends on October 5, with the core issue being whether to suspend official automatic selling when the AST token price breaks down. ConsenSys has historically sold AST over the long term to cover operating costs, creating persistent selling pressure on the token. If the vote passes, it will directly reduce ongoing secondary-market selling pressure and improve the token’s circulation structure, providing a substantial positive catalyst for AST.
The Balancer community treasury resolution vote ending October 6 aims to complete the cross-DAO liquidation and distribution of assets with CoW DAO. The resolution will orderly settle BAL and COW treasury holdings, achieve standardized asset distribution, and eliminate the risk of large-scale disorderly treasury selling. Once governance implementation is complete, the stability of the BAL and COW circulating supplies will improve significantly, benefiting the recovery of ecosystem valuations.
Taken together, the market’s overall logic is as follows: Bitcoin’s medium- and long-term moving-average structure has turned broadly bullish, institutional capital continues to flow in, and weakening macro employment data support the current bull-market recovery. Short-term high-level consolidation and a slight pullback constitute healthy post-high consolidation and a change in holdings, rather than a trend reversal.
This week’s dense macro data releases and on-chain upgrade events will determine whether the market can break through the $87,000 resistance level and begin a new major upward wave. If the dollar continues to weaken and dovish Federal Reserve expectations strengthen, Bitcoin will likely break its previous high and challenge the $90,000 mark. If the data come in unexpectedly hawkish and the dollar surges again, the market will enter a 1–2-week period of range-bound consolidation.

#英伟达股价新高 Nasdaq Hits a New High, Approaching 27,400: A Three-Way Rally or the Eve of a Bubble?
The Nasdaq hit another all-time high on October 5, 2026. It briefly approached 27,400 points intraday—this was not a slow climb, but nearly a 15% gain in less than three months since the late-July low. Just recently, the market was still debating whether the “tech stock bubble would burst”; now the discussion has become “how far can this rally go?” More interesting is the market structure: this is not a solo performance by one stock, but a collective surge by the five major tech heavyweight stocks—SpaceX rose more than 5%, Meta gained over 2%, Tesla and Microsoft climbed nearly 2%, and Nvidia rose more than 1%, again approaching its all-time high.
This broad-based advance is more noteworthy than an index being lifted by a single stock. The core judgment is that this new high is not driven by a single factor,
but by the resonance of three forces: rate-cut expectations, the AI theme, and premium valuations for star stocks.
But each support line has its vulnerabilities.
I The Sharp Turn in Rate Expectations: From 70% to 20%
The most direct catalyst for this rally is the rapid cooling of expectations for Fed rate hikes. Just over a week ago, the market still believed the probability of a rate hike in October was as high as 70%. By this week, that figure had fallen to 20%. Within a week, the market’s view of monetary policy had almost completely reversed. Behind this were two key data points that weakened: · September nonfarm employment came in below expectations, the unemployment rate held at 4.2%, and the labor-force participation rate continued to decline· PCE inflation data came in below expectations, with core PCE at 3.3% year over year, improving for three consecutive months. With inflation moving down and employment moving down, the Fed has less reason to continue raising rates.
For growth stocks, especially tech stocks, each step lower in rate expectations lifts valuations by another step.
But one detail deserves attention: the current federal funds target range is 3.75% - 4.00%, and the market is pricing in “no rate hike,” not yet a “rate cut.” If inflation data reverses, rate-hike expectations could return at any time—wasn’t that exactly what happened before September?
II The AI Theme Returns to the Throne: The Confidence Behind Nvidia’s $5.67 Trillion Market Cap
If rate-hike expectations are the macro backdrop, AI is the fundamental anchor of this rally. Nvidia’s share price hit a new all-time high last Friday, touching $237.88 intraday, bringing its market cap to $5.67 trillion and firmly securing the world’s largest market-cap ranking. This was Nvidia’s first new closing record since May 14. Just over two months ago, at the end of July, Nvidia had retreated nearly 20% from its high on concerns about slowing AI demand, wiping out more than $1 trillion in market value. At the time, the market was filled with talk of an “AI bubble bursting.” In just two months, the story has completely reversed.
Several hard data points are supporting this new high:
Latest quarterly revenue grew 105.9% year over year, while EPS exceeded market expectations
The company announced a record $150 billion buyback, signaling confidence
Morgan Stanley reiterated Nvidia as its “top pick,” with a $300 price target. From the late-July low to now, Nvidia has rebounded nearly 25%. It is the stabilizing force for tech stocks—as long as Nvidia does not collapse, sentiment across the entire AI sector will not dissipate.
III Star Stocks Rise Together: Broad-Based Expansion from SpaceX to Meta
What is most intriguing today is not how much Nvidia rose, but the structure of the stocks topping the gainers’ list. Leading the advance was SpaceX, whose intraday gain expanded to more than 5%. This newly listed stock, which only went public on June 12, once surged to a high of $225 before nearly halving in July, falling to around $108 at its low and shedding more than $1.2 trillion in market value. Now it has returned to the market spotlight. SpaceX’s rally is not based on exactly the same logic as Nvidia’s—it is telling a long-term story combining Starlink, space transportation, and AI infrastructure, with revenue of $18.7 billion in 2025, up 33%. That growth rate is not poor in itself, but compared with a market cap of $1.4 trillion, the valuation is indeed not cheap. Therefore, SpaceX’s sharp rise reflects more of a recovery in market risk appetite—when investors are willing to revalue high-growth stocks with high valuations, the first to move is the one with the greatest elasticity.
Now look at the other names:
Meta rose more than 2%—the dual themes of AI advertising and the metaverse, with its valuation still in a recovery channel
Microsoft rose nearly 2%—the clearest AI commercialization path through Azure cloud and Copilot
Tesla rose nearly 2%—Robotaxi expectations plus its energy business have made the story viable again. This kind of collective rise among heavyweight stocks is much healthier than relying on Nvidia as a lone pillar. But conversely, if these stocks correct at the same time, their drag on the index will also be greater.
IV Three Assumptions: The “Lifeline” for How Far the Rally Can Go
At this point, you may feel that everything looks wonderful. But every pillar of this rally rests on the assumption that “nothing goes wrong.” Stating these assumptions is a responsibility to readers, as well as to the integrity of my own judgment.
Assumption One: Inflation Does Not Rebound
The current downward trend in inflation is clear, but if oil prices, rents, or wage growth unexpectedly rise, core PCE could get stuck above 3%. At that point, the Fed’s choice would not be “whether to raise rates,” but “how many times to raise them.” This is the biggest macro risk.
Assumption Two: AI Capital Spending Does Not Slow
Nvidia’s earnings and the valuation of the entire AI sector are built on the assumption that tech companies will continue increasing their AI investment. If Microsoft, Google, or Meta issues capital-spending guidance below expectations in a given quarter, the entire AI chain will be repriced. Wasn’t that exactly what caused the July correction? Assumption Three: Earnings Growth Keeps Pace
In this round of valuation expansion, valuation expansion has contributed far more to the gains than earnings growth. The Nasdaq has risen nearly 15% from the end of July to now, but the upward revision in corporate earnings expectations over the same period has been nowhere near as large. The faster the rise, the greater the pressure for subsequent earnings to deliver. The third-quarter earnings season is about to begin, and this will be the first test.$NVDA