ShizukaKazu

#原油价格上涨 Gold and Crude Oil: The Logic of Capital Flows in Large-Category Asset Allocation
Within the framework of large-category asset allocation, gold and crude oil each play distinctly different roles. Gold, as a traditional safe-haven asset and an inflation-hedging tool, derives most of its allocation value from hedging systemic risks and substituting for fiat-credit exposure; crude oil, in contrast, is more of a cyclical risk asset, with its price movements closely tied to global economic growth, industrial production, and transportation demand. When investors consider shifting funds from gold allocation to the crude oil industry chain, they are essentially making a structural adjustment within an asset-allocation framework—one that necessarily involves systematic changes behind the scenes in the macroeconomic environment, risk appetite, and relative-value judgments.
From the perspective of the drivers of capital flows, the relationship between gold and crude oil prices is not a simple one of substitution. Historically, their price correlation tends to appear in phases when inflation expectations heat up sharply: when inflation rises rapidly, gold is sought after for its value-preserving characteristics, while crude oil—an essential energy source for industrial production and transportation—often becomes a core factor pushing up the CPI through its price increase. However, this “together rising” does not mean that capital directly flows between the two. More commonly, when the economy enters a recovery or overheating cycle and risk appetite rebounds meaningfully, investors systematically reduce their safe-haven positions in gold while increasing their exposure to cyclical assets, including crude oil. At this point, the reduction in gold holdings and the increase in crude oil holdings are more like parallel actions under the same macro judgment rather than direct capital migration between the two sectors.
When examining the crude oil industry chain’s capacity to absorb capital, structural differences from the gold market become evident. The gold market has a large capacity but a relatively shorter industry chain: allocations through gold ETFs, futures, and physical gold are mainly concentrated in the metal itself, while the share of downstream mining company stocks extending downward is relatively limited. The crude oil industry chain, however, spans multiple links—upstream exploration and production, midstream storage, transport and refining, downstream sales of refined oil products, and petrochemical product manufacturing—along with substantial market capitalizations of listed companies, financing needs, and capital expenditure levels. This means that if capital flows out of the gold market and into the crude oil industry chain, it is not limited to crude oil futures; it can be allocated across a range of segments, including upstream shale oil producers, midstream pipeline transport enterprises, and leading downstream refining-and-chemicals integrated companies, and even into niche areas such as oilfield services equipment and LNG liquefaction units. This multi-layered capital-absorption capability gives the crude oil industry chain a natural advantage in capturing cross-asset-allocation funds.
However, whether capital can effectively flow from gold allocations to the crude oil industry chain also depends on changes in their relative valuations and risk-return characteristics. When a gold real interest rate pricing model indicates that gold’s valuation is supported by fundamentals but is deviating or is overvalued, allocative capital has incentives to reduce gold weight. Meanwhile, if the crude oil market is in an OPEC+ production cut cycle, global inventories are low, and the forward curve is in a backwardation structure (trading at a discount), then both the spot returns and the roll/forward (deferred) returns of the crude oil industry chain are attractive. In this situation, institutional investors often rebalance their portfolios during large-category asset rebalancing windows: they reduce gold-related positions (such as gold ETFs and gold mining stocks) and increase holdings in targets within the crude oil industry chain that feature stable cash flows and lower valuations. It should be noted that such rebalancing more often occurs at the level of long-term allocation funds like sovereign funds and pension funds, whereas hedge funds and CTA strategies tend to rotate frequently among different assets; their flows tend to impact prices more in the short term and are easier to reverse.
Overall, the flow of funds from gold allocations into the crude oil industry chain is not an unconditional inevitability, but a rational choice under specific combinations of macro conditions, relative valuations, and risk appetite. When the economy is in the later stage of an expansion cycle, with inflationary pressures gradually becoming visible but not yet triggering aggressive rate hikes, the cost of holding gold as a non-interest-bearing asset increases, while the crude oil industry chain benefits from resilient terminal demand and supply-side constraints. Under such circumstances, the relative change in their allocation values is most likely to drive capital to complete this structural shift. For investors, rather than simply judging whether “funds are flowing from gold to crude oil,” it is better to establish a dynamic cross-asset relative valuation framework—continuously tracking the trend of the gold-crude oil ratio as a classic indicator, and making comprehensive judgments in combination with real interest rates, inventory cycles, and geopolitical risk. In practice, when the gold-crude oil ratio is at a historical high and begins to decline systematically, it is often the period when the portfolio shifts—reducing allocation to gold and increasing allocation to the crude oil industry chain.

#美伊谈判陷入僵局 The US-Iran negotiations have collapsed! Global inflation alerts have sounded, and the world economy is entering a critical turning point
The storm in the Strait of Hormuz is reigniting. What will happen to oil prices, stock markets, and supply chains?
According to the latest official news, negotiations between the US and Iran scheduled for this weekend have been officially canceled. This high-stakes game in the Middle East, which has been gripping global nerves, has once again fallen into a deadlock.
As of Beijing time April 26, 2026, this round of US-Iran conflict has lasted nearly two months. The blockade of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the continuous surge in energy prices are transmitting through the global industrial chain layer by layer. A profound shift concerning inflation, growth, and the global economic order has already begun.
Negotiations have completely cooled off, core conflicts remain unresolved, and both sides are stuck in a dilemma
On Saturday local time, US President Trump explicitly announced the cancellation of the scheduled trip of Special Envoy Witkov and his son-in-law Kushner to Pakistan for negotiations with Iran. Earlier that day, Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi had finished his visit to Pakistan and headed to Oman. Iran explicitly stated that Araghchi’s trip was never arranged for talks with the US side. From the outset, this negotiation was doomed to fail, rooted in a severe lack of mutual trust and three major irreconcilable core disagreements: control of the Strait of Hormuz, the direction of Iran’s nuclear program, and the conditions for lifting sanctions on Iran. More pragmatic difficulties have pushed this game into a deadlock where “neither side can afford to step back.”
For the US, soaring oil prices have triggered domestic inflation backlash, compounded by political pressure from mid-term elections, making it unwilling to allow the conflict to escalate indefinitely or make substantial concessions in negotiations; for Iran, two months of ongoing conflict have caused damage to domestic infrastructure and significant consumption of strategic resources, yet it remains unwilling to compromise on core sovereignty and interests.
Under this tug-of-war, global market uncertainty is being amplified infinitely.
Energy prices surge, igniting inflation. The IMF warns: global inflation rate will rise to 4.4%. The most immediate impact of the conflict has been in the energy market. As a key passage for nearly one-third of global crude oil shipping, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has directly caused a global crude oil supply shortage, with Brent crude approaching $120 per barrel.
The surge in energy prices is transmitting through the industrial chain without dead ends:
At the consumer level, in March, the US CPI energy component increased by 12.6% year-on-year, and the Eurozone Harmonized Consumer Price Index (HICP) energy component rose to 4.9% year-on-year, putting pressure on transportation, chemicals, and daily consumer goods prices;
At the production level, rising oil and gas prices have directly increased costs for fertilizers, agricultural products, and industrial goods. Urea prices in the Middle East surged 19%-28% in March. If the conflict continues, global fertilizer prices could rise another 15%-20%, directly threatening agricultural output in emerging markets and increasing global food security risks;
At the cross-border transmission level, imported inflation is spreading globally. Energy-importing countries in Asia like Japan and South Korea, and European industrial nations like Germany, are facing unprecedented cost pressures, eroding manufacturing competitiveness.
The latest IMF forecast issues a clear warning: in 2026, the global inflation rate will rise to 4.4%, up 0.3 percentage points from 2025. The global fight against inflation faces a major setback. The global economy is slowing down, with multiple risks intensifying. On the other hand, high inflation continues to exert pressure on economic growth. The IMF has sharply downgraded its 2026 global growth forecast from 3.3% to 3.1%. This conflict is exerting comprehensive pressure on the global economy through a “physical shock → price transmission → policy constraints” three-layer pathway.
The first layer, shipping blockade directly impacts trade flow. The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has driven the Baltic Dry Index (BDTI) higher, systematically raising global logistics costs and severely damaging supply chain efficiency;
The second layer, cost diffusion, is squeezing economic vitality. Rising energy prices continue to spread to manufacturing and consumption, compressing corporate profits and weakening residents’ purchasing power, leading to synchronized declines in supply and demand;
The third layer, inflation constraints, is locking in monetary policy space. Under high inflation, global central banks are forced to delay rate cuts. Market expectations suggest the Fed may only be able to cut rates once in 2026. The absence of easing policies deprives the global economy of an important growth support.
More concerning is that behind the slowdown in growth, the fragility of the global economy is rapidly exposing itself: current account deficits in Japan, Southeast Asia, and other energy-importing countries are worsening; sovereign debt default risks in sub-Saharan Africa and other vulnerable economies are rising sharply; capital outflows from emerging markets are intensifying. The resilience of the global economy is under severe test.
Behind the V-shaped rebound in US stocks, market logic has completely changed
Amid the conflict, global capital markets have experienced highly dramatic swings. Since the outbreak of the US-Iran conflict, the US stock market has shown a V-shaped pattern: the S&P 500 initially fell more than 15%, but by mid-April 2026, it had fully recovered and hit a new all-time high, surpassing 7,000 points. This countertrend rally is not due to market ignoring risks but a complete shift in trading logic. Trump’s “maximum pressure — compromise” game, with his social media statements as the core “trigger,” has created arbitrage opportunities for algorithmic trading, but has not changed the resilience of the US stock market. Currently, the market has shifted from initial panic mode to a “risk re-pricing” phase.
For investors, two core directions are becoming clearer:
If subsequent ceasefire agreements are reached and oil prices stabilize, technology stocks and AI-related sectors are likely to lead a structural market rally again;
Be highly alert to the recurrence of geopolitical policies, avoiding overbetting on short-term news, especially guarding against the risk of deep corrections in high-valuation sectors like AI and tech in the US stock market if the conflict continues to escalate. The long-term shift has already begun. The global order is undergoing a profound reconstruction. The US-Iran conflict is not just about short-term oil price fluctuations and market volatility but also about a deep restructuring of global economic and political order, with three major long-term trends now irreversible.
First, the fundamental logic of the global supply chain has shifted from “efficiency first” over the past thirty years to “security first,” leading to a long-term rise in energy and logistics costs, and a complete rewriting of corporate globalization strategies;
Second, the hollowing out of US hegemony is further exposed. The foundation of the petrodollar is weakening, and Middle Eastern countries are accelerating the exploration of diversified energy settlement paths. The process of diversifying the global monetary system is gaining speed;
Third, global financial risks are continuously accumulating. Geopolitical uncertainties, high inflation and monetary policy constraints, and the correction pressures on overvalued assets are stacking up. Any loss of control in one link could trigger a chain reaction in global financial markets.
The storm in the Strait of Hormuz is not over, and the direction of the global economy is at a critical crossroads. Between growth, inflation, and security, policymakers worldwide need to find new balances. For us caught in this upheaval, understanding the trends and respecting risks are the keys to navigating the cycle.

#伊朗提出霍尔木兹海峡重开协议条件 Based on current information, Iran's Foreign Minister Araghchi's conditions for a ceasefire submitted to the U.S. indeed involve demands related to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, but the specific details of the agreement are still under negotiation. The game over the Strait of Hormuz is heating up! If the situation eases, the Strait of Hormuz reopens, and oil prices fall, the impact on inflation expectations in the crypto market is multifaceted:
1. Direct inflation transmission mechanism
A decline in oil prices will reduce global energy costs, decreasing inflation pressures in production, transportation, and other links. Although the crypto market is not perfectly synchronized with traditional financial markets, overall inflation expectations are influenced by the macroeconomic environment. If traditional inflation expectations decline, crypto market participants will adjust their long-term inflation expectations, especially for crypto assets related to inflation hedging (such as Bitcoin), which may weaken demand and thus suppress the upward price movement driven by rising inflation expectations.
2. Market sentiment and risk appetite
A situation of easing tensions and falling oil prices is generally seen as a sign of economic stability, which may boost market risk appetite. As a high-risk asset class, the crypto market could attract more capital inflows due to improved overall market sentiment, partially offsetting the dampening effect of declining inflation expectations on the crypto market.
3. Policy and regulatory expectations
If falling oil prices ease inflationary pressures, central banks in various countries might adjust their monetary policy expectations, such as slowing the pace of interest rate hikes or maintaining an accommodative stance. This is positive for the crypto market because loose monetary policy typically benefits risk assets, potentially further influencing inflation expectations in the crypto market.
In summary, a decline in oil prices tends to suppress inflation expectations in the crypto market itself, but the actual effect depends on a combination of factors, including market sentiment and policy expectations, which require dynamic assessment.

#白宫记协晚宴发生枪击事件 Trump "Almost Attacked"? The Market Is More Nervous Than Him!
Political risks are here, where should your money hide!
Did you see the news? A security incident occurred at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, suspected of a gunman threat.
Trump said at the press conference: "This (being the U.S. President) is a dangerous job." He also joked: "If Rubio had told me there was a risk of violence, I might not have run for president." It sounds casual. But the market, they shouldn’t be laughing.
📰 On-site at the White House press conference, political risks continue to escalate
01. First, understand what happened
According to The New York Times: On the 25th local time, a security incident occurred at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Suspected of an attempt by a gunman to enter. Trump immediately held a press conference in the White House briefing room. He emphasized: The gunman never got close to him, nor broke into the main banquet hall.
Conclusion: The incident itself did not cause actual harm. But it sent a signal: the U.S. political environment is becoming increasingly "unstable."
02. Why is the market nervous? You might think: the gunman failed, Trump is fine, why is the market still tense? Because the market is not "looking at the outcome," but "watching the trend."
Trend 1: U.S. political risk is rising
This is not the first time. In July 2024, Trump was shot while giving a speech in Pennsylvania, injuring his ear. In 2025, another security incident occurred. Two incidents, less than a year apart. Whether successful or not, the frequency itself is increasing. Rising frequency means "political risk" is becoming a normalized variable.
Trend 2: The continuity of Trump’s policies is being questioned
Trump’s policies have a huge impact on the U.S. market—tariff policies, trade negotiations, interest rate stance, China policy—each directly affects global markets. But if Trump’s "personal safety" becomes an uncertain variable—markets will start asking: How long can his policies be implemented?
Trend 3: U.S. political division is intensifying
The White House Correspondents' Dinner was originally a "relaxed" occasion—reporters and officials dining together, a relatively mellow atmosphere. But now, even such occasions have security incidents. The "division" in the U.S. political environment has penetrated every corner. Markets dislike division. Because division means: policies could shift at any time, society could become turbulent, the economy could be jolted at any moment.
Wall Street trading floor, market anxiety is spreading.
03. What impact might various investments have?
Stock Market
Short-term: After the news, U.S. stocks may decline sharply. Investors will "sell first, ask questions later."
Long-term: Depends on subsequent developments. If impact is confirmed to be "limited," the market will rebound.
Focus on: Tech stocks (policy-sensitive), defense stocks (increased security spending)
🟢 Bond Market
Bonds are "safe-haven assets." When markets panic, investors withdraw from stocks and buy bonds. Especially U.S. Treasuries—considered "the safest asset globally." If the incident continues to ferment, U.S. bond yields may decline.
🟡 Gold Market
In times of panic, gold usually rises. Especially when "U.S. political risk" increases—gold is not only a safe haven but also a "substitute for the dollar."
💵 U.S. Dollar
The strength of the dollar largely depends on "the stability of the U.S. economy." If U.S. political risk rises, the dollar may come under pressure. But the dollar itself is also a "safe-haven currency," and its trend depends on whether "U.S. risk" or "global risk" is greater.
₿ Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrencies are "high-risk assets." During market panic, they are often sold first. But some see them as "hedging against government risk." Their movement depends on investor positioning.
04. How might the global markets be affected?
The U.S. is the center of the global economy—if the U.S. has issues, the world trembles.
🌏 Asia-Pacific markets may follow suit, depending on U.S. exports
🇪🇺 European markets may face short-term shocks, but long-term will depend on their own policies
🇨🇳 Chinese markets may have opportunities or pressures. China’s market is relatively independent—if U.S. political risk rises, it may be viewed as a "relatively stable" alternative. Especially Chinese bonds and some A-shares might attract safe-haven funds. But at the same time, tensions in China-U.S. relations could pressure Chinese markets, as Trump’s incident might make China-U.S. policies even more uncertain.
05. How should you respond? This isn’t about telling you to sell all your stocks immediately—it's about "understanding this signal."
1. Know that political risk can affect your money
Many think "politics has nothing to do with me." But political events directly influence market volatility. Your stocks, funds, savings—all can be affected by political events. ⚠ You may not care about politics, but politics will impact your money.
2. Don’t react impulsively when news first breaks
Markets fear "panic selling." When news first comes out, many rush to sell—yet often, after the news is digested, markets rebound. Selling impulsively means you lose money.
✅ Correct approach: observe first, then decide.
3. Properly increase safe-haven assets
Allocate gold, bonds, cash—these are "safe assets." If you’re worried about rising political risk, consider increasing these assets in your portfolio. Not to switch everything to safe assets—but to keep some "hedging against political risk" in your mix.
06. A deeper truth
This incident itself has limited impact—gunman failed, Trump is safe. But the market’s nervousness isn’t because of "this incident"—it’s because of the "trend" it represents. U.S. political risk is rising, and this trend is more important than any single event. As an investor, you shouldn’t just look at "single events"—you need to see the "trend." When the trend rises, risks gradually become normalized. When risks become normal, your investment strategy must adjust—add more hedging, reduce high-risk assets, stay flexible.
👁 Seeing the trend is a hundred times more important than just seeing the event.
Trump "Almost Attacked," the incident itself is limited— but it signals that U.S. political risk is rising. The market’s nervousness isn’t because of "this," but because of the "trend." Political risk will affect your money. You may not care about politics, but politics cares about your wallet. If you have safe assets, consider adding a bit more. If not, observe first, then decide—don’t act impulsively.

#以太坊基金会解质押约4890万美元ETH Ethereum Foundation's recent unbonding of $48.9 million worth of ETH currently appears to be more of a routine operation rather than a clear warning of position reduction. The detailed analysis is as follows:
1. Basis for routine operation
Historical operation patterns: The Ethereum Foundation has previously conducted similar-scale ETH unbonding and selling activities, such as in October 2025 when it reduced holdings by 1,000 ETH (approximately $4.5 million) to ensure operational funds. Its fiscal policy includes the principle of “periodic, counter-cyclical sales,” aiming to adjust asset structure at relatively high market points to ensure long-term financial stability.
Rationale for fund use: As a non-profit organization, the Foundation needs to maintain daily operations, support R&D, and ecosystem development. The ETH being unbonded may be used for paying team salaries, funding project development, participating in ecosystem collaborations, and other routine expenses, which are normal fund management activities.
2. Consideration of position reduction warning
Market sentiment impact: On-chain data shows that the unbonded ETH has been deposited into Lido’s unlock contract. Market observers are watching whether it will be sold off later. If the Foundation later sells a large amount of the unbonded ETH, it could signal a reduction of positions, affecting market sentiment.
High-price context: Currently, ETH is trading at a relatively high level (around $2,400). Some investors may interpret this move as profit-taking to lock in gains and avoid future price volatility risks, similar to “selling at the high point.”
Overall judgment
At present, the unbonding action alone cannot determine its intent. It is necessary to monitor whether the Foundation will publicly clarify the purpose of the funds and whether the unbonded ETH enters market circulation. If the Foundation explicitly states that the unbonding is for internal fund allocation rather than sale, it is more likely to be a routine operation; if there are signs of large-scale selling, it could be viewed as a warning of position reduction. Investors are advised to pay attention to official Foundation announcements and market dynamics, and to view such events’ impact on the market rationally.

#美伊谈判陷入僵局 The US-Iran negotiations have reached a deadlock, with Iran announcing a comprehensive management plan for the Strait of Hormuz
Both sides' new round of contacts in Pakistan have stalled, with Iran taking a tougher stance, emphasizing that any end to the war must be executed according to Iran's conditions. Iranian Islamic Parliament members disclosed that Iran has finalized a comprehensive management plan for the Strait of Hormuz, requiring all ships to obtain Iranian permission to pass, commercial documents only recognize the name "Persian Gulf," Israeli ships are strictly prohibited from passing, and must pay relevant fees and prioritize payment in Iranian rials. The US Secretary of Defense stated that the maritime blockade is intensifying, with a second US aircraft carrier set to participate in the blockade operations.
Market Impact Assessment:
Short-term (1-3 days): Geopolitical risks may continue to push oil prices higher, intensifying inflation concerns and suppressing the performance of risk assets; the crypto market may continue to fluctuate following macro sentiment.
Medium-term (1-2 weeks): If tensions persist, broader market risk aversion may be triggered; but if signs of easing appear, risk assets could rebound.
Risk Level: Moderate to high - Geopolitical risks are uncertain and may cause significant market volatility.

#加密市场行情震荡 Is the Bitcoin bull market coming? Still a long way off...
Is the bull market coming? Based on Bitcoin's past characteristics, each new high typically requires going through at least 3 to 4, or even 5, rounds of retracement. That’s also why most people can't hold onto Bitcoin. And after breaking new highs, due to institutional entry, although volatility begins to decrease, the retracement now is only 1 to 2 rounds, so it’s far from breaking the next new high. There should still be two more waves of oscillating retracements.
After the retracement, breaking new highs again, Bitcoin’s six-month target could reach $150k, but there will still be two more rounds of retracement during this period.
And right now, it’s only the beginning of the first to second rounds. Based on Bitcoin’s properties, once the first retracement ends, there will be structural adjustments, and you must not chase the highs, as more retracements will follow.
Actually, if you follow human nature, you’ll understand. If your heart isn’t dead, the way won’t be born. Bitcoin will always make you believe it’s rising, and it will always make you believe it’s retracing.
Until you can’t hold it anymore, until your heart turns to ashes, then it reignites hope for revival. Whether in the stock market or the crypto market, it’s all tailored according to human nature.
In the end, it will make you regret, oh, I couldn’t hold it. It’s because I lacked resolve, not because it won’t rise. But 3 to 4, even 5 rounds of retracement are inevitable.
Apart from those who check once a month or even once every three months, avoiding many illusions of retracement in between, most people simply cannot hold onto Bitcoin.
Although, from today’s perspective, holding onto it for the next 10 years could still yield a tenfold increase, but the risks involved are far beyond what most can bear.
So, those who truly profit big in the crypto world are never the clever traders who chase and sell frequently, but the tough ones who endure countless rounds of retracement and hold their positions.
If you don’t understand the cycles or can’t withstand volatility, even the best tracks or top-quality assets will ultimately cause you to miss out on a tenfold rally.
Therefore, if you want to keep up with the full cycle rhythm and seize every adjustment and low-buy opportunity, instead of being washed out by repeated retracements.

#加密市场行情震荡 VanEck issues a double bullish signal for Bitcoin: funds turn negative, hash rate declines
VanEck states that Bitcoin is showing a stronger bullish trend because the deep negative funding rates and the concentrated decline in hash rate (historically associated with robust expected returns) indicate market sentiment is cautious rather than capitulating. The latest on-chain and derivatives data for Bitcoin show a constructive pattern, VanEck points out that negative funding rates and hash rate concentration decline, while volatility diminishes and positions remain cautious.
The company notes in its latest report that as tensions between the U.S. and Iran ease, realized volatility has dropped from about 56% to 41%, and the 7-day average financing rate has fallen to around -1.8%, the lowest since 2023 and in the 10th percentile since the end of 2020.
Since 2020, Bitcoin's 30-day average return during periods of negative funding has been 11.5%, compared to an average return of 4.5% across all periods, with a 77% hit rate for positive returns. When annualized funding rates fall below -5%, the subsequent 30-day average return reaches 19.4%, and the 180-day return is as high as 70%, making negative funding a recurring contrarian buy signal. VanEck’s report also highlights that since 2020, out of 19 windows with 180-day returns among the top 50, 19 began on days with negative funding, even though such periods only account for about 13.6% of the sample.
Bitcoin Hash Rate Declining
In terms of mining, the 30-day moving average hash rate has fallen to the 16th percentile over 30 days and the 9th percentile over 90 days, while mining difficulty has also dropped to the 5th and 6th percentiles within these periods.
Since December 2025, Bitcoin’s hash rate has experienced three consecutive declines, the most intense since China banned mining in 2021, with the most recent drop of about 6.7%, ending around April 15, 2026. Of the seven historic declines completed, six saw Bitcoin prices rise within 90 days, with a median increase of 37.7%, and a median increase of 63.1% over 180 days.
Derivatives and on-chain trading activity reflect cautious market sentiment rather than blind capitulation. The put option premium to spot trading volume ratio is more than six times the April 2024 level, and active supply over the past 180 days has fallen to 28.4%, indicating holders are in a dormant state.
Long-term holders, especially those holding for 7-10 years and over 10 years, have reached the 85th and 90th percentiles in consumption over the past four years. However, VanEck emphasizes that this change does not always signify a complete sell-off.
Overall, the company concludes that a combination of capital shortages and hash rate pressure creates a strong outlook for Bitcoin’s rise.
Analysts write: “The decline in mining rate and negative funding rates are both associated with strong expected returns for Bitcoin. Therefore, we are increasingly optimistic about Bitcoin.”

#加密市场行情震荡 Key level at 2300! Ethereum’s 8-hour chart reveals three major divergence signals—is it a trap for the bulls or the last dip?
1. Current pattern: shrinking volume oscillation at key support, a decisive battle between bulls and bears is imminent
As clearly seen on the chart, ETH price is being tightly “compressed” within a narrowing Bollinger Bands (BOLL). The upper band (UB) is at 2387.20, the middle band (MA30) at 2337.76, and the lower band (LB) has moved up to 2262.75. Currently, the price is trading below the middle band and closely hugging the MA7 (2313.41), indicating a typical weak consolidation pattern. However, the key detail is: during multiple tests of the 2300-2260 zone, downside momentum has significantly weakened, and the Bollinger lower band is providing strong support. This suggests that the selling pressure at low levels is drying up, and this zone has become a critical line in the sand for the market’s future direction.
2. Core indicator analysis: three divergences hint at a trend reversal
MACD hidden divergence: Although the MACD histogram remains negative (-12.92), the fast and slow lines (DIF: 0.03, DEA: 6.49) are extremely close and flattening near the zero line. This usually indicates that downward momentum has greatly diminished, and the bearish force is nearing exhaustion, potentially forming a golden cross and triggering a rebound.
KDJ at low levels shows fatigue, rebound buildup: In the KDJ indicator, the K value (31.82) and D value (31.21) are both at the edge of oversold territory and have flattened, while the J value (33.04) is beginning to turn. This fatigue at low levels is not a sign of continued decline but rather a buildup of rebound energy. Once the K and D lines form a golden cross upward, a strong short-term rebound could be triggered.
Price and volatility divergence: While the price made a new low (touching 2305), the Bollinger Bands did not expand in sync but instead contracted. This constitutes a “volatility squeeze” divergence, indicating that a period of narrow oscillation lasting several days is about to end, and a breakout in one direction could happen at any time.
Overall, market sentiment has become overly pessimistic. Major funds are exploiting concerns about the macro environment to create panic below $2300, clearing out weak hands. From the technical perspective, all short-term indicators are in “oversold” or “divergence” states, with the rebound spring compressed to its limit.
Key levels and trading strategies: Bulls’ defensive line: Pay close attention to the support at 2262 (Bollinger lower band). If this level holds, it will be an excellent opportunity for phased accumulation on the left side.
Reversal signal: A volume breakout and stabilization above 2338 (middle Bollinger band and MA30) will confirm the formation of a short-term bottom, with the target directly at 2387 (upper Bollinger band).
Risk warning: If the price effectively breaks below 2250, beware of a deep correction towards 2200 or lower.
Conclusion: What is needed now is not panic but patience and courage. The chart is “whispering”: the strongest downward momentum has been released, and the darkest hour is often just before dawn. The market is waiting for a catalyst, and a technical rebound is already on the horizon.
This article does not provide any investment advice 📢📢📢