Lei06

When the last article was finished, ZKJ was at $0.02437. Now it is at $0.03146. It has risen by 29%. The mechanism discussed in the last article—shorts being forced to close, time window compressing buying pressure, forced short squeezes—is still in operation today, it hasn't stopped. Now there are less than 21 hours left until Binance delists the ZKJ U-based perpetual contract. At 17:00 on April 29, the contract will close, and that door will be permanently shut. Before the door closes, there are still shorts that haven't been fully closed. Each unclosed short position is a potential buy order at the current price of ZKJ—not because they want to buy, but because they have to buy. Starting from today's opening at $0.0115, ZKJ has now risen by +173.5%, with today's peak reaching $0.03338. In less than a day, the price has nearly tripled. This is not a fundamental reassessment; it is an extreme output of the mechanism—the fundamentals of the same asset today and yesterday have not changed at all; the only change is a delisting notice and the time pressure it creates. But now is the most difficult phase to judge. The price is already above $0.03, and after a 173% increase, most of the early shorts that needed to be closed have already been closed. The remaining question is: how many shorts are still open? No one knows the exact number. If the remaining short volume is still large, the closer it gets to the deadline, the more concentrated the buying pressure will be, and the price may have one last surge before 17:00 tomorrow; if the shorts have basically been cleared, the current price is accommodating the FOMO buying that didn't finish yesterday, and that buying will immediately disappear after the contract closes. This is why tonight until 17:00 tomorrow is the most dangerous time window for the whole situation. Logically, there may be one last surge before the contract closes—shorts concentrating on closing before the deadline; after the contract closes, the mechanism for forcing shorts will completely disappear, and those without new reasons to support this price will be the first to sell. Where is ZKJ's fundamental value? Polyhedra Network, which is working on ZK proof protocols, is in a market segment that currently lacks attention, and without new catalysts, relying solely on narrative to support a price of $0.03+ is quite challenging. For those at $0.03146 now, they have only one question: who will take over after 17:00? If you entered today, this is a trade of "knowing what you are betting on"—the bet is not on ZKJ's value, but on how many shorts are left to close and when they will close. This bet has a clear deadline; the advantage is that you don't have to guess for too long, but the downside is that if you're wrong, there is no time to wait for a reversal. $ZKJ

Zhang Xue once refused to cooperate with Huawei Refusing Huawei in the Chinese tech circle takes a lot of guts. Some say she is foolish. Some say she has principles. But in the end, everyone is discussing her — not because she accepted, but because she refused. Sometimes, refusing is worth more than accepting.

Today, ZKJ gave us a lesson on "How Delisting Can Turn into a Price Surge." Here's the situation: Binance announced that on April 29 at 17:00, it will delist the U-based perpetual contract trading pair for ZKJ. This news should normally be negative—exchanges believe this contract has no value to maintain and are shutting it down. The usual logic is: delisting = liquidity disappearing = price drop. However, today ZKJ surged from $0.0119 to a high of $0.02648, an increase of +122%, with a 24-hour trading volume hitting $1.09 million USDT. It has now pulled back a bit, resting at $0.02437, which is still up +104.79% compared to the opening. Why did this happen? The answer lies with the short sellers. In the perpetual contract market, there have always been people shorting ZKJ—they borrow tokens to sell, betting on a price drop, and then buy back when the price falls to profit from the difference. But after Binance announced the delisting of the contract, these short sellers must close their positions before April 29 at 17:00. How do they close their positions? By buying ZKJ to cover their shorts. A large number of shorts forced to buy the same asset within the same time window results in only one outcome: the price gets pushed up. This isn't because ZKJ's fundamentals suddenly improved, nor is it due to any major news; it's the mechanism at work—the forced liquidation time window compressed what would have been dispersed buying demand into today. This phenomenon is called a short squeeze, but today's ZKJ has a unique aspect: it wasn't due to the bulls actively attacking and pushing the price to squeeze the shorts; rather, it was the exchange's announcement that did this for the bulls. Being delisted turned out to be the most effective trigger for a short squeeze. The current question is: can this price hold? Logically, the buying pressure generated by short covering is a one-time event. After April 29 at 17:00, the contract will be closed, and there will be no new shorts needing to cover, meaning the force that pushed the price up will disappear. Those who bought at today's high are holding an asset that has just completed a full squeeze, with no change in fundamentals, only a price increase due to mechanical reasons—what will they do? With a 24-hour trading volume of only $1.09 million USDT, at this level, the price is very light. Things that rise quickly can also fall quickly without real buying support. Today, ZKJ honestly demonstrated one thing: in the contract market, a delisting announcement ≠ negative news; it is a knife, and the direction depends on whose position is at the edge of the knife. Today, it was the shorts at the edge. After 17:00 tomorrow, the knife will still be there, but the target will have changed. $ZKJ

Arthur Hayes: Bitcoin is expected to continue rising, with a year-end target price of about $125,000. On April 28, BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes stated at the Bitcoin 2026 conference that he is "more optimistic about Bitcoin's prospects. AI will replace a large number of knowledge workers, potentially leading to hundreds of billions of dollars in credit losses for the banking system, similar to a new subprime mortgage crisis. However, the U.S. has entered a wartime state, and the new defense budget will increase by about 50% to $1.5 trillion. The U.S. government will not cut spending but will instead print a lot of money. The enhanced supplementary leverage ratio rule, effective April 1, allows banks to hold less reserves and more government bonds. S&P Global estimates this will release about $1.3 trillion in new lending capacity for the banking system, mainly for defense-related companies and AI infrastructure. The money multiplier effect of bank lending is about 3, which could ultimately create about $4 trillion in credit. Fed chair nominee Waller will reduce the Fed's balance sheet but simultaneously relax bank regulations, allowing commercial banks to take over government bonds and repurchase agreements. The net liquidity impact will be neutral, but the entity creating money will shift from the central bank to commercial banks. The scale of newly created credit will exceed the scale of credit destroyed by AI, so Bitcoin will continue to rise, with a year-end target price of about $125,000. $BTC $ETH $SOL #白宫预告战略BTC储备重大公告 #加密立法倒计时：525最后窗口 #沃什提名落定：首位持币Fed主席

Today, two things happened simultaneously, and I think looking at them together is more interesting than looking at them separately. The first thing: The nomination of Waller has been finalized, and he will become the first Federal Reserve chairman in history to hold cryptocurrency. Not "crypto-friendly," not "expressing support for innovation," but actually holding it himself. The Federal Reserve is responsible for interest rates, monetary policy, and financial stability regulation—yet the head of this institution has a portion of his personal wealth in assets under his regulatory purview. What do we call this in traditional finance? Conflicts of interest. What do we call it in the crypto space? A person from our side. The second thing: #CryptoLegislationCountdown, 525 is the last window. The U.S. crypto market structure bill and stablecoin bill have been dragging in Congress for several years, always close but never quite there. Now there is a clear window: it must be advanced before May 25, or the political agenda will be pushed aside by other matters. Once this window closes, no one knows when the next one will open. You might think that with these two events combined, BTC should be rising today. Then you check the market: BTC is at $77,087 today, down -2.76% in 24 hours, with a daily high of $79,320 that couldn't break $80K, and then it fell back. This contrast is worth pausing to think about. The historically most friendly crypto regulatory environment—holding Fed chairman, congressional legislative sprint, presidential public support—but BTC can't even break $80K. There are several explanations: First, these positive factors have already been priced in; the market has been buying into this environment since last year, and now it's the "buy the rumor, sell the news" phase. Second, macro pressures have overshadowed policy benefits—geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and Iran, tariffs, corporate earnings pressures—these short-term variables are moving faster than the long-term policy narrative. Third, and the hardest to admit: the market is saying that a friendly policy does not equal a change in fundamentals; crypto assets are still risk assets, and in a global risk-off environment, friendly regulation does not solve liquidity issues. But there is a fourth explanation, which I lean towards: all the positives are laying the foundation, not igniting the fire. A holding Fed chairman is the foundation, stablecoin legislation is the foundation, ETF funding is the foundation—just because the foundation is being built does not mean it is the day of the highest price; the day of the highest price is when someone stands on that foundation with real funds. Right now at $77K, we are in the phase of building the foundation, not igniting the fire. After May 25, we will know if the foundation has been built. Do you think Waller's holding is a truly historic turning point, or just another narrative that has been priced in early? $BTC $ETH $DOGE #WallerNominationFinalized: First Holding Fed Chairman #CryptoLegislationCountdown: 525 Last Window #KelpDAORescueFinale: Who Pays for the Vulnerability?

In the past 24 hours, the total liquidation in the cryptocurrency market reached $356 million, primarily affecting long positions. On April 27, CoinAnk reported that in the last 24 hours, the cryptocurrency market saw a total liquidation of $356 million, with long positions accounting for $220 million and short positions for $136 million. The total liquidation amount for BTC was $132 million, and for ETH, it was $116 million. $BTC $ETH $DOGE #沃什提名落定：首位持币Fed主席

Today, BTC and ETH both demonstrated a textbook-level false breakout, and it happened on the same day. The core argument of the post I wrote this morning was: the rise of BTC is driven by new money coming in, while the rise of ETH is due to shorts being squeezed out. ETH just broke through $2,379, and the next target is $2,462. I also mentioned that whether ETH can rely on real buying to continue after holding $2,379 is the most worth watching thing going forward. Tonight, we know the answer: it couldn't hold. First, let's look at ETH. Today, it peaked at $2,404, standing above the resistance level of $2,379. Then it dropped all the way down from $2,404, and is now at $2,278, not only falling back below $2,379 but also breaking below $2,308—this position was clearly stated in the morning analysis as "if it closes below this line on a 4-hour basis, the entire long logic is invalid." It didn't avoid it today; it went straight through. ETH's open interest (OI) dropped from today's peak of 2,097,073 contracts back to the current 2,035,527 contracts. OI is down + price is down; this structure indicates that longs are being liquidated, not shorts entering. During the morning rise, shorts were exiting, and during the evening drop, longs were exiting. ETH completed a two-way squeeze in one day—first squeezing out the shorts, then squeezing out the longs. Now, let's focus on the most noteworthy number: ETH's current long ratio is 67.33%, while shorts are only 32.67%. With the price at $2,278, two-thirds of accounts are still long. What does this mean? These people are losing today; they are holding long positions at an increasingly lower price. As the price continues to drop, their stop-loss pressure increases; if ETH cannot hold $2,264 (today's low), this batch of longs will become fuel pushing the price down, rather than supporting it. A high long ratio + price breaking key levels is a combination to be cautious about, not a signal to chase longs. Now, let's look at BTC. Today, it peaked at $79,459, just $541 short of $80K. Then it dropped from $79,459 and is now at $76,959, with today's low at $76,513, breaking through the support level of $77,424 mentioned in the morning analysis, and also breaking through the stop-loss reference level of $76,800. $80K failed to break through for the second time today. BTC's OI is currently at 97,269 contracts, rebounding a bit from today's low, with the price dropping but OI not showing significant shrinkage—this indicates that shorts are entering, not longs exiting. Price down + OI high means shorts are betting on further declines; this batch of shorts could be potential fuel for BTC's rebound, but before they are forced to close their positions, they act as a booster for price decline. BTC's long ratio is 45.64%, rebounding a bit from the low after the morning washout (40.17%); now shorts are at 54.36%, slightly more than longs, but not extremely skewed. In summary, what happened today is: BTC and ETH made a breakout in the morning, and in the afternoon, they gave back all the profits from the breakout, plus a little more. ETH's breakout at $2,379 was false, and $2,308 was broken; the long logic needs to be reestablished. BTC's $79,459 was an attempt at the highest point this year, which failed, and $76,513 is today's low, lower than the stop-loss level analyzed this morning. At the current position, neither coin is in a "easily longable" place. The real support for BTC is at $75,800-$76,200, and for ETH, it's at $2,200-$2,220. These two areas are where the price becomes interesting—not today's price. This morning, we had a very nice structure; tonight, that structure has been negated. The market has made it very clear this time: $80K and $2,462 are not happening today. $BTC $ETH

The last time I wrote about CORE, it had just started moving, and now I'm here to review what it has gone through. Seven days ago, CORE was at $0.0325, and then it took about two days to rise to $0.0688, an increase of +112%. The price doubled in two days; this speed is not organic growth but rather the result of funds being concentrated in a short period. I didn't see any significant news changing CORE's fundamentals around that peak, and the way it rose indicates the nature of that increase. Then, it took four days to give back nearly half of that 112% increase. Today, CORE's current price is $0.0386, with a daily drop of -12.07%. The 24-hour low hit $0.0383, testing a new low area. From the high of $0.0688 to today, it has dropped 43.9%. The 24-hour trading volume is only $298,000 USDT, and at this price level, the trading volume is actually very low—there's no massive panic selling; it's a slow bleed, with no one frantically selling, just a little drop every day, and no one is coming in to buy. There's something worth noting here. CORE is now at $0.0386, which is +18.7% higher than the low of $0.0325 from seven days ago. This means that those who bought at the low seven days ago are still in the profit zone, and their positions have not been forced to cut losses. However, those who entered at the high of $0.0688 have already lost 44% today; this group is the largest potential source of selling pressure below the current price—they may see every rebound as an opportunity to reduce their positions. This is the structure CORE is facing today: those who built positions at the low are still holding, with no motivation to sell; those who bought at the high want to escape, and every small bounce is pressure. The low trading volume indicates that both sides are waiting, but the directions they are waiting for are different. Where is the support? From the price action, $0.0325-$0.033 is the dense trading area before this round of upward movement. If CORE continues to drop, this area is the first real support, and it is also near the cost line for those who built positions at the low seven days ago; they will have a stronger buying intention here. $0.038-$0.040 is the current position, attempting a weak support, but today’s -12% indicates that this position cannot hold. Looking upward, $0.042-$0.044 is today’s opening area, which has now become the first resistance; above that is $0.050-$0.052, the densest trading area from the past few days, and the chips coming down from there will create pressure here. The Fear and Greed Index is at 47, neutral, and the entire market is not in a state of panic. BTC is also down today; in this context, CORE's independent drop of 12% is due to personal factors combined with market pressure, not purely driven by the market. My current judgment on CORE at this position is: it has not exited the downtrend, the trading volume is low but continues to bleed, and those who entered at the high are clouds above. As long as there is no significant increase in trading volume above $0.033, any rebound is a selling opportunity, not a buying signal. It will be worth reassessing when the trading volume clearly increases at the lows, or if the support at $0.0325 effectively stops the decline. Did you enter at the last low or near the high? Are you planning to hold or cut losses now? $CORE

There’s a rule for booking hotels: the moment you cancel, the price goes up. If you don’t cancel, you make do. If you cancel, you regret. The platform always wins.

Today I discovered something that struck me as very strange: the trading structure of two coins seems to have quietly swapped. First, let's talk about KAT. From the first post until today, I have tracked three prices: $0.02278 (the first time I wrote, saying the support was still there), $0.01302 (the second time I wrote, the support disappeared, -46%), and today’s $0.01117 (another drop of -12%, totaling a decline of -51% from $0.02278). Each time, I calculated the ratio of FDV to market cap, and the results were as follows: First time: FDV/Market Cap = 4.27 times Second time: FDV/Market Cap = 4.27 times Today: FDV/Market Cap = 4.27 times The price has halved, but this number hasn’t changed. It’s like a label stuck on KAT; no matter how the market moves, it remains there. Not a single one of those uncirculated tokens has decreased. Then there’s the strangest thing about KAT today: 2884 buy orders and 2787 sell orders in 24 hours, with buy orders exceeding sell orders for the first time. According to conventional logic, this should be a positive signal—more people are buying, right? But the price dropped 12% today. More buy orders than sell orders, yet the price is still falling, indicating that the average size of each sell order is larger than that of the buy orders. Someone is selling more value with fewer transactions. This isn’t a bottom-buying effort controlling the market; it’s large orders still being sold while retail small orders are picking up, inflating the number of transactions but unable to support the price. Now let’s talk about RAVE. The last time I wrote about RAVE, it rose by 5.3%, but there were 6371 sell orders and only 4361 buy orders—I said that the rebound "felt more like the last gasp." Today, RAVE dropped -5.43%, but there were 1695 buy orders and 1338 sell orders, with 357 more buys than sells. The structure of the two coins has swapped today. However, RAVE’s price still fell today. Why is the price dropping when there are more buy orders than sell orders? The reason mirrors KAT: the average size of the buy orders isn’t enough to hold up against price pressure. Then there’s one more thing that resonates with me more than any data: the last time I wrote about RAVE, there were a total of 10,732 buy and sell transactions in 24 hours; today there are 3,033 transactions, a decrease of 72%. It’s not that the price has dropped and the market is still buzzing; it’s that the number of people looking at this coin has decreased to less than a third of what it was three months ago, and most have left today. The price has dropped from a high of $2.7 to today’s $0.8596, a decline of 68.2%. The number of people trading has decreased by 72%. These are two aligned signals pointing to the same thing: this market is quietly losing participants; it’s not a violent crash, but a slow exit. Today, KAT had more buy orders than sell orders, but the price fell. Today, RAVE had more buy orders than sell orders, but the price fell. Structurally, both coins presented the appearance of "more buys than sells" today, but internally they are different—KAT is small retail investors picking up large orders in a deadlock, while RAVE is the market losing participants in its final throes. I’ve said this last sentence three times already, but I still want to say it for the third time today: KAT’s FDV is 4.27 times the market cap, having dropped from $0.022 to $0.011, and this number hasn’t changed. Those 800 million uncirculated tokens are still waiting there just like on the first day. $RAVE $KAT