20/21年Crypto交易复盘

0xSorosPublished on 2024-08-16Last updated on 2024-08-16

回望20/21年的牛市,看BTC以年为单位的周线。在21年1月突破30000刀后,四个月后达到高点60000刀(2021年4月),接下去的三月回撤到30000刀(2021年7月),随后开启第二轮牛市,长达四个月,冲顶69000刀(2021年11月),再用四个月的时间,回撤到30000刀(2022年3月),一个月的小反弹,紧接着三个月的阴跌,突破至新低20000刀(2022年6月)。

Thanks for reading 0xSoros’s Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

复盘BTC这两年来的走势,价格在30000刀到60000刀间,以3-4个月为周期,有规律的宽幅震荡,共持续了四个周期。那么出货的思路完全可以升级,根本不必拘泥于在某个时刻一次性的出光。面对未来行情的不确定性,那样会失去一种掌控感,谁都不想错过接下去的好日子。

牛市尾声,是介于“下一个热点”和“行情会不会戛然而止”间的心理博弈。分批阶段性的出货,能够更好的感知市场。不撞南墙心不死。果真行情越来越差,心死了,再继续出掉剩下的筹码也不迟。

Crypto行业十年迭代进化,市场趋于缓涨急跌、螺旋式上涨的慢牛。不用担心出货挤兑的事情,你手上的那点筹码,市场完全承接的住。用一位朋友的话来说,现在你手里有几万个BTC,So What?那又如何?

这轮牛市,自己在出货上的瑕疵也有。前期在20年BTC从30000刀上涨到60000刀期间,出货过多。顺利的逃过了519的暴跌,也因此错过了21年第二轮的牛市。都说仓位决定言论,没了仓位,自然也就没了感知和言论,对市场的重量也把握不清了。以至于21年一整年的操作混乱,仓位控制不当,各种盲目瞎操作,赔进去了四辆法拉利是有的。而前期出货过急、过多的原因,无外乎想尽快套现止盈,之前的三四年穷怕了。情有可原吧,功过七三开,整体还不赖的结局。

前辈曾说在牛市时要饥渴的赚钱,为的是在牛末回撤时不那么伤心。以及冲抵诸多猝不及防的亏损方式,多数是没有控制住自己的赌性、眼红他人的财富效应而导致的。不折腾即不亏钱,在牛市尾声,躺平是种智慧。

饥渴的赚钱,即在上涨动能充沛的阶段,尽可能的多赚钱。右侧交易是关键,感知市场情绪,在上涨初期介入。而最开始的那段头部行情,很难吃到,也没必要吃到。因为它的存在,本身就是为了检验一些东西的,譬如市场情绪、核心热点等。同时仓位的轻重、持仓时间的长短要根据市场不同的阶段来调整。

回望21年的几笔大亏损,无不是左侧交易,即在主升浪完成后进入下跌通道后介入,自然亏惨了。左侧交易必然导致破产,并且会随着亏损的加重产生自我欺骗的错觉,等醒悟过来的时候,已经亏光了。

而对于BTC和ETH这两个项目的买入,放在十年大周期里看,每次暴跌时的抄底都是正确的。山寨币不完全适用。对于大盘,我会选择越跌越买或者定投之类的方式,而对于山寨币,我倾向于越涨越买。

交易复盘是略显枯燥的,它不过是围绕着投资最核心的两大操作“低买高卖”去进行优化。但它又是必要的,大道至简,如若娴熟的掌握买卖的火候,何愁没有盈利。

以上的感悟,是在这轮牛市里学到的,不管怎样,于我自己而言,也是大方向正确下的一些缺憾。我是这轮牛市的既得利益者。每轮周期多少会吃一些亏,明白一些你不曾明白的道理。以为自己不会犯同样错误,那是不可能的。

对于自己的定位,还是一个中期趋势交易者吧。我不会再谈价值投资。这个概念,千人有千面的理解。话说回来了,除了BTC/ETH,我似乎没有一个山寨币的持仓是超过6个月的,平均持仓时间也就3-4个月。这般持仓周期,实在也不配叫做价值投资。

行文结尾,算是一点小建议,也是给我自己的警醒。千万不要背离自己韭菜的身份。无论你赚一千万还是一个亿,你终归还是一个韭菜,一个可怜人。

以及学会好好生活,尽量不做“追寻财富道路上的巨人,日常生活里的低能儿”。

Thanks for reading 0xSoros’s Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Coming

"Glue Finance founder argues Ethereum's current price underperformance stems from its 'unfinished machine' status. Despite record usage and settlement value in 2026, ETH remains below its 2021 peak because the protocol's continued development creates a dependency on the Ethereum Foundation for guidance and fixes. Key issues include centralized L2 sequencers, governance-based freezes (as seen with Arbitrum), state bloat, a vulnerable public mempool, and looming quantum computing threats. This 'dependency discount' prevents ETH from accruing the 'ossification premium' that markets award to immutable, trustless systems like Bitcoin. The author, a self-described Ethereum maximalist, rejects two flawed escape paths: a 'war mode' shift towards centralization for speed (which would sacrifice Ethereum's core value), or simply replacing the EF with another governing body. The only solution is the 'Manhattan Plan' or 'Lean Ethereum': a concerted, accelerated effort to complete and then *freeze* the protocol's neutral core. This involves finalizing critical upgrades in consensus (Lean Consensus), scaling (targeting 1 trillion gas/sec), quantum resistance (leanXMSS signatures), and full ZK-provable execution. The goal is to pass the 'walk-away test'—where Ethereum could run forever, neutrally, without the EF. Success would transform Ethereum into the first programmable, quantum-resistant, immutable global settlement layer, flipping its current discount into a unique 'eternity premium' that surpasses Bitcoin's. Failure—stagnation or trading neutrality for speed—would relegate it to being a slower, less trustworthy competitor."

marsbit26m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Coming

marsbit26m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Approaching

Glue Finance founder argues that Ethereum's current price underperformance, despite high on-chain activity, stems from its incomplete state and lingering dependency on central stewards like the Ethereum Foundation. The core thesis is that the market is discounting ETH not for lack of use, but because the protocol remains a "machine under construction." Key unresolved issues include centralized L2 sequencers with limited escape hatches, state bloat, vulnerable public mempools, and the looming quantum computing threat. This perpetual "work-in-progress" status forces reliance on a small group of maintainers, undermining the network's promise of credible neutrality and immutability. The author, a self-described Ethereum maximalist, rejects two flawed paths: a "wartime mode" of centralizing for speed (surrendering Ethereum's unique value) or merely replacing the Foundation with another governing entity. The only solution is to complete and then "freeze" the protocol's neutral core through a focused "Manhattan Project" dubbed "Lean Ethereum." This project aims to bundle critical upgrades—consensus layer overhaul, massive scaling via ZK-proofs, quantum resistance, and statelessness—into a decisive push to finalize the base layer. Once the core rules are cryptographically solidified and beyond anyone's control (passing the "walk-away test"), Ethereum would shed its dependency discount and earn a "rigidity premium" for its credible neutrality and programmability, potentially surpassing Bitcoin's valuation. The race is between completing this hardening and the risks of protocol capture or stagnation.

链捕手28m ago

Glue Finance Founder: ETH Has Entered a Phase of Non-Consensus, an Inflection Point Is Approaching

链捕手28m ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbit1h ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbit1h ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit1h ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

463 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片