# Risk Management Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Risk Management", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

Focus: Five Leading AI Stocks on Nasdaq

The report analyzes five Nasdaq-listed AI infrastructure stocks—Micron (MU), MaxLinear (MXL), AMD, Lumentum (LITE), and Vicor (VICR)—as distinct plays within the AI capital expenditure chain, rather than a single "AI trade." While all benefit from AI data center spending, they differ in their specific roles (e.g., memory, computing, optics, power, connectivity), financial resilience, and risk profiles. The author argues that the key question is not whether the AI narrative remains intact, but whether capital expenditure translates into real orders, earnings justify valuations, and portfolios can withstand high volatility. Historical data shows these stocks have significantly outperformed benchmarks but also experienced deeper drawdowns (~28% to -32%), highlighting their high-beta, high-volatility nature. An investment framework is proposed: core positions (e.g., MU, AMD) for stocks with stronger fundamental evidence; satellite positions (e.g., LITE, VICR) for high-potential, high-volatility names; and cautious observation (e.g., MXL) for smaller-cap ideas with unproven financials. The emphasis is on disciplined, phased buying during pullbacks—only when price corrections align with intact fundamentals and available risk budget—rather than emotional "buy-the-dip" strategies. Overall, AI infrastructure offers long-term potential, but success requires strict position sizing, role definition for each holding, and preparedness for significant volatility.

marsbit06/17 08:07

Focus: Five Leading AI Stocks on Nasdaq

marsbit06/17 08:07

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

**Raydium Exploit Reveals DeFi's Hidden Risk: Forgotten "Zombie" Contracts** A recent attack on Raydium's deprecated V3 AMM pools resulted in a loss of approximately $1.34 million. The hacker exploited pools that were no longer supported by Raydium's current UI or SDK but remained fully functional and accessible on-chain. This incident highlights a critical, often overlooked category of risk in DeFi: inactive or legacy smart contracts that projects fail to properly decommission. Since March 2025, there have been at least 8 publicly reported attacks targeting such abandoned contracts, with total losses around $10.8 million. Including older pools and deprecated features, the count rises to 10 incidents with roughly $22.5 million in losses. These "zombie contracts" represent a lifecycle management failure rather than a code vulnerability, yet they are typically misclassified under general "code bug" categories in security reports, masking the true scale of the problem. The root cause is that projects often merely document a contract as "deprecated" without taking essential technical steps to secure it: withdrawing remaining assets, disabling external call functions, and implementing ongoing monitoring. These forgotten, under-monitored components become prime targets for attackers. To address this, the industry needs to recognize "zombie contracts" as a distinct risk category and establish standardized decommissioning protocols. Essential steps should include: 1) a formal retirement announcement, 2) removal of all front-end integrations, 3) withdrawal of locked assets, 4) disabling key contract functions, 5) ongoing security monitoring, 6) clear user communication, and 7) a post-mortem analysis. The value of a DeFi project lies not only in its current TVL but also in the security of its historical codebase, which has now become a new attack surface.

Foresight News06/13 06:15

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

Foresight News06/13 06:15

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

**Summary: Rising Interest Rates Are Not the Killer of Tech; EPS Is: The "Keep the Strong, Ditch the Weak" Strategy After the AI Theme Plunge** The author argues that the sharp sell-off in tech and AI-related stocks, triggered by a strong US jobs report that heightened Fed rate hike fears, represents a "pullback to pick up passengers" rather than a "car crash." The true end of a tech bull market is not determined by an extra 25 basis point hike, but by industry overcapacity and the disproval of earnings per share (EPS) expectations. Historical analysis shows that during past rate hike cycles, the Nasdaq-100 often outperformed, provided EPS growth remained strong. The current phase is seen as a shift from a "broad narrative-driven rally" to a "focused verification stage" for AI. The investment strategy should be to "keep the strong, ditch the weak." * **Retain exposure** to high-conviction AI infrastructure leaders with clear order visibility, stable margins, strong cash flow, and upward EPS revisions (e.g., AI servers, advanced packaging, optical modules, key cloud suppliers). * **Reduce exposure** to high-beta, narrative-driven stocks with unclear profit paths (e.g., some quantum computing, space, or speculative chip stocks), especially on rebounds. Valuation concerns should focus on whether earnings can catch up to high multiples, not on high P/E alone. Crowded positioning signals a concentration into quality assets, not necessarily a market top. The upcoming Q2 earnings season will be a key validation point. The core principle is to hold stocks with proven EPS, while using macro events (CPI data, central bank meetings) to manage timing and risk.

marsbit06/11 13:38

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

marsbit06/11 13:38

When Doing Cryptocurrency Payment, the First Thing is Licenses, What is the Second?

When launching a crypto payment business, obtaining the necessary licenses is the crucial first step. However, the second, and arguably more critical, step is designing a comprehensive operational framework that forms a coherent business loop. This loop must be clearly understood and executable by all stakeholders: banks, payment partners, exchanges, on-chain analytics providers, regulators, and your internal team. Many projects mistakenly believe a single license permits all operations. Licenses merely grant entry; they don't define how the specific business functions. The real challenge lies in detailing every aspect of the workflow. This involves clarifying the customer base, the flow of fiat and crypto assets, the settlement process, and establishing clear lines of responsibility for risks like AML compliance, sanctions screening, chargebacks, and regulatory inquiries. A robust framework must answer seven core questions: Who are the clients and merchants? Who collects fiat and crypto? Who handles conversion and custody? And who is ultimately accountable for compliance and risk management? Projects often fail not from a lack of licensing, but during due diligence when they cannot convincingly explain these operational details. Therefore, beyond securing licenses, the priority must be constructing a closed-loop system. This system ensures the business model is transparent, risks are managed, responsibilities are delineated, contracts are aligned, and the entire process is comprehensible to partners and regulators. The true competitive edge in crypto payments lies not in acquiring a license quickly, but in integrating licensing, banking, compliance, and operations into a sustainable and executable whole.

marsbit06/09 06:31

When Doing Cryptocurrency Payment, the First Thing is Licenses, What is the Second?

marsbit06/09 06:31

Bitcoin Monthly Chart Adjustment Structure Established, HYPE Entry Opportunity Emerges | Exclusive Analysis

Bitcoin Monthly Correction Structure Confirmed, HYPE Entry Opportunity Emerges | Guest Analysis Last week's analysis correctly identified that the $60,000 level for Bitcoin was an intermediate point, not the bottom of the current correction. This was validated on June 5th when the price broke below this key support, dropping to around $59,100. The monthly-level a-b-c three-wave corrective structure from the October 2025 high of $126,200 is now fully established, with the market currently in the c-wave decline phase. The cumulative adjustment time is less than 35 days, indicating the structure is far from complete. This week's focus will be tracking the rebound's strength and resistance performance. The two key resistance zones of $65,000 and $69,500~$70,500 will be crucial observation points for determining the subsequent trend. For HYPE, last week's top warning signal was also validated, with the price falling up to 27% from its $75.87 high. The token has now entered a support zone, presenting a potential short-term entry opportunity. From a strategic standpoint, the medium-term outlook remains bearish, awaiting optimal timing to add short positions upon a rebound. **Key Trading Views Summary:** * **BTC:** The analysis maintains a bearish medium-term bias. Strategy involves building short positions on rebounds towards $65,000 or the $69,500~$70,500 resistance area. A break below the $59,000-$60,000 support could trigger additional short entries. Short-term trading (30% capital) focuses on range-bound opportunities. * **HYPE:** Following a confirmed correction from the $75.87 high, the short-term strategy shifts to "buying on dips." Consider light long positions (under 30%仓位) if the price finds support and shows stabilization signals in the $55-$57 or deeper $47-$49 support zones, contingent on confirming technical signals. The key resistance to watch is the $62.5-$64.57 area. **Risk Management Reminder:** Always set an initial stop-loss immediately upon opening a position. Move the stop-loss to breakeven upon achieving 1% profit, and subsequently trail it to lock in gains. Market conditions change rapidly; this analysis is for informational purposes only and not investment advice.

marsbit06/08 07:48

Bitcoin Monthly Chart Adjustment Structure Established, HYPE Entry Opportunity Emerges | Exclusive Analysis

marsbit06/08 07:48

The Compounding Crisis in an Era of High Valuations: Is the US Stock Market Facing a New 'Lost Decade'?

This article analyzes the long-term structural risks in US equity markets, challenging the assumption that "time in the market" always ensures positive returns. Drawing on 155 years of historical data, it identifies three prolonged periods—1929-1954, 1966-1982, and 2000-2013—where real buy-and-hold returns were near zero or negative. Collectively, these "lost decades" represent roughly 35% of market history since 1871 and cause not just delayed wealth accumulation but permanent damage to compound growth paths due to the mathematics of recovering from significant drawdowns. Crucially, the authors argue that current conditions mirror historical precursors to such phases. Multiple valuation indicators, including the CAPE ratio (near its 99th percentile), the Buffett Indicator, and Tobin's Q, signal extreme overvaluation, historically associated with lower future 10-year real returns (averaging 3.6%). The paper debunks the common objection to tactical management—fear of missing the "best days" in the market—by showing that the vast majority of these top-performing days occur during bear markets and crises, often adjacent to the worst days. Therefore, avoiding major drawdowns inherently means missing these volatile surges. A key framework proposed involves monitoring market breadth (advance/decline data), which tends to deteriorate before major indices peak, providing an early warning signal. Combined with high valuations, breadth analysis offers a more robust risk-assessment tool. The conclusion for investors and advisors is not a forecast of an inevitable downturn, but a call to move from complacency to preparedness. The empirical evidence suggests that the conditions preceding lost decades are identifiable. A disciplined, adaptive strategy focused on valuation and breadth signals, rather than precise timing, can help protect long-term compounding from permanent impairment.

marsbit06/08 07:25

The Compounding Crisis in an Era of High Valuations: Is the US Stock Market Facing a New 'Lost Decade'?

marsbit06/08 07:25

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

**Title: Has the "Digital Gold" Narrative for Bitcoin Failed?** The article argues that Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative remains valid despite a recent sharp price decline (from a peak near $126k in Oct 2025 to briefly under $61k in Feb 2026). It presents a long-term investment framework based on three core points: **1. Viewing Bitcoin as an Asset:** Bitcoin is presented as a superior potential store of value compared to gold. Key arguments are its absolute scarcity (21 million cap), superior portability, and transparent auditability via its public ledger. While acknowledging its current use in early, volatile stages (~3-4% global adoption), the author draws parallels to the early, disruptive phases of the internet and e-commerce. **2. Understanding the Recent Downturn:** The current ~50% correction is framed as a predictable, consensus-driven cycle following its post-halving peak (the 2024 halving preceded the Oct 2025 high). A crucial factor is a historic "changing of hands": the influx of new institutional buyers via ETFs allowed early, low-cost holders (miners, OG believers) to take profits. The author notes that while severe, Bitcoin's historical drawdowns (e.g., 93% in 2011, 77% in 2021-22) have been progressively smaller, suggesting maturing holder structure and decreasing volatility over time. **3. The Long-Term Perspective:** The long-term thesis hinges on Bitcoin capturing a portion of gold's market value. With Bitcoin's market cap at ~$1.4 trillion (at $70k) versus gold's ~$20 trillion, significant upside potential exists if the "digital gold" narrative is partially realized. However, the author strongly cautions that short-term risks remain, the bottom is unpredictable, and high volatility is inherent. The real risk is not Bitcoin failing but poor personal position management (over-leverage, wrong capital) and a lack of deep understanding, which can force investors out during severe downturns. The conclusion uses Amazon's 95% crash post-2000 dot-com bubble and subsequent 42x recovery as an analogy. The ultimate question is not if Bitcoin's price will rise, but if an investor's strategy and conviction can withstand the volatility to see the long-term play out. The recent divergence (gold up, Bitcoin down) is posed not as a narrative failure, but as potential evidence of this ongoing, painful transition from a speculative asset to a mainstream allocation.

marsbit06/07 13:35

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

marsbit06/07 13:35

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

The article discusses Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative, its recent price drop, and long-term outlook through the perspective of "Jason". It argues the narrative is not a failure but that Bitcoin represents a superior, new asset class due to its fixed supply (21 million), portability, and auditability. The piece compares its current ~3-4% global adoption rate to early internet/e-commerce, suggesting significant growth potential. Regarding the 2025-2026 price decline (from ~$126k to briefly under $61k), the author views it as a predictable, consensus-driven sell-off within Bitcoin's ~4-year cycle post-halving, exacerbated by a major "handover" from early, low-cost holders to new institutional buyers via ETFs. A key observation is that historical peak-to-trough drawdowns have lessened over time (e.g., 93% in 2011 to ~50% in 2026), indicating maturing volatility as holder structure changes. For the long term, the author uses a simple framework: Bitcoin's total market cap (~$1.4T at $70k) is only about 7% of gold's (~$20T). Even capturing 30-50% of gold's value would imply substantial upside. However, the article strongly cautions against viewing this as investment advice, emphasizing extreme volatility and the critical importance of risk management, position sizing, and deep fundamental understanding to survive severe drawdowns. It concludes by drawing a parallel to Amazon's 95% crash in 2000 and subsequent 42x recovery, stressing that the key is surviving market cycles to realize long-term potential.

链捕手06/07 13:25

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

链捕手06/07 13:25

Breaking the Curse of DeFi Cascading Liquidations, Vitalik Proposes a New Solution

**Vitalik Buterin Proposes New DeFi Design to Eliminate Forced Liquidations** Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has published a proposal for a new decentralized finance (DeFi) architecture aimed at removing the automatic liquidation mechanisms prevalent in current lending protocols. The core idea involves creating synthetic assets using options as building blocks, fundamentally avoiding the抵押借贷结构 that triggers forced sell-offs. The proposal responds to a recurring flaw in DeFi: during sharp market downturns, mass自动清算 of under-collateralized positions can exacerbate price declines, creating systemic selling pressure and market instability, as evidenced by recent crypto market volatility. Buterin's model would split an asset like 1 ETH into two option-like derivatives, P and N, pegged to a price index with a set strike price and expiration. At expiry, an oracle determines the settlement price to allocate the underlying ETH between P and N holders. This design eliminates the "cliff" of instant liquidation. Instead, a position's value would gradually drift from its target peg if not actively rebalanced by the user, transferring the rebalancing decision from the protocol to the user or automated tools. A key advantage is the reduced reliance on high-frequency, real-time oracle price feeds, which are vulnerable to manipulation and errors in current systems. The delayed settlement in the options model allows for more robust, fault-tolerant oracle designs. However, significant challenges remain for practical adoption. High transaction costs (slippage) from frequent rebalancing on automated market makers (AMMs) could erode user funds. The model may not be suitable for stablecoins requiring a strict 1:1 dollar peg, as it inherently allows for value drift. Success would depend on developing new liquidity provisioning models and deep markets for these synthetic assets. The proposal represents a fundamental rethinking of DeFi risk management, challenging the industry to explore alternatives to被动集中平仓 rather than merely optimizing existing liquidation processes. It remains a theoretical framework awaiting implementation and testing by development teams.

foresightnews_api06/05 04:31

Breaking the Curse of DeFi Cascading Liquidations, Vitalik Proposes a New Solution

foresightnews_api06/05 04:31

活动图片