[Key interpretation] The unconfirmed transaction of BTC is depressed, and the main selling pressure reappears

Huobi Research2022-07-01 tarihinde yayınlandı2022-07-04 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

In the daily K-line chart of BTC, during the decline of consecutive trading days, it gradually approached the low end of the range.

1、 BTC is brewing to speed up the change

In the daily K-line chart of BTC, during the decline of consecutive trading days, it gradually approached the low end of the range. At present, BTC is still operating above $17246 corresponding to 78.6% of Fibonacci, but the market trend is weak, and investors who take the initiative to buy can also increase the price. Therefore, we need to pay attention to the adjustment range of each transaction. At present, the intra day amplitude of BTC can reach 7.7%. In the low price area, we should also pay attention to the possibility of high-intensity fluctuations.

In terms of intra day trading volume, BTC trading volume rebounded slightly, failing to reach the recent peak performance. The trading volume rose slightly above the equivalent line, which means that investors' trading enthusiasm began to heat up.

2. BTC main pressure drop reproduction

The data shows that the number of large transactions of BTC reached 1295 on June 18. At present, the number of large transactions on June 30 has rebounded to 527, which is also a recent high. In other words, the main activity is still rising. With the rise of BTC volatility, investors' low absorption trading signals appear again.

The number of major large-scale transactions is higher than 500 BTCs, and the number of 527 large-scale transactions converted into BTCs is 263500 BTCs. Since September 2021, the number of large transactions of BTC has frequently reached a high level. The rebound in the number of large transactions happens to be the weak operation stage of BTC at low prices, and the possibility of major shipments cannot be ruled out.

3. BTC did not confirm that the transaction was running at a low level

BTC did not confirm that the transaction was running at a low level, and most of the transaction fees were at a low level, which meant that small and medium-sized investors occupied most of the seats in the transaction. Judging from this, it is unlikely that the main force will buy at a low price during the recent BTC price retreat. After the price retreat in June, the cooling of trading means that the market continues to be relatively depressed, and investors can appropriately adjust their positions to cope with the price decline.

4. Eth trading heat rebounded slightly

Eth's short-term pullback continued to push up trading volume slightly, and the price rebounded in the short term, with a weak price performance of US $1106 as the key support. Judging from this, if eth cannot rise in the short term, it is more likely that the price will remain low. Fibonacci's 78.6% corresponding to $1106 is gradually becoming the pressure level of eth. Therefore, the trading action of buying eth can be postponed in order to obtain better low absorption cost.

5. The trading volume on the ETH chain rebounded

Although the daily online trading volume of eth has continued to grow recently, it is lower than that before the middle of 2021. Recently, the intraday trading volume of eth has remained above 3million eth. Judging from this, the market is in a typical stage of a large number of chips changing hands. Combined with the low volatility of eth price, the market is relatively depressed, and the rising trading days are relatively limited. During the market pullback, there are many trading opportunities in the low price zone, so it is not ruled out that the market continues to retreat again, raising the turnover rate and prompting the possibility of bottom buying opportunities.

İlgili Okumalar

Four Questions on the Zcash Orchard Vulnerability: Was It Exploited? Can Funds Be Recovered? Is the Supply Verifiable? And Are There Others?

Zcash Orchard Bug: Four Key Questions Answered A critical forgery vulnerability was discovered in Zcash's Orchard privacy pool, raising four major concerns for users. 1. **Was the Orchard bug exploited?** The likelihood is considered low. The bug was found proactively using advanced AI-assisted tools and was promptly patched, limiting any potential attack window. If exploitation had occurred, evidence would likely have surfaced by now. 2. **Can legitimate Orchard funds be recovered?** It is believed so, based on the assessment that the bug was not exploited. If forgery did happen, existing "turnstile" mechanisms could prevent full recovery of legitimate funds if forged coins were moved out first, though this scenario is deemed unlikely. Users can choose to move funds, but this carries risks like loss of privacy or new wallet/software issues. 3. **Can users verify Zcash's total supply?** Currently, no. The vulnerability's prior existence prevented independent verification of the shielded supply. The proposed "Ironwood" network upgrade will restore this ability by sealing the Orchard pool, allowing anyone running a node to verify that the circulating ZEC does not exceed the correct amount. 4. **Are there other forgery bugs?** Ongoing intensive audits by multiple teams, including AI-assisted analysis, have not found additional forgery vulnerabilities, increasing confidence that none remain. Further work and collaborations are planned to provide additional guarantees. In conclusion, while the team assesses that exploitation was unlikely and the supply is safe, the upcoming upgrade is critical to restore users' ability to independently verify Zcash's supply integrity, moving away from reliance on trust.

marsbit21 dk önce

Four Questions on the Zcash Orchard Vulnerability: Was It Exploited? Can Funds Be Recovered? Is the Supply Verifiable? And Are There Others?

marsbit21 dk önce

Four Questions on the Zcash Orchard Vulnerability: Was it Exploited? Can Funds Be Recovered? Is the Supply Verifiable? Are There Others?

**Summary: Zcash Orchard Vulnerability Analysis** A critical forgery vulnerability was recently discovered in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, raising concerns about the coin's supply and user funds. The developers, led by Zcash Open Development Labs, acted swiftly to temporarily freeze the pool and deploy a fix. The article addresses four key questions: 1. **Was the vulnerability exploited?** While unknown, the developers believe it is unlikely for several reasons: the bug was difficult to find, using advanced AI tools; the fix was deployed quickly; and typical crypto exploits are fast, with no evidence of abnormal outflows. 2. **Can legitimate Orchard funds be recovered?** If the bug was not exploited, all funds are safe. If exploited, a mechanism limits total withdrawals from the pool to the amount legitimately entered, potentially blocking some legitimate funds. The developers deem this unlikely but advise cautious users to consider moving funds, noting the privacy and risk trade-offs of moving to transparent or Sapling pools. 3. **Can users verify Zcash's total supply?** Not currently. The vulnerability temporarily broke the ability for users to independently verify that no extra ZEC was created. 4. **Are there other forgery bugs?** Ongoing audits by multiple teams, including using advanced AI analysis, have so far found no others, increasing confidence. The proposed "Ironwood" network upgrade is the core solution. It will **seal** the Orchard pool, preventing new entries or internal circulation. This action, combined with the existing withdrawal mechanism, will restore the ability for any node operator to verify that Zcash's supply limit has not been violated, regardless of whether exploitation occurred in the past. The upgrade aims to restore the system's long-term credibility through user-verifiable supply integrity.

Odaily星球日报22 dk önce

Four Questions on the Zcash Orchard Vulnerability: Was it Exploited? Can Funds Be Recovered? Is the Supply Verifiable? Are There Others?

Odaily星球日报22 dk önce

An AI Version of the 'Subprime Crisis'? A Hidden Debt of $1.8 Trillion is Accumulating in the Shadows Amid the Frenzy

Amidst the AI infrastructure construction boom, a massive debt expansion is forming, with the most dangerous portion remaining off-balance sheets. Morgan Stanley research reveals approximately $1.8 trillion in off-balance-sheet exposures, including nearly $1 trillion in purchase commitments and over $800 billion in non-active lease contracts. These future cash outflows are not recorded as liabilities. The leverage of hyperscale cloud companies has surged from 0.9x to 1.8x in just two quarters. Private credit firms like Apollo and Blackstone are shifting leverage into the supply chain through complex, opaque SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) financing structures. Global AI-related bond issuance has skyrocketed, with annual volume projected to exceed $570 billion. However, capital expenditure growth is outpacing revenue and free cash flow. Major cloud providers may see free cash flow approach zero or turn negative in 2026. A significant 'depreciation cliff' looms as vast amounts of current capital spending, recorded as 'construction in progress,' have yet to begin depreciating, artificially inflating current profit margins. Future depreciation could severely pressure earnings. The core risk is identified as a series of timing mismatches, not an immediate solvency crisis. Investment is racing ahead of monetization, leverage is being obscured, and accounting classifications hinder comparability. The entire financing structure faces a fundamental stress test if AI commercialization lags or enterprise clients shift to cheaper alternatives, potentially triggering chain reactions within the highly interconnected funding ecosystem.

marsbit33 dk önce

An AI Version of the 'Subprime Crisis'? A Hidden Debt of $1.8 Trillion is Accumulating in the Shadows Amid the Frenzy

marsbit33 dk önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片