Lei06

Crypto Market Participants & Web3 Content Creators. Study on-chain data, track hot narratives, and make transactions that you can understand. I believe that good content requires patience just like good positions.

1KFollowing

1.2Kfollowers

Feed

Today is a memorable day. On the OKX contract gainers list, RLS is up +17%, BSB is up +11%, and a bunch of altcoins are rising. BTC has climbed back from its low today, up +1.2%, signaling to the market participants: it's time to move. KAT today: -2.8%. On an afternoon when altcoins are generally rising, KAT is falling. This is the first time I've seen KAT decline independently against the backdrop of a market recovery since I started tracking it. This detail is important: a coin rising with the market isn't necessarily healthy; but a coin that still falls while the market is rising usually has one reason—holders don't believe in this rebound and choose to sell during this liquidity window. The price has reached $0.01091. From when the support buy orders were still there—$0.02278—KAT has already dropped -52%. Then I looked at today's order data. There were 2,328 buy orders and 2,298 sell orders—30 more buy orders than sell orders, which numerically indicates "buy orders are dominant." But the price still fell -2.8%. We've seen this pattern with KAT more than once: more buy orders, yet the price continues to drop. The reason remains the same: while the number of buy orders is high, each sell order is larger in scale. You win in quantity, but lose in amount; the price follows the amount. That batch of large funds that once systematically absorbed all sell orders quietly left one day. On the day they left, the price dropped 46% in a single day. Since then, no one has come to fill that position. Now let me mention that one number that has never changed: FDV/Market Cap ratio, 4.27 times. At $0.02278 it was 4.27 times, at $0.01117 it was 4.27 times, and today at $0.01091, it is still 4.27 times. Why does this ratio remain unchanged? Because it has nothing to do with the price. It reflects that only about 23% of the tokens are in circulation, while the remaining 77% are waiting somewhere. The price has dropped 52%, but not a single one of those 77% tokens has disappeared; they have just lost their book value, but can come out at any time. This is the fundamental source of structural pressure for KAT's decline: the disappearance of support buy orders + 77% of uncirculated tokens hanging overhead. When there is no large fund to support the price, every price rebound is a window to release that 77%; the rational choice for holders is to sell, not to hold. Today BTC is up, altcoins are up, and KAT is down. This detail tells you more directly than any technical analysis: the market's current pricing of KAT is "leaving through this liquidity window," not "building positions during the rebound." What does $0.01091 mean? From the above structure, it is not a bottom; it is a price that has not yet found buyers willing to take over. The characteristic of a bottom is "someone believes this is worth buying," not just "hasn't broken through yet." $KAT $RLS $BTC

This afternoon at 4 PM, I opened the OKX contract gain leaderboard and saw something very interesting. Top of the list: RLS, +17.48%. Second on the list: BSB, +10.90%. These two coins are the ones we've written the most about this week. Yesterday, everyone was discussing that RLS's on-chain liquidity was only $110K, and sell orders had already exceeded buy orders; they were also discussing that BSB's market cap/liquidity ratio was 552 times, and the selling pressure in the Base pool was starting to dominate. Today, these two coins reappeared at the top of the gain leaderboard. This situation itself illustrates a characteristic of today's market: it's not new narratives leading the way, but rather the momentum from last week that hasn't finished catching up. What's the background? BTC climbed back from yesterday's low of $75,678 to now $77,130, marking a +1.03% increase since the UTC opening. It's not a significant rebound, but a small stabilization after a decline. Yet, this 1% stabilization has sent a signal to the existing funds in the market: it's time to move. Then look at today's gain leaderboard structure. RLS +17%, BSB +11%, UB +11%, API3 +8.7%, TRIA +8.6%, KGEN +7.9%, AEVO +7.8%, AIXBT +7.3%. This isn't a single sector rising; it's eight completely different narratives rising simultaneously: privacy chain (RLS), BSC ecosystem (BSB), AI + crypto (AIXBT), Oracle (API3), options derivatives (AEVO) — all on the same list, with no common narrative thread, only a shared background: the market dropped yesterday, stabilized today, and the rotation has begun. However, there's one number today that I think needs to be taken seriously: the fear and greed index is at 26. 26 is lower than yesterday's 33. Overall market sentiment is sliding further into fear, yet on the surface, altcoins are rising today. The occurrence of these two events simultaneously indicates that today's rise isn't a sign of market confidence returning; it's the existing funds looking for an exit while pushing the price up a bit. There are two types of rises in a fear zone: one is a true bottom reversal, where buying pressure starts to exceed selling pressure, and confidence grows with more buying; the other is the last push of existing chips, where the price is pushed up to find buyers at high levels, and then the sellers exit. The fear index at 26 and BTC only rebounding 1% aligns more with the second scenario. So today's gain leaderboard should be viewed in two layers: The gains are real — RLS is up +17% today, BSB +11%, the data is there, it's not fake. The underlying support is thin — market liquidity hasn't significantly increased, no new macro buying has come in, and the fear index is still trending down. Today's momentum is a rebound elasticity from yesterday's drop, not the starting point of a new trend. This week, I've followed two pieces on RLS and three on BSB. Their reappearance at the top of the leaderboard today isn't due to any fundamental change in these two projects; it's because in this kind of market, assets with stories, heat, and names that people remember are always more likely to be selected again by funds than those that no one knows. The next question is: where will the people who entered today exit?

Today. The core observation from that time is: the liquidity of this coin is extremely thin, with an incremental capital of about $290K driving nearly 57% of the two-day increase—small money, big impact, applicable in both directions, rising fast and dropping just as quickly. Today, I take another look at CORE, and there has been a change in the numbers that I need to take seriously. Price: $0.0396. 24-hour increase: +5.65%. Not too big, not too small, a very normal number. Then I look at the trading volume: $12.83 million. Last time I wrote, CORE's 24-hour trading volume was about $1.34 million. Now it is $12.83 million, an increase of 9 times. This is the most noteworthy set of numbers for CORE today: a 9-fold increase in trading volume, while the price only rose by 5.65%. Two interpretations, completely opposite. The first: Someone is building a position, but doing so very cautiously. A 9-fold inflow of trading volume has only resulted in a +5.65% price change, indicating that this batch of buying pressure encounters selling pressure every time the price rises slightly—some are buying, and some are selling. But if the net effect is that the price continues to rise, it indicates that the buying pressure is slightly dominant overall. This is a "slow accumulation, not rushing to raise the price" position-building pattern, and if it is genuine institutional buying, there is often a period of acceleration afterward. The second: Someone is using volume to offload. The 9-fold trading volume provides enough liquidity window for high-position holders, allowing them to transfer their chips to today's incoming buyers under limited price increases. The price not keeping up with the volume indicates that the selling pressure is consistently hedging against the buying pressure, resulting in the price stagnating, but the chips have already changed hands. What is CORE itself? It is an L2 direction for Bitcoin—Satoshi Plus consensus, allowing BTC holders to stake BTC to earn CORE, EVM compatible. The BTC L2 narrative has seen periodic attention in the market this year; it is not the main character, but every time BTC makes a move, it brings a wave of L2 discussions. With a market cap of $42.63 million, it is considered a low market cap player in BTC L2, and the underlying reason for its price elasticity remains the same: small market cap, thin liquidity, and extremely high capital efficiency. The structure I wrote about last time still holds today: for CORE's size, a daily trading volume of $12.83 million is already 30% of its market cap. A 30% turnover in one day is not typical behavior for a holding asset; it is circulating in fast-trading funds. Where does the 9-fold volume come from? I have not found any significant positive announcements for CORE today—no new exchange listings, no obvious product progress announcements appearing in mainstream channels. Excluding clear catalysts, today's volume is more likely one of two situations: a rotation of funds in the market's Fear zone (the BTC narrative returning, bringing a wave of related assets), or someone is using today's active liquidity for chip transfer. Last time I wrote about CORE, the price completed a rapid rise in thin liquidity. This time, the trading volume has significantly increased ahead of the price—this is a signal that needs to be observed in the next 48 hours for price reactions, not a signal to draw immediate conclusions. Volume first, price later. If the price follows up next, then the first interpretation holds; if the trading volume starts to shrink while the price falls back, then the second interpretation is more accurate. Is CORE still on your watchlist? What do you think of the 9-fold volume release? $CORE

Hello, the token name $J has risen +66% today on OKX, currently priced at $0.01360, with a high of $0.014439. Looking at the 4-hour chart, the candlesticks over the past ten days form an almost horizontal line, with prices hovering around $0.008 for a long time, the moving averages pressing down hard, and the BOLL bands narrowing—this is a classic pattern of energy compression. Then today, at an unknown point in time, a candle shot up almost vertically. This candle crossed from the middle BOLL band at $0.008874 all the way to the upper band at $0.011478, directly flying to $0.014439. The price is now at $0.01360, already up 18.5% from the upper BOLL band—this is not a "just broken through" position; this is a "has already flown for a while" position. The KDJ J value reading today is 101.27. In standard KDJ, a J value over 100 is an overbought alert. 101 is a number that usually means "overheated in the short term," but it also indicates that momentum is very strong at this point—overbought can continue to be overbought, provided there is sustained buying pressure. What is $J? Jambo, a company making Web3 phones, specifically targeting emerging markets like Africa and Southeast Asia, equipping low-cost smartphones with crypto wallets, allowing users who can't afford a $500 flagship phone to enter Web3. The narrative is "the popularization of Web3 in Africa," and the product is real hardware—not just a narrative, but actual phones sold. However, this narrative has been lukewarm, and I haven't found a clear triggering news behind today's +66%. I've seen several instances of surges without clear catalysts this week: RLS rose 138% with a lukewarm narrative, and ZKJ rose 215% driven by mechanisms. Today's rise of J is most similar to RLS—low market cap, low liquidity, CEX trading volume ($2.48 million) increased, but on-chain DEX data shows almost no depth. A daily trading volume of $2.48 million is quite high for a token that isn't considered mainstream, indicating that there is indeed active buying today. But there are a few numbers worth paying attention to: The price has exceeded the BOLL upper band $0.011478 by about 18%, and the pressure for mean reversion starts from now. If this rising candle on the 4H chart does not have follow-up support, we may see a pullback in the next candle or the following few candles—BOLL's middle band is at $0.008874, which is the center of the compressed range and also the position where the price will start to drift if momentum runs out. The 24h low is $0.008000, the high is $0.014439, with a range from low to high of +80.5%. Now at $0.01360, it has already pulled back -5.8% from the peak—there hasn't been a significant reversal yet, but that upward candle was from the early morning, and whether the Asian morning session continues will be the most important observation window in the next 6 hours. The Jambo project itself has a real product logic, with phone shipments, emerging market narratives, and bundled Web3 wallets—these are stories that can be continuously told under the right market sentiment. But today's rise seems more like funds looking for undervalued narrative targets in the market's Fear zone, rather than any fundamental change happening with Jambo as a project. To determine whether $J can hold above $0.013+, the key is to look at two things: whether the Asian morning session trading volume can pick up, and whether there are any supplementary catalysts (announcements, partnerships, new exchange listings). Without follow-up, this position is likely to test a pullback in the next 24 hours, with the testing range between $0.010 and $0.011. $J

"Will BSB become the second RAVE?" Today, I looked at two sets of numbers together, and my first reaction was: they are the same kind of animal. First, let's lay out the structure: Before RAVE's collapse, its market cap was around $200 million, with on-chain liquidity of a few million dollars—at that time, RAVE's liquidity was extremely thin relative to its market cap. Then RAVE experienced a price surge that was suspected to be orchestrated by insiders, pushing it from the bottom to $2.7, then a single candlestick dropped it back to $1.1, with $44M in long positions liquidated, and now it's at $0.858, down 68% from its peak. Today, BSB: market cap $181 million, total on-chain real liquidity $328,000, a ratio of 552 times. Today, RAVE: market cap $213 million, total on-chain real liquidity $502,000, a ratio of about 423 times. The prices of the two projects are almost the same today (BSB $0.840, RAVE $0.858), with market caps in the same range, but BSB's liquidity structure is even thinner than RAVE's now. After RAVE went through that massacre, its liquidity is actually healthier than BSB's—because after being crushed at a high position, the remaining chips went through a round of real price discovery. So, will BSB become the second RAVE? Structurally, it already is. But there is an important difference in mechanism. The reason RAVE's collapse was so severe—a single candlestick dropped 67%, $44M liquidated—was because RAVE had perpetual contracts on CEXs like Bitget, with high-leverage long positions piled on top. Insiders pushed the price, triggering FOMO, retail investors chased long positions with leverage, and then a single dump triggered a chain reaction of liquidations, resulting in a long squeeze. With thin on-chain liquidity, the contract liquidity couldn't hold up, leading to a free fall in price. Currently, I haven't found a large-scale perpetual contract market for BSB. If BSB is primarily circulating in spot markets, its decline will be more "civilized"—it won't be a single candlestick drop of -67%, but rather a longer, less noticeable process of bleeding. When it rises, there are buyers stepping in; when it falls, there are no liquidations pressing down, and the price gradually leaks out until one day you realize it has dropped 50%, but each day's decline feels "okay". This kind of death is harder to guard against than RAVE's. Another new signal worth noting today: sell orders in the Base pool (1,608 orders) are exceeding buy orders (1,222 orders), and the Base pool is the deepest liquidity pool for BSB. The main BSC pool still has more buy orders (10,497 vs 9,507), but in the Base pool, which has the highest quality liquidity, selling pressure has started to dominate today. This is not a collapse signal, but it is an early directional data point. The 552 times market cap/liquidity ratio, during the time I've been tracking BSB, has dropped from 1,873 times to 583 times, and today it has dropped to 552 times. Every time I write about BSB, it has been rising, and this ratio has been there too. A coin that can rise while I repeatedly write about liquidity risks indicates that the buying pressure coming in now does not care about this ratio—they care about whether it's "more expensive or cheaper than yesterday". This is the last logic that can keep the price going up: the next buyer is more expensive than you. This logic holds when there are buyers stepping in, but when there are no buyers, a liquidity ratio of 552 times means that at the moment you try to cash out, the "market" simply does not exist. At the high point of RAVE, it was also like this: every buyer was waiting for the next buyer, until there was no next one. Whether BSB will become RAVE depends on two things: whether there is a similar centralized catalyst to push the price to an absolutely absurd position, and who will be the last batch of people to take the fall. If BSB rises quietly and falls quietly, it will be a quiet RAVE; if one day someone sets it on fire, it has the potential to perform a less quiet version. Structurally, it is already in place. Do you still hold BSB? Do you think BSB will replicate RAVE's script, or will it end in another way? $RAVE $BSB

When the market is stalling in the Fear zone, today RLS and BIO are doing something completely different. First, let's talk about RLS (Rayls). It opened today at $0.00347, surged to a high of $0.01098, an increase of +216%, then pulled back a bit, currently at $0.00826, which is still +138% from the opening. Bitget's single platform 24-hour trading volume hit $3.95 million. However, looking at the on-chain data, the combined DEX liquidity across BSC and ETH is only about $93,000. This number indicates something important: today's surge in RLS mainly occurred on centralized exchanges, not on decentralized chains. $3.95 million in CEX trading volume versus $93K in on-chain liquidity—these two numbers are not operating in the same market. CEX prices can be pushed up by fewer buy orders, while on-chain liquidity is a true reflection of carrying capacity. What is Rayls? It is a Layer 1 project focused on financial privacy, developed by the Brazilian crypto company Parfin, aimed at providing privacy-compliant blockchain infrastructure for traditional financial institutions. This direction is not a hot narrative, and I currently have not found clear first-hand news regarding the specific catalyst behind today's surge—but regardless of what the catalyst is, a project with a market cap of $12.5 million and on-chain liquidity of $93K being pushed by $3.95 million in daily CEX trading volume can have significant price elasticity, both upwards and downwards. Next is BIO (Bio Protocol). It rose from $0.02805 to a high of $0.03928 today, currently at $0.03727, an increase of +33%. Compared to RLS, this is a "much more civilized" way of rising. BIO is a representative project in the DeSci (decentralized science) space, which gained attention from Vitalik in its early years and is set to launch on Binance Launchpool in early 2025. What it does is tokenize the IP of biotech research, allowing retail investors to invest in drug development and scientific projects. The DeSci narrative has been quiet for a while under the pressure of the AI narrative, and today’s +33% for BIO can be seen as a small signal of narrative return. Putting RLS and BIO together against the backdrop of BTC -2%, ETH -1%, and a fear and greed index of 33, I see a specific market state: the main funds are waiting, but the existing funds in the market are rotating. Bitcoin and Ethereum are sitting there, and those holding them are not able to sell much or enter many positions; however, the funds already in the market are starting to look for assets with stories to tell. RLS has a privacy chain narrative, and BIO has a DeSci narrative, neither of which is mainstream today, but in the silence of the mainstream, the non-mainstream stands out. This kind of rotation has a historical pattern: it usually occurs during the energy accumulation phase before the market truly breaks out, and also happens in the "whack-a-mole" stage before the market takes a downturn—each sector takes turns pulling up, providing liquidity for those at high positions to exit. The two situations have the same appearance but completely different outcomes. RLS surged 216% today, now back to 138%, having retracted -24.7% from the peak. The $93K on-chain liquidity means that if you are someone holding a position on CEX, trying to find a stable price benchmark to judge the "reasonable price level," this on-chain number is hard to give you confidence. BIO is relatively rational, with +33% supported by actual CEX liquidity, making the pullback more controllable. Two coins, on the same day, in the same big context, but with completely different risk structures. In this market rotation where the big market is stalling, will you choose to follow or observe? $RLS $BIO

Last time I wrote about BSB, I mentioned one thing: the most dangerous aspect of this project is not whether it will drop, but that a large portion of its market cap cannot be realized. Today BSB has risen again. +12.22%, current price $0.8391, market cap shows $180.6 million. There are 10,023 buy orders and 9,274 sell orders, with buy orders outnumbering sell orders—on the surface, everything looks "healthy." Then let's look at liquidity. BSC main pool: $83,691. Base pool: $210,260. Total across the chain: about $309,000. $180.6 million market cap, $309,000 real liquidity. The ratio is 583 times. Last time I wrote about BSB, this ratio was 1,873 times—because the Base pool didn't exist then. Now that the Base pool has been added, it has diluted some, and 583 times sounds "much better." But 583 times means: if all holders decide to sell at the same time, the market only has one 583rd of the liquidity to absorb it. In other words, if you have $1,000 of BSB, there is only $1.7 in the market waiting to buy your goods. Today's trading volume is $3.34M, liquidity is $309K, trading volume/liquidity = 10.8 times. Each piece of liquidity has been flipped back and forth 10 times today—does this indicate an active market, or a market where people are constantly entering and exiting the same shallow pool? There are more buy orders (10,023) than sell orders (9,274)—is this a real accumulation of buy orders, or are small buy orders continuously being introduced during the price increase, while selling is done through a few large sell orders? This question cannot be seen from the number of buy and sell orders; it requires looking at the size of each order, and that data is hard to cleanly separate from the noise on-chain. This is the third rally cycle I have tracked for BSB. Each rally has the same structure: price rises, more buy orders, increased trading volume, but the liquidity pool remains at an extremely small scale relative to the market cap. This structure means: the price can be easily pushed up because the cost of pushing the price is low; but the price can also be easily pushed down because the ability to absorb selling pressure is equally thin. When it rises, the market cap number looks great, $180.6 million. When it drops, what you can sell is just the portion you can grab from that $309,000. One thing worth noting: today it rose +12%, but in 6 hours it dropped -0.27%, indicating a slight pullback after a spike during the day. The price did not move in one direction; someone is reducing at the high point. Is this an early selling signal, or normal price fluctuation? With BSB's liquidity structure, the difference between the two often only becomes clear after the price has already run. BSB has once again made the numbers look good today. But the 583 times ratio has not changed.