The fact that $ETH worth 1.9 billion is queued to exit the staking queue, I won't bet on any direction. Every angle of interpretation makes sense; it has happened in history, but the situation and environment are different now. Just stick to your original strategy and don't let short-term events affect the plans you've already made.

$SPK has risen over 100% in a single day. Taking this opportunity to discuss the situation of Spark and the entire lending market: 1. Valuation: There was definitely some undervaluation before, but this surge is likely due to high control. Currently, the FDV (1.6 billion) is close to Morpho (1.9 billion). Of course, the market cap is still relatively low, and rationally speaking, it’s about right. It could surge further, but the volatility makes it unpredictable. 2. Position and Development: This is not FUD; I personally still pay attention to its development. From a fundamental perspective, relying on MakerDAO, the TVL is definitely not lacking, and this alone is a moat. However, it’s currently quite difficult to capture Aave's market. Essentially, it’s in T2 with Morpho and Compound, and below T3 are Euler and Silo. The lending space is very competitive, but now with compliant stablecoins and RWA expectations, there are new topics emerging. If these two new topics unfold, it could essentially benefit the entire lending market. For the current landscape, changes may not be significant unless a project can secure very good resources. In that case, overtaking is possible, but as it stands, Aave still holds the most advantage. Spark also has potential because MakerDAO is involved with RWA, so this is worth keeping an eye on.

Reading between the lines, $INK might be having its TGE soon, and if that's the case, the timing is quite good.

TVL 4.8 billion, the third-ranked lending protocol, Spark $SPK surged 80% in a single day, with almost no discussion on the timeline. Instead, the screen is filled with hype during the bull run, it seems the market is really light.

This time, compared to the rise of $ETH in May, I want to update my views: thread(1-8)🧵 1. This rise is mostly driven by institutional buying. 2. The influence of Peter Thiel entering the market acts as an emotional catalyst. 3. The peak phase is likely when altcoins start to adopt a "micro-strategy," leading to a collapse of weak consensus assets, which will then transmit declining market confidence to mainstream assets, but for strong consensus assets, it presents a buying opportunity. 4. Strong consensus assets, BTC is basically undisputed in the market, while ETH has some controversy, but it has the most potential, and the excessive FUD sentiment correction is still ongoing. 5. The ETH/BTC exchange rate has risen to 0.03+, which was expected; it has passed the absolute bottom but still has room to grow. 6. This coin-stock structure requires higher sensitivity in the stock market, leading to greater volatility, making the timing of entry very important. On the crypto asset side, the model is simpler, but there are indeed more degen opportunities in the stock market. 7. It’s not a perpetual motion machine; MicroStrategy and BTC are not either. Fundamentally, it’s a structural issue. MicroStrategy has a better structure, and its debt currently seems manageable, with interest being repayable. The "new micro-strategists" usually adopt a more aggressive approach, and the core of everything is very simple: it’s about financing capability and how to strengthen that capability through narrative and packaging, creating a good structure so that when market risks arise, they don’t have to sell their coins and can even continue to raise funds. 8. However, the problem is that if smaller assets also follow suit aggressively, this approach is too risky and could easily backfire. There’s also suspicion of transferring stocks from one hand to the other, which poses compliance risks as an X factor, leading to a decline in market confidence in this model. If it gets serious, it could affect mainstream assets, even MicroStrategy and BTC. This is a potential risk that can be predicted, but to some extent, it’s also an opportunity; it’s all about perspective.

$ENA is about to launch its first "DeFi micro strategy" through a company called StablecoinX, raising $360 million via PIPE, of which $260 million will be immediately invested in purchasing ENA reserves, expected to be completed within 6 weeks, at about $5 million per day. StablecoinX plans to go public in the US stock market in the next 3 months. The bridge between DeFi and CeFi is surprisingly built this way; four years ago, it would have been considered madness. We might soon see the next one.

Measuring the current $ETH market based on whether the fundamentals have improved is clearly misplaced. There is no dispute that this round of the bull market is dominated by institutions and the traditional world. The "fundamental issues" that BTC originally had, such as security budgets and quantum computing, which were often discussed before, are hardly visible now because these issues have not affected institutional and external investors' willingness to buy. Mapping this to ETH corresponds to issues like fragmentation and L2 offloading. These problems, like those of BTC, need to be fully discussed and resolved, but using them to judge the current market is clearly misplaced. The key to the current market is not the fundamentals of the CRYPTO world; the narrative in the market during this cycle is not dominant. Instead, it is the micro-strategy flywheel that requires: 1. Continuous financing capability 2. Market confidence building Whether it can run smoothly in markets outside of Bitcoin, whether SBET's aggressive approach is healthy for speeding up the flywheel, whether compliance pressures will arise, and whether it will bring in other institutions. This door has already been opened; do not let it close.

My winning rate in this cycle should be relatively low, even if the low point of DeFi positions such as $AAVE $UNI has risen a lot, but the comprehensive calculation is still not as good as the full position shuttle $BTC, let alone the emperor of the meme chain. So my position has little reference value. The things that are sent are all supported by interest.

The market's expectations for $ETH now basically come from whether Ethereum can usher in its own "micro-strategy moment" and the possible "flywheel version of micro-strategy". Throughout the cycle, the unique $BTC has completely attracted everyone's attention and emotions to the operation of capital. Personally, I am more clear that in this cycle, technology is not the main line, if it is not a player suitable for meme pvp, then the game will become extremely simple, that is, bet on mainstream assets, have the opportunity to be operated by capital, or can eat spillover dividends. The rest of the time is spent resting and enriching yourself.

Unichain up-to-date Almost all pools have seen their incentives drop sharply since July. If the price of $UNI does not rise, this yield is less competitive in the current high-interest rate environment of on-chain stablecoins. Judging from Gauntlet's summary report last month, Unichain has achieved the KPIs set at the beginning in terms of TVL and trading volume data, but most of the growth has come from arbitrage, rather than organic demand. For Uniswap, as long as you are willing to spend money, the scale can be done, because the mechanism of AMM determines that it naturally brings arbitrage trading, even if there is no actual demand, mainstream assets must have trading volume, and in the case of subsidy decline or even stopping, TVL will decline in the short term, until it matches a balance point with trading volume and fee, and it will probably stop somewhere. Because Uniswap benefits from the moat of its own protocol stability, as long as the yield of fee is one level higher than the market average, someone will be an LP. For a dex, the expansion of Uniswap can still be completed without actual demand, but from the perspective of a Unichain chain, if it is never able to generate organic demand, this problem is completely different and unacceptable to users.