@raintures
Account based inWest Asia
About this account
- Account based in
- West Asia
- Connected via
- West Asia App Store
Account-level information from X, not a live location or the device used for a specific post.
I'm Rain | | Alpha Content | ⛓️ 🦅
Metaverse
Joined May 2022
- Tweets156K
- Following11.2K
- Followers141K
- Likes259K
100 million $POL about to get burned and anyone can trigger it.
The last one is the actual detail worth sitting with, beyond the number.
0.93% of total supply. one-time event. Pol emits about 2% a year going forward.
This burn is under half of one year's issuance.
Whether supply actually shrinks depends on quarterly burns keeping pace after this, not on this first one alone.
A lot burns sit behind a foundation multisig where someone has to remember to pull the trigger.
This one doesn't work that way: the fee accrues, anyone can call the burn, no gatekeeper required.
One thing worth flagging separately is the revenue comparison by nailwal:
$24.5m for polygon against $8.41m for arbitrum, credited to "my analyst at chatgpt."
Does a permissionless quarterly burn actually outpace 2% annual emissions over a full year?
BIG UPDATE: 100M POL ready to be permanently BURNED.
Polygon is printing revenue. $24.5m YTD. We are deploying a change that lets anyone in the community trigger its burn.
2026YTD Revenue
Super happy about $NEAR and $ARB getting much deserved love, but in terms of revenue, my analyst at ChatGPT says:
ethereum:0x455e53cbb86018ac2b8092fdcd39d8444affc3f6 : 24.5mn
$ARB : $8.41m (Includes the trailblazing Robinhood chain)
$NEAR : $5.6m (Includes the now legendary Near Intents)
ethereum:0x455e53cbb86018ac2b8092fdcd39d8444affc3f6 is 3x revenue of $ARB, 5x of $NEAR.
I hope the market gods will shower their smiles on ethereum:0x455e53cbb86018ac2b8092fdcd39d8444affc3f6 community too someday.
BTW huge kudos and love to both @NEARProtocol and @arbitrum teams and communities (Forgive me for this bad cope on ethereum:0x455e53cbb86018ac2b8092fdcd39d8444affc3f6 missing out of the rally till now 😥😥)
Anyways, the contracts are on testnet, after the final Security Council signatures, they go to mainnet.
Then anyone can trigger the first burn, permanently burning the 100M POL instantly. Post that every quarter, anyone from the community would be able to burn ethereum:0x455e53cbb86018ac2b8092fdcd39d8444affc3f6 from the supply
Since January 2026, POL has been deflationary and the network is still getting hammered with activity…payments, trades, consumer apps, everything. We have scaled 10x to 5k TPS and multiple earth shattering updates are coming on the TPS front.
Every base fee adds POL to the collector. it has reached 121M POL. It's your time to burn 100M! 🔥
My least productive market habit is probably opening 12 tabs to understand one move.
- X for the reaction / social sentiment
- Another feed for stocks
- Somewhere else for macro
Then back to crypto to see what actually reacted.
Binance Square adding a Stocks tab is interesting mostly because it removes some of that context switching.
Market news, stock discussion and macro/micro takes can now sit next to the crypto conversation instead of living in a completely separate workflow.
Could seem a small product change by @heyibinance & @cz_binance, but it’s closer to how people actually follow markets now.
➡️ You can follow the latest stock moves directly through Binance Square: binance.com/en/square/stock
Wall street prefer $BTC to gold?
Today ibit beat gld outright: an etf that's existed two years just out-volumed one that's been around since 2004.
$1.56b traded by midday. Thursday's entire session did $1.3b.
More volume in half a day than the full previous day.
Fifth place across all us-listed etfs, behind only spy, qqq, soxl, iwm.
The actual index giants, decades of liquidity behind them.
Context helps explain it: blackrock told clients in august to hold some btc.
Regulators actually backed the sector after the fomc mess. btc's up 5.54% today past $80,933.
Does ibit hold this rank once the day closes??
$BTC printed a bottom signal that’s 3-for-3 historically.
I’m not even convinced that’s the most important part.
The monthly Fisher Transform flipped bullish around -2.26, only the fourth such crossover in BTC’s history.
The previous three appeared around major bear-market bottoms.
Weekly structure adds to it.
Fisher has been making higher lows while BTC made lower lows, a divergence that also developed during the final stretch of the 2022 bear market.
Pretty compelling technically.
But there’s a contradiction I can’t ignore.
BTC touched ~$57K in July, yet the bid-side activity around those lows reportedly lacked the broad accumulation you’d normally want to see at a major cycle bottom.
If $57K really was the cycle low, when does the technical reversal start showing up in buyer demand?
Higher rates aren’t automatically bearish for all of crypto anymore.
That’s the part of @Grayscale latest take I find interesting.
The Fed is now at 3.75–4.00%, and markets are pricing an 88.2% chance that rates finish December above that range.
For $BTC, another 25bps increases the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset.
But for stablecoin issuers, higher cash yields can mean more reserve income.
Tokenized Treasuries and money-market products also become more attractive onchain.
So I’m increasingly skeptical of treating “Fed hikes” as one directional crypto trade.
If rates stay higher, does the story become less about capital leaving crypto and more about where inside crypto that capital migrates?
Dated futures are basically disappearing from crypto.
Their volume is now ~97% below 2021 levels.
Options have gone from roughly 25% to nearly 50% of $BTC derivatives notional OI across the crypto-native venues.
To me, the split is becoming pretty clear:
- Perps are where traders take continuous leverage
- Options are increasingly where they price risk
Bybit’s numbers are a good example of that rotation.
Its share of BTC options volume across the four venues studied rose from below 10% to 28%, while its options book grew from $529M in its first month to $2.33B.
$ETH now accounts for roughly a third of its options volume.
If options keep taking this much share, does implied volatility eventually become as fundamental to reading crypto risk as funding rates are today?
Didn’t have the @Polymarket DeFi comeback arc on my bingo card.
Great hire.
🤝 Paid partnership
Calling all crypto twitter.
I'm proud to announce that Jacob Horne @js_horne has joined Polymarket. He will be working closely with me on product, in particular making Polymarket DeFi great again.
Jacob is amongst the best product and innovation minds in crypto. Before this, he was CEO of Zora. He built multiple beautiful products (I was one of the first users of the first version in 2020). Now he's got the PMF and distribution of Polymarket. I'm so excited to work with him.
We'll be hosting a Polymarket DeFi town hall soon to hear from our longtime users and lay out the plan to make the Polymarket DeFi product the best it’s ever been. In the meantime, DM your feedback to @js_horne or me and we'll action it.
To the DeFi community, we know the performance of the onchain product has waned as we've scaled, and it hurts us to hear the frustration of the people who love Polymarket and have supported us for so long thinking we’ve pivoted all focus to US, but just know we're working behind the scenes to unify the products and make Polymarket better than ever, across all surface areas.
One of $BTC supposed structural buyers has gone very quiet.
Corporate treasuries added just ~5,900 BTC over the last three months.
In July 2025 alone, they bought ~89,000 BTC.
Their aggregate cost basis is around $80.5K, roughly 6% above spot.
BTC has already tried and failed twice this year to hold above that level.
So I wouldn’t treat corporate treasuries as automatic support here. They’re barely adding while the cohort remains underwater.
The same caution is showing elsewhere. US spot BTC ETFs saw $462.7M in net outflows over the five trading days through Sep. 11.
Realized cap has also started falling, sitting around $1.069T.
To me, the common thread is simple: fresh capital has slowed.
Which makes $80.5K a much more interesting level than ordinary resistance.
What comes first: BTC reclaiming the corporate cost basis, or those buyers returning before it gets there?
$30 billion in intents transaction volume is the number behind $NEAR +5,5% move.
The airdrop model is tied to something concrete.
[email protected] doesn't reward random holders, it triggers off confidential intents tvl crossing 70 million…which just happened.
The chart basically backs this up.
NEAR went from $1.80 to $2.41 in two weeks this month.
60% off the august low, it broke every major moving average doing it.
Today's push to $2.76 is more of the same move, not something new starting from scratch.
The ai agent narrative right now is trending.
But the intents volume would still be there even without that story attached on it.
Curious tosee if price keeps tracking actual usage once this airdrop window closes.
A fund manager tweeting he owns something moved prices more than a fed rate hike.
$ZEC is up 23%. $BTC is up less than 1% on the same news, the actual rate decision itself.
Matt huang from Paradigm called zec "a private complement to bitcoin" and disclosed his firm holds it, and that single post lines up almost exactly with the surge.
A fed decision and a single disclosure from one investor produced wildly different magnitudes of reaction.
The rate hike itself reads as a non-event.
A quarter point hike, first since 2023, should theoretically pressure risk assets, higher rates make cash and treasuries more competitive against something that pays no yield.
Instead $BTC, $SOL, $BNB, $HYPE and $ETH all rose together.
Does the move of zec hold once the huang effect fades?
Coinbase premium just hit -0.079: lowest since august 16th.
Binance is telling a different story though as cvd data shows binance buyers accumulating starting september 11, while coinbase sellers stayed in control the entire time.
Same asset, same week, opposite flow depending on which exchange you're watching.
The short term holder data explains who's selling.
34,000 $BTC hit exchanges in 24 hours, the largest move in a month. 23,200 of those coins sold at a loss. that's capitulation, not profit-taking.
Worth holding two facts at once here.
This is the same cohort that just posted its longest profit streak of the year.
Now, a chunk of them are dumping at a loss into one specific piece of news.
Are US investors pricing a political risk offshore markets don't have to care about?
Crypto stocks fell almost three times harder than $BTC and alts on the clarity act news.
- Coinbase fell almost 9%
- Circle fell 9.4%
- Galaxy lost 8%
Bitcoin, the actual asset the legislation was about, dropped roughly 3% over the same 24 hours.
All make sense once you separate what each one prices.
Bitcoin doesn't need a us regulatory framework to function.
But coinbase's business does and circle's stablecoin business depends on it even more.
The miners round it out with riot down 5% and mara, cleanspark, iren, core scientific all down 3-4%.
Mining bitcoin has nothing to do with market structure legislation.
More a contagion than a reaction to the bill itself.
How wide does that spread get the next time this vote comes up?
$610M ETF swing in 24 hours in the same week the Senate shelved CLARITY.
- Monday: $159.9M into Bitcoin ETFs.
- Tuesday: $450.4M out.
Worst single day since June 24.
Look at who led the exit;
- FBTC: -$214.8M
- IBIT: -$161.7M
Fidelity sold harder than BlackRock. IBIT usually absorbs the shock. Not this time.
GBTC, ARKB, BITB all bled small in comparison: -$44.1M, -$17.4M, -$12.4M.
The size sat in one or two books, not spread across retail.
Same day, BTC dropped 2.5% to $75.7K. Same day, CLARITY Act failed to advance.
One bill, one fund, one bad day. Coincidence or correlation.
Are these flows pricing Bitcoin, or pricing the Senate?
Perps on @Polymarket are doing ~$100m/day now.
$49m OI, 21k traders, 83 markets.
Still tiny relative to the big perp venues, but what's interesting is where the OI sits.
BTC + ETH: ~$18.5m
S&P + Nasdaq: ~$12m
Gold + Silver: ~$6m
Almost as much OI in those four TradFi markets as BTC and ETH combined.
That's probably the more interesting part of the experiment.
Onchain perps don't necessarily have to be crypto perps.
🔗 Here you can give a closer look: polymarket.com?via=raintures
🤝 Paid partnership
Rain retweeted
Some of you are holding the fake one right now and don't know it.
Robinhood chain has 2,000+ stock tokens live, and the moment any asset gets attention on-chain, lookalikes show up using the same ticker and the same name.
@fletch_now registry checks every stock token address against the issuer's own on-chain records, bytecode-verified.
Some of the copies apparently have more holders than the real contract does.
Also the rest of what fletch.now does is worth nothing.
I would define it as a builder tool with prompt-to-deployed-app hosting for robinhood chain.
Apps stay live after you close the tab, pay in $FLTX credits or bring your own AI key and skip the fee entirely.
Useful if you're building there.
CA: 0xbac1d12ca1802b1b9b0fc96418b90927f941d354
Not affiliated with Robinhood. NFA, DYOR.
🤝 Paid partnership
30 days is the number worth sitting with beyond the $168.2b in profit next to it.
Short term holders haven't had a streak like this all year.
January got a week before breaking. May was mostly losses. This one hit a full month.
The cost basis split tells you who's driving it. 1-3 month holders came in around $63,372.
3-6 month holders are higher, around $73,190.
Newer money entered cheaper than older money. that's backwards from what you'd expect this deep into a recovery.
$102.6b is still sitting in loss on the other side of that same ledger though.
The streak doesn't erase that.
Does 30 days actually change holder behavior the way 2022 did?
10-year treasuries crossed 5% monday and $BTC barely moved.
The logic says it should have.
A risk-free 5% raises the bar for anything that doesn't yield, and bitcoin generates nothing, unlike stocks which at least produce earnings.
It should get hit hardest.
instead it's sitting near $77,800, mostly flat through the whole move.
Bank of america's own strategist called this the bigger near-term risk for stocks, not crypto.
The fed decision this week actually settles it.
A hold pulls yields back and the pressure story fades. a hike with hawkish guidance tests whether this flatness was real or just the calm before the reaction shows up.
Was bitcoin silence here the opportunity cost thesis breaking down??
