Binance Square

Spectre BTC

Crypto | DeFi | GameFi | NFTs | Content Writer | Ambassador | Marketer
High-Frequency Trader
4.1 Years
94 Following
23.9K+ Followers
23.8K+ Liked
1.5K+ Shared
Posts
·
--
Don’t be dazzled by slide decks shouting “hundreds of thousands of TPS.” What serious Web2 companiesDon’t be dazzled by slide decks shouting “hundreds of thousands of TPS.” What serious Web2 companies really care about is how clean a chain is. At 3 a.m., when I finally got a carbon-footprint tracking smart contract running, I wasn’t frustrated because the code was difficult. I was frustrated because I realized how much time I had wasted on other public chains. Over the past few days, I helped a friend who creates generative AI art search for a reliable infrastructure layer. I reviewed nearly every major L1—Flow, Aptos, Sui, Solana. The documentation was impressive, the marketing even louder. But when it came time to deploy, hidden complications and edge cases appeared everywhere. Just before giving up, I tried Vanar with little expectation. That attempt showed me a different path for combining Web3 and AI—less flashy, far more practical. Many people still equate decentralization with fairness. But in areas like on-chain AI computation and data rights management, absolute decentralization can be unrealistic. If a company like Disney wanted to launch AI-generated dynamic NFTs, would they risk deploying on a network where anyone can spin up a node? What if an anonymous validator acts maliciously or a fork damages continuity? Brand reputation is at stake. Vanar takes a different route. Instead of chasing the “impossible triangle,” it introduces reputable enterprises as Vanguard verification nodes, forming a trust layer anchored in reputation. Crypto purists may see this as semi-consortium design. But from a business perspective, tangible accountability often matters more than theoretical purity. On testnet, what stood out most was stability. Not perfection—there were frontend freezes when uploading HD textures via Creator Pad, and occasional delays in transaction receipts. But the core network—transaction confirmation and state updates—felt controlled and precise. That kind of engineering restraint is rare in today’s hype-driven environment. Compared with Flow, whose Cadence language prioritizes asset safety but creates a steep learning curve, Vanar’s EVM compatibility lowers the barrier dramatically. Solidity developers can migrate almost immediately. Respecting existing developer habits is fundamental to ecosystem growth. Energy transparency is another overlooked factor. ESG may be mocked in crypto circles, but for publicly listed companies, it’s non-negotiable. Vanar makes block-level energy consumption traceable and measurable. Retail users won’t notice this—but for enterprises filing carbon disclosures, it’s essential. That’s why Vanar feels less like a speculation playground and more like infrastructure for regulated businesses. The ecosystem may look sparse now—almost like a newly built ghost town—but I’d rather build in a clean, compliant, low-cost environment than operate in chaos. There are risks. The cross-chain bridge remains weak, and asset transfers are not seamless—problematic for DeFi composability. But this may be intentional. The team doesn’t appear focused on attracting speculative liquidity. Instead, tools like Creator Pad suggest an “outside-in” strategy: onboard Web2 creators and IP first, then expand. If successful, that ceiling could exceed projects driven purely by internal speculation cycles. The market today is noisy. Everyone stares at price charts; few read documentation or test real interactions. Vanar feels like a quiet engineer—no grand narratives, no philosophical slogans. It just builds solid roads and stable infrastructure. For those building in the AI era, that might be enough. It may not deliver the most explosive gains in the next bull run, but it could prove to be one of the most durable. In uncertain times, stability itself is a competitive advantage. @Vanar $VANRY #Vanar

Don’t be dazzled by slide decks shouting “hundreds of thousands of TPS.” What serious Web2 companies

Don’t be dazzled by slide decks shouting “hundreds of thousands of TPS.” What serious Web2 companies really care about is how clean a chain is.
At 3 a.m., when I finally got a carbon-footprint tracking smart contract running, I wasn’t frustrated because the code was difficult. I was frustrated because I realized how much time I had wasted on other public chains. Over the past few days, I helped a friend who creates generative AI art search for a reliable infrastructure layer. I reviewed nearly every major L1—Flow, Aptos, Sui, Solana. The documentation was impressive, the marketing even louder. But when it came time to deploy, hidden complications and edge cases appeared everywhere.
Just before giving up, I tried Vanar with little expectation. That attempt showed me a different path for combining Web3 and AI—less flashy, far more practical.
Many people still equate decentralization with fairness. But in areas like on-chain AI computation and data rights management, absolute decentralization can be unrealistic. If a company like Disney wanted to launch AI-generated dynamic NFTs, would they risk deploying on a network where anyone can spin up a node? What if an anonymous validator acts maliciously or a fork damages continuity? Brand reputation is at stake.
Vanar takes a different route. Instead of chasing the “impossible triangle,” it introduces reputable enterprises as Vanguard verification nodes, forming a trust layer anchored in reputation. Crypto purists may see this as semi-consortium design. But from a business perspective, tangible accountability often matters more than theoretical purity.
On testnet, what stood out most was stability. Not perfection—there were frontend freezes when uploading HD textures via Creator Pad, and occasional delays in transaction receipts. But the core network—transaction confirmation and state updates—felt controlled and precise. That kind of engineering restraint is rare in today’s hype-driven environment.
Compared with Flow, whose Cadence language prioritizes asset safety but creates a steep learning curve, Vanar’s EVM compatibility lowers the barrier dramatically. Solidity developers can migrate almost immediately. Respecting existing developer habits is fundamental to ecosystem growth.
Energy transparency is another overlooked factor. ESG may be mocked in crypto circles, but for publicly listed companies, it’s non-negotiable. Vanar makes block-level energy consumption traceable and measurable. Retail users won’t notice this—but for enterprises filing carbon disclosures, it’s essential. That’s why Vanar feels less like a speculation playground and more like infrastructure for regulated businesses. The ecosystem may look sparse now—almost like a newly built ghost town—but I’d rather build in a clean, compliant, low-cost environment than operate in chaos.
There are risks. The cross-chain bridge remains weak, and asset transfers are not seamless—problematic for DeFi composability. But this may be intentional. The team doesn’t appear focused on attracting speculative liquidity. Instead, tools like Creator Pad suggest an “outside-in” strategy: onboard Web2 creators and IP first, then expand. If successful, that ceiling could exceed projects driven purely by internal speculation cycles.
The market today is noisy. Everyone stares at price charts; few read documentation or test real interactions. Vanar feels like a quiet engineer—no grand narratives, no philosophical slogans. It just builds solid roads and stable infrastructure.
For those building in the AI era, that might be enough. It may not deliver the most explosive gains in the next bull run, but it could prove to be one of the most durable. In uncertain times, stability itself is a competitive advantage.
@Vanarchain $VANRY #Vanar
$PEPE is pushing back into the supply zone around 0.0000038 after a sharp bounce from the lows. That reclaim attempt matters. If it can close strong above 0.0000039, I’m looking for a squeeze toward 0.0000041–0.0000042. Fail here, and this just becomes another lower high inside distribution. #pepe {spot}(PEPEUSDT)
$PEPE is pushing back into the supply zone around 0.0000038 after a sharp bounce from the lows. That reclaim attempt matters.

If it can close strong above 0.0000039, I’m looking for a squeeze toward 0.0000041–0.0000042.

Fail here, and this just becomes another lower high inside distribution.

#pepe
0.19$ ——> 0.55$ Solid 185% gain on $PIPPIN in just 4 days
0.19$ ——> 0.55$

Solid 185% gain on $PIPPIN in just 4 days
$CLO will follow $TAKE Fully oversold coin and created perfect bottom It will be the quickest multiple xs coin we will see Buy the bottom ✍️
$CLO will follow $TAKE

Fully oversold coin and created perfect bottom

It will be the quickest multiple xs coin we will see

Buy the bottom ✍️
$MAGIC weekly double bottom Will bounce hard from here Buy the bottom and have patience
$MAGIC weekly double bottom

Will bounce hard from here

Buy the bottom and have patience
Binance Co-CEO Richard Teng says, the $19B crypto liquidations on Oct. 10 were driven by US-China macro shocks, not Binance.
Binance Co-CEO Richard Teng says, the $19B crypto liquidations on Oct. 10 were driven by US-China macro shocks, not Binance.
Nice to see good positive buying pressure from all the majors today. Binance, Coinbase, ByBit, OKX. $BTC at 68K! {spot}(BTCUSDT)
Nice to see good positive buying pressure from all the majors today.

Binance, Coinbase, ByBit, OKX.

$BTC at 68K!
Someone is scam pumping $BERA ... 🚩 On February 7, a massive $253M worth of tokens unlocked. Instead of the price dropping from the new supply, the token miraculously pulled a 200% pump, jumping from $0.50 all the way to $1.50. It has since settled around $0.86, but that's a lot of action right when investors and contributors got their bags. Stay safe out there.
Someone is scam pumping $BERA ... 🚩

On February 7, a massive $253M worth of tokens unlocked. Instead of the price dropping from the new supply, the token miraculously pulled a 200% pump, jumping from $0.50 all the way to $1.50.

It has since settled around $0.86, but that's a lot of action right when investors and contributors got their bags.

Stay safe out there.
PIPPIN LIMIT SHORT TRADE ENTRY: 0.5508 STOP LOSS: 0.6011 TAKE PROFIT: Take 50% out at 0.31, the rest at 0.193 Leverage: 10X $PIPPIN is very likely to get rejected at that psychological resistance level. In BSC/Solana coins that move similarly, such levels are important. For example look at the triple top on MYX.
PIPPIN LIMIT SHORT TRADE

ENTRY: 0.5508
STOP LOSS: 0.6011
TAKE PROFIT: Take 50% out at 0.31, the rest at 0.193
Leverage: 10X

$PIPPIN is very likely to get rejected at that psychological resistance level.

In BSC/Solana coins that move similarly, such levels are important.

For example look at the triple top on MYX.
Vanar has the potential to become backend infrastructure for Web2 applications — and this isn’t mainly about technical compatibility. It’s about how much blockchain interferes with the user experience. If a Web2 app forces users to deal with wallets, gas fees, or tokens, then regardless of what runs in the background, it stops feeling like Web2. To truly function as backend infrastructure, blockchain must be almost invisible. Most user interactions should remain within familiar, traditional frameworks. The chain should only surface when it’s necessary to record ownership, validate assets, or handle value distribution. From that perspective, Vanar’s ($VANRY) architecture — with its clearer separation between off-chain logic and on-chain settlement — moves in the right direction. Developers can maintain a conventional tech stack for core application logic, while using the blockchain as a final layer for verification and settlement. That separation meaningfully reduces friction. But becoming a backend for Web2 isn’t just about design elegance. It’s also about reliability, predictable costs, and long-term scalability. If Vanar can demonstrate that blockchain can operate as foundational infrastructure without complicating the product experience, then the opportunity is real. If it cannot, the idea will remain more narrative than reality. @Vanar #vanar $VANRY
Vanar has the potential to become backend infrastructure for Web2 applications — and this isn’t mainly about technical compatibility. It’s about how much blockchain interferes with the user experience.
If a Web2 app forces users to deal with wallets, gas fees, or tokens, then regardless of what runs in the background, it stops feeling like Web2. To truly function as backend infrastructure, blockchain must be almost invisible. Most user interactions should remain within familiar, traditional frameworks. The chain should only surface when it’s necessary to record ownership, validate assets, or handle value distribution.
From that perspective, Vanar’s ($VANRY ) architecture — with its clearer separation between off-chain logic and on-chain settlement — moves in the right direction. Developers can maintain a conventional tech stack for core application logic, while using the blockchain as a final layer for verification and settlement. That separation meaningfully reduces friction.
But becoming a backend for Web2 isn’t just about design elegance. It’s also about reliability, predictable costs, and long-term scalability.
If Vanar can demonstrate that blockchain can operate as foundational infrastructure without complicating the product experience, then the opportunity is real. If it cannot, the idea will remain more narrative than reality.
@Vanarchain #vanar $VANRY
Hard Money vs Weak Money Bitcoin
Hard Money vs Weak Money Bitcoin
What’s the real difference between Plasma and Solana when it comes to stablecoin payments?Today I tried to position @Plasma next to Solana — not in terms of TPS, valuation, or hype — but in terms of design philosophy. Specifically: if stablecoins are the focus, how do these two networks differ at the structural level? Solana is undeniably fast. Stablecoins move efficiently, liquidity is deep, and the ecosystem is vibrant. For a startup launching a crypto payment app today, Solana is close to a default choice — the infrastructure, tooling, and users are already there. But Solana wasn’t built specifically for payments. It was built for throughput. DeFi, NFTs, memecoins, trading bots — everything runs on the same shared infrastructure. When the market heats up, the entire network heats up. Payments don’t receive special treatment. From a builder’s standpoint, one issue always stands out: resource contention. The broader the chain’s scope, the more different use cases compete for block space and execution. That diversity is powerful for ecosystem growth — but not necessarily ideal for a settlement layer that prioritizes consistency. If Plasma is truly positioning itself as stablecoin-first, then it’s deliberately choosing a narrower path. It’s not aiming to be an “everything chain.” It’s focusing on stablecoin flow as the core function. That may sound less exciting, but it makes the objective clearer. This isn’t about who’s faster or cheaper. It’s about architectural intent. Solana pushes for maximum performance across all use cases. Plasma, if executed well, optimizes for reliability within a specific one. Payments don’t require extreme TPS. They require predictable fees. They require insulation from speculative surges. They require steady operation through both bull and bear markets. Another important observation: most stablecoin activity today still revolves around trading. On Solana, a large portion of stablecoin flow is tied to DEXs and DeFi. That’s not inherently negative — it simply reflects where demand currently lies. If stablecoins remain primarily internal financial tools within crypto markets, Solana is more than sufficient — arguably ideal. But if Plasma’s thesis ($XPL) is that stablecoins evolve into global payment rails — powering remittances, merchant transactions, and cross-border settlement — then a specialized infrastructure starts to make sense. The key question is whether the market is ready for a chain dedicated almost entirely to stablecoins. Solana’s network effects are powerful: liquidity, developers, users. Competing head-on is extremely difficult. So I don’t view Plasma as a direct competitor today. It feels more like a long-term bet — a wager that stablecoins will eventually decouple from trading and mature into standalone payment infrastructure. If that thesis fails, Plasma will struggle. If it proves correct, Solana may remain strong — but will continue balancing many competing demands on shared resources. Right now, Solana is where capital is flowing. Plasma is where a hypothesis is being tested. I’m not picking sides. I’m watching to see, five years from now, whether stablecoins are primarily used for trading — or for payments. That distinction will ultimately define the divergence between these two paths. @Plasma #Plasma $XPL

What’s the real difference between Plasma and Solana when it comes to stablecoin payments?

Today I tried to position @Plasma next to Solana — not in terms of TPS, valuation, or hype — but in terms of design philosophy. Specifically: if stablecoins are the focus, how do these two networks differ at the structural level?
Solana is undeniably fast. Stablecoins move efficiently, liquidity is deep, and the ecosystem is vibrant. For a startup launching a crypto payment app today, Solana is close to a default choice — the infrastructure, tooling, and users are already there.
But Solana wasn’t built specifically for payments. It was built for throughput. DeFi, NFTs, memecoins, trading bots — everything runs on the same shared infrastructure. When the market heats up, the entire network heats up. Payments don’t receive special treatment.
From a builder’s standpoint, one issue always stands out: resource contention. The broader the chain’s scope, the more different use cases compete for block space and execution. That diversity is powerful for ecosystem growth — but not necessarily ideal for a settlement layer that prioritizes consistency.
If Plasma is truly positioning itself as stablecoin-first, then it’s deliberately choosing a narrower path. It’s not aiming to be an “everything chain.” It’s focusing on stablecoin flow as the core function. That may sound less exciting, but it makes the objective clearer.
This isn’t about who’s faster or cheaper. It’s about architectural intent.
Solana pushes for maximum performance across all use cases.
Plasma, if executed well, optimizes for reliability within a specific one.
Payments don’t require extreme TPS. They require predictable fees. They require insulation from speculative surges. They require steady operation through both bull and bear markets.
Another important observation: most stablecoin activity today still revolves around trading. On Solana, a large portion of stablecoin flow is tied to DEXs and DeFi. That’s not inherently negative — it simply reflects where demand currently lies.
If stablecoins remain primarily internal financial tools within crypto markets, Solana is more than sufficient — arguably ideal.
But if Plasma’s thesis ($XPL ) is that stablecoins evolve into global payment rails — powering remittances, merchant transactions, and cross-border settlement — then a specialized infrastructure starts to make sense.
The key question is whether the market is ready for a chain dedicated almost entirely to stablecoins.
Solana’s network effects are powerful: liquidity, developers, users. Competing head-on is extremely difficult.
So I don’t view Plasma as a direct competitor today. It feels more like a long-term bet — a wager that stablecoins will eventually decouple from trading and mature into standalone payment infrastructure.
If that thesis fails, Plasma will struggle.
If it proves correct, Solana may remain strong — but will continue balancing many competing demands on shared resources.
Right now, Solana is where capital is flowing.
Plasma is where a hypothesis is being tested.
I’m not picking sides. I’m watching to see, five years from now, whether stablecoins are primarily used for trading — or for payments. That distinction will ultimately define the divergence between these two paths.
@Plasma #Plasma $XPL
What advantages would Plasma have if stablecoins become the core infrastructure of crypto? Imagine a future where most on-chain activity revolves around stablecoins. Not meme speculation. Not yield farming. Just capital moving in and out — payments, settlements, liquidity flows. If stablecoins truly become the backbone of the ecosystem, the standards change. The foundation of a financial system cannot be “sometimes fast, sometimes slow” or “sometimes cheap, sometimes expensive.” It needs consistency. It needs predictability. In that scenario, Plasma holds a structural advantage because it was built with stablecoins at its center from day one. It doesn’t compete for block space with countless other narratives. Fewer conflicting use cases. Less reliance on speculative congestion. More focus on optimizing for one core function: stable value transfer. Large general-purpose chains can support stablecoins, but they must constantly balance DeFi, NFTs, memecoins, gaming, and more. Plasma ($XPL) makes a trade-off — sacrificing breadth for specialization and operational stability. So the real question becomes: If stablecoins become crypto’s backbone, will the market value focused infrastructure built specifically for that purpose? Or will it continue to favor broad, multi-use ecosystems? @Plasma #Plasma $XPL
What advantages would Plasma have if stablecoins become the core infrastructure of crypto?
Imagine a future where most on-chain activity revolves around stablecoins. Not meme speculation. Not yield farming. Just capital moving in and out — payments, settlements, liquidity flows.
If stablecoins truly become the backbone of the ecosystem, the standards change. The foundation of a financial system cannot be “sometimes fast, sometimes slow” or “sometimes cheap, sometimes expensive.” It needs consistency. It needs predictability.
In that scenario, Plasma holds a structural advantage because it was built with stablecoins at its center from day one.
It doesn’t compete for block space with countless other narratives. Fewer conflicting use cases. Less reliance on speculative congestion. More focus on optimizing for one core function: stable value transfer.
Large general-purpose chains can support stablecoins, but they must constantly balance DeFi, NFTs, memecoins, gaming, and more. Plasma ($XPL ) makes a trade-off — sacrificing breadth for specialization and operational stability.
So the real question becomes:
If stablecoins become crypto’s backbone, will the market value focused infrastructure built specifically for that purpose? Or will it continue to favor broad, multi-use ecosystems?
@Plasma #Plasma $XPL
🔥 BTC Realized Loss Surpasses $2.3B — Capitulation Signal or Setup for Fresh Volatility?On-chain metrics have just flashed one of the strongest stress signals of this cycle. Bitcoin’s 7-day moving average of Realized Loss has climbed above $2.3 billion — a level that historically appears during intense panic selling or late-stage trend shakeouts. Realized Loss measures the total value of coins sold below their original purchase price. When this metric spikes, it suggests mounting psychological pressure, with short-term holders capitulating and locking in losses. Historically, sharp surges in Realized Loss often mark periods of supply redistribution: Short-term participants exit under pressure Long-term holders step in to absorb liquidity This isn’t merely a sign of weakness — it reflects a restructuring of market ownership. In previous cycles, similar capitulation phases have frequently laid the groundwork for renewed volatility and eventual recovery. If historical behavior holds, the market may currently be experiencing accumulation-driven stress rather than the start of a prolonged downturn. At this stage, capital flows and supply dynamics matter more than short-term price swings. Seasoned investors watch the capitulation process closely — not just the candlesticks. #BTC

🔥 BTC Realized Loss Surpasses $2.3B — Capitulation Signal or Setup for Fresh Volatility?

On-chain metrics have just flashed one of the strongest stress signals of this cycle. Bitcoin’s 7-day moving average of Realized Loss has climbed above $2.3 billion — a level that historically appears during intense panic selling or late-stage trend shakeouts.
Realized Loss measures the total value of coins sold below their original purchase price. When this metric spikes, it suggests mounting psychological pressure, with short-term holders capitulating and locking in losses.
Historically, sharp surges in Realized Loss often mark periods of supply redistribution:
Short-term participants exit under pressure
Long-term holders step in to absorb liquidity
This isn’t merely a sign of weakness — it reflects a restructuring of market ownership. In previous cycles, similar capitulation phases have frequently laid the groundwork for renewed volatility and eventual recovery.
If historical behavior holds, the market may currently be experiencing accumulation-driven stress rather than the start of a prolonged downturn.
At this stage, capital flows and supply dynamics matter more than short-term price swings.
Seasoned investors watch the capitulation process closely — not just the candlesticks.
#BTC
VOLATILITY IS NOISE. INSTITUTIONS ARE STILL ACCUMULATING. Binance CEO Richard Teng pushed back on the panic narrative. He pointed to institutional holdings sitting around 1.3 million $BTC -- stable -- with another 43,000 Bitcoin added globally in January alone. That’s not weak hands. That’s deployed capital adding on volatility. While headlines focus on short-term price swings, institutions are looking at structure: stablecoin usage reportedly tripled last year, total market cap rose roughly 50%, crypto payments are expanding, and real-world asset tokenization is accelerating. Teng says nearly every major financial institution he meets is exploring how to tokenize assets and move trading on-chain for 24/7 access. Traditional exchanges like the NYSE and Nasdaq are pushing toward extended trading hours. Crypto already operates 24/7. The direction of travel is clear: markets are adapting toward crypto’s model, not the other way around. Zoom out four years and Bitcoin has multiplied several times over. Zoom in three months and you get volatility. Institutions aren’t trading three-month charts. They’re positioning for infrastructure-level change. Short-term fear, long-term deployment. That’s a structural bid under this market. 🔥
VOLATILITY IS NOISE. INSTITUTIONS ARE STILL ACCUMULATING.

Binance CEO Richard Teng pushed back on the panic narrative.

He pointed to institutional holdings sitting around 1.3 million $BTC -- stable -- with another 43,000 Bitcoin added globally in January alone. That’s not weak hands. That’s deployed capital adding on volatility.

While headlines focus on short-term price swings, institutions are looking at structure: stablecoin usage reportedly tripled last year, total market cap rose roughly 50%, crypto payments are expanding, and real-world asset tokenization is accelerating. Teng says nearly every major financial institution he meets is exploring how to tokenize assets and move trading on-chain for 24/7 access.

Traditional exchanges like the NYSE and Nasdaq are pushing toward extended trading hours. Crypto already operates 24/7. The direction of travel is clear: markets are adapting toward crypto’s model, not the other way around.

Zoom out four years and Bitcoin has multiplied several times over. Zoom in three months and you get volatility. Institutions aren’t trading three-month charts. They’re positioning for infrastructure-level change.

Short-term fear, long-term deployment. That’s a structural bid under this market. 🔥
JACK DORSEY'S CASH APP DROPS BTC BUY FEES Jack Dorsey's Cash App is eliminating fees on large Bitcoin purchases and recurring $BTC buys, making it cheaper to stack sats. The move could accelerate long-term adoption as more retail investors dollar-cost average into Bitcoin with zero extra fees
JACK DORSEY'S CASH APP DROPS BTC BUY FEES

Jack Dorsey's Cash App is eliminating fees on large Bitcoin purchases and recurring $BTC buys, making it cheaper to stack sats.

The move could accelerate long-term adoption as more retail investors dollar-cost average into Bitcoin with zero extra fees
$BTC Weekly chart WE'RE APPROACHING THE DANGER ZONE ❗️ This is honestly becoming dangerous for Bitcoin Yes, we can still be saved and get another weekly close above our key weekly support (71 000$). However, it becomes less and less likely as we keep dipping more. It is the last minute before midnight for $BTC. Pump now, or die.
$BTC

Weekly chart

WE'RE APPROACHING THE DANGER ZONE ❗️

This is honestly becoming dangerous for Bitcoin

Yes, we can still be saved and get another weekly close above our key weekly support (71 000$).

However, it becomes less and less likely as we keep dipping more.

It is the last minute before midnight for $BTC .

Pump now, or die.
$BTC exactly following my chart ✅ I warned you guys about retest 👇🏻
$BTC exactly following my chart ✅

I warned you guys about retest 👇🏻
$XRP is going to skyrocket today 🚀🌖 retweet & like ❤️
$XRP is going to skyrocket today 🚀🌖 retweet & like ❤️
Bitcoin super cycle is coming. $BTC 🔥🔥
Bitcoin super cycle is coming.

$BTC 🔥🔥
Login to explore more contents
Explore the latest crypto news
⚡️ Be a part of the latests discussions in crypto
💬 Interact with your favorite creators
👍 Enjoy content that interests you
Email / Phone number
Sitemap
Cookie Preferences
Platform T&Cs