Last night, BTC failed to break through $95,000 and entered a period of consolidation with decreasing volume, currently hovering around $93,050. As recent geopolitical events' sentiments are gradually digested, the market lacks new upward momentum in the short term, further compressing space.

More notably, the Supreme Court of the United States' tariff case ruling—likely to be announced this Friday—represents the biggest macro uncertainty at the start of 2026. This directly concerns the direction of the dollar and subsequently influences capital flow pricing in the crypto market. The market's reaction to this is likely to exceed expectations.

From the perspective of mining companies, pressure is evident. Marathon Digital transferred 519 BTC overnight to trading platforms, worth approximately $48.3 million. This is not an isolated case—the entire mining sector has been frequently cashing out above $90,000 to supplement operational funds for 2026, creating persistent selling pressure from the top. This phenomenon indicates that even at relatively high levels, mining companies are preparing for potential difficult times.

There are new developments on exchanges. A leading platform announced the launch of spot trading for the ZK co-processor project BREV, and to optimize the market ecosystem, it has suspended low-liquidity trading pairs such as ETH-DAI, FLOW-USDT, and MANA-ETH. This reflects the top exchanges' strategic shift towards "reducing costs and increasing efficiency."

Discussions about stablecoins have also cooled down. Princeton researchers pointed out that the previously proposed "stablecoin-backed government bonds" plan by the Treasury faces practical issues—stablecoin scale is far from enough to alleviate trillion-level debt pressures. This has dealt a cold shower to the overly optimistic narratives around stablecoins.

Additionally, Flow's official team disclosed a review report of the security incident at the end of December, involving a type confusion vulnerability in the Cadence virtual machine. Although it did not cause significant asset losses, this technical flaw has once again prompted the market to scrutinize the underlying security of non-EVM chains.