CORE (CORE)Price Live Chart, Prediction, Market Cap, Token Unlocks, CORE Concept Stocks WalletJYS

BTC

$62,990.01

+0.29%

/CORE Price

CORE

No.589

$0.01973

+7.46%

≈$0.02

Market Cap

$41.31M

Cir. Cap

$21.14M

Cir. Supply

1.07B

Cir. Rate

51.1751%

Total Supply

2.09B

Max Supply

2.1B

24h Volume

$335.76M

24h Vol (BTC)

6.56M

24h Turnover

31.020169%

Market Share

0.00%

Performance

Low

0.02

Range

+0.11%

High

0.02

Listing

$4.79

ATH (2026-02-01)

$6.47

-99.69%

ATL (2023-02-08)

$0.01506

+31.01%

Official

Contract

CORE: 0xeeee...eeeeee

Official

Whitepaper

Social

Network

Converter

Chart

Market

About

Price

Cap

K-line

Depth

1 Minute

5 Minutes

15 Minutes

1 Hour

4 Hours

1 Day

TradingView

+0.56%

24H

+7.46%

+4.45%

30D

-22.17%

-96.1%

All

-99.59%

AI Assistant

CORE下跌原因

CORE资金流向

CORE买卖支撑位

CORE多空比分析

CORE趋势分析

Ask AI

CORE Market

CEX Spot

CEX Derivatives

Pairs

#	Exchange	Pairs	Price	+2%Depth	-2%Depth	Volume (24h)
1	Hotbit	COREUSDT	0.0195	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	2,929
2	CoinEx	COREUSDT	0.019549	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	3,450
3	OKX	COREUSDC	0.01958	$23,521.81	$24,674.18	41,680
4	BingX	COREUSDT	0.01955	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	51,091
5	Bitunix	COREUSDT	0.01954	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	81,611
6	Bybit	COREUSDT	0.01958	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	84,391
7	gate.io	COREUSDT	0.019564	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	102,078
8	MEXC Global	COREUSDT	0.01957	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	116,228
9	Bitget	COREUSDT	0.01959	$43,366.75	$47,984.05	209,414
10	LBank	coreusdt	0.01957	--	--	383,268

11 items

Rows

#	Unlock Date	Unlock Amount	Unlock Value	Total Supply %	Unlock Details
No Data

About CORE

CORE is the native utility and governance token of the Core blockchain, an EVM-compatible Layer 1 built on Bitcoin infrastructure. It has a maximum supply of 2.1 billion tokens with a hard cap similar to Bitcoin, following a scarcity-driven value model. As of late 2024, its circulating supply stands at approximately 1.24 billion tokens with a market capitalization in the hundreds of millions of dollars, positioning it as a leading Bitcoin DeFi ecosystem.

66%

33%

Bullish

Bearish

Community

CryptoPotato Official

4h ago

📜 Cryptocurrency Today (1997): On August 1, 1997, Adam Back released the Hashcash proposal, introducing the Proof-of-Work (PoW) system to combat spam. This mechanism later became the core consensus foundation of Bitcoin.

374

Mario Nawfal

4h ago

Netanyahu's plan has always been to have the United States confront Iran on their behalf. Israel is a powerful military force, but its geography, manpower, and economic conditions pose significant constraints. Iran has a population roughly ten times that of Israel, a vast industrial base, strategic depth, and defensible terrain. No Israeli government can truly expect to conquer or occupy a country of such size. Instead, a more realistic strategic objective for Israel is to persuade the United States to shoulder the burden of the conflict. If Washington commits carrier strike groups, long-range bombers, missile defense systems, intelligence resources, and precision-guided weapons, Israel will gain capabilities it could never achieve on its own. Meanwhile, most of the costs are shifted to the United States. Iran is forced to deplete its missiles, drones, and military resources in a US-led military operation, while simultaneously suffering a double blow to its infrastructure and economy. From Israel's perspective, the cost-effectiveness becomes exceptionally favorable. A weakened Iran, weakened economically, diplomatically, and internally, will significantly diminish its influence throughout the region. Whether this translates to regime change, long-term containment, or merely strategic paralysis remains to be seen, but weakening Iran's influence has always been a core objective for Israel. However, a significant risk exists. If the American public increasingly believes that the human, financial, and political capital invested by the United States is primarily used to advance the strategic goals of other countries, then approval ratings for US-Israel relations could decline as we are currently seeing. This would constitute a profound and long-term strategic setback. The ultimate outcome will not depend on airstrikes or missile interceptions. It will depend on the state of Iran after the war. If Tehran is militarily weakened and economically isolated, Israel will claim a strategic success. But if Iran retains its offensive capabilities, strengthens regional partnerships, secures economic concessions, and demonstrates greater resilience than before, then this campaign may ultimately not be remembered as a strategic victory.

312

SOL I don't understand

7h ago

After reviewing the expenditures of the six major companies, what I want to say isn't that big companies are burning through cash again. Rather, the market's assessment of AI is shifting from one question to another: Previously, the question was: "Will AI capital expenditures be too high?" Now, the question is: "If we don't continue investing, will our computing power be insufficient?" This is the core reason for the recent strong rebound in storage, HBM, and semiconductors. Several changes make this clear. Google raised its 2026 Capex guidance from $180-190 billion to $195-205 billion. Meta initially only gave $115-135 billion, but subsequently revised it upwards, and it's now at $130-145 billion. Intel continues to increase its investment in advanced process technologies, foundry services, and packaging capacity. Tesla is also continuing to invest in Dojo computing power, robotic production lines, and factory expansion. While Microsoft slightly lowered its full-year capital expenditure forecast from $190 billion to $175 billion due to accounting adjustments, the key point isn't that it's stopped investing, but rather that its investment in AI hardware and computing power hasn't shrunk; the overall scale of investment remains far higher than last year. This illustrates one point: The AI capital expenditure cycle is still being forcibly pushed forward. Moreover, this round of investment isn't simply about buying a few GPUs. Behind an AI data center lies an entire industry chain: GPU/ASIC chips HBM high-bandwidth memory Server DRAM Enterprise-grade SSDs Advanced packaging Optical modules Power equipment Liquid cooling Data center land and power grid So why has the storage sector rebounded so strongly recently? Because the market suddenly realized: If cloud providers continue to expand AI data centers, then storage demand is unlikely to cool down quickly. Companies like Micron, SK Hynix, and Samsung are no longer just traditional DRAM cyclical stocks. They are now more like "capacity sellers" in the AI infrastructure chain. GPUs are responsible for computing. HBM (Hardware Bus) feeds the data. DRAM handles the operation. SSDs store the data. The larger the data center, the more exorbitant the storage consumption. Previously, the storage industry focused on smartphones, PCs, and inventory cycles. Now it's different. Now we need to look at: Google Cloud growth; Microsoft Azure growth; Meta data center expansion; Tesla robotics and self-driving technology; AI inference throughput; HBM supply and demand gap; Enterprise-grade SSD prices. This is why storage stocks rebound so sharply. Because the market was previously focused on two expectations: First, whether the AI caps had peaked; Second, whether the storage price surge would end. Now, with the release of major companies' earnings reports and guidance, the market has discovered: money is still being poured in, demand is still there, and capacity expansion hasn't stopped. Therefore, the previously suppressed storage valuations will quickly recover. But investors should remain calm. A sharp rebound doesn't mean there are no risks. The biggest problem in the AI hardware chain right now isn't a lack of compelling narratives, but rather overly optimistic expectations. If cloud providers slow down their Capex projections, or storage prices stall, stock prices will likely plummet. Therefore, my focus in this sector isn't on whether to chase it or not. The key is to look at three things: Are major vendors continuing to revise their Capex projections upwards? Are HBM/DRAM/SSD prices continuing to improve? Can cloud revenue prove that the money spent isn't wasted? If all three remain intact, the storage theme hasn't been disproven. If any one of these weakens, you need to reassess your position. This storage rebound, superficially a stock price correction, is actually driven by the ongoing global AI capital expenditure cycle. Short-term prices are driven by sentiment. Mid-term prices are driven by rising prices. Long-term prices depend on whether AI data centers can sustain their expansion.

445

Mars Finance

8h ago

25-Year-Old OpenAI Prodigy Dragging Global Stock Market Investors Down with Him Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former core member of OpenAI, founded the hedge fund Situational Awareness at the age of 25. He heavily invested in AI hardware stocks and operated with high leverage, achieving a 439% return in six months and managing nearly $45 billion in assets. However, the fund collapsed due to a forced liquidation triggered by a sharp drop in AI tech stocks. His heavily invested hardware stocks, such as SK Hynix and Micron, fell by more than 35% in a single month, while the software stocks he shorted rebounded. Ultimately, Citadel acquired $16 billion of his holdings at a drastic price, highlighting the enormous risks of high-leverage betting on a single trend.

365

Lava Network 🌋

18h ago

July Ecosystem Conference Call 🌋 • RPC fees hit a record high of approximately €25,000, a 38.7% increase month-over-month. • Gateway V2 has been released, supporting self-registration and Stripe payments with a seamless process. • A partnership with @ErigonETH was announced. Paolo Rebuffo will be present to discuss Ethereum archiving infrastructure and zero-knowledge proofs (ZK). Revenue growth. Product release. Ethereum core contributors also attended the call.

385

Raoul Pal

23h ago

If you want to survive in the cryptocurrency space, you must accept its true nature. You will experience 35% pullbacks, even 50% drawdowns. But if you truly understand the assets you hold, these are insignificant. Your core holdings should be a few truly long-term value networks that are widely accepted. If you do this right, drawdowns are no longer frightening; they become crucial. Because this is a long-term battle. I believe these networks will become a retirement safety net for an entire generation. You can't achieve this through trading. You need to build an investment logic, accumulate continuously, reserve some funds to cope with large sell-offs, and then let time and widespread adoption work. Volatility is a necessary price to pay for entering this space. Ultimately, those who succeed are those who are no longer afraid of volatility.

418

zhao

07-31 23:35

I've been following TRON DeFi Summer S1 closely these past few days, and it's clear the event is entering its final sprint. Core asset pools like TRX, JST, SUN, and USDD still offer Boosted APR incentives. You can directly view participation methods and real-time yields for different asset pools by accessing #JustLendDAO through @binancezh Wallet DeFi. Currently, the highest Boosted APR reaches 62.61%, and there's a $2.15 million prize pool waiting for users to participate in. For users who already hold these assets, it's a good time to learn more before the event ends and choose pools that suit your strategy. 🌊 @trondaoCN @SUNWUKONG_ZH @usddio_cn @justinsuntron @TRONDAO #TRONEcoStar

322

Filecoin TL;DR

07-31 22:41

The "Export" button only covers one of the eight layers that constitute true data portability. In short: the "Export" button only covers one of the eight layers of data portability. WM Technology paid $2.3 million for unused AWS capacity. Filecoin CID proves the data has not been tampered with, while Onchain Cloud covers the rest. 1/ Illusion Based on the framework built by standard institutions and enterprise architectural practices, the "Export" button only covers one of the eight different layers that constitute true data portability. Most companies stop here, believing the whole problem is solved. 2/ Cost WM Technology, the parent company of Weedmaps, reduced its AWS usage to below the contractual minimum in fiscal year 2025, and therefore set aside $2.3 million in loss reserves, as disclosed in its financial filings. It paid for the capacity it had already optimized for on AWS. 3/ Who Said? Security researcher and author Bruce Schneier wrote on his blog in December 2025, “When you own and control highly intact data storage,” external systems cannot manipulate a company’s perception of its own information. 4/ Where Exports Fail Even complete data exports can fail at layer 5 of the eight-layer framework: verifying that the transmitted bytes have not been tampered with. Most cloud exports lack built-in verification mechanisms, relying entirely on trust in the provider rather than solid evidence. 5/ What Filecoin Addresses The Content Identifier (CID) built into the Filecoin protocol addresses this deficiency. A CID is a cryptographic hash of the data itself, so any file retrieved after any transfer can be compared to the original without relying on any promises from the provider. 6/ Achieving the Goal Portability requires passing all eight layers of verification within the framework. The core of Filecoin Onchain Cloud lies in its identifiers, standard interfaces, and pricing; these are the cornerstones of the company's business, not a seemingly legitimate but actually vulnerable export button. Beyond a simple export function:

354

zhao

07-31 22:34

Recently, the most noticeable thing about the TRON ecosystem is that DeFi Summer S1 is entering its final sprint. Core asset pools such as TRX, JST, SUN, and USDD are still retaining Boosted APR incentives. You can check the real-time status of different asset pools by accessing #JustLendDAO through @binancezh Wallet DeFi. The current highest Boosted APR is 62.61%, and there's also a $2.15 million prize pool waiting to be shared by participating users. For users who already hold these assets, it's advisable to pay close attention to the event's progress during this period, understand the risks and rules, and choose a participation method that suits you. 🌊 @trondaoCN @SUNWUKONG_ZH @usddio_cn @justinsuntron @TRONDAO #TRONEcoStar

335

Chain Research Institute | AI First 🔶💧

07-31 21:27

The most surreal aspect of this AI earnings season is how the market is repricing several giants. The same massive AI bets are being treated drastically differently. $MSFT $AMZN After the market closed on July 29th, Microsoft's stock rose 9% after releasing its earnings report. On the same day, Meta's stock fell as much as 8.3% after its earnings report. Both companies are pouring money into AI, yet the treatment they receive is worlds apart. I've been watching these earnings reports for two days, and my conclusion is straightforward: the market no longer cares who's betting heavily on AI. The narrative of 2023, where anything related to AI would rise, is over. Now, the market only asks one question: does your AI strategy make sense? I. The Pricing Logic Has Changed: From Narrative to Accounting The old logic was simple. You said you were going to do AI, and the market would give you a valuation. It was a competition of who could shout the loudest and who could invest the most. Now it's different. Microsoft, Google, Meta, and Amazon all released their reports in the same week, with capex in the hundreds of billions, yet their reactions were completely different. The market only cares about one thing: whether the money was well spent and whether it can be recouped. I break down the market's reaction; it's actually going through four hurdles: First, has the growth rate accelerated? If cloud business is still accelerating, the market is reassured. Microsoft's intelligent cloud and Google Cloud are both exceeding expectations in growth, providing confidence. Second, has unit economics improved? For every dollar invested in AI, is the return more than before? Self-developed chips are a key variable in this hurdle, which I'll discuss later. Third, is there external support for demand? Simply saying demand is strong isn't enough; there must be contracts. RPO (Residual Performance Obligation) and backlog are the most valued evidence by the market. The fourth hurdle is hidden underneath: can the timing mismatch of cash flow be controlled? If you burn through tens of billions this year, and the cash won't be returned for five years, can the market tolerate that gap? Google's penalty stemmed primarily from questions surrounding this hurdle. Passing three out of four hurdles earns a reward. Failing even one results in a direct valuation drop. II. Three living examples: Different hurdles passed, different treatment. Microsoft passed three hurdles. Azure's growth is accelerating, and RPO backlogs are hitting new highs, proving that enterprise AI demand is genuine. Even more ingeniously, Microsoft adjusted its capex accounting, extending building depreciation from 15 years to 25 years and shifting some leases from financing to operating. The market interprets this as proactive cash flow management; while capex figures appear lower, actual investment hasn't stopped. Demand exists, and the accounts are clear, leading to a 9% after-hours rise. Google passed two and a half hurdles. Google Cloud grew 82% year-over-year, with its backlog reaching $514 billion, making it the most successful at validating demand. However, its quarterly capex surged to $44.9 billion, and its full-year guidance was revised upwards to $195 billion to $205 billion, causing free cash flow to turn negative to -$5.86 billion. The market initially fell by about 4%, concerned about cash flow mismatch. But its demand was genuine, so it wasn't severely impacted. Meta failed to pass any hurdle. Second-quarter revenue was $60.8 billion, a 28% year-over-year increase, which looks good. But free cash flow was only $784 million, a sharp 91% year-over-year drop. Net profit was $15.8 billion, a 14% year-over-year decline. Capex continued to rise, with full-year guidance at $130 billion to $145 billion. Most critically, the AI investment didn't generate incremental revenue in its core business, and the two return paths of computing power rental and enterprise services hadn't yet proven successful. The market voted with its feet, with the stock falling 8.3% in after-hours trading. The same AI story: Microsoft was seen as the right solution, while Meta was seen as a gambler. The difference lies in how robust the financial statements are. III. The Significant Difference in Payback Periods: Self-Developed Chips are the Watershed. The market is scrutinizing financial statements, with a key metric being the payback period. Third-party calculations show Google Cloud's payback period is approximately 2.5 years, AWS about 4 years, and Microsoft about 6 years. Where does this difference come from? The core lies in self-developed chips. Unit computing power cost: GB200 is approximately $2.28 per GPU-hour, Google TPU v7 is approximately $0.96, and Amazon Trainium3 is approximately $0.78-$0.86. Google and Amazon develop their own chips, reducing costs and achieving faster payback. Microsoft heavily relies on Nvidia, suffering cost disadvantages and experiencing slower payback. This is why the market is more tolerant of Google than Meta. Google's self-developed stack can justify its cost reduction strategy, while Meta's computing power is largely purchased, burning money without demonstrating profitability. IV. Which Types of Companies Are Favored? By reviewing the seven companies, the characteristics of those currently favored by the market are quite clear. First, verifiable demand. They have cloud backlog, RPO, and large customer contracts. Google Cloud's $514 billion backlog is the best safeguard. Second, improving unit economics. Either they are reducing costs through self-developed chips (Google, Amazon), or their cloud business profit margins are increasing (Microsoft, Google Cloud profits have tripled). Third, those selling shovels are the most stable. Nvidia basically doesn't have a capex burden; customers borrow money to buy its cards, and it directly collects payment. It's the most favored in this round, with the simplest logic. Fourth, controllable cash flow mismatch. They dare to burn money, but the market can see the recovery path, and the timing mismatch shouldn't be too outrageous. Conversely, the characteristics of those not favored are also obvious. Heavy asset investment with an unverifiable return path (Meta's current predicament), pure cash burning without visible revenue growth, or like Apple, AI investment being eroded by hardware price increases and consumer apathy. SpaceX and Musk's approach is different. Acquiring Cursor, leasing computing power, and integrating xAI, they follow a vertically integrated route of computing power, applications, and terminals, neither building a general-purpose cloud nor commoditizing models. The market hasn't yet given it a clear pricing anchor; it's more like betting on whether Musk can succeed. V. A Major Overlooked Risk: Off-Balance Sheet Leverage (The part beneath the iceberg)The seven major AI companies' ASC 842 operating lease commitments total approximately $1.2 trillion, which are off-balance-sheet liabilities. Microsoft shifted some leases from financing to operating, seemingly reducing capex, but the off-balance-sheet commitments actually rose to $329.1 billion. The current cash flow pressure may only be the tip of the iceberg. The commoditization of AI models is also changing the rules. Open-source models are catching up with closed-source ones; DeepSeek-V4-Pro scores 65.1 overall, GPT-5.4 scores 67.3, prices have dropped 1000 times, and usage has increased 10,000 times. Those who truly profited from this wave were those selling computing power and building cloud infrastructure. Those who bought models missed out. This earnings season clarifies one thing: AI is no longer a magic buzzword that can cover up everything. The market is starting to examine the fundamentals. If you can demonstrate demand, explain cost reduction, and make cash flow mismatches manageable, prices will rise. If you can't prove it, no amount of money can change the fundamental problem. For the next few quarters, just keep an eye on three things: the backlog of cloud orders, whether prices are still rising, whether self-developed chips can reduce costs, and whether free cash flow can avoid becoming a major deficit. If these three things pass, the company will be viewed favorably. If they don't...

425