The Truth About Diamond Sword Warriors: Even Institutions Are "Crying" Over Their Holdings and Positions. They are experiencing significant losses and emotional distress as the market fluctuates, revealing the hidden struggles behind the seemingly brave front of these warriors. Despite their fierce appearance, they are also vulnerable to the unpredictable tides of the market, and their "tears" reflect the harsh reality faced by many investors and organizations alike.

Diamond Knife believers are not few, but when the market truly tests itself, even the most steadfast holders begin to feel uneasy. After reviewing the holdings of several leading institutions, a very real problem becomes apparent: even institutional funds that pride themselves as “professional investors” are starting to worry about their accounting pressures.

From Faith to Pressure: The Passive Choices of Micro Strategies

As the most symbolic publicly traded company in the crypto industry, MicroStrategy has long been a benchmark for institutional Bitcoin allocation. The company’s approximately 710,000 BTC has a cost basis stabilized at $76,037, a strategic high point considered a golden level for layout back then. But now, Bitcoin hovers around $70,000 (latest data shows $70.16K), meaning the once-large paper profits have significantly shrunk.

Last year, the confident narrative about “digital gold” seemed grand, but in the ongoing price fluctuations, it now appears somewhat pale. Analysts earning millions annually have to face this reality: every dip in holdings could mean a reduction in year-end bonuses.

The Heavy Blow of Paper Losses: How Institutional Giants Respond

More severe than MicroStrategy is Tom Lee’s Bitmine. This investment firm has a position of 4.24 million ETH, with an average cost locked at a high of $3,849. Currently, ETH is trading around $2,110 (real-time data shows $2.11K), which means unrealized losses have reached nearly $5.9 billion, with a loss ratio exceeding 36%.

This is not a few thousand dollars loss that retail investors can bear, but real, billions of dollars in actual money. Every ETH decline is a direct blow to the confidence of these institutions.

A more dangerous situation appears in the holdings of Yi Lihua. Holding 650,000 ETH with leverage significantly amplifies the risk, with liquidation lines near $1,880. Compared to the current price of $2,110, the buffer space is less than $600. If any market correction breaks through this line, billions of dollars could evaporate in an instant.

Diamond Knife or Cardboard Knife? The Market’s Answer

In the past, headlines about “Institutional Bull Market Initiated” and “Wall Street Recognizes Crypto Assets” flooded the media, cheering for these “smart money” entries. But the truth has proven that the timing of entry is often severely underestimated. Whether it’s a loss or a trap, the market’s rules do not change based on the participant’s identity.

There’s an interesting paradox here: fund managers manage LP money, and when their accounts decline, they face a crisis of confidence and pressure from year-end evaluations; ordinary investors lose their own real money, but may have stronger psychological resilience.

In such an environment, a deeper question emerges—when even professional investors with research teams, data support, and market experience are on the verge of cutting losses, what should ordinary people believe? Trust professional institutions’ judgments? Or trust that the market is always right?

The answer may surprisingly be simple: do not blindly follow any authority, nor let your greed control you. The essence of the Diamond Knife is not blind steadfastness, but a rational long-term belief. When the logic of holdings no longer holds, and risks have exceeded your capacity to bear, even the most hardened investors need to reassess their decisions.

The market never distinguishes between retail and institutional investors; it only cares about the price at which you buy and whether you remain rational.