All analysts are shouting "Key level 3090, break it and take off," but there's a more painful question no one is asking: is the number you use to judge a "breakthrough" even trustworthy?

In the fragmented ecosystem of the crypto market, differences in Ethereum prices across exchanges and chains are normal. The "3090" on your 4-hour K-line chart might just be an isolated quote from a platform with insufficient trading depth. If this benchmark price is easily manipulated or distorted, then all technical analyses based on it—golden crosses, divergences, breakout signals—are essentially built on quicksand.

That's why infrastructure like decentralized oracles is so critical. They are not meant to predict market trends but to verify data in real-time through a network of distributed nodes, sourcing multiple trusted data feeds worldwide. Using a consensus mechanism, they generate a tamper-proof, verifiable unified price on-chain. This provides traders with a reference closer to the real market conditions.

Think about it from another angle: when you analyze whether "ETH has volume and breaks 3090," you first need to clarify—which 3090 are you talking about? The real-time quote from a specific exchange? Or on-chain data that has undergone multiple layers of verification and reflects the true global liquidity? For those making decisions based on tiny price points (stop-loss, risk management, trend judgment), the quality of the data source directly determines success or failure.

So, as Ethereum faces a turning point, don’t just focus on MACD and news. More importantly, reflect on your information chain: is your data source transparent? Is the price data tamper-proof and verifiable? In a market dominated by algorithms and liquidity, the biggest hidden risk is not necessarily making the wrong call, but that the "facts" you rely on are already distorted.

In the next cycle, true competitiveness may lie in who can first build a "trustworthy data moat." Because no matter how sophisticated your trading strategy, it ultimately depends on the underlying truth.