Family, this round of BCH market movement has caused panic in the community—"Short at 630 or 650?" "Break previous high, chase or not?" Various analysts are analyzing support and resistance levels with candlestick charts, full of routines. But the question is, are these seemingly professional judgments really reliable?

I've been in this circle for 5 years, and now I finally see a harsh reality: the points, resistances, and supports you’re obsessing over are actually superficial. What truly determines whether your account profits or loses isn’t how the candlesticks are drawn, but whether the data you use is genuine or not.

Imagine this scenario—what you see as "strong resistance levels" might actually be illusions created by thin trading on a certain DEX; the "real-time quotes" you watch could be lagging behind the actual market by several seconds; when you place an order based on technical analysis signals, big players have already harvested profits with accurate data. 99% of people lose money, and they lose before making decisions because their entire judgment system is built on sand.

This also explains why more and more traders and developers in the market are paying attention to **data credibility**. In the crypto market, information asymmetry is deadly. Multi-source data aggregation, cryptographic verification of authenticity, on-chain transparent records—these should be the infrastructure of trading. When you see BCH’s quote, can you verify whether it’s genuinely aggregated from multiple channels like Binance, DEX, etc.? The importance of this question is what the community should truly be thinking about.

The next market winners won’t be those who guess the levels most accurately, but those who can find the most authentic data sources.