In the past 24 hours, Bitcoin was up 0.1% and Ethereum was up 2.1% to trade at $2,521 mark. Among the major altcoins, BNB, XRP, Solana, Tron, Dogecoin rallied upto 2% whereas Hyperliquid and Cardano were down respectively.

Also Read | Explained: Want to build a corpus with a Rs 15,000 monthly SIP? Know Rule 15*15*30The global crypto market capitalisation was up 0.4% to $2.73 trillion, according to Coingecko.

Nischal Shetty, Founder, WazirX said Ethereum is holding relatively firm near $2,450, market sentiment remains in Greed, and Bitcoin continues to trade above its 200-week moving average.

Live Events

“Markets are turning more cautious as sticky inflation gives the Fed less room to ease and has pushed expectations for a rate hike next week significantly higher.”
Technically, Bitcoin is at an important level. $76K is the immediate support, with $75.5K the level bulls really need to defend. Ethereum is holding the $2,400–$2,425 support band, while $2,500–$2,525 remains the immediate resistance, Shetty further said.Over the last week, Bitcoin was down 2.9% and Ethereum was up 2.8%. Among the major altcoins, BNB and Tron were up 1.2% and 2.5% respectively whereas XRP, Solana, Hyperliquid, Dogecoin, and Cardano corrected upto 6.4%.

Riya Sehgal, Research Analyst, Delta Exchange said crypto markets saw sharp two-way volatility after the latest U.S. CPI release, with Bitcoin briefly pushing toward $79K–$80K before giving back most of the move.

“Roughly $750 million in leveraged crypto positions were liquidated over 24 hours, with both shorts and longs caught during the rapid reversal. The initial upside squeeze forced bearish positions out, while the failed breakout later pressured late buyers.”

Also Read | SIF AUM rises 34% to Rs 31,175 crore in August; inflows jump 56% MoM: Report

The next major catalyst is the September 15–16 FOMC meeting, where policy guidance and the rate outlook are likely to drive the next major move, Sehgal further said.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Sensex, which had dropped around 740 points in the morning, recovered 622 points to close at 74,782. Nifty 50, which had fallen below 23,250, rebounded 167 points to end the session near 23,400. Despite the sharp recovery, the Indian stock market overall closed in the red, with Sensex down 121 points and Nifty down 80 points.

Analyst Sudeep Shah, Vice President and Head of Technical & Derivatives Research at SBI Securities, interacted with ETMarkets regarding the outlook for the Nifty, options data as well as an index strategy for the upcoming week. The following are the edited excerpts from his chat:

1.) Nifty down 2% this week, how are charts looking and what strategy should traders adopt?

For the fifth consecutive week, the benchmark index Nifty ended in negative territory, reflecting the persistent weakness in market sentiment. The index declined nearly 2% during the week and formed a sizeable bearish candle with a lower shadow, indicating that despite some buying interest at lower levels, selling pressure continues to dominate the broader trend. However, domestic equities did not weaken in isolation, with overseas developments further exacerbating market pressure.
Those global developments were dominated by the escalation in geopolitical tensions between US and Iran. Brent crude oil prices witnessed a sharp surge, while the US 10-year bond yield climbed to 4.97%, its highest level since October 2023. The combination of rising crude prices, elevated bond yields and geopolitical uncertainty significantly dented investor sentiment. And as these concerns intensified, the selling pressure on Nifty gradually transformed from a controlled decline into a much sharper correction.

Live Events

That sharper correction becomes evident when we look at the index’s journey since its recent peak. After marking a high of 24,774 in the first week of August, Nifty gradually moved lower, with the pace of the decline accelerating significantly during the previous week. From its recent high, the index has tumbled more than 1,500 points, or over 6%, in just 29 trading sessions. The magnitude and speed of this fall have now started leaving a much clearer imprint on the index’s technical structure.
That deterioration is visible across multiple technical parameters. Nifty has slipped below its crucial short and long-term moving averages, reinforcing the bearish undertone. Momentum indicators and oscillators are also portraying a weak picture. The daily RSI is currently at 27.66 and remains in a falling mode, while the weekly RSI is approaching the crucial 40 mark and continues to trend lower. With momentum weakening across timeframes, the market is now approaching a zone where the next move could become particularly important.That makes the 23,100–23,000 zone a crucial area to watch in the coming sessions. This zone represents a strong confluence of the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement of the previous rally from 22,182 to 24,774 and a prior swing low. A decisive break below the 23000 mark could open the door for further downside towards 22,800, followed by 22,500.

On the upside, the 23,600–23,650 zone will act as a crucial hurdle for the index. A sustained move above this zone could provide the first indication that the selling pressure is beginning to ease. Until then, the battle between the crucial support near 23,000 and resistance around 23,650 is likely to decide whether Nifty is preparing for a rebound or another leg of the correction.

2.) Given the uncertainty around Iran war and rising yields, what should traders watch out for?

Given the uncertainty surrounding the Iran conflict and the recent rise in bond yields, traders should remain cautious and avoid taking overleveraged positions in the current volatile environment. Risk management and disciplined position sizing will be key until market conditions stabilize.

From a technical perspective, traders should closely monitor the 23,100-23,000 support zone on the Nifty, which remains a critical near-term level. A sustained breach below this range could lead to further downside pressure, while holding above it may help the index stabilize and attempt a recovery.

3.) India VIX has climbed 13% in the last 5 days. What is it indicating?

India VIX has given a breakout from a downward-sloping trendline on the daily chart. The volatility index had found strong support in the 9.7–9.5 zone and subsequently consolidated within a narrow range before starting to move higher. The recent rise in volatility comes amid heightened tensions in the Middle East, rising crude oil prices and higher bond yields in the US and Japan.

Despite the prolonged uncertain environment, Indian VIX has so far remained relatively subdued and has not reacted as sharply as one might have expected. From a technical perspective, it is still too early to conclude that we are witnessing the beginning of a significant spike in volatility. However, a sustained move above the 13–13.5 zone could signal a meaningful rise in volatility and potentially have a stronger impact on broader market movements.

4.) Metal stocks witnessed downturn on Friday after bond yields rose. How can one trade Vedanta, Hindustan Copper, NALCO, and Vedanta Aluminum?

Vedanta slipped below its 200-day EMA during the session, but strong buying at lower levels helped the stock reclaim and close above this key long-term moving average. The stock has largely been consolidating in the Rs 250–290 range for nearly two months. A decisive breakout on either side of this range will provide further directional cues.

Hindustan Copper has been forming a symmetrical triangle pattern on the weekly chart. The Rs 620–630 zone is likely to act as immediate resistance, while Rs 460–470 is likely to provide immediate support. The falling ADX indicates a lack of strong directional volatility. A decisive breakout from the triangle will provide further directional cues.

NALCO has been witnessing a phase of distribution following a strong run. The stock has been consolidating within a broad Rs 329–445 range since the beginning of the year, largely oscillating within this band. A decisive breakout on either side of the range will provide further directional cues.

Vedanta Aluminium continues to have a relatively weak technical setup. Since its demerger, the stock has largely remained sideways to bearish. The Rs 428–430 zone is likely to act as immediate resistance. As long as the stock trades below this zone, the overall bias is likely to remain weak.

5.) Can you pick 5 stocks that look good on the charts for the coming week?

Based on the current technical setup, LIC Housing Finance, Emcure Pharmaceuticals, Five-Star Business Finance, VA Tech Wabag and PNB Housing Finance are among the stocks that appear well-positioned for the coming week.

(This article has been written by Veer Sharma, who is not a SEBI-registered Research Analyst or an Investment Adviser. Veer Sharma and his/her ‘relative(s)’ (as defined under Section 2(77) of the Companies Act, 2013) do not hold any financial interest in the companies mentioned in this article as of the date of publication. The views/recommendations mentioned in this article, wherever applicable, are those of the respective SEBI-registered Research Analyst/brokerage and have been reproduced/reported with due attribution. They should not be construed as the views or recommendations of The Economic Times Digital or the journalist. Readers are advised to consider the original research report and make their investment decisions based on their own assessment. Brokerage disclaimers here

Apple unveiled its latest premium smartphone lineup, the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max, at its “Surprise and Shine” event on Sept. 9, setting up pre-orders that open Saturday, Sept. 12, at 5 a.m. Pacific time ahead of official store availability on Sept. 18.

Unlike some past generations, where the larger Pro Max model came with meaningful performance or camera advantages over its smaller sibling, this year’s lineup is nearly identical across the board. According to Apple’s own published specifications, the two phones differ on essentially four points: screen size, physical dimensions and weight, battery life ratings, and price. Everything else — from the processor to the camera system to charging speeds — is shared equally between the two models.

Same chip, same cameras, same colors

Both the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are powered by Apple’s new A20 Pro chip, built on a 3-nanometer process and described by the company as its fastest ever, designed to run what Apple calls the “most advanced on-device” version of its Apple Intelligence AI tools. Both models pair that chip with a hexa-core processor and Apple’s 6-core GPU.

Camera hardware is also identical across both sizes, with each phone featuring a triple-camera system built around a 48-megapixel main sensor with variable aperture. Storage and memory configurations line up as well, with both offering 12GB of RAM and options ranging up to 2TB of storage on the larger model, and up to 1TB on the smaller one in some configurations.

Design language also carries over unchanged from last year’s iPhone 17 Pro lineup. Both the 18 Pro and 18 Pro Max keep an aluminum frame and a large rear camera bar, continuing Apple’s move away from the titanium builds used during the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro era. Both phones use Apple’s new Ceramic Shield 2 glass on the front for display protection, are rated IP68 for water and dust resistance, and come in the same four color options: black, silver, glacier and burgundy.

One notable shared upgrade this year is a smaller Dynamic Island cutout at the top of the display, freeing up additional screen space and allowing users to track three live activities simultaneously in the Dynamic Island interface, up from two on previous models.

Where the two phones actually differ

The most obvious distinction between the two devices is screen size. The iPhone 18 Pro features a 6.3-inch Super Retina XDR OLED display, while the iPhone 18 Pro Max steps up to a 6.9-inch panel. Both use the same LTPO OLED technology with a 120Hz refresh rate and support Dolby Vision for HDR content, meaning picture quality itself should be comparable despite the size difference.

That larger display comes with a larger, heavier chassis. The iPhone 18 Pro measures 8.75 millimeters thick and weighs 211 grams, while the iPhone 18 Pro Max shares the same thickness but weighs a substantially heavier 249 grams, making it the heaviest iPhone Apple has ever released.

Battery life is the other major differentiator, and it’s tied directly to the larger phone’s bigger body. Apple rates the iPhone 18 Pro Max for up to 45 hours of video playback, calling it the largest increase in battery life the company has ever delivered on an iPhone in a single generation. The standard iPhone 18 Pro, by comparison, is rated for up to 36 hours of video playback. Apple has cautioned that these figures represent maximum lab-tested conditions, and that based on research into how people actually use their phones, real-world battery life is likely closer to 24 hours for the iPhone 18 Pro and 30 hours for the iPhone 18 Pro Max. Both phones support the same fast-charging capabilities, reaching up to 50% charge in 15 minutes and roughly six hours of video playback from just five minutes on a charger.

Pricing

The iPhone 18 Pro starts at $1,199 for the base 256GB configuration, while the iPhone 18 Pro Max starts at $1,299 for the same storage tier, putting a flat $100 premium on the larger model at every equivalent storage level.

How to decide

With performance, cameras and connectivity effectively identical across both models this year, the purchasing decision comes down to a more personal set of trade-offs: screen size and one-handed usability versus battery endurance and $100 in additional cost.

Buyers who prioritize a more compact, easier-to-hold device, or who don’t typically push their phone’s battery to its limits in a single day, may find the standard iPhone 18 Pro delivers everything the larger model offers in terms of raw capability, at a lower price and lighter weight. Those who rely heavily on their phone throughout long days, frequently stream video, or simply prefer a larger canvas for media consumption and multitasking may find the extra battery life and screen real estate of the Pro Max worth both the added bulk and added cost.

Apple confirmed that both the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max will become available in an initial wave of markets starting Sept. 18, with 20 additional countries gaining access the following week, on Sept. 25. Pre-orders open globally Saturday morning, giving prospective buyers a narrow window to weigh screen size against battery life and decide which version of Apple’s latest flagship best fits how they actually use their phone day to day.

Apple unveiled two very different flagship phones at its “Surprise and Shine” event on Sept. 9: the iPhone 18 Pro Max, an evolution of its familiar premium slab design, and the iPhone Duo, the company’s first-ever foldable iPhone and the biggest structural change to the product line in nearly two decades. With both now heading toward release this fall, buyers face a genuinely different kind of decision than in past years — not just how much phone to buy, but what kind of phone to buy.

Two fundamentally different designs

The iPhone 18 Pro Max sticks with Apple’s established form factor: a single 6.9-inch OLED display, an aluminum frame, and the same general shape iPhone users have grown accustomed to over the past several generations. It represents a refinement of an already mature design.

The iPhone Duo, by contrast, opens like a book. Closed, it functions as a compact phone with a 5.4-inch outer display; opened, it reveals a 7.6-inch inner screen, which Apple describes as the largest display ever fitted to an iPhone, offering roughly 50% more screen area than the iPhone 18 Pro Max. Apple built the Duo around a titanium frame rather than aluminum, and the device uses a nano-texture finish on its inner display designed to minimize glare during extended viewing.

Pricing gap is substantial

The price difference between the two phones is significant. The iPhone 18 Pro Max starts at $1,299 for 256GB of storage, while the iPhone Duo starts at $1,999 for the same base storage tier, climbing as high as $3,199 for a 2TB configuration. For many buyers, that roughly $700 gap alone may settle the decision before specs even come into play.

Where the hardware diverges

Both phones share Apple’s A20 Pro chip, though the version inside the Duo includes vapor-chamber cooling, an addition Apple says helps sustain performance inside the thinner folding chassis. Battery life is close between the two: Apple rates the iPhone 18 Pro Max for up to 45 hours of video playback, while the iPhone Duo is rated for up to 44 hours, meaning battery endurance is unlikely to be a deciding factor either way.

Camera hardware favors the Pro Max more clearly. The iPhone 18 Pro Max carries a full triple-camera system, including a telephoto lens, while the iPhone Duo’s setup — built around dual 48-megapixel Fusion cameras plus additional front and inner-facing cameras for its folding design — notably lacks a telephoto lens altogether, a trade-off Apple made in favor of the device’s foldable mechanics and dual-screen camera features like Duo Preview and Smart Take, which use the outer display to let subjects preview shots before they’re taken.

Biometric security also differs sharply between the two devices. The iPhone 18 Pro Max uses Apple’s established Face ID system. The iPhone Duo instead relies on Touch ID built into its side power button, since the folding hinge and dual-screen design made a traditional Face ID sensor array impractical to implement, at least in this first-generation model.

What each phone is built for

The iPhone 18 Pro Max is designed for buyers who want the most refined version of the traditional iPhone experience: strong all-around cameras, a proven design, broad accessory compatibility, and a form factor that fits comfortably into existing habits, cases and one-handed use, despite its already large 6.9-inch screen.

The iPhone Duo is aimed at a different kind of user entirely — someone drawn to the versatility of a larger canvas for tasks like split-screen multitasking, gaming, video-heavy work, or hands-free FaceTime calls, where the phone can stand upright on its own in a partially folded position. Apple has rebuilt core elements of iOS around the Duo’s dual-screen capabilities, including StandBy mode without requiring a charger, layouts that shift fluidly between the outer and inner displays, and multitasking features specifically designed to take advantage of the larger unfolded screen.

Trade-offs to weigh

Choosing between the two ultimately comes down to a handful of practical trade-offs. Buyers prioritizing camera versatility, particularly zoom photography, and a lower price point are likely better served by the iPhone 18 Pro Max. Buyers who value screen real estate, multitasking flexibility, and are willing to pay a premium for Apple’s first generation of foldable hardware — while accepting the absence of a telephoto lens and a shift away from Face ID — may find the iPhone Duo’s novelty and functionality worth the added cost and, in some cases, added bulk when folded.

It’s also worth noting that first-generation hardware categories often carry more risk than established product lines. As Apple’s first foldable device, the Duo represents new engineering territory, including a hinge mechanism and dual-battery system that haven’t been tested over multiple years of real-world use the way the traditional iPhone form factor has.

Release timing

The two phones are also arriving on different schedules. The iPhone 18 Pro Max opened for pre-order on Saturday, Sept. 12, with retail availability beginning Sept. 18. The iPhone Duo follows several weeks later, with pre-orders opening Oct. 16 and the device becoming available in stores on Oct. 23, giving prospective buyers extra time to weigh their decision against real-world reviews and hands-on impressions as they roll out in the coming weeks.

For now, the choice boils down to a familiar flagship refined to its highest point yet, or a genuinely new kind of iPhone built around a folding screen — a decision that, for the first time in years, is less about incremental upgrades and more about which type of device fits how someone actually wants to use their phone.

Billions of years ago, our young sun may have consumed a planet several times the mass of Earth, and the chemical fingerprints of that ancient collision could still be detectable deep inside the star today, according to new research published in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

The study, authored by Mutlu Yildiz, an astronomer at Ege University in Turkey, presents a model suggesting the sun engulfed a “super-Earth-mass” planet — one estimated at five to 10 times the mass of Earth — early in its history. The finding offers a possible explanation for two longstanding puzzles in solar science that conventional models have struggled to fully resolve.

“Our new study suggests that a planet several times more massive than Earth may have fallen into the young Sun and left a lasting chemical imprint deep inside it,” Yildiz said in a statement.

Two mysteries in search of a common cause

The research grew out of separate, seemingly unrelated problems in solar astronomy. The first involves the sun’s convection zone, the star’s outermost layer, where standard models have consistently had difficulty matching actual observational data. The second concerns lithium, an element that should be among the earliest to survive largely intact through a star’s evolution, yet the sun’s surface shows a notable lithium deficiency compared with other stars of similar size and age.

Yildiz set out to determine whether these two unrelated anomalies might share a single origin. “We were interested [in] whether these problems might have a common origin in the early chemical history of the Sun,” Yildiz said. “Since planets are made of material that is chemically different from the gas in the disc, we wondered whether the early engulfment of a planet could have left a chemical signature inside the young Sun.”

Modeling a cosmic collision

To test the idea, Yildiz used an open-source stellar evolution module to run through a wide range of possible accretion scenarios, essentially testing different combinations of events that could have produced the sun as it appears today. Among the scenarios tested, the one that best matched observed data involved the young sun consuming a super-Earth-mass planet.

The resulting numbers lined up closely with existing measurements of the sun’s internal structure and its surface lithium content, lending additional weight to the scenario. Yildiz noted that the precision of the result came as something of a surprise even to him.

“We thought planetary engulfment might affect the solar structure but did not expect the calculations to converge on such a specific super-Earth mass range,” Yildiz said. “That was one of the most interesting outcomes of the study.”

A possible clue to the makeup of our solar system

Beyond addressing the lithium and convection-zone puzzles, the engulfment scenario may also help explain another peculiar feature of our solar system: the conspicuous absence of super-Earth-sized planets, a category common in many other star systems observed by astronomers. If an early super-Earth once orbited close to the young sun and was ultimately pulled in and destroyed, its disappearance could account for why no planet of that size exists in our solar system today.

Evidence, not proof

Yildiz was careful to frame the findings as evidence supporting a plausible scenario rather than definitive confirmation that the event occurred. In the paper, he wrote that the calculations “strengthen the physical plausibility” of the sun having swallowed a super-Earth-sized planet, while stopping short of claiming certainty. The paper describes the scenario as a promising candidate for the “key missing ingredient” that has been absent from existing solar and stellar models.

Yildiz said the next phase of research will focus on searching for more direct, independently verifiable evidence of the ancient engulfment buried within the sun’s structure. “Our paper asks whether the Sun itself could still carry observable evidence that such an engulfment actually happened, and we believe it could,” Yildiz said. “The next step is to see if these fingerprints can be independently detected.”

Why planetary engulfment matters to astronomers

Stellar engulfment of planets is not considered a rare phenomenon in the broader universe. Astronomers have observed direct evidence of stars consuming nearby planets in other systems, and theoretical models suggest such events are a natural, if violent, part of how planetary systems evolve and stabilize over billions of years. Planets that form too close to their host star, or whose orbits become unstable over time due to gravitational interactions with other bodies, can spiral inward and eventually be pulled apart and absorbed by the star’s immense gravity and heat.

What makes the sun’s case distinctive, according to the new research, is the possibility that this kind of event left behind detectable chemical evidence that has persisted for billions of years, offering scientists a potential window into the sun’s earliest, most chaotic period of formation.

The study adds to a growing body of research using increasingly sophisticated stellar modeling techniques to probe the sun’s distant past, a period that remains difficult to study directly given how much the star’s structure and composition have evolved since its formation roughly 4.6 billion years ago. If future observational work is able to confirm the specific chemical signatures Yildiz’s model predicts, it could mark a significant step toward resolving decades-old questions about the sun’s internal chemistry and, more broadly, about how the current architecture of our solar system came to be.

For now, the case remains open, but the new modeling gives astronomers a specific and testable hypothesis to pursue in the search for what really happened inside our solar system’s earliest, most turbulent chapter.