Daily Archives: May 18, 2022

On May 17, United States Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell told the Wall Street Journal that the 50-basis-point rate hikes would continue until inflation is under control. Powell’s emphasis on a hawkish policy suggests that monetary conditions are likely to remain tight in 2022, which could limit the upside in risky assets.

On-chain market intelligence firm Glassnode said that historically, Bitcoin (BTC) has bottomed out when the price breaks below the realized price. However, barring the 2019 to 2020 bear market, during previous bear cycles, Bitcoin’s price stayed below the realized price for anywhere between 114 to 299 days. This suggests that if macro situations are not favorable, a quick recovery is unlikely.

While the current decline in U.S. equity markets and Bitcoin has similarities with the crash in March 2020, the recovery may not follow the same trajectory because market conditions are different. In 2020, the Fed supported the markets with an unprecedented stimulus, but in 2022 the focus will remain on reducing inflation and monetary tightening.

Could Bitcoin and altcoins resume their downtrend or will lower levels attract buying? Let’s study the charts of the top-10 cryptocurrencies to find out.

BTC/USDT

Bitcoin’s recovery failed to rise above the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level at $31,721 suggesting that the trend remains negative and traders are selling on minor rallies.

The BTC/USDT pair could drop to the immediate support at $28,630. If the price rebounds off this level, the pair could consolidate between $28,630 and $31,721 for some time.

A break and close above the 20-day exponential moving average (EMA) ($32,979) will be the first sign of a potential change in trend. The pair could then rally to the 61.8% retracement level at $34,823.

On the other hand, if the price slips below $28,630, the bears will try to cement their position by pulling the pair below $26,700. If that happens, the negative momentum could pick up and the pair may slide to $25,000 and thereafter to $21,800.

ETH/USDT

Ether’s (ETH) failure to rise above the overhead resistance at $2,159 may have tempted short-term traders to book profits. That pulled the price below $1,940 but the bulls are attempting to defend the level.

If the price rebounds off $1,940 with strength, the ETH/USDT pair could again rise to $2,159. The bulls will have to push and sustain the price above $2,159 to clear the path for a rally to the 20-day EMA ($2,353). A break and close above this resistance will suggest that the markets have rejected the lower levels.

Conversely, if bears sustain the price below $1,940, the pair could decline to the crucial support at $1,700. This is an important level to keep an eye on because a break below it could result in panic selling. The pair could then slump to $1,500 and later to $1,300.

BNB/USDT

The bulls have not been able to push BNB above the overhead resistance at $320. This suggests that bears have not given up and they continue to sell at higher levels.

If the price slips below $290, the BNB/USDT pair could drop to $265. This level is likely to act as a strong support but if bears pull the price below it, the next stop could be the critical level at $211. The bears will have to break this level to signal the start of the next leg of the downtrend.

Alternatively, if the price rebounds off $265, it will suggest that bulls are attempting to form a bottom. That could keep the pair stuck between $320 and $265 for a few days. A break and close above $320 could suggest that the pair may have bottomed out.

XRP/USDT

Ripple’s (XRP) recovery failed to sustain above $0.45, indicating a lack of demand at higher levels. The bears will now attempt to pull the price below the immediate support zone at $0.40 to $0.38.

If they do that, the XRP/USDT pair could drop to $0.33. This is an important level to keep an eye on because a break and close below it could signal the resumption of the downtrend. The XRP/UDST pair could then plunge to the next support at $0.24.

On the other hand, if the price rises from $0.38 or $0.33, the bulls will again try to push the pair above $0.45. If they succeed, the pair could rise to the stiff overhead resistance zone at $0.50 to $0.55. The bulls will have to clear this hurdle to suggest that the downtrend may be over.

ADA/USDT

Cardano (ADA) has been stuck in a tight range between $0.61 and $0.51 for the past few days. This suggests a tough battle between the bulls and the bears.

If the price slips below $0.51, the ADA/USDT pair could slide to the support zone between $0.46 and $0.40. The bulls may mount a strong defense in this zone. If the price rebounds off this zone, the buyers will again try to push the pair above the 20-day EMA. If they succeed, the pair could rise to $0.74.

Conversely, if the price breaks below $0.40, the selling could pick up momentum and the pair may extend its decline to $0.33 and then to $0.28.

SOL/USDT

Solana (SOL) is facing strong resistance near the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level at $59, suggesting that the sentiment remains negative and bears are selling on minor rallies.

If the price breaks below the psychological level at $50, the pair could slip to $43 and thereafter to $37. The bulls are likely to defend this level with all their might because if the support gives way, the downtrend could resume. The next stop on the downside may be $32.

Alternatively, if the price turns up from the current level and rises above $59, the SOL/USDT pair could rally to the overhead resistance zone between the 20-day EMA ($67) and $75. A break and close above this zone could suggest that the downtrend may be over.

DOGE/USDT

Dogecoin (DOGE) continues to trade below the breakdown level of $0.10. This suggests a lack of urgency to buy at higher levels. Generally, sharp declines are followed by consolidations as bulls and bears battle it out for supremacy.

The failure of the bulls to push the price above $0.10 may attract another round of selling by the bears who will attempt to resume the downtrend. If the price dips below $0.08, the DOGE/USDT pair could drop to $0.06. If this support cracks, the decline could extend to the next support at $0.04.

On the contrary, if the price rebounds off $0.08, the pair may rise to $0.10 and remain stuck inside this range for a few days. The bulls will have to push and sustain the price above the 20-day EMA ($0.10) to suggest that the downward momentum may be weakening.

Related: Aave price risks a 25% plunge as a classic bearish reversal pattern emerges

DOT/USDT

The bulls defended the $10.37 support on May 17 but the shallow rebound suggested a lack of demand at higher levels. The bears resumed their selling on May 18 and pulled the price below $10.37. Polkadot (DOT) could now drop to $8.

The buyers are expected to aggressively defend the zone between $8 and $7.30. If the price rebounds off this zone, the DOT/USDT pair could again attempt a relief rally. The recovery could pick up momentum on a break above the 20-day EMA ($12.53).

Alternatively, if bears sink the price below $7.30, the selling could accelerate and the pair may signal the resumption of the downtrend. The pair could then plummet toward psychological support at $5.

AVAX/USDT

The buyers could not push Avalanche (AVAX) above the immediate resistance at $38. This suggests that demand dries up at higher levels.

The bears will now fancy their chances and attempt to pull the price below the critical support at $29. If they succeed, the AVAX/USDT pair could retest the May 12 intraday low at $23.51. A break and close below this level could open the doors for a further decline to $20 and later to $18.

Contrary to this assumption, if the price rebounds off $29, the bulls will again try to push the pair above $38. If that happens, the relief rally could reach the 20-day EMA ($45). The bears may again pose a strong challenge at this level.

SHIB/USDT

Shiba Inu (SHIB) has been consolidating inside the tight range between $0.000011 and $0.000014 for the past four days. Usually, such tight ranges resolve in a strong trending move.

If the price breaks below $0.000011, the bears will try to pull the SHIB/USDT pair to $0.000009. This is an important level for the bulls to defend because a break below it could signal the resumption of the downtrend. The pair could then decline to $0.000007 and later to $0.000005.

Contrary to this assumption, if the price turns up and breaks above the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level at $0.000014, the bulls will attempt to push the pair to the breakdown level at $0.000017.

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision.

Market data is provided by HitBTC exchange.

Social media giant Facebook’s parent company, Meta, may be planning to launch a payments platform with support for cryptocurrency. 

According to records submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, on May 13, Meta filed five applications for its namesake to be used in a platform called Meta Pay. The filings included Meta’s name for use in a “online social networking service for investors allowing financial trades and exchange of digital currency, virtual currency, cryptocurrency, digital and blockchain assets, digitized assets, digital tokens, crypto tokens and utility tokens.”

Meta Platforms Inc. (i.e. Facebook) has filed 5 new trademark applications for:

“META PAY”

The filings indicate that @Meta plans to launch a payment platform called “META PAY” for users to exchange old-fashioned regular money and cryptocurrencies.#Meta $FB#Metaverse pic.twitter.com/W2ObxgAWfl

— Josh Gerben (@JoshGerben) May 18, 2022

In March, Meta filed eight trademark applications with the USPTO related to Metaverse and blockchain technology. CEO Mark Zuckerberg also said on May 9 that the company had begun testing digital collectibles on Instagram, signaling a move toward adding nonfungible tokens, or NFTs. Meta currently controls several major apps including WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger and Facebook.

Other companies based in the United States including Gatorade producer Stokely-Van Camp, the Air Force, the New York Stock Exchange, and Mastercard have filed similar applications related to possible entries into the Metaverse or otherwise expanding into the crypto space. According to the USPTO website, trademark applications take roughly eight months to process the first action as of March.

Related: Meta’s Reality Labs posts $2.9B loss: ‘I recognize it’s expensive,’ says Zuck

Since rebranding from Facebook to Meta in October 2021, the social media giant has announced many initiatives seemingly aimed at extending a hand to crypto users. In addition to its work online, Meta also recently expanded its real-world presence with the opening of a brick-and-mortar metaverse-themed retail store in the San Francisco Bay Area.

More than 5,505 Ether of the Ronin Bridge exploitation seems to be transferred through Tornado Cash, a unique privacy crypto exchange.

Blockchain data showed that the address associated with the $625 million Ronin Bridge Attack had begun transferring ether tokens valued at over $10 million. This occurred during the Asian morning hours.

The data showed that the Ronin hacker had transferred over 5,505 ether to one unknown account this morning. Additionally, the funds were sent from another Ethereum wallet funded by the prominent hacker’s blockchain address. All these took place within the early hours of Wednesday, as the funds were sent in groups of 100 ether each to the Tornado privacy crypto exchange.

The Ronin Bridge Ether Exploit

Ronin Bridge is an Ethereum-based sidechain for the play-to-earn game Axie Infinity, an NFT game. It was created by Sky Mavis and is running both Ronin Bridge and Axie Infinity.

Related Reading | Bitcoin Market Plunges Into Extreme Fear, How Scary Does It Get?

On March 23, cybercriminals exploited The Ronin Bridge Network, and the hackers looted over $625 million worth of assets. The assets comprise 25.5 million USDC and over 173,600 ether. A report on their blog revealed this data. The platform realized the attack when one of its users couldn’t withdraw 5,000 Ether from the Ronin Network.

Then, they took to Twitter to notify the public of the security breach on the platform. After the hack, the Ronin Bridge temporarily shut down to redevelop the platform. Moreover, even though attackers targeted the hack at Ronin and Axie Infinity, the incident didn’t affect the ‘axie’ tokens. Therefore, the AXS and SLP tokens used to facilitate transactions within the Axie Infinity game are still safe and unaffected.

Blockchain Data Reveals Ongoing Ether Fund Transfer

Within the early hours of Wednesday, Etherscan, a blockchain tracking platform, revealed that the attackers made about 55 transactions from an address funded by the principal looter. Currently, the wallet holds 3.45 ether, summing to $6,885.84.

This step followed the massive selling of looted ether in April when the looters transferred over 21,000 ether via various transfers to the Tornado exchange. The transaction was worth over $65 million then.

Tornado Privacy Crypto Exchange

Tornado crypto exchange is an advanced crypto exchange that tweaks and breaks through the on-chain for a destination and source address. Thus, enabling hackers to hide their addresses while illegally withdrawing looted funds.

The United States Trace the Looting to North Korean Hackers

The United States official had previously traced the looter’s address to the “Lazarus” group, an infamous group of hackers sponsored by the North Korean supreme leader Kim Kuk-song. Also, Chainalysis, the blockchain tracking platform, traced and confirmed the transaction between the North Korean Cybercriminal group.

Related Reading | New Data Shows China Still Controls 21% Of The Global Bitcoin Mining Hashrate

In a thread on Twitter, the platform even provided proof of the Lazarus group being behind the March exploitation.

Sky Mavis Accrues $150 Million In A Funding Round to Regain Ronin Bridge

Sky Mavis, the Ronin Bridge, and the Axie Infinity platform raised over $150 million following the massive attack and exploitation. This effort was to regain the Ronin Bridge platform after the previous hit.

Among the list of supporters was the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange Binance, alongside other crypto entities.

Featured image from Pexels, charts from EtherScan and TradingView.com

The past week has not been an easy one. After the collapse of the third-largest stablecoin (UST) and what used to be the second-largest blockchain after Ethereum (Terra), the depeg contagion seems to be spreading wider. 

While UST has completely depegged from the U.S. dollar, trading at sub $0.1 at the time of writing, other stablecoins also experienced a short period where they also lost their dollar peg due to the market-wide panic.

Tether’s USDT stablecoin saw a brief devaluation from $1 to $0.95 at the lowest point in May. 12.

FRAX and FEI had a similar drop to $0.97 in May 12; while Abracadabra Money’s MIM and Liquity’s LUSD dropped to $0.98.

Although it is common for stablecoins to fluctuate in a very narrow range around the $1 peg, these recent trading levels are seen only during extremely stressed market conditions. The question that now sits in the mind of investors is will the fear spread even wider and will another stablecoin de-peg?

Let’s take a look at the mechanism of some of the major stablecoins and how they are currently traded in the Curve Finance liquidity pool.

The main purpose of stablecoins is to preserve a stable value and provide investors an avenue to park their money when volatility from other crypto assets are much higher.

There are two distinct mechanisms in stablecoins — asset-backed and algorithm-based. Asset-backed stablecoins are the most common version and issuers purport to back stablecoins with fiat currency or other cryptocurrencies. Algorithm-based stablecoins, on the other hand, seek to use algorithms to increase or decrease the supply of stablecoins based on market demand.

Asset-backed stablecoins were in favor during downturn, except for USDT

USD Coin (USDC), Dai (DAI) and USDT are the most traded asset-backed stablecoins. Although they are all over-collateralized by fiat reserves and cryptocurrencies, USDC and USDT are centralized while DAI is decentralized.

USDC’s collateral reserves are held by U.S.-regulated financial institutions, whereas USDT’s reserves are held by Tether Limited, which is controlled by BitFinex. DAI, on the contrary, does not use a centralied entity but uses the primary market borrowing rate to maintain its dollar peg, which is called the Target Rate Feedback Mechanism (TRFM).

DAI is minted when users borrow against their locked collateral and destroyed when loans are repaid. If DAI’s price is below $1, then TRFM increases the borrowing rate to decrease DAI’s supply as less people will want to borrow, aiming to increase the price of DAI back to $1 (vice versa when DAI is above $1).

Although DAI’s pegging mechanism seems algorithmic, the over-collateralization of at least 150% makes it a robust asset-backed stablecoin during volatile market conditions. This can be seen by comparing the price movements of USDC, USDT and DAI in the past week where DAI, along with USDC, clearly showed a spike on May 12 when investors lost confidence in USDT and rushed to swap out.

Tether’s USDT has long been controversial despite its large market share in the stablecoin space. It was previously fined by the U.S. government for misstating the type of cash reserves they have. Tether claims to have cash or cash-equivalent assets to back USDT. However, a large portion of the reserves turn out to be commercial paper — a form of short-term unsecured debt, which is riskier and is not “cash equivalent” as dictated by the U.S. government.

The recent Terra debacle and the lack of transparency of their reserves triggered fresh concerns about USDT. The price reacted violently with a brief devaluation from $1 to $0.95. Although USDT’s price has recovered and repegged closely back to $1, the concerns are still there.

This is shown clearly in the largest liquidity pool on Curve Finance. The DAI/USDC/USDT 3pool in Curve shows a proportion of 13%-13%-74% for each of them respectively.

Under normal circumstances, all the assets in a stablecoin liquidity pool should hold equal (or very close to equal) weight because the three stablecoins are all supposed to be valued at around $1. But what the pools have shown in the past week is an unbalanced proportion, with USDT holding a much larger percentage. This indicates the demand for USDT is much smaller than the other two. It could also mean that for USDT to hold the same dollar value as the other two, more units of USDT are needed in the pool, indicating a lower value for USDT compared to DAI and USDC.

A similar imbalance is observed in the DAI/USDC/USDT/sUSD 4pool. It is interesting to see that sUSD and USDT both spiked in proportion around May 12 during the peak of the stablecoin fear. But sUSD has quickly reverted back to the equal portion of 25% and has even dropped in percentage since while USDT remains as the highest proportion in the pool.

The Curve 3pool has a daily trading volume of $395 million and $1.4 billion total value locked (TVL). The 4pool has a $17 million trading volume and $65 million TVL. Both pools show USDT is still less favourable.

Are algorithmic stablecoins finished?

An algorithmic stablecoin is a different mechanism from an asset-based stablecoin. It has no reserves; therefore, it is uncollateralized. The peg is maintained through algorithmically minting and burning the stablecoin and its partner coin based on the circulating supply and demand in the market.

Due to its uncollateralized, or less than 100% collateralized nature, an algorithmic stablecoin is much more risky than an asset-backed stablecoin. The Terra UST depeg debacle has surely shaken investors’ confidence in algorithmic stablecoins. This has manifested quite clearly in the Curve liquidity pool.

FRAX — an algorithmic stablecoin by Frax Protocol — is partially backed by collateral and partially based on the algorithm of supply and demand. Although the coin is partially collateralized, the ratio of the collateralized and thealgorithmic still depends on the market price of the FRAX.

In the recent perfect storm of stablecoin panic, the ratio of FRAX versus the other three stablecoins spiked to 63% to 37%. Although the disproportion can already be seen from early March 2022, the collapse of UST definitely exacerbated the fear of a FRAX de-peg.

A similar surge in fear triggered by the Terra UST de-peg event is also present in MIM — Abracadabra Money’s algorithmic stablecoin. The Curve MIM/3CRV pool shows the MIM proportion jumped to 90% — a similar level reached in January when the Wonderland scandal came about.

Despite the algorithmi similarity to DAI, MIM doesn’t use ETH directly as collateral but instead uses interest-bearing tokens (ibTKN) from Yearn Finance — ywWETH. The additional layer of complexity makes it more sensitive to catastrophic events such as the UST depeg event.

The goal for all stablecoins is to maintain a stable value. But all of them experience volatility and a lot of them have deviated away from the $1 peg much more than expected. This is probably the reason why it has led some regulators to quip that stablecoins are neither stable nor coins.

Nonetheless, stablecoin volatility is much lower than any of the other cryptocurrencies and still provides a safe harbour for crypto investors. It is therefore important to understand the risks embedded in different stablecoins’ peg mechanisms.

Many stablecoins have failed in the past, UST is not the first and it will certainly not be the last. Keeping an eye on not only the dollar value of these stablecoins but also how they stand in the liquidity pool will help investors identify potential risks ahead of time in a bearish and volatile market.

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph.com. Every investment and trading move involves risk, you should conduct your own research when making a decision.

On May 18, the billionaire investor and crypto proponent Mike Novogratz published a post about the recent Terra blockchain fallout. Novogratz and his firm Galaxy Digital were big believers in the Terra project, and the investor even got a LUNA-centric tattoo on his arm. Despite the recent events and losses, the crypto economy felt this past week, Novogratz stressed that he still firmly believes the “crypto revolution is here to stay.”

Novogratz Reflects on Terra’s Demise: ‘It’s Time to Talk About Last Week’

Just recently, Bitcoin.com News reported LUNA and UST’s implosion and the big name backers that invested in Terraform Labs. One of the investors mentioned in our report was the billionaire investor and crypto proponent Mike Novogratz. For quite some time, Novogratz and his firm Galaxy Digital were big believers in the Terra ecosystem. On January 26, 2021, Bloomberg quoted Novogratz and the investor called the Terra blockchain project one of “the canaries in the coal mines of what else is going to happen.”

Novogratz also got a LUNA-themed tattoo and said he was “officially a Lunatic.” After the UST de-pegging incident and the entire Terra ecosystem getting obliterated, Novogratz was not as talkative as he usually is on Twitter. On Wednesday, May 18, Novogratz tweeted for the first time since May 8, 2022. “After much thought, it’s time to talk about last week and, more importantly, the weeks ahead,” Novogratz said. In addition to the tweet, Novogratz left a link to a blog post that discusses the Terra fiasco in detail.

“There is no good news in what happened in markets or to the Terra ecosystem,” the investor detailed in his blog post. “In Luna and UST alone, $40bn of market value was destroyed in a very short amount of time. Both large and small investors saw profits and wealth vanish. The collapse dented confidence in crypto and [decentralized finance]. Whenever money is lost in such an abrupt fashion, people want answers. I am going to try to add some insights to the ongoing discussion.”

Novogratz then got into Galaxy’s principal investments in LUNA starting in Q4 2020, and how the team noticed that the project had “more than 1.8m users and was a top 5 finance app in South Korea that we considered had significant growth potential.” Galaxy was “intrigued” by the Terra ecosystem, and thought of it as “an example of crypto finding a real-world use case.” Then the investor noted that the global macro backdrop did a number on many risk assets this year, and he believes the “macro backdrop put pressure on Luna and the reserves held to back UST.” Novogratz added:

UST’s growth had exploded from the 18% yield offered in the Anchor protocol, which eventually overwhelmed other uses of the Terra blockchain. The downward pressure on reserve assets coupled with UST withdrawals, triggered a stress scenario akin to a ‘run on the bank.’ The reserves weren’t enough to prevent UST’s collapse.

Novogratz Highlights the ‘Core Tenets of Investing’ — Galaxy Founder Says ‘It’s Important That Less Experienced Market Participants Only Risk What They Are Comfortable Losing’

Novogratz said that the LUNA and UST incident shined a light on some core tenets of investing which include diversification, taking profits along the way, risk management, and an understanding of investing under a macro framework. The billionaire investor said that Galaxy Digital kept to these core tenets when it came to its investments in LUNA.

“Reading the stories of retail investors who lost their savings in one investment is heart- wrenching,” Novogratz’s blog post explains. “A core tenet in the crypto belief system is equal access to markets. But it’s important that less experienced market participants only risk what they are comfortable losing. I’ve often said people should allocate 1%-5% of their assets to the space.”

The Galaxy Digital founder concluded by noting that he’s still a firm believer in the crypto space but that does not mean the bottom is in and the market will be going straight up after this. “It will take restructuring, a redemption cycle, consolidation, and renewed confidence in crypto. Crypto moves in cycles, and we just witnessed a big one,” Novogratz added.

What do you think about the reflection blog post Mike Novogratz wrote about his belief in Terra and the LUNA and UST fiasco that took place this past week? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comments section below.

Jamie Redman

Jamie Redman is the News Lead at Bitcoin.com News and a financial tech journalist living in Florida. Redman has been an active member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011. He has a passion for Bitcoin, open-source code, and decentralized applications. Since September 2015, Redman has written more than 5,000 articles for Bitcoin.com News about the disruptive protocols emerging today.