Connect with us

Crypto World

Crypto Market Absorbs Tariff Pressure as Market Structure Shows Signs of Recovery

Published

on

Nexo Partners with Bakkt for US Crypto Exchange and Yield Programs

TLDR:

  • Crypto markets absorbed repeated tariff escalations in 2025, unlike the mass liquidations seen in October 2024.
  • October’s crash was driven by overleveraged positioning and thin liquidity, not solely by the tariff headlines alone.
  • Analysts note forced sellers have largely exited, leaving a cleaner and less one-sided market structure today.
  • Price reaction to negative news, not the news itself, remains the strongest signal for gauging crypto market health.

The crypto market is responding differently to macroeconomic pressure compared to months prior. Analysts and traders are noticing a sharp contrast in price behavior.

Where escalating tariff headlines once triggered mass liquidations, buyers are now stepping in instead. This shift in market reaction is drawing attention from seasoned observers who track positioning and market structure over narrative-driven explanations.

October’s Flush Versus Today’s Absorption

The crypto market experienced a violent downturn around October 10th. Tariff news hit, and the reaction was immediate and brutal.

Mass liquidations swept through exchanges, and prices dropped sharply. The explanation at the time seemed straightforward — tariffs broke crypto, and that was that.

Analyst Justin Wu pointed this out in a recent post on X. He noted, “Back on October 10th the entire timeline agreed on one thing: Tariffs just broke crypto.”

Advertisement

The difference today, however, tells another story. Tariff escalation continues, yet the crypto market is absorbing the pressure without cascading lower.

Wu attributed October’s severity to the market structure at that time, not the news itself. Leverage was elevated, long positions were overcrowded, and liquidity was thin. Those conditions made the market fragile before any catalyst even arrived.

Once that unwind started, it fed on itself. Liquidations triggered more liquidations, bids disappeared, and the narrative became the explanation rather than the actual cause.

Positioning Has Quietly Shifted Below the Surface

The crypto market today appears to be operating from a cleaner base. Forced sellers from the October episode are largely gone. Leverage has cooled across major exchanges, and positioning is far less one-sided than before.

Advertisement

Wu noted that stronger buyers are now willing to step in where panic once ruled. This is typical behavior following a proper cleanup phase in any asset class. The market stops reacting to bad news the same way once the weak hands have exited.

Negative headlines are still hitting the tape regularly. However, price action is no longer following the same script. That kind of divergence between news and reaction is often a leading signal worth watching closely.

Wu wrapped his analysis with a clear point of focus. He wrote, “Most people focus on the story. The better signal is always the reaction.”

The crypto market reaction right now is notably different from what it was during the October flush. Whether this leads to a sustained move higher remains to be seen.

Advertisement

Still, the structural condition of the market today appears more stable. Traders tracking positioning rather than headlines are finding a more measured picture beneath the surface noise.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

Disagreement Means a DAO Is Healthy: Curve Finance Founder

Published

on

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance

Disagreements within a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) are a sign of a healthy DAO, according to Dr. Michael Egorov, founder of the decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Curve Finance.

DAOs are a decentralized organizational structure that relies on smart contracts to automate functions and member voting to govern onchain protocols.

Egorov said that both a 2024 governance proposal involving the Curve DAO and the recent dispute involving the Aave DAO illustrate the importance of disagreements to the structure’s vitality. He told Cointelegraph:

“If everyone automatically agrees on something, it feels like people just don’t really care. They vote for whatever comes in, or they don’t participate at all. The first sign of that would be governance apathy, like when people are not voting at all.”

That earlier Curve DAO matter concerned a 2024 governance proposal to provide Swiss Stake AG, the main developer behind the Curve Finance protocol, with a grant valued at about $6.3 million at the time, which drew significant pushback from members of the Curve DAO.

Advertisement
Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
The 2024 proposal for a grant to Swiss Stake AG. Source: Curve Governance

Egorov noted that the proposal was revised and resubmitted in December 2025, and the redrafted proposal received over 80% turnout from DAO members.

An analysis last year by blockchain development company LamprosTech found that “Voter turnout in most DAOs rarely passes 15%, concentrating decision-making power in the hands of a small, active group.”

Curve token holders lock up their tokens for a long period, which encourages long-term governance engagement, Egorov said.

Egorov said that DAOs represent a new model for human organization that is distinct from a company or a self-sovereign country, but features elements of a sovereign country, including political parties voicing disagreement about how to govern a protocol.

Related: Core technical contributor to cease involvement with Aave DAO

Advertisement

Aave dispute highlights challenges in onchain governance and intellectual property rights 

In December 2025, a governance dispute erupted between Aave Labs, the main development company of Aave products, and the Aave DAO over fees from the integration with DeFi exchange aggregator CoW Swap.

Decentralization, DAO, Aave, Curve Finance
One member of the Aave DAO raises questions about fees from the CoW Swap integration. Source: Aave Governance

Members of the DAO were critical of the fees from the integration going directly to a wallet controlled by Aave Labs, and the pushback sparked a debate over which entity has rightful control over intellectual property on the DeFi platform.

A proposal was then submitted to the Aave DAO to bring Aave brand assets and intellectual property under the control of the DAO; it ultimately failed to pass.

Legal recognition of DAOs could mitigate governance disputes

DAOs cannot interact with the real world without regulated legal structures, like business entities or bank accounts, and DAO control over intellectual property is a common governance issue, Egorov said.

DAOs are a great fit for governing anything onchain, he said, adding that users should also experiment with DAOs for offchain elements as well, though centralized companies might be a better fit to manage offchain structures.

Advertisement

If DAOs could be legally recognized and interact with the traditional financial world, owning business entities and bank accounts, it could mitigate governance disputes, Egorov said, adding that the legal system has yet to catch up to the latest technology.

Magazine: Real AI use cases in crypto, No. 2: AIs can run DAOs