Crypto investors faced a sharp increase in sophisticated “signature phishing” attacks in January, with losses jumping more than 200%.

According to data from blockchain security firm Scam Sniffer, signature phishing drained approximately $6.3 million from user wallets in the first month of the year. While the raw count of victims fell by 11%, the total value stolen surged 207% from December levels.

Signature Phishing and Address Poisoning Wreak Havoc in January

This divergence highlights a tactical shift among cybercriminals toward “whale hunting.” The strategy involves targeting a smaller number of high-net-worth individuals rather than casting a wide net for smaller retail accounts.

Sponsored

Sponsored

Scam Sniffer reported that just two victims accounted for nearly 65% of all signature phishing losses in January. In the largest single incident, a user lost $3.02 million after signing a malicious “permit” or “increaseAllowance” function.

These mechanisms grant a third party indefinite access to move tokens from a wallet. This allows attackers to drain funds without requiring the user to approve a specific transaction.

While signature scams rely on confusing permissions, a separate and equally damaging threat known as “address poisoning” is also plaguing the sector.

In a stark example of this technique, a single investor lost $12.25 million in January after sending funds to a fraudulent address.

Address poisoning exploits user habits by generating “vanity” or “lookalike” addresses. These fraudulent strings mimic the first and last few characters of a legitimate wallet found in a user’s transaction history

The attacker hopes the user will copy and paste the compromised address from their history rather than verifying the full string.

The rise in these incidents prompted Safe Labs, the developer behind the popular multisig wallet formerly known as Gnosis Safe, to issue a security warning. The firm identified a coordinated social engineering campaign targeting its user base, using approximately 5,000 malicious addresses.

“We’ve identified a coordinated effort by malicious actor(s) to create thousands of lookalike Safe addresses designed to trick users into sending funds to the wrong destination. This is social engineering combined with address poisoning,” the firm stated.

Consequently, the firm warned users to always verify the full alphanumeric string of any recipient address before executing high-value transfers.

With crypto’s multi-month downturn accelerating into a freefall last week, bulls were frantically grasping for technical signals, or maybe yarns about the blowup of some leveraged hedge fund, that might signal a final bottom for this bear market.

Perhaps the ultimate sign of a bottom, though, might be the cheers arising from those who have been faithfully bearish on bitcoin BTC$70,930.61 as its price rose from $0 to more than $100,000 over its 16-year lifespan.

Over the years, the Financial Times has surely stood above all traditional publications in its steadfast opposition to bitcoin and crypto. The London paper’s team of truly talented writers has seemingly never wavered from a firm no-coiner stance, and this week was their moment.

“Bitcoin is still about $69,000 too high,” was the headline of a Sunday essay by the FT’s Jemima Kelly that wonderfully summed up Kelly’s and the FT’s general stance over the last decade-plus. [The FT subsequently changed the headline to “$70,000 too high” after bitcoin rose overnight].

“Ever since its creation, bitcoin has been on a journey that will end, splattered on the ground,” Kelly wrote. “This week has shown us that the supply of ‘greater fools’ that bitcoin relies on is drying up,” she continued. “The fairy tales that have been keeping crypto afloat are turning out to be just that. People are beginning to wake up to the fact that there is no floor in the value of something based on nothing more than thin air.”

Earlier in the week, with the price of bitcoin declining below the $76,000 average cost basis of BTC treasury giant Strategy (MSTR), the FT’s Craig Coben published, “Strategy’s long road to nowhere.”

With the stock already down about 80% from its record high of late 2024, Coben in February 2026 declared, “Management has no safe choices — only different paths to destroying shareholder value … it is hard to see the case for buying into a vehicle that has merely broken even on its investments over five years.”

“Like a gigantic mastodon stuck in La Brea tar pits,” Coben concluded. “Strategy is flailing for a way out.”

Peter Schiff joins in

With gold — despite a good deal of recent volatility — continuing in a major bull cycle, longtime goldbug and bitcoin critic Peter Schiff was feeling his oats as well.

“According to Michael Saylor, bitcoin is the best-performing asset in the world,” he wrote on Tuesday. “Yet Strategy invested over $54 billion in bitcoin over the past five years, and as of now the company is down about 3% on that investment. I’m sure the losses over the next five years will be much greater!”

“Bitcoin below $76,000, it’s now worth 15 ounces of gold, down 59% from its Nov. 2021 high,” Schiff continued. “Bitcoin is in a long-term bear market priced in gold.”

Other signs

“I refuse to pick bottoms,” once said former hedge fund manager Hugh Hendry. “Monkeys spend all their time picking bottoms.”

As Hendry noted, it’s probably a good idea not to get too cute timing one’s buys to headlines like those seen in the FT this week. It’s probably fairly safe to say, though, that some sort of bottoming process is underway.

In other news this week that would never appear near tops, it appears that investor interest in Tether is evaporating. With the crypto market still perky late last year, it was reported that the stablecoin issuing giant was in talks to raise $15-$20 billion at as much as a $500 billion valuation.

According to a report in the FT on Tuesday, however, investors appear to be pushing back against that valuation, and capital-raising efforts may only be on the order of about $5 billion.

For its part, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino told the FT that the original reports of a $15-$20 billion capital raise were a “misconception,” and that Tether had received plenty of interest at that $500 billion valuation.

Nevertheless, according to the report, investors have privately raised concerns about that lofty valuation. Things are fluid, the report continued, and a crypto rally could quickly change sentiment.

South Korean cryptocurrency exchange Bithumb announced that it has resolved a weekend incident in which a promotional payout error briefly overcredited certain user accounts with Bitcoin. In a Sunday statement, the firm said it recovered 99.7% of the excess BTC on the same day the issue occurred. The remaining 1,788 BTC that had already been sold was reimbursed using company funds to ensure customer balances remained fully matched. Bithumb asserted that its holdings of all virtual assets were 100% equivalent to or exceeding user deposits, reinforcing the premise that customer liabilities were adequately backed. The exchange noted that most of the excess was retrieved directly from individual accounts, while the portion already liquidated in the market was funded by corporate reserves to restore balance sheets and maintain trust. The incident was not the result of a hack, and deposits and withdrawals continued normally during the disruption.

Key takeaways

• 99.7% of the overpaid BTC was recovered on the same day the incident happened, with 1,788 BTC already sold and reimbursed from corporate funds.
• Bithumb stated its total asset holdings were sufficient to cover all user deposits, underscoring balance-sheet integrity even in a disruption.
• Compensation includes 20,000 won per user for those who were connected during the incident, plus full reimbursement plus 10% for traders who sold at unfavorable prices during the event.
• A seven-day, platform-wide trading-fee waiver was announced to cushion the disruption’s impact on active traders.
• The incident originated from a promotional payout error rather than a security breach, and normal trading activity quickly stabilized after account restrictions were put in place.
• Industry context highlights ongoing operational challenges for centralized exchanges, with broader coverage of interoperability and risk controls as regulators scrutinize platform reliability.

Tickers mentioned: $BTC

Sentiment: Neutral

Price impact: Neutral. While there was intraday volatility during the incident, the exchange disclosed no lasting price impact beyond a temporary spike caused by liquidations and subsequent remediation measures.

Market context: The episode arrives amid a period of heightened attention on how centralized exchanges manage incidents, with observers watching how firms reconcile user balances, communicate clearly, and maintain liquidity during promotional events or high-volume trading days. The broader crypto market has seen sporadic operational hiccups across multiple platforms, reinforcing the importance of robust controls and transparent remediation steps in sustaining market confidence.

Why it matters

For users on Bithumb, the episode tested confidence in the exchange’s risk management and accounting practices. By recovering the majority of overpaid BTC on the same day and funding reimbursements from reserves for the rest, Bithumb signaled a commitment to preserving customer asset integrity even when promos and systems interact in unintended ways. The adherence to the principle that customer deposits should equal or exceed liabilities is a critical touchstone for users who rely on centralized venues for liquidity, staking, and spot trading.

The compensation scheme further matters because it attempts to reduce the financial friction faced by traders during a disruption. The per-user credit, full reimbursement of affected sale values, and an additional 10% payout for traders who sold at unfavorable prices collectively aim to restore trading activity while dampening reputational damage. The seven-day trading-fee waiver is a tangible incentive to keep volume steady and discourage a mass exodus from the platform during remediation.

From a market-structure perspective, the incident underscores a recurring theme in centralized exchanges: even without a cybersecurity breach, operational mishaps tied to promotions can trigger a cascade of effects, including price volatility and liquidity concerns. Observers will be watching how Bithumb and other platforms strengthen validation and post-event reconciliation processes to minimize recurrence. The episode also feeds into a broader discourse about the resilience of crypto ecosystems, especially as regulators demand greater clarity around risk controls, customer protections, and the speed at which firms can restore normal service after anomalous events.

What to watch next

• Clarification on the total amount of BTC credited in error and a detailed post-incident accounting breakdown by Bithumb.
• Any follow-up audits or third-party reviews assessing the effectiveness of the compensation program and the firm’s reserve adequacy.
• Regulatory or legislative responses in South Korea related to incident reporting, consumer protections, and exchange risk management.
• Announcements outlining changes to promotional payout workflows to prevent recurrence and improve real-time error detection.

Sources & verification

• Bithumb official notice: https://feed.bithumb.com/notice/1651928
• Cointelegraph: Bithumb confirms reward payout error after abnormal Bitcoin trades — https://cointelegraph.com/news/bithumb-confirms-reward-payout-error-after-abnormal-bitcoin-trades
• Cointelegraph: Bithumb flags $200M in dormant crypto assets across 2.6M inactive accounts — https://cointelegraph.com/news/bithumb-dormant-crypto-assets-200m-inactive-accounts
• Cointelegraph: Coinbase cuts unnecessary account restrictions — https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinbase-cuts-unnecessary-account-restrictions
• Cointelegraph: Binance 400m program traders hit Friday downturn — https://cointelegraph.com/news/binance-400m-program-traders-hit-friday-downturn

Resolution and compensation measures after an over-credit incident

The weekend episode centered on Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC), the most liquid asset in crypto markets, and tested Bithumb’s operational safeguards. After a Friday system fault during a promotional payout briefly overcredited some users, the exchange acted quickly to contain the fallout. In its Sunday update, Bithumb said it recovered 99.7% of the overpaid BTC on the same day and covered the remaining 1,788 BTC that had already left the market using corporate reserves to ensure customer balances remained fully matched. The firm added that its overall holdings of virtual assets were 100% equivalent to or exceeding user deposits, reinforcing a basic but critical premise for users: asset reserves should cover outstanding liabilities, even in disruptive events.

Most of the recovery came directly from the affected accounts as managers worked to claw back the erroneous transfers. Where balances had already been liquidated, reimbursements would come from reserve funds rather than customer funds, underscoring a commitment to limit customer losses. Importantly, Bithumb stressed that the incident was not the result of a security breach and that normal deposit and withdrawal operations continued uninterrupted during the episode. While there was widespread chatter about the total amount involved, the exchange did not disclose a final figure, though some users asserted that up to around 2,000 BTC were credited in error. The company’s messaging sought to reassure customers that the issue did not compromise the integrity of institutional or retail accounts.

As part of its response, Bithumb outlined a compensation plan aimed at restoring trust among users who were on the platform when the error occurred. Those who were connected to the service during the incident received 20,000 won (about $15) per user, a modest gesture intended to acknowledge the disruption. Traders who executed sales during the anomaly and sold at unfavorable prices will be fully reimbursed for the sale value, plus an additional 10% payout as a further remedy. Additionally, Bithumb announced a seven-day period in which trading fees would be waived across all markets, a move designed to reduce the cost of the disruption for active traders and to encourage continued participation on the platform. The plan reflects a broader approach to incident response that blends restitution with policy incentives to sustain activity during periods of system turbulence.

The Friday-late-week event was triggered by a routine promotional payout that unexpectedly inflated user balances, prompting a surge of selling activity once recipients began liquidating. The exchange moved to restrict affected accounts within minutes and stabilized trading quickly, limiting potential digit-asset liquidations for other participants. In its update, Bithumb noted that there was no connection to hacking or external exploitation and that the incident did not derail deposits or withdrawals. The absence of a security breach is a critical distinction that helps maintain confidence in the platform, even as customers digest the temporary disruption and the compensatory measures that follow.

Beyond the immediate incident, the episode feeds into a broader conversation about the reliability of centralized exchanges—the kind of institutions that handle the largest pools of liquidity in many markets. The ripple effects have already surfaced in parallel industry coverage, where other platforms have faced operational problems during crowded trading conditions, underscoring the importance of resilient infrastructure, robust reconciliation processes, and clear customer compensation policies. As users scrutinize exchange responses to promotional errors and other anomalies, regulators in several jurisdictions are paying closer attention to how firms manage risk, communicate incidents, and safeguard user assets.

Bitwise advisor Jeff Park attributed the February 5 crypto selloff to multi-asset portfolio deleveraging rather than crypto-specific factors.

IBIT recorded 10 billion in trading volume, doubling its previous high, while options activity hit historic levels led by put contracts rather than calls.

The crash saw Bitcoin (BTC) fall 13.2% yet IBIT posted $230 million in net creations with 6 million new shares, bringing total ETF inflows above $300 million.

Goldman Sachs’ prime brokerage desk reported February 4 was one of the worst daily performances for multi-strategy funds with a z-score of 3.5. This was a 0.05% probability event 10 times rarer than a three-sigma occurrence.

Park wrote that risk managers at pod shops forced indiscriminate de-grossing, explaining why February 5 turned into a bloodbath.

CME basis trade unwinding drove violent deleveraging

Park identified the CME basis trade as a primary driver of selling pressure. The near-dated basis jumped from 3.3% on February 5 to 9% on February 6, one of the largest moves observed since ETF launch.

Traders are now starting to look beyond single-chain markets, using more flexible on-chain derivatives products. With increasing speed in the Solana ecosystem, there is a growing need for perpetual futures products that can efficiently track price movements without compromising on non-custodial, transparent, and on-chain qualities.

These developments are taking place alongside other shifts in DeFi trading dynamics, where traders are now looking for leverage but are also requiring capital efficiency, reliability, and risk parameters.

Platforms such as HFDX are benefiting from this evolution by offering on-chain perpetual futures and structured liquidity strategies designed for cross-chain participation rather than siloed liquidity.

SOL Ecosystem Growth Fuels Spike In Cross-Chain Perp Trading On HFDX

Solana is currently trading at $92.25, down 4.82% in the last 24 hours, but trading volumes are still high. With a market cap of $52.32 billion and daily trading volumes of $8.13 billion, up over 32%, it is clear that engagement is increasing, not decreasing.

For traders, the current state of the market is conducive to derivatives trading as opposed to spot trading.

Cross-chain perps enable traders to engage, hedge, and short without leaving their ecosystems. As Solana liquidity within its ecosystem continues to increase, traders are increasingly turning to cross-chain perps for risk management and efficient leverage utilization.

This is a reality of the market that traders must understand. Liquidity does not remain on one chain, nor does demand for derivatives.

How Cross-Chain Demand Is Reshaping Perp Markets

Traders are showing a clear preference for platforms that can aggregate liquidity across ecosystems. Cross-chain perp trading allows participants to express views on assets like SOL while accessing deeper, more stable liquidity pools.

This matters during volatile conditions. When activity spikes on one chain, isolated markets can experience slippage and funding instability. Cross-chain models help smooth these effects by distributing risk and liquidity more efficiently.

For advanced traders, this also unlocks new strategies. Basis trading, hedging correlated assets, and managing multi-chain portfolios all benefit from unified, on-chain perpetual infrastructure.

HFDX Positioned For Cross-Chain Perp Growth

HFDX is designed with this exact purpose in mind. It’s a non-custodial perpetual futures protocol that allows users to trade major digital assets with leverage while keeping their funds fully on-chain. Trades occur through shared liquidity pools instead of traditional order books.

Execution is an important aspect. HFDX has executed over 500,000 trades with execution speeds of less than 2 milliseconds. For traders looking to participate in cross-chain perps, execution speed is critical during periods of volatility.

Additionally, HFDX has integrated advanced charting with TradingView. Users can view real-time price information, technical indicators, macroeconomic information, and broader market information. This combination supports informed decision-making across chains.

Alongside trading, HFDX offers Liquidity Loan Note (LLN) strategies. These allow capital to be allocated to protocol liquidity for fixed terms, with returns generated from actual trading and borrowing fees.

Why HFDX Stands Out In Cross-Chain Perp Trading

• Non-custodial, on-chain perpetual futures architecture
• Cross-chain-friendly liquidity model designed for scale
• Ultra-fast execution for volatile market conditions
• Transparent oracle-based pricing and automated risk controls
• Structured liquidity strategies backed by real protocol revenue
• Professional-grade analytics and trading tools

These features support consistent performance as cross-chain leverage demand grows.

Cross-Chain Perps And HFDX’s Early Positioning

As DeFi matures, traders are seeking leverage, but they also want flexibility, transparency, and infrastructure that works across ecosystems.

HFDX sits at the center of this shift. By combining on-chain perpetual futures, structured liquidity models, and execution built for scale, the protocol is positioning itself as a long-term derivatives infrastructure rather than speculative tooling. While all participation involves risk, HFDX offers a framework designed for disciplined trading in a multi-chain world.

For traders and liquidity participants looking to engage early with cross-chain perpetual markets, HFDX represents an opportunity to explore as on-chain derivatives adoption continues to accelerate.

Make Your Money Work Smarter And Unlock A Wealth Of Opportunities With HFDX Today!

Website: https://hfdx.xyz/

Telegram: https://t.me/HFDXTrading

X: https://x.com/HfdxProtocol

Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.

Traders on prediction market Polymarket have doubled the implied odds of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ occurring by year-end, turning one of the platform’s stranger contracts into a better performer than bitcoin.

The market, titled “Will Jesus return in 2026,” traded around 4 cents on Friday, implying a roughly 4% chance. That’s up from a low of about 1.8% on Jan. 3, meaning the “Yes” side has gained more than 120% in just over a month.

Bitcoin, in contrast, has been moving in the opposite direction. The largest cryptocurrency has lost 18% this year for reasons ranging from concerns that quantum computing could break its encryption to speculation about a hedge fund blow-up and broader risk-off pressure across global markets.

Such price action has left even meme-like prediction contracts looking resilient by comparison.

Polymarket markets work like binary options. A “Yes” share pays out $1 if the event happens and $0 if it doesn’t, with the trading price reflecting the crowd’s implied probability.

A trader who buys “Yes” at 4 cents is effectively paying that amount for a shot at $1. Someone buying “No” at 96 cents is betting the event will not happen and stands to earn 4 cents if the contract resolves “No.”

If “No” trades in the mid-to-high 90s for long stretches, it creates the appearance of a slow, steady gain for anyone willing to park money there, even though the trade is ultimately binary and can still swing sharply.

The contract resolves to “Yes” if the Second Coming occurs by Dec. 31, 2026 at 11:59 p.m. ET, and to “No” otherwise. Polymarket says the resolution will be based on a consensus of credible sources, a clause that highlights why traders treat the market more as a novelty than a serious forecast.

The price action offers a snapshot of how prediction markets can behave like microcap tokens. With relatively limited liquidity, even small bursts of buying can push probabilities sharply higher, creating headline-grabbing percentage gains.

The rally also reflects Polymarket’s growing role as a real-time barometer for internet attention, where everything from elections to celebrity gossip to religious prophecies can be traded in the same interface.

As such, the “Jesus trade” remains a tiny sideshow. But in a year where bitcoin has struggled to find a stable footing, it’s also a reminder that the weirdest corners of crypto are sometimes the only ones going up.

TLDR:

• Two California teenagers posed as delivery drivers to execute a $66 million cryptocurrency heist.
• Suspects were allegedly extorted by individuals known as ‘Red’ and ‘8’ to carry out the robbery.
• Police arrested both teens in a shopping center parking lot shortly after the violent incident.
• A 3D-printed gun was found in suspects’ possession, though it contained no ammunition at all.

Two California teenagers face multiple felony charges after a targeted home invasion in Scottsdale that authorities say was motivated by cryptocurrency theft.

Jackson Sullivan and Skylar Lapaille allegedly posed as delivery drivers to gain entry into a residence near Cactus Road and Loop 101 on January 31.

The suspects restrained two adults with duct tape and assaulted them while searching for $66 million in digital assets. Police arrested both individuals shortly after they fled the scene.

Delivery Disguise Used in Violent Break-In

The teenagers arrived at the Scottsdale home dressed as package delivery workers Saturday morning. Court documents reveal they forced their way inside after gaining initial access through the disguise.

Once inside, Sullivan and Lapaille used duct tape to restrain two adult victims. The pair then assaulted the homeowners during their search for cryptocurrency holdings.

Investigators believe the suspects were extorted into carrying out the crime. Two individuals known only as “Red” and “8” allegedly orchestrated the plot from a distance.

The teenagers had reportedly met recently before traveling from California with $1,000. Those funds were intended for purchasing supplies including disguises and restraining devices.

One victim denied possessing the cryptocurrency, which led to further violence. An adult son present in another room managed to contact authorities during the incident. Officers responded quickly to the emergency call and arrived while the suspects were still in the area.

The teenagers attempted to flee when police arrived at the scene. However, law enforcement successfully tracked and apprehended both suspects in a nearby shopping center parking lot.

Officers found them in possession of a blue Subaru vehicle that matched witness descriptions.

Swift Police Response Brings Community Relief

Authorities discovered a 3D-printed gun during the arrest, though it contained no ammunition. Police have not yet determined whether the weapon was functional.

The suspects now face charges including burglary, aggravated assault, and kidnapping. All charges carry felony-level penalties under Arizona law.

Local resident Ari Parker witnessed part of the police operation without initially understanding the connection. He had noticed a blue vehicle driving through the neighborhood earlier that morning.

Parker later saw what he thought was a drug-related arrest at a shopping center. “The trunk was open, there were supervisory police vehicles there, and I thought, ‘Oh wow, that person’s screwed,’” Parker said. “I had no idea that they were connected to the crime that happened here.”

Police confirmed the vehicle captured on Parker’s Ring camera matched the one used in the crime. “The police work was really impressive,” Parker said.

“They were pounding the pavement, doing real gumshoe police detective work, knocking on doors, letting neighbors know what was happening.” He noted the incident was eye-opening given how evidence was pieced together.

Neighbors expressed shock at the incident but relief over the quick resolution. “Many of them have lived here for 15, 20 years and mentioned this is the first time they remember something like this happening,” Parker said.

“So it actually brought the neighborhood together in a way.” The case demonstrates a growing trend of criminals targeting individuals for cryptocurrency holdings.

Despite the crypto market crash, USDT adds 35.2 million users, bringing the total user base to 534.5 million across wallets and platforms.

Tether’s USDT stablecoin reached a market capitalization of $187.3 billion in Q4 2025, which marked the eighth consecutive quarter of adding more than 30 million users despite broader crypto market challenges.

Total estimated USDT users increased by 35.2 million during the quarter. This pushed the cumulative user base to 534.5 million, a figure that includes both on-chain wallet holders and users on centralized platforms.

USDT Smashes Records

On-chain holders increased by 14.7 million in Q4 to reach 139.1 million, which is the largest quarterly growth ever. Among these wallets, 30.8% were 100% savers who retained all USDT received. Another 6.7% were savers holding between two-thirds and the full amount. The remaining 62.6% were senders, keeping less than two-thirds of the USDT they received.

Monthly active on-chain users averaged 24.8 million and accounted for 68.4% of all stablecoin monthly active users, the highest level recorded to date.

Tether’s total reserves rose to $192.9 billion in Q4, including 96,184 BTC, an increase of 9,850 BTC, 127.5 metric tons of gold, up 21.9 metric tons, and $141.6 billion in US Treasuries, up $6.5 billion. The stablecoin issuer’s net equity stood at $6.3 billion. In 2025, the company added $28.2 billion of US Treasuries, ranking as the seventh-largest purchaser globally. It even surpassed countries including Taiwan and South Korea.

Following the October 10, 2025, crypto liquidation cascade, the total crypto market capitalization declined by more than one-third through February 1, 2026. Despite this, the report said that USDT continued to grow after increasing 3.5% compared with declines of 2.6% and 57% for the second- and third-largest stablecoins.

Centralized exchanges held the largest share of USDT at 36%. Savers held 33% and senders 26.5% at quarter-end. Savers increased holdings by $2.9 billion to $62.1 billion, while senders added $2.2 billion. Meanwhile, USDT held in decentralized exchanges and DeFi declined by $3 billion to $7.1 billion.

You may also like:

Tether Cuts Fundraising Target

Earlier this month, reports emerged that Tether scaled back its planned fundraising after investor pushback on a proposed $500 billion valuation. Advisers are now exploring a raise of around $5 billion, down from the $15-$20 billion initially discussed.

CEO Paolo Ardoino stated that the higher figure was never a firm target and that Tether does not urgently need outside capital. While some investors questioned the valuation, talks remain early, and no final decision has been made on the size or timing of any fundraising.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin historical halving cycles show 363-406 day pattern from ATH to bottom across 2012, 2016, and 2020 
• October-November 2026 identified as highest probability window for cycle bottom based on time analysis 
• Ultimate price target ranges between $45,000-$50,000 with current accumulation starting at $60,000 zone 
• NUPL on-chain indicator has not yet reached capitulation levels seen in previous 2018 and 2022 bottoms 

A cryptocurrency analyst has shared a detailed thesis suggesting Bitcoin could continue declining throughout 2026.

The prediction relies on historical halving cycle data spanning over a decade. Analyst, Wimar. X tracks both temporal and price-based metrics.

This approach differs from the conventional price-only analysis that many traders employ. The forecast anticipates a cycle bottom occurring between October and November 2026.

Time-Based Analysis Points to Late 2026 Bottom

The analyst’s methodology centers on measuring days from all-time highs to cycle lows following Bitcoin halvings. Historical data shows the 2012 cycle took 406 days to reach bottom.

The 2016 cycle required 363 days for the same journey. Meanwhile, the 2020 cycle saw 376 days pass before hitting its lowest point. These numbers cluster within a narrow range, creating a predictable pattern.

Building on this consistency, the current cycle projects a similar timeline. The analyst calculates October through November 2026 as the highest probability window for the next major bottom.

This time-focused strategy removes emotional decision-making from the equation. According to the post, buying during this window will occur regardless of price levels.

The analyst emphasizes that most market participants miss optimal entry points. They focus exclusively on price action while ignoring temporal patterns.

This narrow view leads to missed opportunities when historical windows align. The time-based approach aims to prevent getting “front run” by market movements.

Wimar.X stated that execution of daily purchases worth $500,000 begins when either time or price conditions trigger.

The commitment to this strategy remains firm despite market volatility. Past predictions have already materialized, including the recent drop into the $60,000 range.

Price Targets and On-Chain Indicators Signal Further Downside

The price component of the analysis sets $60,000 as an initial accumulation zone. The analyst began purchasing Bitcoin after prices entered this territory.

However, waiting for perfect price levels can result in missing entire market moves. This pragmatic approach balances patience with opportunistic buying.

A lower price target sits between $45,000 and $50,000 by year-end 2026. This range represents the analyst’s “ultimate bottom target” for aggressive accumulation.

The prediction acknowledges the current risk of lower lows materializing. Market conditions remain uncertain, but historical precedent guides the strategy.

Net Unrealized Profit/Loss serves as the third analytical pillar. This on-chain metric successfully identified cycle bottoms in 2018, during the COVID crash, and in 2022.

Current readings show the market has not yet reached the capitulation zone. The NUPL indicator historically appears in a specific blue zone during major bottoms.

The analyst’s experience dates back to 2016, providing perspective through multiple market cycles. Prior predictions, including calls made when Bitcoin traded near $114,000, have proven accurate.

The framework combines quantitative analysis with disciplined execution across both time and price dimensions.

Bitcoin gained up to 3% Sunday, offering a tentative sign of relief after a brutal slide, but many traders remained skeptical that the selling pressure had truly exhausted itself. After Friday’s losses stretched into the weekend, price action stayed volatile as participants weighed whether a durable rebound would form or another leg lower loomed. The market briefly nudged above a key level, reviving conversations about whether macro fundamentals and ETF dynamics could sustain any upside. A look at on-chain and chart data shows the debate is far from settled, with analysts pointing to long-term moving averages, ETF cost bases, and the possibility of a fresh capitulation phase ahead.

Key points:

• Bitcoin price comparisons warn that new macro lows are due if the 2022 bear market repeats itself.
• Moving averages and the cost basis of the US spot Bitcoin ETFs are in focus.
• Analysis says that a carbon copy of 2022 is not a certainty.

Key takeaways

• BTC rebounded intraday, crossing above the $71,000 mark and marking a roughly 20% recovery from the Friday lows, though the pace and durability of the move faced scrutiny from strategists.
• The technical landscape rests on the long-term cloud formed by the 200-week simple moving average (SMA) and the 200-week exponential moving average (EMA), a zone some observers identify as a critical battleground for bulls and bears.
• Analysts highlighted the trading backdrop around US spot Bitcoin ETFs, noting that the average cost basis of ETF holdings has been reported around $82,000, implying substantial unrealized losses at current price levels.
• Several voices warned that the market has yet to see a true capitulation, with a prominent claim that a real bottom would likely form well below $50,000, where ETF buyers would be heavily underwater.
• Historical patterns from 2022 and comparative analyses of trendlines continue to shape expectations, but experts cautioned that the bear market’s exact replication is not guaranteed.

Tickers mentioned: $BTC

Sentiment: Bearish

Price impact: Positive. Intraday gains suggested a short-term rebound, but the broader setup remained under question.

Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold.

Market context: The rebound comes amid a broader crypto environment characterized by volatile liquidity, sensitivity to macro cues, and ongoing scrutiny of ETF placements and cost bases, which continue to influence price action and risk appetite across digital-asset markets.

Why it matters

The price action surrounding BTC over the weekend underscores a persistent tug-of-war between technical support zones and the structural pressures that defined 2022’s drop. For market participants, the critical question is whether the bounce represents a meaningful shift in momentum or a temporary respite within a larger downtrend. The reference points cited by analysts — the 200-week MA cloud, the 200-week SMA/EMA confluence, and the price neighborhood around $58,000 to $68,000 — provide a framework for assessing whether bulls can establish a footing or if sellers regain control as risk sentiment ebbs and flows.

On-chain and derivatives signals reinforce the complexity. The data indicating an average ETF buy-in cost near $82,000 paints a stark picture of unrealized losses should prices retreat again, particularly for funds that entered at elevated levels amid the late-2023/early-2024 hype. This dynamic contributes to a bearish undertone, as players weigh the potential for further drawdown against the possibility of a resilient, longer-term base forming near or above prior cycles’ critical lines. Even as price nudges higher, market participants are careful to separate a fleeting rebound from a durable reversal, mindful of how quickly sentiment can pivot in a risk-off environment.

The narrative of a potential capitulation has persisted through the period. A widely cited perspective from an independent trader cautions that the “final capitulation” has not yet occurred, implying that a true bottom could lie well below the $50,000 zone. That viewpoint aligns with the sense that ETF holders and late-entry risk-takers could be sitting on substantial underwater positions if prices fail to sustain a recovery. Yet others, including technical analysts who study moving-average dynamics, contend that markets do not always repeat past cycles in a near-perfect fashion, leaving room for a range of outcomes even if the broad trend remains bearish.

In broader terms, the market’s mood appears tethered to the same macro undercurrents that have driven risk assets into a risk-off stance at times. The interplay between macro data, liquidity conditions, and the evolving ETF landscape is likely to keep BTC in a volatile orbit as participants parse signals from charts and on-chain activity alike. While a bounce may provide relief to shorts and layer-2 players alike, many observers emphasize that key technical touchpoints — including revisits of the late-2021/early-2022 bases and the responses around ETF pricing nodes — will help define the near-term trajectory.

For readers seeking a concrete reminder of where traders are placing weight, a look at the price action relative to key trendlines remains instructive. A reference chart tracking BTC price against a long-term moving-average cloud has previously shown how the market reacts to a first retest of the cloud, with past cycles revealing that initial bounces can give way to renewed consolidation if the price fails to gain momentum. The narrative is not a binary one; rather, it centers on whether price can establish a series of higher-lows and whether volatility can begin to normalize from the extremes seen in earlier sessions.

Four more for your foresight https://t.co/psM23MQiI2 pic.twitter.com/Qu0Pt5QeUz

— Tony Severino, CMT (Twitter)

Advertisement

As the weekend progressed, a consensus emerged among several traders that the market would need to break decisively in one direction to confirm a new phase. The denouement of the current cycle will likely be decided not simply by a single price level but by how long price can sustain moves above and below critical references — especially the broad band of support around the 200-week MA and the lower bound of the cloud in the $58,000–$68,000 area. The possibility remains that 2022’s patterns could recur in spirit without exact replication, leaving room for a range of outcomes as the market digests both price and macro signals.

Looking ahead, market participants are watching how these dynamics unfold against evolving ETF activity and macro liquidity. While a quick bounce may dampen some short-term bearish bets, the path to a durable reversal remains contested, with the door arguably open for further volatility as investors weigh the balance of risk and reward in a sector redefining its own cycles.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

What to watch next

• Monitor BTC price action around the 200-week MA cloud and the $58,000–$68,000 support zone for signs of a sustained breakout or renewed pullback.
• Watch for a decisive move below $50,000 to signal a deeper capitulation phase or a renewed base for potential recovery.
• Track ETF-related indicators, including the cost basis of US spot BTC ETFs and any shifts in premium/discount levels, as flows influence medium-term dynamics.
• Observe how macro risk sentiment and liquidity conditions evolve, particularly any catalysts that could alter the probability of a longer-term bottom forming.

Sources & verification

• TradingView data showing BTC/USD crossing the $71,000 level and comparing it to Friday’s lows.
• Checkonchain ETF MV RV data indicating the current average buy-in cost for US spot BTC ETFs around $82,000.
• Filbfilb’s commentary on BTC price action relative to the 50-week moving average and the current price against that line.
• Social posts from BitBull and Tony Severino discussing capitulation timelines and market structure (X/Twitter posts).
• Caleb Franzen of Cubic Analytics discussing the 200-week MA cloud and its historical relevance to price reversals.

BTC price action and the hunt for a bottom

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) began the weekend with a cautious bounce, climbing as much as 3% at times as traders weighed the possibility of a sustainable revival after the sell-off that dragged the market into a precarious zone near multi-month lows. The intraday move above the $71,000 threshold signaled that buyers remained active, but skeptics pointed to a lack of follow-through and a fragile setup that could quickly evaporate if key support levels failed to hold. The immediate context includes a 20% rebound from the prior Friday’s near-term trough, a figure that underscores the volatility baked into the current price action and the hesitancy among bulls to declare victory prematurely.

Analysts frequently return to long-term moving averages as anchors for judgment. The 200-week simple moving average (SMA) and the 200-week exponential moving average (EMA) together form a “cloud” that has historically defined the atmosphere around major basins and recoveries. In recent observations, the price has hovered near the lower boundary of this cloud, a zone that has previously acted as both resistance and support depending on the broader momentum. If BTC can sustain a move above this band, bulls may gain confidence; if the price slips back into the cloud or below, the path toward new lows could re-emerge.

Independent analysts have offered divergent views on the path forward. One trader shared a comparison chart showing the current price trajectory against the long-term moving averages, with a cautionary note that the market’s behavior could echo cycles from 2022 but not replicate them exactly. The critique emphasizes that the current rebound lacks the same strength and breadth that would accompany a genuine trend reversal. Another analyst underscored the risk that the bear market’s dynamics could reassert themselves, particularly if macro factors remain restrictive or if demand signals falter amid ongoing uncertainty about ETF structures and risk appetite.

Meanwhile, a veteran trader highlighted a more explicit bottom scenario: the real capitulation, in their view, would arrive only after prices fall beneath the $50,000 level and ETF holders find themselves underwater. Such a level would likely reflect a prolonged period of distress and could catalyze a broader capitulation event. The tension between these viewpoints captures the essence of today’s market — a landscape where a seemingly constructive bounce coexists with a persistent awareness that the longer-term trend remains tilted downward for many participants.

On the ETF front, Checkonchain’s data points to a substantial cost basis gap that influences how investors assess risk and potential recoveries. The implication is that even a technical rebound could be tempered by the reality that many market participants have been positioned at much higher price points, which weighs on the willingness to buy aggressively into any new leg higher. This factor, combined with the long-term moving-average framework and the absence of a clear catalyst to elevate demand, suggests that the market would need a sustained series of favorable conditions to establish a durable bottom rather than a shallow, short-lived rally.

Amid the uncertainty, observers stress that the market does not always adhere to exact historical proportions. While the ghost of 2022’s bear market lingers in the form of a cautious outlook and a vigilant technical chorus, the possibility remains for a unique path shaped by evolving institutional flows, energy markets, and shifting risk sentiment. The absence of a definitive bottom narrative means that traders should prepare for ongoing volatility, with risk management and disciplined strategy as essential tools in navigating BTC’s next moves.