Crypto World
ENS governance battle, EF cuts and Gnosis reboot
Last week was a dramatic week for DeFi with the Ethereum Name Service (ENS) DAO facing a proposal that’s been branded an attempt to “steal its treasury,” Gnosis DAO rerunning recent treasury redemption discussions, and the Ethereum Foundation announcing a 20% staff cut.
The proposal facing the ENS DAO entitled “Next Era of ENS DAO: Empowering the ENS Foundation,” would see day-to-day operations and treasury assets transferred to the ENS Foundation, “led by a full-time executive director and staff.”
It cites issues such as “delegate fatigue,” exacerbated by the DAO making “too many small decisions and too few big ones,” a lack of accountability from grant recipients, coordination problems and the potential to put treasury funds to work.
Lefteris Karapetsas, who admits he’s “inactive and no longer participates in DAO governance,” got into a heated exchange on X with ENS lead developer Nick Johnson, who’s worried the DAO is “almost solely concerned with how best to spend the treasury.”
Karapetsas accuses Johnson of “delegat[ing] ~50% of the entire voting supply to yourself,” though Johnson counters that such low delegate participation is “a testament to how difficult it’s been to keep the DAO secure using token-weighted delegated voting.”
Almost six years ago the pair clashed on the topic.
Johnson stressed the need for the legitimacy of a DAO over treasury spending, while Karapetsas had hoped that ENS wouldn’t have a token at all.
The controversial proposal’s author Katherine Wu made a lengthy post in an attempt to “clear some things up” but, by turning off replies, has only faced further criticism.
Johnson has insisted that ENS was always meant to be a governance only token, with the treasury solely meant for “building ENS, and… funding public goods, and not to be used for anything else.”
With many upset at the direction of Ethereum’s most popular name service, an L2BEAT researcher decided to set up an “ownerless and unruggable” alternative.
Read more: ‘RFV Raiders’ target Gnosis DAO for treasury redemption proposal
According to DeFiLlama data, the ENS DAO treasury is valued at around $350 million, or $88 million if excluding the project’s own ENS token.
DAO treasuries are occasionally targeted by so-called “RFV raiders,” who buy up large voting positions in order to use governance to redistribute DAO assets.
One such activist investor suspects that the move from ENS may be in order to pre-empt any such “raid.”
Another longstanding DAO, Gnosis, recently faced such a treasury redemption proposal, which was ultimately rejected.
However, the DAO did ultimately vote in favour of a second, simplified iteration of the idea, which was “developed jointly with the Gnosis founding team.”
The governance drama comes during a tricky period for Gnosis, which recently saw its Gnosis Pay crypto card experience a security incident, and its X handle compromised to promote a phishing site.
Ethereum Foundation layoffs
Following a number of recent high-profile departures, the Ethereum Foundation announced a 20% staff cut.
In a euphemism-packed blog post, the foundation announced that a reorganisation would mean “parting ways with 54 of our colleagues.”
Read more: Bizarre Ethereum Foundation anime letter blamed for mass resignations
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin expanded on X, linking the layoffs to a 40% decrease in the foundation’s budget this year.
He highlights the loss of “brilliant” colleagues, and presents the changes as Ethereum’s “third iteration.”
It includes optimising the “multi-client model” for specialization, “implementing ZKP-based privacy and scaling” and a reduction in scope of non-development activities.
Meanwhile, non-profit R&D outfit Ethlabs announced its launch, with former EF member Barnabé Monnot joining the organisation, among others.
In other DeFi news…
When a predatory MEV bot gets rekt, scammers waste no time in taking advantage.
After notorious, prolific sandwicher jaredfromsubway.eth fell into an expertly crafted approvals booby trap last weekend, losing $7.5 million, a scammer wasted no time in spinning up a spoof X account to profit off the attention.
The account has since been used to promote fake bounty offers, giveaways and even launched its own Pump Fun token.
The JARED token struggled to break a $25,000 market cap, and currently sits at just $9,200.
Read more: MEV bot JaredFromSubway.eth loses $7.5M to approvals honeypot
Meanwhile, it appears the genuine 50% bounty offer fell on deaf ears, when the proceeds began to be laundered via Tornado Cash on Tuesday.
Recent exploits on Taiko and SecondFi have security researchers scratching their heads.
Taiko developers apparently left a signing key on GitHub, which was initially thought to be the cause of a recent $1.7 million hack.
However, a SuccintLabs developer’s theory is that the root cause was a “missing check,” not the leaked key. The attacker was able to rebuild Taiko’s prover in debug mode, extract an “in-enclave signing key,” and use that to drain the bridge.
Then, what began as a $2.4 million hack on Cardano wallet provider SecondFi was thought to be far larger, until the firm assured users that the majority of funds were rescued in a whitehat operation.
The problem was that, days later, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson claimed that Emurgo, SecondFi’s developer, didn’t know who the whitehat was…
The bug itself was reportedly down to a very basic and unfortunately-named “public nonce” issue, which allowed an attacker to use public transaction data to back-calculate private keys of SecondFi wallets.
Coinbase’s layer two network Base went offline on Thursday, marking its second outage in less than a year.
According to the network’s status page, the chain was stalled following “a consensus problem that caused an invalid block to be sequenced.”
After approximately two hours, block sequencing resumed, with any stuck nodes needing to restart and resync.
Less than 24 hours later, however, the disruption flared up again.
Finally, shutdown season continues.
Read more: Goldfinch Africa lending dream ends in defaults and 99.8% token crash
Lending platform Ionic Money announced it was unable to recover from last year’s hack (not to mention the two hacks it suffered in 2023 under its previous moniker Midas Capital).
Following a bank run, Altura decided to sunset its AVLT amid the Main Street msUSD depeg chaos.
Loopring, “the very first zkRollup on the market,” is winding down, citing a lack of “meaningful adoption.” Users’ assets will be returned directly to their wallets.
And, after being depegged for over a year, Synthetic sUSD will be deprecated at “a slight premium to par” following a lock up period.
Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
MoneySimpler promotes passive income strategies for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders through AI-driven digital asset utilization tools.
Summary
- MoneySimpler offers AI-driven automated strategies for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders to generate passive income.
- MoneySimpler uses 24/7 AI quantitative trading to analyze markets and automate digital asset management.
- MoneySimpler enables simple, automated crypto strategies for ETH, USDT, USDC, and BTC with real-time tracking.
For those who hold ETH, USDT, or USDC, they might have wondered: besides waiting for prices to rise, can these digital assets create more value?
In recent years, more and more digital asset investors have begun exploring new avenues for passive income. From staking and DeFi to AI-automated trading, the focus is no longer just on asset prices but on how to more effectively utilize funds to ensure that the digital assets they hold continue to generate value.
MoneySimpler provides daily passive income for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders through an intelligent and automated asset management model.
How can automated strategies help improve returns on assets?
The digital asset market operates 24/7, and more and more investors want to reduce the time costs of frequent market monitoring and manual trading while simultaneously increasing asset returns.
MoneySimpler uses an AI-powered quantitative trading system to continuously analyze the market and automatically execute corresponding processes based on preset strategies, helping users to use quantitative trading more conveniently and improve their returns.
The main features of the platform include:
- Automated operation 24/7, no need for frequent market monitoring
- Intelligent quantitative strategies continuously analyze market changes
- Supports mainstream digital assets such as ETH, USDT, USDC, and BTC
- Allows users to view account status, profit records, and asset information at any time
- Simple operation process, no complex trading experience required
How to get started with MoneySimpler?
MoneySimpler is dedicated to simplifying the AI-driven quantitative trading process. Users can quickly start AI-automated trading without programming, building a trading system, or constantly monitoring the market.
Step 1: Register an Account
Upon completing account registration, new users will receive a $10 sign-up bonus and a $50 trial fund to experience the platform’s AI-powered automated trading features.
Step 2: Choose a Trading Plan
Select a suitable trading plan based on needs and complete asset allocation using cryptocurrency. (Minimum investment starts from $100)
Examples of popular contracts
Basis Arbitrage Strategy: Invest $100, 2-day period, daily return $4, total return at maturity $100 + $8
Digital Asset Trend Tracking 2.05: Invest $600, 5-day period, daily return $7.5, total return at maturity $600 + $37.5
Digital Asset Trend Tracking 2.1: Invest $1,100, 10-day period, daily return $14.3, total return at maturity $1100 + $143
Trend Tracking 2.1: Invest $5,000, 20-day period, daily return $70.5, total return at maturity $5,000 + $1,410
Inter-Exchange Arbitrage 3.5: Invest $12,000, 30-day period, daily return $153, total return at maturity $10,000 + $4,590
Cryptocurrency Statistical Arbitrage Strategy 2.45: Invest $100,000, 40-day period, daily return $1,950, total return at maturity $100,000 + $78,000
For more strategy details, please visit the MoneySimpler website.
Step 3: Activate AI-Automated Trading.
After selecting the corresponding trading contract, daily profits will be automatically settled into an account. The AI system will automatically run the corresponding strategy and execute trades based on market changes.
A secure and transparent smart quantitative trading platform
For digital asset users, a platform’s security, transparency, and compliance are often just as important as profit opportunities.
MoneySimpler continuously improves its platform security system and adheres to international digital asset management standards to provide users with more reliable intelligent quantitative services.
The platform’s security and compliance system includes:
- Compliant with the UK Financial Conduct Authority and the EU MiCA (Mini-Assets Framework) standards for crypto assets;
- Quarterly earnings audits by PwC;
- Lloyd’s of London provides insurance coverage for the platform’s funds;
- Cloudflare and McAfee provide enterprise-grade cybersecurity and real-time security protection.
With a robust compliance, security, and risk control system, MoneySimpler is committed to providing global ETH, USDT, and USDC holders with a safer, more transparent, and intelligent quantitative asset management experience.
Summarize
The development of the digital asset market is driving investors to shift from “long-term holding” to “enhancing asset profitability.”
For users holding ETH, USDT, or USDC, MoneySimpler offers a smarter, automated asset management approach, allowing idle digital assets to generate more value.
Register an account now on the Money Simpler official platform, claim new user rewards, experience AI-powered quantitative trading, and start the daily passive income journey.
Disclosure: This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company.
TLDR:
- Solana RWA distributed asset value climbed to $3.03B after posting a 13.2% increase over 30 days.
- Monthly RWA transfer volume surged 120.5% to $8.53B, marking the fastest-growing network metric.
- RWA holders reached 290,481 after growing 24.4% in one month, showing wider ecosystem participation.
- Solana stablecoin market cap rose to $15.77B, supporting liquidity across the expanding RWA market.
Solana’s real-world asset market continues to expand as fresh on-chain data points to stronger activity across tokenized assets.
The latest figures show higher asset values, growing participation, and a sharp rise in transfer volume. Stablecoins also remain a major source of liquidity across the network. The new metrics highlight steady growth across multiple parts of the Solana ecosystem.
Solana RWA Ecosystem Records Higher Asset Value and User Growth
Data shared by Everstake shows the Solana RWA ecosystem reached $3.03 billion in distributed asset value. That marks a 13.2% increase over the past 30 days.
The same dataset shows the number of RWA holders climbed to 290,481. Monthly holder growth reached 24.4%, indicating broader participation in tokenized assets.
Transfer activity expanded even faster. Solana recorded $8.53 billion in 30-day RWA transfer volume, representing a 120.5% increase from the previous month.
Everstake highlighted transfer volume as the strongest metric during the latest reporting period. The figures suggest assets moved across the network at a much faster pace than before.
The platform also reported 2,115 tokenized real-world assets operating on Solana. Represented asset value stood at $125.86 million during the same period.
Stablecoins Continue Powering Solana RWA Market Activity
Stablecoins remained the largest segment supporting the Solana RWA market. Network data placed the total stablecoin market capitalization at $15.77 billion, up 3.43% over 30 days.
Stablecoin transfer volume reached $487.08 billion during the month. Activity increased 3.59%, even as stablecoin holders declined 7.77% to 10.95 million.
The league table published alongside the data ranked Circle as the largest platform by asset value. Circle accounted for approximately $7.1 billion across three supported asset classes.
Tether Holdings followed with roughly $3.8 billion, while Paxos ranked third at $1.4 billion. BitGo, Securitize, Anchorage Digital Bank, Ethena, Ctrl Alt, Solstice, and Ondo completed the top ten.
Among individual assets, USDC remained the largest tokenized product on Solana with nearly $6.97 billion in distributed value. USDT followed at about $3.77 billion, while BitGo’s USD1 exceeded the $1 billion mark.
Other leading products included Anchorage Digital Bank’s USDGO, Paxos-issued PYUSD, and Securitize’s BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund.
According to Everstake’s published figures and the accompanying Solana RWA dashboard, stablecoins continue to dominate network value while tokenized treasuries, private equity, and corporate credit products steadily expand their presence.
XRP has slid to around $1, down from its $3.66 high last year, with retail in fear even as whale wallets hit record highs. Where could it finish 2026? Credible forecasts run from below $1 to $8, and the gap comes down to one question. Here is what would push XRP to each level, and which path looks most defensible.
Summary
- XRP trades near $1.04 as of late June 2026, down from a July 2025 cycle high near $3.66, with relative strength near oversold and moving averages around $1.13 to $1.14 sitting overhead as resistance.
- The forecast range for year-end 2026 is unusually wide: bearish models point below $1, conservative models to roughly $1.40 to $1.80, Standard Chartered to $2.80, and bullish publishers toward $4.36 to $8.
- Standard Chartered’s Geoffrey Kendrick cut his year-end target from $8 to $2.80 while keeping a $28 call for 2030, capturing the split between near-term caution and long-term conviction.
- The entire range turns on one question: whether the XRP token itself, not just Ripple’s network, captures the cross-border payment and settlement volume flowing through it.
- A move to $2 or $3 needs stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while $5 or higher needs a genuine shift in market structure and proven token utility.
XRP (XRP) is trading near $1.04 as of late June 2026, and for holders it has been a deeply frustrating year: the token has cleared nearly every obstacle its community spent years waiting for, yet the price has done close to nothing but fall. XRP is down from a cycle high near $3.66 reached in July 2025, having declined through the back half of last year and the first half of this one, and it now sits roughly a third below where it began 2026.
The technical picture is heavy. The relative strength index hovers near 30, at the lower boundary where downtrends sometimes exhaust themselves, and the 50-day and 200-day moving averages cluster overhead around $1.13 to $1.14, acting as the resistance XRP must reclaim to change its trend. Sentiment is weak, with retail traders fearful, even as on-chain data shows whale wallet counts at record highs, a contrarian split in which large holders appear to be accumulating while smaller holders capitulate. The question this article addresses is where that leaves XRP at the end of 2026, and the honest answer is that the credible range is enormous.
That range, from below $1 to $8, is not a sign of lazy forecasting; it reflects a real and unresolved disagreement about what XRP fundamentally is and whether its token captures value. This article works through the question methodically: where XRP stands and how it got here, the bearish case for a finish below $1, the base case in the $1.40 to $2.80 zone, the bullish case for $4 to $8, the meaning of Standard Chartered’s high-profile cut from $8 to $2.80, the enormous valuation gap that Bitwise’s own model reveals, the catalysts that could actually move the price, and three concrete scenarios for year-end.
Throughout, the goal is to show what each outcome requires rather than to pick a number, because XRP’s path depends on variables that genuinely could resolve in very different directions. The forecasts here are information, not advice, and the single most useful thing to carry through the piece is the question underneath every target: does XRP the token capture the volume that Ripple the company is winning, or does the value accrue elsewhere? Almost everything about the price follows from the answer.
Where XRP stands and how it got here
To judge where XRP might end 2026, you need the recent history, because XRP’s price has been driven as much by legal and structural events as by market cycles. The token spent years under the shadow of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit against Ripple, and that case formally concluded in 2025, establishing that XRP is not a security when sold on exchanges and removing the single largest overhang on the token.
On the back of the resolution and a friendlier regulatory climate, XRP surged to a cycle high near $3.66 in July 2025, approaching the kind of levels its long-suffering community had anticipated for years. Spot XRP exchange-traded funds launched in November 2025 and drew over $1 billion in net inflows, another long-awaited milestone. By the standards of what the community had been waiting for, 2025 delivered nearly the full checklist.
And yet the price has fallen steadily since. From the July 2025 high near $3.66, XRP declined through the rest of the year and into 2026, sliding to around $1.04 by late June against a backdrop of broad crypto weakness. The frustration in the XRP community is precisely that the token cleared every hurdle and still dropped, which has fueled a debate about whether the good news was already priced in, whether broader market conditions simply overwhelmed XRP’s catalysts, or whether something more structural is limiting how much value flows to the token.
The current setup reflects that tension: XRP is liquid and actively traded, whale wallets are accumulating at record levels in what looks like strategic positioning, but retail sentiment is fearful, and the chart is below its key moving averages. The token sits at a level that is either a coiled accumulation base before the next move higher or a waypoint in a continued decline, and which one it is depends on the catalysts and the value-accrual question explored below. The history matters because it shows XRP has already spent its biggest bullish catalysts, the legal resolution and the ETF launch, which raises the bar for what it takes to push the price meaningfully higher from here.
The bearish case: a finish below $1
The case for XRP ending 2026 below $1 is grounded in both technicals and a structural skepticism that deserves to be taken seriously. Technically, XRP trades below its key moving averages near $1.13 to $1.14, and a market that cannot reclaim those levels is, by definition, still in a downtrend. Several model-based and technical forecasting systems remain bearish on XRP, with some, such as Gov Capital and WalletInvestor, projecting outright losses over a 1-year horizon, treating recent weakness as part of a broader risk pattern rather than a dip to be bought. If macro conditions deteriorate, whether through a broad crypto downturn, a risk-off shift in markets, or disappointing follow-through on ETF flows, XRP could test and break its current support, with technical analyses pointing to downside levels in the low-$1 range and below if the bearish trend persists.
The deeper bearish argument is structural and connects to the value-accrual question at the heart of this piece. Skeptics contend that Ripple’s commercial success, its growing roster of financial-institution partnerships and its cross-border payments business, does not necessarily translate into demand for the XRP token, because much of Ripple’s settlement activity can be conducted without participants holding XRP for any meaningful duration, and because Ripple’s own dollar stablecoin offers an alternative settlement instrument that does not require the token at all. In this reading, XRP could remain a liquid, speculative asset whose price is driven by sentiment and trading rather than by genuine, sustained utility demand, and absent a clear mechanism forcing value into the token, it could drift lower or stagnate even as Ripple thrives as a company.
The bearish case, then, is not merely a chart pattern; it is a thesis that XRP the token may be structurally disconnected from the network’s success, and that a finish below $1 is what happens if the market comes to share that view while macro conditions stay unsupportive.
The base case: $1.40 to $2.80
The base case, where a plurality of serious forecasts cluster, sees XRP recovering modestly to somewhere between roughly $1.40 and $2.80 by year-end, and it rests on a more balanced set of assumptions. Conservative, model-driven forecasters such as CoinCodex and Changelly project XRP in the $1.40 to $1.80 area, with Changelly specifically modeling a December range around $1.29 to $1.55 and an average near $1.42.
These forecasts assume XRP stabilizes, reclaims some lost ground as the broader market steadies, and benefits from continued but not explosive ETF interest, without breaking decisively above its major resistance levels. This is essentially a recovery-without-breakout scenario: XRP stops falling, grinds back toward and through its moving averages, but does not enter a new bull phase.
The upper end of the base case is anchored by the most-watched institutional forecast on XRP. Geoffrey Kendrick at Standard Chartered, after cutting his target, places XRP’s year-end 2026 level at $2.80, a number that sits deliberately between the cautious algorithmic models and the more bullish crypto-publisher calls. That $2.80 figure has become a useful benchmark precisely because it comes from a major bank instead of from automated technical models or retail-facing commentary, and it implies meaningful recovery from current levels without requiring a structural transformation in how XRP captures value.
The base case overall assumes that XRP’s concluded legal status, its live ETFs, and its institutional relationships provide enough of a foundation for a recovery toward the $1.40 to $2.80 band, supported by moderate ETF inflows and a stable-to-improving macro environment, but that the bigger moves toward $5 and beyond require catalysts that are not yet in evidence. For a token that has spent its largest bullish events already, a base-case recovery into the low-single-digits is a reasonable central expectation, and it is where the weight of credible forecasting sits.
The bullish case: $4 to $8
The bullish case for XRP reaching $4 to $8 by year-end is not fringe; it has institutional roots, but it requires conditions that go well beyond a general crypto rebound. The bullish group of forecasts starts near $4.36 and extends above $6, drawing on sources including PricePrediction.net, Telegaon, and commentary such as Dominic Basulto at The Motley Fool, who has floated $5 for XRP in 2026 with asset tokenization as a potential catalyst.
At the top of the credible bull range sits Standard Chartered’s original $8 target for 2026, which Kendrick held before cutting it and which was predicated on sustained ETF inflows and the regulatory clarity following the SEC settlement. The common thread is that these higher targets all assume XRP converts its structural advantages, concluded legal status, live ETFs, and Ripple’s institutional footprint, into real, sustained demand for the token.
What would it actually take to get there? The bullish case requires several things to align: ETF inflows would need to accelerate substantially, with some bullish models assuming flows climbing toward the multibillion-dollar range that Standard Chartered modeled as the trigger for its higher targets; the CLARITY Act or similar legislation would need to pass and codify XRP’s commodity status, unlocking institutional capital that has stayed on the sidelines; Ripple’s expanding use of XRP in cross-border settlement and its banking ambitions would need to translate into demonstrable token demand; and the broader market would likely need an altcoin-favorable phase instead of the current Bitcoin-dominated, risk-off mood.
The cleanest way to summarize it, echoing the analysts who have studied the range, is that a move toward $2 to $3 requires stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while a move toward $5 or higher requires a stronger shift in market structure, institutional demand, and proven token utility. The bull case is achievable, but it is conditional on XRP answering the value-accrual question in the affirmative, which is exactly what remains unproven.
Why Standard Chartered cut from $8 to $2.80
The most instructive single event in XRP’s forecast landscape this year is Standard Chartered’s revision, because it crystallizes the shift from hope to realism. Geoffrey Kendrick, the bank’s digital-assets research lead, had previously set an $8 year-end 2026 target for XRP, a number that implied a large rally and was anchored in expectations of sustained ETF inflows and the post-settlement regulatory clarity.
As the year progressed and XRP failed to sustain the more aggressive assumptions priced into that forecast, Kendrick cut the year-end target to $2.80. The revision fit the broader weakness seen across crypto in 2026 and reflected that the catalysts, while real, were not translating into price at the pace the original target assumed. The cut matters because it came from a credible institutional source recalibrating to reality instead of from a perma-bear or a hype account, which makes the new $2.80 figure a more grounded benchmark than the targets above it.
Crucially, Kendrick left his longer-term call untouched: he kept a $28 target for XRP by 2030 even as he slashed the near-term number. That juxtaposition, $2.80 by year-end but $28 by 2030, captures the defining feature of serious XRP analysis, which is a split between near-term caution and long-term conviction. The long-term bull case rests on XRP becoming a major institutional settlement asset as Ripple’s banking and cross-border infrastructure matures, a process measured in years instead of months.
The near-term caution reflects that, right now, those flows have not materialized at the scale needed to drive the price, and the token remains hostage to sentiment and macro conditions. For anyone trying to forecast year-end 2026 specifically, the lesson of the Standard Chartered cut is sobering: even a committed long-term bull at a major bank concluded that the near-term path was far more modest than the $8 he once projected, and $2.80 now functions as the credible ceiling of the base case instead of the floor of the bull case.
The valuation gap that defines XRP
If one piece of analysis captures why XRP forecasts diverge so violently, it is the valuation work from the asset manager Bitwise, which ran XRP through a formal model and produced 2030 outcomes ranging from roughly $0.13 at the bottom to above $29 at the top. That is more than a 200-fold gap between the same firm’s bearish and bullish cases for the same token, and it sounds absurd until you see what drives it. The entire spread rests on a single assumption: whether XRP the token captures a meaningful chunk of the cross-border payment and settlement volume that Ripple is winning. Bitwise’s high case assumes it does, with XRP becoming the bridge asset that institutional value routes through; its low case assumes it does not, with banks sticking to existing systems and dollar stablecoins, including Ripple’s own, moving the money instead while XRP is bypassed.
This is the question underneath every XRP price target, and it is why the same catalysts can be read as wildly bullish or quietly bearish. Standard Chartered’s $28 by 2030 and the high single-digit-to-low-teens targets from other analysts all quietly lean on the assumption that the token captures the volume; the bearish models assume it does not.
The reason the question is so hard to settle is that Ripple can and does conduct much settlement activity without participants holding XRP for long, and its dollar stablecoin offers a token-free alternative, so the mechanism by which network success forces sustained demand into XRP is contested instead of obvious. For year-end 2026, the practical implication is that XRP’s price will be driven less by any single catalyst than by how the market’s collective answer to this question evolves. If confidence grows that the token captures the volume, the higher targets come into reach; if doubt deepens, the lower ones do. Everything else- the ETF flows, the legislation, the partnerships- ultimately feeds into that one judgment, which is why the credible forecast range is a chasm instead of a band.
The catalysts that could move XRP
Several concrete catalysts could push XRP toward one end of the range or the other before year-end, and watching them is more useful than fixating on a target. The 1st is the CLARITY Act and the broader regulatory picture. Passage of legislation codifying XRP’s commodity status into law, instead of leaving it resting on the concluded lawsuit, could unlock institutional capital that has stayed cautious, and XRP is widely seen as a beneficiary alongside other payment-focused tokens.
The 2nd is ETF flows. The spot XRP ETFs that launched in late 2025 are central to any serious forecast, because they remove supply from exchanges as providers accumulate, and the trajectory of their inflows, whether they reaccelerate toward the multibillion-dollar levels bulls assume or stagnate, will heavily influence the price. The 3rd is Ripple’s own business: its expanding use of XRP in cross-border corridors, its banking and custody ambitions, and the growth of its dollar stablecoin, which cuts both ways by validating Ripple while offering a token-free settlement path.
The 4th set of catalysts is macro and market structure: the Federal Reserve’s policy path, broad crypto liquidity, Bitcoin’s behavior, and whether the market rotates into altcoins or stays concentrated in Bitcoin. XRP, like most altcoins, tends to need a risk-on, altcoin-favorable environment to sustain large moves, and the current Bitcoin-dominated, fearful market has been a headwind.
The contrarian signal worth watching is the divergence between record whale accumulation and fearful retail sentiment, which historically can precede a reversal if the large holders prove right, though it can also simply reflect long-term holders averaging into a continued decline.
The honest framing is that these catalysts are real, but their effects are conditional, and none of them individually guarantees a direction; collectively, they will determine whether XRP’s year-end print lands in the bearish, base, or bullish zone. For a token that has already spent its biggest catalysts, the marginal mover from here is most likely the combination of ETF-flow momentum and the market’s evolving answer to the value-accrual question.
Three scenarios for XRP at year-end 2026
Drawing the analysis into scenarios clarifies the range. In the bull scenario, XRP finishes 2026 somewhere between $4 and as high as $8. This requires ETF inflows to accelerate meaningfully, the CLARITY Act or similar to pass and unlock institutional capital, an altcoin-favorable market phase to arrive, and growing confidence that XRP the token genuinely captures Ripple’s settlement volume. It is the path the most bullish credible forecasts describe, and it depends on the value-accrual question resolving in XRP’s favor while macro conditions turn supportive. It is achievable but conditional, and the bar is high given that XRP has already spent its legal and ETF-launch catalysts.
In the base scenario, the most heavily populated by serious forecasts, XRP recovers modestly to roughly $1.40 to $2.80. Support holds, the broader market steadies, ETF interest continues at a moderate pace, and XRP grinds back toward and possibly through its key moving averages without entering a new bull phase, with Standard Chartered’s $2.80 marking the credible upper edge. This recovery-without-breakout outcome fits the weight of model-based and institutional forecasting and is arguably the most likely central case. In the bear scenario, XRP finishes below $1. Macro conditions deteriorate, or ETF flows disappoint; the market comes to doubt that the token captures the network’s volume, support breaks, and XRP drifts lower as the structural skeptics’ thesis gains traction, validating the bearish models that project outright losses.
Which scenario unfolds depends primarily on ETF-flow momentum, regulatory progress, the macro backdrop, and above all the market’s evolving judgment on whether XRP the token captures the volume Ripple is winning. All 3 are live, and the wide gap between them is the most honest description of where XRP stands.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where could XRP end 2026?
The credible range is unusually wide, from below $1 to $8. Bearish models and some technical systems point below $1 if support breaks and the market doubts the token captures value. The base case, where most serious forecasts cluster, sees a modest recovery to roughly $1.40 to $2.80, with Standard Chartered’s $2.80 as the credible upper edge. The bullish case of $4 to $8 requires accelerating ETF inflows, regulatory progress, an altcoin-favorable market, and growing confidence that XRP captures Ripple’s settlement volume. The outcome depends on those catalysts and, above all, on the market’s evolving answer to whether the token, not just the network, captures value.
Why has XRP fallen to $1?
XRP is down from a July 2025 cycle high near $3.66, sliding through the back half of last year and the first half of 2026 amid broad crypto weakness. Part of the frustration is that XRP cleared its biggest catalysts: the SEC lawsuit concluded in 2025, and spot ETFs launched that November, yet the price still fell, which suggests the good news may have been priced in or overwhelmed by market conditions. The deeper question is structural: skeptics argue Ripple’s commercial success does not necessarily force sustained demand into the XRP token, especially with Ripple’s own dollar stablecoin offering a token-free settlement path. That value-accrual doubt, plus a Bitcoin-dominated risk-off market, has weighed on the price.
Why did Standard Chartered cut its XRP target?
Geoffrey Kendrick, Standard Chartered’s digital-assets research lead, had set an $8 year-end 2026 target for XRP based on expectations of sustained ETF inflows and post-settlement regulatory clarity. As 2026 progressed and XRP failed to sustain the aggressive assumptions behind that number, he cut the year-end target to $2.80, fitting the broader crypto weakness this year. Notably, he kept his $28 target for 2030 unchanged, which captures the split in serious XRP analysis between near-term caution and long-term conviction. The cut matters because it came from a credible institutional bull recalibrating to reality, which makes $2.80 a grounded benchmark and the effective ceiling of the base case instead of the floor of the bull case.
Can XRP reach $5 or more in 2026?
It is possible but conditional on several things aligning. The bullish forecasts of $4.36 to $8 assume ETF inflows accelerate substantially, the CLARITY Act or similar passes and unlocks institutional capital, the market rotates into an altcoin-favorable phase, and XRP demonstrably converts Ripple’s settlement footprint into sustained token demand. As analysts who have studied the range put it, a move to $2 to $3 needs stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while $5 or higher needs a stronger shift in market structure, institutional demand, and proven token utility. The bar is high because XRP has already spent its biggest catalysts, so reaching the bull range requires new, larger drivers instead of a simple market rebound.
What is the value-accrual question for XRP?
It is the single question underneath every XRP price target: whether the XRP token itself, not just Ripple’s network, captures the cross-border payment and settlement volume flowing through it. Bitwise’s formal model shows why it matters so much, producing 2030 outcomes from about $0.13 to above $29, a more than 200-fold gap driven entirely by this assumption. The high case assumes XRP becomes the bridge asset institutional value routes through; the low case assumes banks and dollar stablecoins, including Ripple’s own, move the money while XRP is bypassed. Because Ripple can conduct much settlement without participants holding XRP for long, the mechanism forcing demand into the token is contested, which is why forecasts diverge so violently.
Are whales accumulating XRP?
On-chain data shows XRP whale wallet counts at record highs even as retail sentiment sits in fear, a contrarian divergence in which large holders appear to be accumulating while smaller holders capitulate. Bulls read this as strategic positioning ahead of a potential reversal, on the logic that large, informed holders are buying weakness. The cautionary reading is that record whale accumulation can also reflect long-term holders averaging into a continued decline that does not reverse on schedule, so it is a supportive signal instead of a guarantee. It is one of the more constructive data points in XRP’s current setup, but like every catalyst here, its payoff depends on the broader market and the value-accrual question resolving
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. XRP price levels, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain, and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
South Korean brokerage Kiwoom Securities is reportedly in talks to buy a stake in Bithumb, making it the latest traditional financial firm in the country to seek exposure to a local crypto exchange.
The two companies are reportedly discussing a third-party allotment of new shares that would allow Kiwoom Securities to acquire new shares issued by Bithumb, Chosun Biz reported on Monday.
Cointelegraph contacted Kiwoom Securities and Bithumb for comment on the reported talks.
The development makes Kiwoom Securities the latest traditional finance (TradFi) company to seek entry into the crypto markets as South Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) prepares to announce new regulatory reforms in July, including a framework for tokenized securities, as the country prepares to bring them under its capital markets framework from 2027.
The developments are part of the amended Capital Markets Act and Electronic Securities Act, the country’s first tokenized securities framework, scheduled to take full effect on Feb. 4, 2027.
On Wednesday, the FSC folded token securities infrastructure into a broader overhaul of the country’s capital markets, as part of its efforts to modernize traditional financial markets and potentially bring blockchain-based investment products closer to systems used for mainstream securities settlement and trading.
Top five cryptocurrency exchanges in South Korea by daily trading volume. Source: CoinGecko
Bithumb is one of South Korea’s largest crypto exchanges by daily volume, CoinGecko data shows.
Related: South Korea police probe Polymarket users over illegal gambling claims: Report
Korean brokerages target crypto exchanges
The reported Kiwoom talks come after several major South Korean financial firms moved to buy stakes in local crypto exchanges and exchange operators.
On May 29, Korea Investment & Securities (KIS) and OKX Ventures agreed to invest a combined 160 billion won ($106 million) to buy a 19.6% stake in South Korean crypto exchange Coinone.
A day earlier, Samsung Securities, Samsung SDS and Samsung Card acquired a combined 4% stake in Dunamu, the operator of South Korean crypto exchange Upbit, for $408 million, Cointelegraph reported on May 28.
On May 15, Hana Financial Group said it would acquire a 6.55% stake in Dunamu from Kakao Investment for more than $668 million, making it the Upbit operator’s fourth-largest shareholder.
In February, Mirae Asset Consulting agreed to acquire a 92.06% stake in Korbit for $93 million, taking control of the majority of the exchange as part of its digital asset push.
Magazine: Polymarket seeks Japan entry, Harvard dumps entire ETH position: Hodler’s Digest, May 17 – 23
Cryptocurrency exchanges already approved to operate in European Union member states under the soon-to-be enforced Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework are incentivizing users from companies that failed to gain license approval.
With MiCA restrictions set to be enforced starting on July 1, executives of cryptocurrency exchanges including Coinbase and OKX have taken to social media to sway users from soon-to-be unauthorized companies, like Binance and Bybit Global.
The world’s largest crypto exchange, Binance, said that it would restrict services for EU-based users after withdrawing its MiCA application last week. Bybit Global on Monday said access to services for users in the European Economic Area “will be progressively limited” starting on July 1, though its Bybit EU arm is authorized to operate under MiCA through its Austrian licensee.
As of Monday, regulators in EU member states had approved 244 total licenses for crypto companies under MiCA. Of those, about a quarter (57) came from Germany’s Federal Financial Supervisory Authority, or BaFin. Authorities in Greece, Hungary, Poland, Portugal and Romania had not issued any licenses as of Friday.
Erald Ghoos, CEO of OKX Europe, said on Monday that the exchange would offer 8% on new deposits, suggesting that Binance and Bybit users transfer their funds. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said on Friday that the company would offer a 5% transfer bonus for users before July 13, about two weeks after MiCA takes effect. Kraken, also authorized under MiCA, offered a $1.1 million prize draw for euro deposits.
Source: OKX CEO Mingxing “Star” Xu
Under MiCA, crypto companies offering services to EU-based users in 27 countries must be licensed as a Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) by a regulator in one of the member states. While many exchanges, including Coinbase, FalconX, Kraken and OKX, have obtained licenses to operate after the June 30 deadline, the absence of others could significantly impact the region’s crypto market.
Related: Binance faces EU service limits next week as MiCA rules take effect
As Bybit pulls back in EEA, MENA business expands
While Bybit moves to limit its services in the EEA, the company is ramping up business in the Middle East.
Derek Dai, Bybit’s head for the Middle East and North Africa, said at a Tel Aviv event on Sunday that the company was stepping up efforts to build in the region as it restricted certain services for EU users.
Bybit MENA head Derek Dai (left) and Collider partner Eylon Aviv (right) at Sunday’s event in Tel Aviv. Source: Cointelegraph
“Our business strategy for MENA has been to differentiate marketing and business plans to make sure that each group of customers are well served,” said Dai. “We are creating halal products that meet the needs of more conservative customers in a number of the Arabic countries while focusing on derivative products that are of interest to younger investors in Morocco who are starting to develop their trading skills and interests.”
Magazine: Bitcoin slides to $58K, XRP hits $1 but onchain data promising: Market Moves
Nearly one year after CNBC’s “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer grouped Palantir (PLTR), Applovin (APP), Robinhood (HOOD), and Coinbase (COIN) into the “PARC” basket, three of the four stocks have either fallen or gone nowhere.
At the time, many in the industry felt that cross-stitching the four into one word meant that Cramer was feeling bullish about crypto, but now, the most industry-linked stock of the lot has suffered the largest drop.
PARC Report Card Leaves Coinbase as the Biggest Loser
Cramer named PARC on July 14, 2025, grouping Palantir, Applovin, Robinhood, and Coinbase together as the stocks retail investors had, in his words, “anointed and taken up without any real bounds.” He framed the market at the time as split into two: the S&P 500 and the PARC four, which were running on pure momentum.
However, in a June 29, 2026 post on X, market commentator Heisenberg posted updated performance figures showing that since Cramer introduced the acronym, Coinbase had performed the worst after dipping by 62%.
Additional data from Yahoo Finance shows that across 52 weeks, the stock has traded between $139 and $444, and is currently sitting near the bottom of that range at around $149, a long way from where conviction was running when Cramer put it in the basket. Interestingly, Donald Trump’s financial disclosure filed in May showed the president bought COIN between January and March of this year, although those transactions are handled by third-party financial institutions.
Meanwhile, Palantir is down roughly 25% since the acronym was coined and about 40% in 2026 alone. Its 52-week high was around $207, and at the time of writing it was trading near $113.
On its part, Robinhood is essentially flat, which might count as a mild win in this context given how the other two have moved. Early this month, the company entered the Canadian crypto space after completing a $180 million acquisition of WonderFi and now counts well over 1 million international funded customers, although that has not done much for the stock price.
Applovin is the only one that has genuinely performed and is up 34% since PARC was named. However, its current price of around $477 is still well below its one-year high of $745, but compared to the rest of the group, it is the clear outlier.
From PARC to CRAP
Back in 2025, Cramer had a choice of two meme acronyms: PARC, which he eventually settled for, and CARP (Coinbase, Applovin, Robinhood, Palantir).
However, some cheeky community members came up with a third one: CRAP, and one year later, it looks to have held better than the basket itself, a point that was revisited by analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera when commenting on the development in a post on X:
“The acronym arrived at the precise moment conviction in these names ran hottest, and the year that followed turned a throwaway joke into a price chart,” he wrote. “CRAP was never an insult. It was the forecast, written a year early.”
The post Coinbase (COIN) Down 62% One Year After Jim Cramer’s PARC Basket appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Bitcoin has fallen to around $60,000, more than half off its all-time high, with the Fear and Greed Index in extreme fear and momentum near oversold. Is this the bottom before the next leg higher, or a pause on the way to $55,000 and lower? Here is what the charts, the 4-year cycle, and the analysts actually say.
Summary
- Bitcoin trades near $60,000 as of late June 2026, down roughly 18% on the month and about 52% below its all-time high near $126,000 set late last year.
- The bottom case rests on extreme fear, oversold momentum, support holding near $58,000, and structural demand from ETFs and corporate treasuries.
- The lower case rests on a broken technical structure below every major moving average, a late-cycle position historically tied to deep corrections, and a loss of $58,000 opening $55,000 and below.
- The single most important level is the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600; reclaiming it on a monthly close would shift the picture, while failure keeps sellers in control.
- Analyst year-end targets span an enormous range, from the low-$40,000s in bearish models to $180,000 and beyond from prominent bulls, which tells you how unsettled the outcome is.
Bitcoin (BTC) is trading near $60,000 as of late June 2026, and the question dividing traders is simple to state and hard to answer: is this the bottom, or is there more pain to come? The price sits roughly 52% below the all-time high near $126,000 reached late last year, down about 18% over the past month, with the Crypto Fear and Greed Index mired in extreme fear at a reading around 18 and the relative strength index near 31, close to the oversold zone.
Bitcoin price is stuck below the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600, a level that has historically separated Bitcoin bull markets from bear markets, and the immediate support that bulls are defending sits near $58,100, with $55,000 the next major shelf below that. This is the kind of moment that defines cycles.
Either extreme fear and oversold momentum mark a durable low from which Bitcoin recovers, as they often have before, or the late-cycle structure resolves lower in the classic post-halving correction that history warns about. Both outcomes have serious advocates and serious evidence, and the honest answer is that the setup is genuinely balanced rather than obvious in either direction.
This article works through the question from every angle a serious trader would weigh: where Bitcoin actually stands on the charts, the strongest version of the case that $60,000 is the bottom, the strongest version of the case that $55,000 or lower is next, the specific price levels that will confirm one path or the other, where Bitcoin sits in its 4-year halving cycle and whether that framework still applies, what the major analysts are forecasting and why their numbers diverge so wildly, and finally three concrete scenarios for the rest of 2026. The aim is not to tell you what Bitcoin will do, because nobody can, but to lay out what each outcome requires so that you can watch the right signals and form your own view.
The forecasts that follow are information, not advice, and the spread among them is itself the most honest summary of where Bitcoin stands: deeply uncertain, at a level that will look in hindsight like either a generational entry or a bull trap, with the evidence today pointing both ways.
Where Bitcoin stands right now
Start with the unvarnished technical picture, because it frames everything else. Bitcoin near $60,000 is in a confirmed downtrend on the higher timeframes. It trades below the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600, the level many long-term traders treat as the dividing line between bull and bear regimes, and well below shorter-term averages such as the 20-month exponential moving average near $80,000, which shows how far price has fallen from its recent range. The monthly candle is down sharply, around 18%, and the broader drawdown from the $126,000 peak is about 52%, a decline consistent in scale with past Bitcoin bear phases.
Momentum is weak: the monthly relative strength index sits near 31, at the lower boundary that has historically marked important bottoms but which can also stay depressed while price grinds lower. Composite technical readouts across the major analytics platforms lean bearish, with the clear majority of tracked indicators flashing sell signals rather than buy signals.
Sentiment matches the price action. The Fear and Greed Index reads around 18, deep in extreme fear, the zone where past panic-driven selling has often exhausted itself and set up rebounds, though extreme fear can also persist through further declines when a real bear market is underway.
The key support structure is well defined, which is useful: immediate support sits near $58,100, and a decisive loss of that level would expose $55,000 and then lower shelves beneath it. On the upside, the first hurdle is reclaiming the 50-month average near $65,600 on a monthly closing basis, which would be the earliest technical sign that the worst is over. Until that happens, the structure favors sellers, and the burden of proof sits with the bulls.
None of this resolves the bottom question by itself, but it maps the terrain: oversold, fearful, below the key line, defending support, with a clear level overhead that needs to be reclaimed before any recovery can be called real.
The case that $60,000 is the bottom
The bottom thesis is not wishful thinking; it rests on a coherent set of signals. The first is sentiment as a contrarian indicator. The Fear and Greed Index at extreme-fear levels has, in Bitcoin history, frequently coincided with major lows, because by the time fear reaches these readings, the holders most inclined to sell in panic have largely done so, leaving a market with less downside fuel.
The 2nd is momentum. A monthly relative strength index near 31 is close to the oversold threshold that has historically preceded recoveries, and on the weekly timeframe some analysts note RSI approaching levels that have marked important bottoms in past cycles, suggesting the correction is closer to its end than its beginning. The 3rd is the price structure itself: Bitcoin is defending support near $58,100, and as long as that floor holds on a closing basis, the bottoming case remains technically intact.
The deeper support for the bottom thesis is structural demand that did not exist in earlier cycles. Spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds now hold very large quantities of Bitcoin, on the order of well over 1 million coins across the complex, and corporate treasuries continue to accumulate, with some holdings approaching levels that rival the largest known wallets. This persistent, price-insensitive buying provides a demand floor that earlier Bitcoin bear markets lacked, and bulls argue it changes the math of how low Bitcoin can realistically fall before institutional buyers step in.
Layer on the regulatory tailwind, with clearer United States rules advancing through the digital-commodity framework, and the bull case is that Bitcoin near $60,000 is being offered at a steep discount precisely when its structural demand base is the strongest it has ever been. In this reading, extreme fear plus oversold momentum plus a record institutional bid equals a bottom, and the people selling here are handing cheap coins to long-term accumulators. It is a serious argument backed by real flows, not merely hope.
The case that $55,000 or lower is next
The bearish thesis is equally coherent and arguably has the cleaner technical structure behind it right now. The starting point is that Bitcoin trades below every major moving average that matters, from the 50-month exponential average near $65,600 on down, and price below falling long-term averages is the textbook definition of a downtrend, not a bottom. Extreme fear and oversold momentum, the bears note, are necessary but not sufficient for a low; in genuine bear markets, both conditions can persist for months while price keeps sliding, and a reading of extreme fear is just as consistent with the middle of a decline as with its end.
The support at $58,100 is the line in the sand, and a weekly close below it would, on this view, confirm further downside and bring $55,000 into focus, with little structural support between there and lower levels once that shelf breaks.
The macro and cyclical context reinforces the bearish read. Bitcoin is roughly 26 months past the April 2024 halving, which places it deep in the late-cycle phase that has historically followed the halving with a peak and then a substantial correction.
If the cycle top was the $126,000 high reached late last year, then a 52% drawdown is well within the range of past bear-market declines, and history would suggest the correction could run deeper and longer before a true bottom forms. Bears also point to the risk that the very institutional structures bulls celebrate could amplify a decline: leveraged corporate Bitcoin treasuries that bought at higher prices may face pressure to sell if their financing terms or share valuations deteriorate, and ETF flows that were a tailwind on the way up can reverse into outflows that remove the demand floor exactly when it is needed.
In this reading, $60,000 is not a bottom but a way station; the support break to $55,000 is the more probable next move, and the late-cycle clock argues for patience over bottom-fishing.
The levels that will settle it
Rather than guess, traders can watch a specific ladder of levels that will confirm which thesis is playing out, and this is where the abstract debate becomes concrete. On the downside, the first decisive level is $58,100. A clean weekly or monthly close below it would invalidate the immediate bottoming case and open the door to $55,000, which is the next significant shelf. Below $55,000, the structure thins out, and a loss there would suggest the broader bear phase has further to run, with traders then watching round-number psychological levels and prior-cycle reference points beneath. The bears need that $58,100 break to confirm their case; until it happens, the lower targets remain hypothetical.
On the upside, the levels are equally clear. The first and most important is the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600. A monthly close back above it would be the earliest serious signal that the downtrend is ending, because reclaiming that bull-bear line has historically preceded recoveries. Above it, the next hurdles are the 200-day moving average near $65,200, which sits close by, and then the 20-month average near $80,000, a reclaim of which would signal a genuine trend change instead of a relief bounce. The bulls need that $65,600 monthly close to confirm their case; a rejection there would keep the structure bearish even if price bounces in the meantime.
The practical takeaway is that the bottom question will be answered not by sentiment or narrative but by which of these levels gives way first. Hold $58,100 and reclaim $65,600, and the bottom case strengthens decisively. Lose $58,100, and $55,000 becomes the conversation. Everything between is noise.
The 4-year cycle and where Bitcoin sits in it
No Bitcoin price discussion is complete without the halving cycle, and right now it cuts toward caution while raising a genuine question about whether the old framework still holds. Bitcoin’s supply issuance halves roughly every 4 years, and the April 2024 halving cut the block reward to 3.125 coins. Historically, the 12 to 18 months after a halving have produced the cycle’s price peak, followed by a deep correction into the next cycle’s accumulation phase. Bitcoin is now around 26 months past that halving, which places it firmly in the late-cycle window where, in past cycles, the top was already in, and a correction was underway or complete. If history rhymes, the $126,000 high late last year was the cycle peak, and the current drawdown is the correction phase, which historically has run deep before bottoming. That reading supports patience and the lower-price case.
But there is a serious counterargument that this cycle may not behave like the past ones, and it is the crux of the most important debate in Bitcoin right now. The arrival of spot ETFs, large corporate treasuries, and institutional adoption has injected a new kind of demand that did not exist in earlier cycles, and some analysts argue this could either smooth out the 4-year pattern, blunting both the euphoric tops and the brutal bottoms, or extend the cycle by adding sustained buying that delays the peak. If the cycle is being stretched or dampened by institutionalization, then late-cycle timing alone is a weaker guide than it used to be, and a drawdown to $60,000 could be a mid-cycle shakeout instead of the start of a multi-year bear market.
The honest position is that nobody yet knows whether the 4-year cycle still governs Bitcoin or whether institutionalization has changed the rules, and that uncertainty is precisely why the bottom question is so contested. The cycle clock says caution; the structural-demand argument says this time may differ. Both could be partly right.
What the analysts are forecasting
The dispersion among professional forecasts is wide enough to be its own data point, and it reflects exactly the unresolved debate this article describes. On the bullish side, Ripple chief executive Brad Garlinghouse has pointed to $180,000 for Bitcoin in 2026 on favorable market and regulatory conditions, and Bitwise chief investment officer Matt Hougan has reiterated a $200,000 target for the year, while acknowledging he did not expect the scale of selling that hit the market on the way down.
More structured institutional views are more measured but still constructive: the head of research at CoinShares has projected Bitcoin holding a $120,000 to $170,000 range across 2026 with stronger action in the 2nd half, and Carol Alexander has described a high-volatility band of $75,000 to $150,000 with a central tendency near $110,000.
Longer-term, Bitwise has floated $500,000 as Bitcoin approaches a share of gold’s market value, and various quantitative models, from stock-to-flow to power-law frameworks, sit anywhere from $100,000 to well above $250,000.
Against those stand the cautious and bearish models. Algorithmic forecasters such as CoinCodex read the 2026 setup as bearish on technical indicators, and model-based ranges from sources like CoinLore place 2026 anywhere from the low-$40,000s at the bottom to roughly $118,000 at the top, depending on conditions, with near-term projections clustering close to current levels. The sheer gap, from a low-$40,000s downside to a $200,000-plus upside within the same year, is not a sign that forecasters are careless; it reflects that Bitcoin’s 2026 path depends on variables that genuinely could break either way, chiefly ETF flows, macro liquidity and Federal Reserve policy, and whether the 4-year cycle reasserts itself.
When the credible range is this wide, the responsible conclusion is not to pick a number but to recognize that the outcome is unusually open, and to size risk accordingly. The analysts are not telling you where Bitcoin is going; collectively, they are telling you it is a genuine coin-flip at a decision point.
What would confirm a bottom, and what would break it
Pulling the threads together, a real bottom would announce itself through a recognizable cluster of signals instead of a single one. Technically, it would start with $58,100 holding on a closing basis, followed by a monthly close back above the 50-month average near $65,600, ideally on rising volume that shows real buying instead of a low-conviction bounce. Fundamentally, it would coincide with ETF flows turning consistently positive again after any period of outflows, since that institutional bid is the demand floor the bull case depends on, and it would likely be helped by a supportive macro shift, such as the Federal Reserve easing policy or broad liquidity improving, conditions under which risk assets like Bitcoin tend to recover. A stabilization or reversal in Bitcoin dominance and a lift in sentiment off extreme-fear lows would round out the confirmation. If those align, the case that $60,000 marked the low becomes strong.
The breakdown scenario is the mirror image. It would begin with a decisive loss of $58,100, opening $55,000 and then lower levels with little support beneath, and it would be reinforced by ETF flows turning to sustained outflows that remove the demand floor. The macro trigger would be tightening conditions, a stronger dollar, or a broad risk-off episode that pulls capital out of speculative assets.
The cyclical trigger would be confirmation that the 4-year pattern is intact and the late-cycle correction has further to run. And a specific structural risk worth watching is forced selling from leveraged Bitcoin treasury companies, whose need to sell into weakness could amplify a decline well beyond what spot demand alone would produce.
The practical discipline for anyone navigating this is to treat $58,100 as the hinge: above it, with $65,600 reclaimed, the bottom case has the upper hand; below it, the lower targets become the base case. Watching those levels and those flows beats guessing, because the market itself will signal which path it has chosen.
Three scenarios for Bitcoin into late 2026
Synthesizing the evidence into scenarios makes the range concrete without pretending to certainty.
In the bull scenario, $60,000 proves to be the cycle low or close to it. Support at $58,100 holds, extreme fear and oversold momentum mark the exhaustion of selling, ETF inflows resume, and a supportive macro turn lets Bitcoin reclaim the 50-month average near $65,600 and then push back toward and beyond $80,000 over the 2nd half of 2026, validating the more constructive analyst targets and putting 6-figure prices back in view into 2027. This scenario leans on the structural-demand argument and the possibility that institutionalization has changed the cycle, and it is the path the prominent bulls like Hougan and Garlinghouse are forecasting toward.
In the base scenario, Bitcoin chops in a wide, volatile range without a clean resolution for some time. It defends the low-$58,000s to $60,000 area more often than not but struggles to reclaim $65,600 decisively, spending the rest of 2026 oscillating between roughly the mid-$50,000s and the mid-$70,000s as bulls and bears fight over the cycle question, with the outcome unresolved into 2027. This middle path fits the high-volatility ranges that measured analysts like Carol Alexander and CoinShares describe, and it is arguably the most likely outcome given how balanced the evidence is.
In the bear scenario, the late-cycle correction reasserts itself. Bitcoin loses $58,100, slides to $55,000 and then lower, ETF flows reverse, treasury-company selling amplifies the move, and the 4-year cycle plays out classically with a deeper and longer bottoming process that drags into 2027 before a new accumulation phase begins, validating the bearish models that see the low-$40,000s as a real possibility. Which scenario unfolds depends on the levels and flows described above, and the only intellectually honest stance today is that all 3 are live.
Frequently Asked Questions
Has Bitcoin bottomed at $60,000?
It is truly unresolved. The bottom case rests on extreme fear, oversold momentum near a monthly RSI of 31, support holding near $58,100, and record structural demand from ETFs and corporate treasuries. The lower case rests on Bitcoin trading below every major moving average, a late-cycle position around 26 months past the April 2024 halving that historically precedes deeper corrections, and the risk that a loss of $58,100 opens $55,000 and below. The deciding signal is whether Bitcoin holds $58,100 and reclaims the 50-month average near $65,600 on a monthly close. Until then, neither side is confirmed, and the evidence points both ways.
What is the key level to watch for Bitcoin?
The 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600 is the single most important level, treated by many long-term traders as the line between bull and bear regimes; a monthly close above it would be the earliest serious sign the downtrend is ending. On the downside, $58,100 is the critical support, and a decisive close below it would expose $55,000 and lower. The 200-day moving average near $65,200 sits close to the 50-month average and reinforces that zone, while the 20-month average near $80,000 is the level a true trend change would need to reclaim. Watch $58,100 as the hinge and $65,600 as the confirmation.
Why is Bitcoin down so much from its high?
Bitcoin is about 52% below its all-time high near $126,000 reached late last year, having fallen roughly 18% in the past month alone. The decline reflects a combination of factors: a late-cycle position about 26 months past the April 2024 halving, the phase that has historically followed the halving peak with a correction; weakening momentum and sentiment, with the Fear and Greed Index in extreme fear; and macro pressures including liquidity conditions and uncertainty about Federal Reserve policy. Whether this is a normal cyclical correction or the start of a deeper bear market is exactly the question dividing analysts, and it depends heavily on whether ETF and institutional demand offsets the cyclical downdraft.
What are analysts predicting for Bitcoin in 2026?
The range is extremely wide, which reflects real uncertainty. Bullish forecasts include $180,000 from Ripple’s Brad Garlinghouse and $200,000 from Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, with longer-term calls like Bitwise’s $500,000 tied to Bitcoin taking share from gold. More measured institutional views include CoinShares at $120,000 to $170,000 for the year and Carol Alexander’s $75,000 to $150,000 band centering near $110,000. Cautious and bearish models run lower, with ranges extending into the low-$40,000s in weak scenarios. The gap from the low-$40,000s to above $200,000 within 1 year shows that the outcome depends on variables, chiefly ETF flows, macro liquidity, and the cycle, that truly could break either way.
Could Bitcoin fall to $55,000 or lower?
Yes, it is a real possibility if support breaks. The bearish path runs through a decisive loss of $58,100, which would open $55,000 as the next major level, with thin support beneath it once that shelf gives way. The case is reinforced by Bitcoin trading below all major moving averages, the late-cycle timing that historically precedes deeper corrections, the risk of ETF flows reversing into outflows, and the specific danger of forced selling from leveraged corporate Bitcoin treasuries that bought higher. Bearish models see the low-$40,000s as possible in a weak 2026. Whether it happens hinges on the $58,100 support; as long as that holds on a closing basis, the lower targets remain hypothetical.
Is the 4-year cycle still valid for Bitcoin?
This is one of the most important open debates in Bitcoin right now. The traditional pattern, in which price peaks roughly a year or so after each halving and then corrects deeply, would place Bitcoin in a late-cycle correction now, around 26 months past the April 2024 halving, and argues for caution. But the arrival of spot ETFs, corporate treasuries, and broad institutional adoption has introduced sustained demand that did not exist in earlier cycles, which some analysts argue could smooth out the pattern, blunting both tops and bottoms, or stretch the cycle by delaying the peak. Nobody yet knows whether the cycle still governs Bitcoin or whether institutionalization has changed the rules, and that uncertainty is central to why the current bottom question is so contested.
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. Bitcoin price levels, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
Crypto World
Thailand’s Stablecoin Push Signals Next Phase of Digital Asset Strategy as Central Bank Prepares Baht-Pegged Framework
TL,DR
- Thailand plans a 1:1 baht-backed stablecoin.
- Sandbox trials helped shape the new framework.
- Authorities strengthen foreign exchange enforcement.
- Thailand expands its regulated digital asset ecosystem.
Thailand is preparing to introduce a regulatory framework for a privately issued stablecoin, currently at the core of global crypto regulation, backed one-to-one by the Thai baht, marking another milestone in the country’s evolving digital asset strategy.
The proposal, expected to enter public consultation before the end of 2026, reflects a broader shift in Thailand’s approach to blockchain technology, where the focus has moved beyond regulating cryptocurrencies toward building long-term financial infrastructure.
According to Bank of Thailand Governor Vitai Ratanakorn, the proposed stablecoin will initially serve as a settlement instrument between licensed financial institutions before any wider public rollout is considered. The central bank expects formal regulations to follow in early 2027 after gathering industry feedback and assessing the results of ongoing pilot programs.
Stablecoin Will Be Fully Backed by Thai Baht Reserves
Unlike a central bank digital currency (CBDC), the proposed token will be issued by regulated private institutions rather than the Bank of Thailand itself. Every token in circulation must be backed by an equivalent amount of Thai baht held in segregated reserve accounts at licensed financial institutions, ensuring full collateralization.
The central bank believes this model offers the efficiency benefits of blockchain-based payments while preserving confidence through strict reserve requirements and regulatory oversight.
During the initial phase, access will remain limited to banks and financial institutions using the stablecoin strictly for interbank settlement. Broader retail applications will only be considered after authorities evaluate operational performance, security, and financial stability implications.
Thailand’s central bank has spent nearly two years studying programmable digital payments through its Programmable Payment Sandbox, first launched in 2024 before being expanded in late 2025 to accommodate additional participants and use cases.
Insights gathered from those pilot programs now form the foundation of the proposed regulatory framework.
Beyond payments, the Bank of Thailand has also explored how blockchain-based settlement infrastructure could support carbon credit trading and sustainable finance initiatives, adding on to its recent venture in AI. Tokenized settlement is viewed as a way to improve transparency, shorten settlement times, and address inefficiencies that continue to affect environmental asset markets.
Thailand Continues Tightening Oversight of Cross-Border Payments
While expanding regulated blockchain innovation, Thai authorities are simultaneously reinforcing existing foreign exchange controls.
Governor Ratanakorn reiterated that personal QR code payments conducted within Thailand must remain denominated in Thai baht. He also warned that renminbi-denominated transactions processed through foreign payment platforms such as Alipay and WeChat Pay are not permitted for domestic transactions.
Between February 2025 and May 2026, regulators reportedly suspended approximately 5,000 accounts linked to peer-to-peer renminbi payment activity.
Financial institutions or payment providers facilitating transactions in currencies other than the baht could face regulatory penalties, including fines, suspension of operations, or revocation of operating licenses.
The governor also made clear that the Bank of Thailand has no intention of licensing speculative retail foreign exchange trading. Institutions providing settlement services for unauthorized forex transactions could be found in violation of Thailand’s Foreign Exchange Control Act of 1942, exposing operators to significant financial penalties and potential prison sentences.
Thailand’s Crypto Policy Has Shifted From Regulation to Market Development
The stablecoin proposal arrives at a time when Thailand’s digital asset framework is entering a more mature phase amid a recent ease on taxes.
After establishing one of Asia’s earliest comprehensive digital asset regulatory regimes through the Emergency Decree on Digital Asset Businesses in 2018, regulators are now concentrating on expanding legitimate market infrastructure rather than simply managing risk.
The Securities and Exchange Commission’s 2026–2028 strategic plan places digital assets alongside traditional financial products instead of treating them as experimental instruments.
The SEC is also developing common technical standards to improve interoperability across tokenized assets while working closely with the Bank of Thailand on settlement mechanisms involving stablecoins, deposit tokens, and electronic money tokens.
Beyond traditional financial products, tokenization is increasingly extending into real estate, infrastructure, entertainment projects, and green finance. Under Thailand’s investment token framework, approved issuers have already raised more than $263 million across several tokenized fundraising projects, with additional offerings progressing through regulatory review.
Ethereum has fallen harder than Bitcoin, down nearly 70% from its high while the ETH/BTC ratio sits near multi-year lows. Will Ether keep lagging the market leader through 2026, or is the underperformance setting up a reversal? Here is the case on both sides, and what would flip it.
Summary
- Ethereum trades near $1,550 as of late June 2026, down roughly 68% from its August 2025 all-time high near $4,950 and below every major moving average, the weakest technical picture among the large-cap majors.
- The ETH/BTC ratio sits near multi-year lows because Ether has fallen harder than Bitcoin’s roughly 52% drawdown, extending a multi-year stretch of underperformance against the market leader.
- The case for continued underperformance rests on Bitcoin’s ETF and treasury-driven institutional dominance, competition from Solana for on-chain activity, and a muddier investment narrative for Ether.
- The case for a reversal rests on deep-value pricing, staking yield, the Layer-2 and tokenization ecosystem, potential rotation of ETF flows, and the tendency of Ether to outperform in late-cycle altcoin phases.
- Year-end forecasts span roughly $1,266 at the bearish end to $4,400 to $5,300 at the bullish end, a gap that turns on whether capital rotates back toward Ether or stays concentrated in Bitcoin.
Ethereum (ETH) is trading near $1,550 as of late June 2026, and it has fallen harder than almost any other large-cap crypto asset, which raises the question this article addresses: will Ether keep underperforming Bitcoin through the rest of 2026, or is the very depth of its decline setting up a reversal?
The numbers frame the problem starkly. Ether is down roughly 68% from its August 2025 all-time high near $4,950, a far deeper drawdown than Bitcoin’s roughly 52% fall from its own peak, and it trades below every major moving average, from the 20-day exponential average on up through the 200-day near $2,317, with a completed death cross and a relative strength index near 30.
The Fear and Greed reading sits around 13, even deeper in extreme fear than Bitcoin’s, and the $1,500 to $1,600 zone has become the line in the sand that bulls are defending; a clean loss of it opens $1,450 and then $1,400. Most tellingly for this question, the ratio of Ether’s price to Bitcoin’s sits near multi-year lows, the clearest single expression of how badly Ether has lagged the asset the market treats as its anchor.
That ratio, ETH measured against BTC, is the real subject of this piece, because the question is not only where Ether’s dollar price goes but whether it keeps losing ground to Bitcoin specifically. This article works through it from both directions: where Ethereum stands technically, what the ETH/BTC ratio actually measures and why it matters, the structural reasons Ether has underperformed, the case that the underperformance continues, the case that it reverses, what the analysts forecast, the specific conditions that would flip the ratio one way or the other, and three scenarios for both the ratio and the absolute price into year-end. The aim is to give a fair hearing to both sides, because this is a genuinely contested question on which thoughtful people disagree.
The forecasts here are information, not advice. And the framing to carry throughout is that Ether’s 2026 outcome has 2 layers: its dollar price, which depends heavily on the broad market, and its performance relative to Bitcoin, which depends on whether capital rotates back toward Ether or stays concentrated in the market leader. Both layers point to the same underlying question of whether Ethereum can reclaim the narrative momentum it has lost.
Where Ethereum stands right now
The technical condition of Ethereum is the weakest among the large-cap majors, and being honest about that is the starting point. Near $1,550, Ether trades below its 20-day, 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day exponential moving averages, the last of which sits up near $2,317, meaning price is far beneath even its slowest-moving trend line. A death cross, the bearish crossover of shorter and longer averages, has completed, confirming the downtrend on the technical framework many traders use.
The relative strength index near 30 indicates oversold conditions and weak buying momentum, and the broader structure since the spring has been one of lower highs and lower lows, with sellers in control through a steep decline from the $2,000-plus range earlier in the year down to the current zone. The $1,500 to $1,600 area is the critical support, having acted as the 2026 floor, and below it the next levels are $1,450 and $1,400.
Sentiment is correspondingly grim. The Fear and Greed reading around 13 is a deeper extreme fear than Bitcoin’s, reflecting how thoroughly the market has soured on Ether specifically. The drawdown of roughly 68% from the August 2025 high near $4,950 is severe even by crypto standards and significantly worse than Bitcoin’s contemporaneous decline, which is the heart of the underperformance story. To improve the picture,
Ether needs, at minimum, to reclaim short-term resistance near $1,700 to $1,750, and a genuine trend change would require recovering the higher averages up toward $2,000 and then $2,317. Until then, the structure is bearish, and the burden of proof sits with buyers.
This is the uncomfortable backdrop against which the underperformance question must be answered: Ether is not merely down; it is down harder than Bitcoin, deeper in fear, and weaker on the charts, which is exactly why some see capitulation and opportunity while others see a structurally lagging asset with further to fall.
What the ETH/BTC ratio is telling us
To analyze underperformance properly, you have to understand the ETH/BTC ratio, because it strips out the broad market and isolates the question of Ether versus Bitcoin specifically. The ratio simply expresses Ether’s price in terms of Bitcoin rather than dollars, and it rises when Ether outperforms Bitcoin and falls when Ether lags. Right now it sits near multi-year lows, which is the precise, quantified statement of the problem: over an extended period, and especially through the 2025 to 2026 drawdown, Ether has lost value against Bitcoin, not just against the dollar. When both assets fall, but one falls more, the ratio captures the difference, and Ether’s roughly 68% drawdown against Bitcoin’s roughly 52% means Ether has shed a meaningful chunk of its value relative to the market leader.
Why does this matter beyond bookkeeping? The ETH/BTC ratio is one of the most-watched gauges in crypto because it functions as a barometer of risk appetite and capital rotation within the asset class. When the ratio rises, it typically signals that capital is rotating out of Bitcoin and into Ether and the broader altcoin complex, the classic risk-on, altcoin-season dynamic. When it falls, as now, it signals that capital is concentrating in Bitcoin, treating it as the safer, more institutionally endorsed crypto asset while shunning the higher-beta alternatives.
A ratio near multi-year lows therefore tells a story: the market, in its current risk-off and Bitcoin-dominated mood, has been choosing Bitcoin over Ether decisively. For the question of whether Ether underperforms again in 2026, the ratio is both the scoreboard and the leading indicator.
A continued decline or stagnation in the ratio means underperformance persists; a sustained turn upward would be the clearest sign that Ether is regaining ground. Everything that follows, the structural arguments and the catalysts, ultimately expresses itself through which way this ratio moves.
Why Ethereum has underperformed
Understanding the causes of Ether’s underperformance is essential to judging whether it continues, and several structural forces have converged against it. The 1st and arguably most important is the institutional bid for Bitcoin that Ether has not matched in kind.
Spot Bitcoin ETFs and a wave of corporate Bitcoin treasuries have created sustained, price-insensitive demand that treats Bitcoin as digital gold and a primary reserve asset, a role with no clear Ether equivalent. While Ether has its own ETFs, the institutional narrative around Bitcoin as a macro reserve asset has been far more powerful, channeling the bulk of institutional crypto allocation toward Bitcoin and leaving Ether to compete for a smaller, more speculative pool of capital. In a risk-off market, that distinction is decisive: capital flows to the asset with the strongest institutional endorsement, which has been Bitcoin.
The 2nd force is competition for Ethereum’s core use case. Solana and other high-throughput chains have captured a large share of the on-chain activity, particularly the memecoin and high-frequency trading culture, that once would have flowed to Ethereum, challenging Ether’s status as the default smart-contract platform and muddying its growth narrative.
The 3rd is a narrative problem of Ether’s own. Following its technical upgrades, the relationship between network activity and value accrual to the token has become more complicated, with much activity migrating to Layer-2 networks whose fees do not always translate cleanly into demand for Ether, leaving the investment case harder to articulate than Bitcoin’s simple scarcity story.
Together, these forces- Bitcoin’s institutional dominance, Solana’s competitive pressure, and a muddier value-accrual narrative- explain why capital has favored Bitcoin and why the ETH/BTC ratio has fallen to multi-year lows. They are real and structural, not merely cyclical, which is what gives the continued-underperformance thesis its force.
The case that the underperformance continues
The bearish-on-ratio case holds that the forces just described are durable and that Ether keeps lagging Bitcoin through 2026. Its strongest pillar is that the institutional preference for Bitcoin is structural rather than temporary. As long as the dominant institutional narrative casts Bitcoin as the crypto reserve asset and digital gold, with ETFs and treasuries channeling allocation toward it, Ether will struggle to attract a comparable bid, and in any risk-off phase capital will continue concentrating in Bitcoin.
This is not a sentiment that flips quickly; it reflects how large allocators have categorized the two assets, and that categorization has only deepened through the current drawdown. On this view, the ETH/BTC ratio at multi-year lows is not an anomaly poised to mean-revert but the accurate reflection of a lasting shift in how the market values the two.
The competitive and narrative pillars reinforce the case. If Solana and other chains continue to capture on-chain activity and developer attention, Ethereum’s growth story weakens further, and a weakening fundamental narrative makes it harder for Ether to outperform regardless of price level. The muddled value-accrual picture, with activity on Layer-2 networks not cleanly driving Ether demand, means that even genuine ecosystem growth may not translate into the token appreciation that would lift the ratio. Bears also note that Ether’s deeper drawdown is itself a warning: an asset that falls harder than the market leader in a downturn is displaying higher beta and weaker relative strength, traits that tend to persist until a clear catalyst changes them.
In this reading, the most likely path for 2026 is that Ether’s dollar price may rise or fall with the broad market, but it continues to underperform Bitcoin specifically, with the ratio grinding sideways to lower, because none of the structural forces working against it have meaningfully reversed. The underperformance, on this thesis, is a feature of the current market regime, not a temporary dislocation.
The case for a reversal
The bullish-on-ratio case is equally serious and rests on the proposition that Ether’s underperformance has gone far enough to create the conditions for its own reversal. The 1st pillar is deep value. After a 68% drawdown that has driven Ether to multi-year lows against Bitcoin and into extreme fear, the bull argument is that the selling has been overdone, that much of the bad news, the competition, the narrative confusion, the risk-off flight to Bitcoin, is now priced in, and that assets this oversold relative to the leader have historically offered strong mean-reversion potential when sentiment turns.
The 2nd pillar is Ether’s genuine fundamental base, which remains the deepest in the smart-contract world: it anchors the largest decentralized finance ecosystem, hosts the bulk of tokenized real-world asset activity, supports a sprawling Layer-2 network of scaling solutions, and offers a staking yield that gives holders a return Bitcoin does not. These are real assets that a reversal thesis can build on.
The 3rd pillar is the potential for capital rotation, which is how ratio reversals historically happen. In past cycles, after Bitcoin leads a move and its dominance peaks, capital has frequently rotated into Ether and the broader altcoin complex in a late-cycle altcoin season that drives the ETH/BTC ratio sharply higher, and bulls argue the current extreme in Bitcoin dominance and Ether weakness is exactly the kind of setup that precedes such a rotation.
Specific catalysts could trigger it: ETF flows rotating from Bitcoin toward Ether, particularly if Ether ETF staking features attract yield-seeking institutional capital; a stumble in Solana’s momentum that returns activity and attention to Ethereum; a broad macro shift to risk-on that lifts the higher-beta assets most; and the growth of tokenization and institutional finance building on Ethereum translating into clearer token demand.
On this view, the very severity of Ether’s underperformance, the multi-year-low ratio and the extreme fear, is the contrarian signal, and 2026 could be the year the ratio turns as capital rotates back toward a deeply discounted asset with the strongest fundamental ecosystem in its category. The reversal is not guaranteed, but it is a coherent thesis grounded in real catalysts and historical precedent.
What the analysts forecast
The analyst forecasts for Ether’s dollar price in 2026 span a wide range that maps onto the underperformance debate. On the bearish side, model-driven and cautious forecasters see continued weakness: Traders Union’s statistical model projects a year-end average near $1,266, and DigitalCoinPrice has pointed to a 4th-quarter low around $1,370, both implying Ether stays near or below current levels and, by extension, likely keeps underperforming a Bitcoin that most forecasters see holding higher absolute levels. These bearish targets are consistent with the thesis that the structural forces against Ether persist and that the ratio does not recover.
On the bullish side, forecasters such as BitScreener have projected Ether reaching toward $4,676 by year-end, and others, including Cryptopolitan and the optimistic scenarios at LiteFinance, point to ranges of roughly $4,400 to $5,300, which would imply a powerful recovery and, if Bitcoin does not rise proportionally, a sharp improvement in the ETH/BTC ratio.
The gap between roughly $1,266 and $5,300 for the same asset in the same year is enormous, and like Bitcoin and XRP, it reflects genuine uncertainty rather than careless modeling. The bearish numbers assume the structural underperformance continues and Ether stays pinned near its lows; the bullish numbers assume a reversal driven by rotation, deep-value mean reversion, and Ether’s fundamental strengths reasserting themselves.
What the forecasts collectively reveal is that Ether’s 2026 outcome is even more binary than Bitcoin’s, because it depends not only on the direction of the broad market but on whether capital rotates back toward Ether specifically. An investor who believes the rotation comes will lean toward the high forecasts; one who believes Bitcoin’s dominance is structural will lean toward the low ones.
The forecasts cannot settle the debate; they can only show how much rides on it. For the underperformance question specifically, the spread is a reminder that Ether is the higher-variance bet, capable of both deeper losses and sharper recoveries than the market leader, which is precisely the profile of an asset whose relative performance is genuinely up for grabs.
What would flip the ratio, and what would keep it down
The underperformance question ultimately resolves into a set of watchable conditions, and naming them is more useful than guessing. The ratio would flip in Ether’s favor on several developments. The clearest would be a broad rotation into altcoins, the classic late-cycle dynamic in which Bitcoin dominance peaks and capital flows down the risk curve into Ether first; a sustained turn upward in the ETH/BTC ratio off its multi-year lows would be the signal that this is underway. ETF flows rotating toward Ether, especially if staking-enabled Ether products draw yield-seeking institutional capital, would provide a concrete demand catalyst.
A stumble in Solana’s momentum that returns on-chain activity and developer attention to Ethereum would repair the competitive narrative. A macro shift to risk-on, with the Federal Reserve easing and liquidity improving, would favor the higher-beta asset, which is Ether. And technically, reclaiming resistance near $1,700 to $1,750 and then the higher averages toward $2,000 and $2,317 would confirm a trend change. If these align, the reversal thesis gains the upper hand.
The conditions that keep Ether underperforming are the mirror image. Continued institutional concentration in Bitcoin, with ETFs and treasuries channeling allocation toward the market leader and away from Ether, would preserve the structural imbalance. Ongoing Solana strength and further erosion of Ethereum’s on-chain dominance would keep the fundamental narrative weak.
A persistent risk-off market would keep capital huddled in Bitcoin instead of rotating into higher-beta Ether. And technically, a loss of the $1,500 support that opens $1,450 and $1,400 would confirm that sellers remain in control and that the ratio is still falling. The practical discipline for anyone watching this question is to track the ETH/BTC ratio directly as the scoreboard, alongside Bitcoin dominance, ETF flow data, Solana’s activity trends, and the macro backdrop. Those signals will reveal whether 2026 is another year of Ether lagging the leader or the year the long underperformance finally reverses. The market will answer the question through the ratio; the job is to watch it instead of to assume.
Three scenarios for Ethereum in 2026
Translating the debate into scenarios captures both the dollar price and the relative-performance dimension. In the bull scenario, the underperformance reverses. Capital rotates into Ether in a late-cycle altcoin phase, ETF flows and staking demand pick up, Solana’s momentum cools, the macro turns risk-on, and Ether recovers toward the $4,400 to $5,300 range that the optimistic forecasts describe, with the ETH/BTC ratio turning sharply higher off its multi-year lows.
In this world, Ether not only rises in dollar terms but decisively outperforms Bitcoin, rewarding the deep-value and rotation thesis. It is a coherent path, grounded in historical precedent and real catalysts, but it requires the structural forces that have favored Bitcoin to loosen.
In the base scenario, Ether broadly tracks the market without a clean resolution of the underperformance question. It stabilizes around current levels, recovers modestly if the broad market does, but continues to lag Bitcoin or merely matches it, with the ETH/BTC ratio grinding sideways near its lows instead of reversing decisively. Ether’s dollar price spends 2026 in a wide, volatile band, and the relative-performance question stays unresolved into 2027. This middle path reflects how balanced the structural arguments are and is a reasonable central expectation. In the bear scenario, the underperformance deepens.
Bitcoin’s institutional dominance persists, Solana continues to pressure Ethereum, the market stays risk-off, Ether loses the $1,500 support and slides toward $1,400 and below, validating the bearish forecasts near $1,266, and the ETH/BTC ratio falls further as capital keeps choosing Bitcoin. Which scenario unfolds depends on capital rotation, ETF flows, the Solana competition, and the macro backdrop, all of which express themselves through the ETH/BTC ratio. All 3 are live, and the breadth between them is exactly why Ether is the higher-variance bet among the majors heading into the rest of 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions
Will Ethereum underperform Bitcoin in 2026?
It is truly contested. Ether has underperformed Bitcoin badly, down roughly 68% from its 2025 high versus Bitcoin’s roughly 52%, pushing the ETH/BTC ratio to multi-year lows. The case for continued underperformance rests on Bitcoin’s structural institutional dominance through ETFs and treasuries, competition from Solana for on-chain activity, and a muddier value-accrual narrative for Ether. The case for a reversal rests on deep-value pricing after the severe drawdown, Ether’s strong fundamental ecosystem and staking yield, and the potential for capital to rotate into Ether in a late-cycle altcoin phase. The deciding signal is the ETH/BTC ratio itself; a sustained turn higher would mark a reversal, while continued weakness would confirm more underperformance.
Why has Ethereum fallen harder than Bitcoin?
Several structural forces have weighed on Ether more than Bitcoin. The biggest is the institutional bid for Bitcoin as digital gold and a reserve asset, channeled through ETFs and corporate treasuries, with no equally powerful equivalent for Ether. Competition from Solana and other high-throughput chains has captured on-chain activity that once flowed to Ethereum, weakening its growth narrative. And Ether’s value-accrual story has grown more complicated, with much activity migrating to Layer-2 networks whose fees do not cleanly translate into demand for the token. In a risk-off market, capital concentrates in the asset with the strongest institutional endorsement, which has been Bitcoin, leaving higher-beta Ether to fall harder.
What is the ETH/BTC ratio and why does it matter?
The ETH/BTC ratio expresses Ether’s price in terms of Bitcoin instead of dollars; it rises when Ether outperforms Bitcoin and falls when Ether lags. It matters because it strips out the broad market and isolates the question of Ether versus Bitcoin specifically, and because it functions as a barometer of risk appetite and capital rotation within crypto. A rising ratio typically signals capital rotating out of Bitcoin into Ether and altcoins, the classic altcoin-season dynamic; a falling ratio, as now near multi-year lows, signals capital concentrating in Bitcoin. For the underperformance question, the ratio is both the scoreboard and the leading indicator, so watching it directly is the best way to judge whether Ether is regaining or losing ground.
What would make Ethereum outperform again?
A reversal would likely require capital rotation into Ether, the late-cycle dynamic in which Bitcoin dominance peaks and money flows into Ether and altcoins, signaled by the ETH/BTC ratio turning up off its lows. Concrete catalysts include ETF flows rotating toward Ether, especially staking-enabled products attracting yield-seeking capital; a stumble in Solana’s momentum returning activity to Ethereum; a macro shift to risk-on that favors higher-beta assets; and Ether reclaiming technical resistance near $1,700 to $1,750 and then the higher averages toward $2,000 and $2,317. The bull thesis also leans on deep value after the 68% drawdown and Ether’s strong fundamentals in decentralized finance, tokenization, Layer-2s, and staking. If these align, the long underperformance could reverse in 2026.
What are analysts forecasting for Ethereum in 2026?
The range is very wide. Bearish, model-driven forecasts see continued weakness, with Traders Union projecting a year-end average near $1,266 and DigitalCoinPrice pointing to a 4th-quarter low around $1,370, implying Ether stays near its lows. Bullish forecasts are far higher, with BitScreener toward $4,676 and others, including Cryptopolitan and optimistic scenarios at LiteFinance, in the $4,400 to $5,300 range, implying a strong recovery. The gap from roughly $1,266 to $5,300 reflects genuine uncertainty: the low end assumes structural underperformance continues, while the high end assumes a reversal driven by rotation and deep-value mean reversion. Ether’s outcome is more binary than Bitcoin’s because it depends on whether capital rotates back toward Ether specifically.
Is Ethereum a better buy than Bitcoin right now?
This article does not give buy recommendations, and the honest answer is that it depends entirely on the question it examines. Ether offers higher potential reward if the underperformance reverses, because it is more deeply discounted and has more room to mean-revert, but it carries higher risk because the structural forces favoring Bitcoin- institutional dominance, Solana competition, and a muddier narrative- may persist. Bitcoin has been the safer, more institutionally endorsed asset that capital has favored in the risk-off market. Choosing between them is really a bet on whether capital rotates back toward Ether in 2026 or stays concentrated in Bitcoin, which is the unresolved question at the center of this analysis. Both are highly volatile and can lose value.
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. Ethereum and Bitcoin price levels, the ETH/BTC ratio, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain, and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
Nvidia stock price keeps sliding, yet the usual dip buyers are missing. Institutional money flow on the stock is the most negative of any major chip name, which means big investors are stepping back instead of loading up.
That single fact reframes the whole selloff. A falling price normally pulls in bargain hunters. This time, the money is leaving Nvidia and moving elsewhere inside the same sector, and the reasons explain why the dip keeps failing.
Institutions are Leaving Nvidia, Not the Chip Sector
Across the major semiconductor names, Nvidia (NVDA) shows the deepest negative reading on the 20-day Chaikin Money Flow, near -0.19. Micron (MU) is one of the few stocks in the group still being accumulated.
In plain terms, this indicator works as a proxy for institutional money. Nvidia’s deep negative score means institutional money isn’t choosing this chip stock.
Because the selling is specific to Nvidia, the price split is stark. The stock is up only about 2.6% so far in 2026 and has slipped roughly 18% from its May peak.
Measured against the semiconductor index, Nvidia scores just 52.9 on relative strength, where 100 means keeping pace with the sector.
In plain terms, the chip index has nearly doubled over the past six months while Nvidia has gone almost nowhere. So the sector is not breaking. One company is, which is why its chart signals turned bearish while peers rose.
Positioning agrees. In early June, Nvidia director Mark Stevens sold about 1 million shares worth roughly $221 million, one of several insider sales that month. That is the setup. The next question is: where did the money go?
Why the Money is Rotating Elsewhere
The capital from Nvidia went mostly into the memory sector. Micron recently posted record revenue of $41.46 billion, up 346% in a year, and the stock jumped about 15% immediately after.
It also guided next-quarter sales near $50 billion, well above forecasts. The Micron stock forecast is now one of the hottest on Wall Street.
Here is the simple version. Micron makes the memory chips that feed Nvidia’s processors, and that memory is in short supply. Its entire HBM (specialized AI memory) is sold out, and prices keep climbing. So big money chased it.
The Micron stock price has roughly tripled this year, and Micron even briefly passed Meta in value. Investors did not quit chips. They moved one step over, from Nvidia to its supplier.
Nvidia’s Biggest Customers Are Now Its Rivals
The second reason runs deeper. Nvidia’s largest buyers are building their own chips. Alphabet now sells its in-house AI chips to outside customers, and Anthropic plans to spend about $200 billion with Alphabet over five years.
In short, the giant cloud firms that buy the most Nvidia chips need fewer of them once they make their own. Citizens analyst Andrew Boone estimates Alphabet’s chip business could grow from about $3 billion in 2026 to $25 billion in 2027.
That is why investors doubt Nvidia can keep charging top prices, a worry tied to the wider AI spending surge and Wall Street’s caution on the stock.
Why Wells Fargo Cutting Its Nvidia Target Makes Sense Now
Put those causes together and one earlier move suddenly fits. The buy ratings have not changed. Nvidia still holds a Strong Buy consensus, with 37 buy ratings, one hold, and no sells over the past month, and an average target near $309.
But the ceiling is dropping. On June 1, Wells Fargo analyst Aaron Rakers cut his Nvidia target from $375 to $315 while keeping his buy rating. Across the desk, the Wall Street price target picture shows buyers stepping aside even as ratings stay green.
That combination is the rotation in a single data point. Analysts still like the business, so they hold the rating. They no longer trust the premium, so they cut the number. A target trim that looked odd in isolation makes sense once you see the money already leaving.
What It Takes for Institutions to Come Back
None of this means Nvidia is broken. Revenue is still growing fast, Blackwell demand looks strong, and the forward price-to-earnings (P/E) has slipped to roughly 20 times earnings, cheap next to several AI peers.
In plain terms, that means investors pay about $20 for every $1 of profit the company is expected to earn over the next year, a low price for a top AI name.
Wedbush keeps a $330 target and calls the selloff a buying chance.
That is the tension. Fundamentals look excellent, yet the flow points the other way, and flow is what moves price now. While the money flow stays this negative, each dip is more likely to meet sellers than buyers.
The first real signal of a turn would be Chaikin Money Flow returning to accumulation. Until that happens, Nvidia is no longer the default chip stock, and the smart money is shopping elsewhere in the aisle.
The post Smart Money is Leaving Nvidia for This AI Chip Stock appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Wimbledon 2026 LIVE: Novak Djokovic vs Yibing Wu first round result and latest updates
British American Tobacco plans to cut 9,000 jobs using AI to save costs
Why more ETH, USDT, USDC holders are earning daily passive income through moneysimpler
-
Sports6 days agoTwo goals and an assist by sheer aura: Cristiano Ronaldo just entered the World Cup chat
-
Fashion3 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Staud – Corporette.com
-
Politics4 days agoThe House | Manchesterism won’t survive the painful trade-offs unless it gets citizens on board
-
Politics4 days agoPotential 2028er World Cup attendee leaderboard
-
News Videos1 day agoMAJOR BITCOIN & MARKET UPDATE!!!! (MUST WATCH ASAP!!!)
-
Business4 days agoAsia stock markets slide as tech shares slump
-
Tech4 days agoA Look At A Gaggle Of Transputer Boards
-
Crypto World6 days ago
Bitcoin (BTC) Dips Below $62K, Ethereum (ETH) Plunges 6% Daily: Market Watch
-
Crypto World4 days agoDell (DELL) Shares Tumble Over 5% Following Analyst Downgrade to Hold
-
Crypto World2 days agoCoinbase, Circle Deepen Crypto Stock Losses Despite Resilient S&P 500
-
Crypto World6 days agoSecuritize Wraps Roubini's SEC-Registered ETF as Dubai VARA Digital Security
-
Business6 days ago
Entergy settles forward sale agreements, raises $672 million in cash proceeds
-
Crypto World3 days agoKraken's xStocks Opens Bending Spoons IPO Registration to EEA Retail
-
Sports3 days agoFIH Pro League: India defeat Pakistan 7-1, register biggest win of campaign | Other Sports News
-
Tech2 days agoRussian hackers now target Signal backup recovery keys
-
Tech2 days agoBluekit phishing kit adopts browser-in-the-middle for login theft
-
Crypto World4 days agoBitcoin Sparks $600M Hourly Liquidations With $65,000 Set To Become Resistance
-
Crypto World3 days agoRTX holders must register wallets before token distribution begins
-
Crypto World3 days ago
Hyperliquid Named on Singapore MAS Investor Alert Register
-
Crypto World5 days agoRipple and SBI launch RLUSD in Japan after JFSA approval
You must be logged in to post a comment Login