Connect with us

Crypto World

ETH Rebounds From $1.8K as Price Metrics Signal Prolonged Weakness

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Ether has faced renewed selling pressure, with traders watching a price drift toward a critical support zone as bearish sentiment deepens. A roughly 14% slide over the past 10 days culminated in a notable surge in leveraged liquidations, underscoring the fragility of near-term demand for the network’s data-processing capabilities. The latest move comes as broader market dynamics remain tethered to Bitcoin, with cyclical risk-off trades and hedging activity intensifying as on-chain activity cools and institutional flows remain unsettled.

Key takeaways

  • ETH futures liquidations reached $224 million after a 14% price drop over 10 days, coinciding with a broad pullback in on-chain activity and a precarious bias in the options market.
  • Derivatives data show a sharp shift toward downside hedging, with the ETH put-to-call volume premium spiking to 2.2x and the 30-day delta skew at 18%, signaling elevated demand for protection against further declines.
  • Ethereum’s network fundamentals deteriorated, with total value locked (TVL) dipping to $51 billion—the lowest level since May 2025—and 30-day network fees sliding to $13.7 million, indicating waning activity on the chain.
  • Valuable anchor events added pressure, including a reported $7 million in ETH sales tied to donations associated with Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin, contributing to a cautious mood around the asset.
  • US-listed Ether ETFs recorded outsized outflows, totaling about $405 million since Feb. 11, driving assets under management down to roughly $12.4 billion and signaling continued institutional repositioning.
  • The price path remains tightly correlated with Bitcoin, as Ether’s and BTC’s 20-day correlation held in the upper echelons, reinforcing the perception that macro flows dominate near-term moves.

The latest price action saw Ether fall toward the $1,800 level, erasing a substantial portion of gains from late last year and prompting traders to reassess risk exposure. The pullback has not only tested support but also exposed the fragility of the current floor, particularly as options markets show a renewed appetite for hedges rather than directional bets. The sentiment is not just about a single order book imbalance; it reflects a combination of thinner on-chain activity, lower disposable fees, and a sense that investors are waiting for clearer catalysts before re-engaging with sustained long exposure.

On the derivatives front, the market’s mood shifted abruptly on Tuesday. The put-to-call volume premium in ETH options rose to 2.2 times, a visible tilt toward downside protection as market participants positioned for increased volatility. The delta skew—an indicator of the relative pricing of puts versus calls—stood at about 18% on that day, underscoring that hedging costs were skewed toward protection rather than speculative bets on immediate rebounds. In practice, this configuration implies a market bracing for further price disruption, even as some traders may still tilt toward selling puts to attempt a bounce, a strategy that often backfires in persistent drawdowns.

The chain’s fundamental metrics corroborate a darker near-term outlook. Ethereum’s total value locked declined to around $51 billion, marking a multi-quarter low that suggests reduced appetite for DeFi protocols and the kinds of capital-intensive activity that historically sustain higher gas demand. Network fees have also cooled, averaging roughly $13.7 million over the past 30 days—well below late-2025 levels—and hint at a softer cadence of user activity and contract interaction. Against this backdrop, sentiment around encoding and data processing on the network remains subdued, with potential knock-on effects for validators and ecosystem development projects.

Beyond the on-chain and derivatives signals, a notable social and governance dynamic has fed into the mood music. A recent round of ETH sales linked to donations associated with Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum’s co-founder, drew additional attention. In January, Buterin earmarked a considerable tranche of ETH—16,384 ETH—for philanthropic purposes spanning privacy-focused technologies, open-source hardware, and secure, verifiable software systems. While charitable in nature, the sale added a layer of bearish optics during a week already defined by fragile confidence and risk-off trading. The optics reflect a broader theme: even constructive or altruistic actions can weigh on investor sentiment when market participants are looking for signals of durable demand recovery.

Advertisement

Further pressure has come from ETF-related trends. Outflows from Ether ETFs have been persistent, with US-listed Ether ETFs recording net withdrawals that have pushed total assets under management down to around $12.4 billion. The pace of withdrawals has accelerated since mid-February, contributing to a sense that institutional players are rebalancing away from Ether in favor of other assets or strategies. The development occurs alongside broader gold-market activity, where gold ETFs saw sizable inflows in the latest reporting period, highlighting a contrast in capital allocation across traditional and crypto-linked investment products.

From a price-movement standpoint, Ether remains tightly correlated with Bitcoin, a relationship that has historically amplified both upside and downside in periods of macro-driven risk appetite. The 20-day correlation between Ether and Bitcoin has hovered in the high 90s, illustrating how a single market narrative—risk-off sentiment—can pull both assets in the same direction for extended stretches. This correlation complicates a clean technical recovery play for Ether, as a broad risk-off backdrop can forestall sustained rallies even when Ether-specific catalysts emerge.

Amid this confluence of signals, traders face a difficult calibration: hedge protection while recognizing the potential for further declines, weigh the durability of on-chain usage against the immediate squeeze on liquidity, and monitor the evolving flow dynamics that continue to shape institutional positioning. The current environment is not merely about price—it is about the balance between hedging demand, network activity, and the liquidity hooks that can either slow or accelerate a potential drag on Ether’s value.

The broader backdrop remains essential. As risk sentiment in crypto persists in a cautious mode and macro flow regimes continue to influence asset dispersion, Ether’s path will depend as much on the resilience of hedging mechanisms and ETF liquidity as on any single protocol upgrade or on-chain development. The market is currently prioritizing protection over speculation, and until derivatives metrics stabilize and on-chain usage strengthens, the path of least resistance could tilt lower rather than higher.

Advertisement

Market context: The current dynamics place Ether in a broader risk-off framework where liquidity, hedging, and ETF flows weigh as heavily as on-chain activity in determining near-term momentum. In such an environment, macro catalysts and cross-asset capital allocation will continue to shape the trajectory of Ether alongside Bitcoin and other major crypto benchmarks.

Why it matters

For investors, the confluence of a price drop, rising hedging activity, and persistent ETF outflows signals a period of heightened caution. The absence of a clear catalyst for a fast revival raises the probability that Ether could test lower supports before any durable recovery materializes. Traders must weigh the cost of hedges against the risk of a deeper drawdown, particularly in a landscape where futures positions can unwind rapidly in response to new macro cues.

For builders and protocol participants, the softness in on-chain activity and the readiness of markets to hedge rather than deploy funds may influence decisions around network improvements, layer-2 integrations, and development roadmaps. A sustained reduction in network usage could impact fee-based incentives for validators and the long-term economic design of the platform, prompting a closer look at throughput solutions and utilization strategies.

For policymakers and institutional watchers, the flow dynamics around Ether ETFs and other crypto investment products offer insight into how mainstream capital is approaching crypto assets during stress. The rate of outflows and the resilience of liquidity in key products can inform discussions about product design, investor protection, and the evolving regulatory framework governing crypto markets.

Advertisement

What to watch next

  • Monitor Ether’s price action around the $1,800 level for any decisive break or a potential bounce in the next 1–2 weeks.
  • Track Ether ETF inflows/outflows and any new filings or product adjustments that could signal shifting institutional appetite.
  • Watch Deribit and other venues for changes in put-call ratios and delta skew, which would indicate evolving hedging pressure.
  • Observe on-chain metrics like TVL and network fees for any uptick in activity that could precede a tactical recovery.
  • Keep an eye on the 20-day ETH/BTC correlation, as a sustained decoupling would be a meaningful sign of evolving market dynamics.

Sources & verification

  • ETH price movement to around $1,800 and the $224 million leveraged liquidations over 48 hours.
  • Deribit-based derivatives data showing a 2.2x put-to-call premium and an 18% delta skew for ETH options.
  • Ethereum network metrics: TVL at $51 billion and 30-day network fees at $13.7 million.
  • Vitalik Buterin’s ETH sale tied to donations for privacy-focused technologies and open-source hardware (ETH donations noted in January).
  • US-listed Ether ETF net outflows totaling approximately $405 million since Feb. 11, with AUM around $12.4 billion.
  • BTC–ETH 20-day correlation readings indicating tight co-movement over recent weeks.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Crypto World

Cross-Chain Governance Attacks – Smart Liquidity Research

Published

on

Cross-Chain Governance Attacks - Smart Liquidity Research

The Governance Exploit Nobody Is Pricing In. Bridges get hacked. That’s old news. We’ve seen the carnage: nine-figure exploits, drained liquidity, emergency shutdowns, Twitter threads filled with “funds are safu” copium.

From Ronin Network to Wormhole, bridge exploits have become a recurring tax on innovation. But here’s the uncomfortable truth. The next systemic risk in crypto probably won’t be a bridge exploit. It’ll be a governance exploit enabled by cross-chain voting power. And almost nobody is pricing it in.

The Shift: From Asset Bridges to Power Bridges

Cross-chain infrastructure has evolved.

We’re no longer just bridging tokens for yield. We’re bridging:

Protocols increasingly allow governance tokens to exist on multiple chains simultaneously — often via wrapped representations or omnichain token standards (like those enabled by LayerZero Labs).

Advertisement

This improves capital efficiency and participation.

But it also introduces a new attack surface:

The separation of voting power from finality.

The Core Problem: Governance Is Local. Voting Power Is Not.

Governance contracts typically live on a single “home” chain.

Advertisement

But voting power can be represented across multiple chains.

This creates a dangerous gap:

  1. Tokens are locked on Chain A

  2. Voting power is mirrored on Chain B

  3. Governance decisions are executed on Chain A

If the system relies on cross-chain messaging to sync voting balances, any delay, exploit, or manipulation in that messaging layer becomes a governance vector.

You don’t need to drain liquidity.

Advertisement

You just need to distort voting power long enough.

And governance proposals often pass with shockingly low turnout.

The Attack Path Nobody Talks About

Let’s walk through a hypothetical.

Step 1: Acquire or Manipulate Voting Power Cross-Chain

An attacker:

Advertisement
  • Borrows governance tokens

  • Bridges them to a secondary chain

  • Exploits a delay in balance updates

  • Or abuses inconsistencies in wrapped token accounting

In poorly designed systems, the same underlying tokens may temporarily influence voting in multiple domains.

Even if briefly.

Even if “just a bug.”

Governance doesn’t need hours. It needs one block.

Advertisement

Step 2: Flash Governance

We’ve already seen governance flash-loan exploits in DeFi.

The most infamous example? The attack on Beanstalk in 2022.

The attacker used flash loans to acquire massive voting power, passed a malicious proposal, and drained ~$182M.

Now imagine that dynamic — but across chains.

Advertisement

Flash-loaned tokens → bridged representation → governance vote → malicious proposal executed → unwind.

All before the watchers even understand what happened.

Step 3: Proposal Payloads as Weapons

Governance proposals can:

If cross-chain voting power is compromised, the proposal payload becomes the exploit.

Advertisement

No bridge drain required.

Just governance “working as designed.”

Why Markets Aren’t Pricing This Risk

Three reasons.

1. Everyone Is Still Fighting the Last War

After major bridge hacks, teams hardened signature validation and multisig thresholds.

Advertisement

But governance-layer risk is subtler.

It doesn’t show up as “TVL at risk” on dashboards.

It shows up as “who controls protocol direction.”

That’s harder to quantify.

Advertisement

2. Voting Participation Is Low

Many DAOs struggle to get 10–20% participation.

Which means:

You don’t need 51%.

You need slightly more than apathy.

Advertisement

Cross-chain voting power distortions don’t need to be massive. They just need to be decisive.

3. Composability Multiplies Complexity

Modern governance stacks combine:

  • Delegation contracts

  • Token wrappers

  • Cross-chain messaging

  • Snapshot systems

  • Execution timelocks

Each layer introduces potential inconsistencies.

And composability means failures cascade.

Advertisement

Where the Real Risk Lives

This isn’t about one protocol.

It’s systemic.

The more governance tokens become:

The more fragile governance assumptions become.

Advertisement

If a governance token is:

You’ve built a multi-dimensional voting derivative.

And derivatives break under stress.

Ask TradFi. They have scars.

Advertisement

The Governance Exploit Nobody Is Pricing In

Markets price:

  • Smart contract risk

  • Bridge exploit risk

  • Oracle manipulation risk

But they do not price:

Cross-domain voting synchronization risk.

No dashboards are tracking:

Advertisement
  • Governance message latency

  • Cross-chain vote desync windows

  • Wrapped-token vote inflation

  • Double-counted delegation

Yet these variables may determine who controls billion-dollar treasuries.

What Builders Should Be Doing (Now)

If you’re designing cross-chain governance:

1. Separate Voting Power from Bridged Liquidity

Avoid naïve 1:1 mirroring without strict finality checks.

2. Introduce Vote Finality Windows

Require:

Advertisement
  • Cross-chain state verification

  • Message settlement delays

  • Proof-of-lock confirmations

Before votes are counted.

3. Use Decay or Cooldowns on Newly Bridged Tokens

Voting power shouldn’t activate instantly after bridging.

If tokens just moved chains 5 seconds ago, maybe they shouldn’t decide protocol destiny.

4. Simulate Governance Stress Scenarios

Run adversarial simulations:

Advertisement

If your governance model breaks under simulation, it will break in production.

What Investors Should Be Asking

Before allocating to a multi-chain DAO:

  • Where does governance live?

  • How is voting power mirrored?

  • Can voting power be double-counted during bridge latency?

  • What happens if the messaging layer stalls?

  • Is there a time lock between the vote and execution?

If the answers are vague, the risk is real.

And it’s not priced in.

Advertisement

The Inevitable Wake-Up Call

Crypto learns through catastrophe.

  • Smart contract exploits → audits became standard.

  • Oracle exploits → TWAP and redundancy

  • Bridge hacks → validator hardening

Governance-layer cross-chain exploits are likely next.

And when it happens, it won’t look like a hack.

It’ll look like a proposal that “passed.”

Advertisement

That’s the scary part.

Final Thought

Cross-chain infrastructure is powerful. It enables capital mobility, global participation, and modular design.

But it also decouples authority from location.

And when authority becomes fluid across chains, attackers don’t need to steal funds.

Advertisement

They just need to win a vote.

That’s the governance exploit nobody is pricing in.

And by the time the market does, it’ll already be too late.

REQUEST AN ARTICLE

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Payoneer Adds to Crypto, Fintech Firms Seeking Bank Charter

Published

on

Payoneer Adds to Crypto, Fintech Firms Seeking Bank Charter

Global financial services firm Payoneer is the latest in a growing number of companies that have filed for a national trust banking charter in the US, which could enable it to issue a stablecoin and provide various crypto services.

Payoneer said on Tuesday it filed with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to form PAYO Digital Bank, a week after it partnered with stablecoin infrastructure firm Bridge to add stablecoin capabilities to its platform that is mainly focused on cross-border transactions.

Payoneer said that it is seeking to issue a GENIUS Act-compliant stablecoin, PAYO-USD, to serve as the holding currency in Payoneer wallets, in addition to allowing customers to pay and receive stablecoins.

OCC approval would also enable Payoneer to manage PAYO-USD reserves, offer custodial services and enable customers to convert between the stablecoins into their local currency.

Advertisement

“We believe stablecoins will play a meaningful role in the future of global trade,” said Payoneer CEO John Caplan.

Source: Payoneer

The OCC gave conditional approval to Crypto.com for a charter on Monday, adding to the banking charters won by crypto companies Circle, Ripple, Fidelity Digital Assets, BitGo and Paxos in December.

Related: Better, Framework Ventures reach $500M stablecoin mortgage financing deal

The Trump family’s World Liberty Financial also applied for one in January to expand the use of its USD1 (USD1) stablecoin, but is still awaiting a decision. 

Crypto trading platform Laser Platform also submitted an application in January, while Coinbase has been awaiting a decision on its application since October.

Advertisement

Stablecoins ideal for business cross-border transfers: Payoneer

Payoneer said OCC approval would allow it to offer its nearly two million customers, which are mostly small and medium-sized businesses, a regulated stablecoin solution to simplify cross-border trade.