本周精选项目推荐:PEPE、ONDO、BONK、UNI

金色财经Published on 2024-07-08Last updated on 2024-07-08

图片

上周,多种顶级加密货币出现第二轮价格上涨,延续了前一周的复苏趋势。 

结果,全球加密货币市值增长了 1400 亿美元,增长了 5.7%,达到 2.57 万亿美元。 

以下是我们挑选出的本周最值得关注的加密货币,以下是这些资产的显著走势:

图片PEPE、NOT 和 ONDO 价格 – 5 月 26 日 PEPE:连续第二周创下新高

尽管在此期间大盘出现不稳定,但Pepe ( PEPE ) 自 4 月中旬以来一直处于持续上涨趋势。市场数据证实,自 4 月 20 日以来,这款 meme 币已连续四次盘中上涨。

这一趋势发生在4月20日至23日、5月1日至4日以及5月11日至14日。

尽管本周未能实现类似的涨势,但 Pepe在 5 月 21 日和 22 日飙升了 45.86%,而其他市场则面临回调。回想一下,两周前,这枚以青蛙为主题的 meme 代币创下了0.00001161 美元的历史新高。

上周, Pepe价格于 5 月 25 日上涨至 0.00001577 美元,创下另一个历史新高。此次价格上涨逆转了由比特币(BTC)于 5 月 20 日从 71,000 美元的高点回撤引发的市场整体看跌趋势。

Pepe 在过去 7 天内飙升了 75.88%,成为这段时间内前 100 种资产中涨幅最大的一种。这款 meme 币目前正处于价格发现阶段,截至发稿时,其 24 小时交易量为 19.46 亿美元,在加密货币市场中排名第七。 

Pepe 的累积/分配指标证实,上周的上涨主要是由大量需求引发的。截至 5 月 19 日,该指标的价值为 615.79 万亿 PEPE,但到本周末已飙升至 775.91 万亿代币。PEPE 目前的交易价格为 0.00001606 美元,有望确保其对该门槛的主张。

ONDO:创下新纪录 

翁多 (ONDO) 是上周表现最好的股票之一。与大盘一样,该资产本周开盘时表现疲软,5 月 19 日下跌 3.82%。 

然而,它借助市场反弹的势头收复了损失,并于 5 月 20 日收盘上涨 8.29%。

当天,尽管其他市场回吐涨幅,但 RWA 代币化平台Ondo Finance的原生代币 Ondo却出现了温和回调,随后恢复了上涨趋势。最终,该代币于 5 月 24 日创下了1.16 美元的历史新高。

此后,该资产已超过这一水平,并加入了 PEPE 的价格发现模式。截至报告时,ONDO 的价格为 1.28 美元,过去七天上涨了 40.73%,成为这段时间内涨幅第五大的股票。

该代币目前已收复 4 月份 23% 的损失,本月上涨了 71.88%。

不过,翁多币在 1.28 美元上方的位置依然脆弱,尤其是 77.29 的 RSI 暗示其处于超买水平。

该资产即将进行修正,但多头需要在 23.6% 斐波那契回撤位(1.1873 美元)找到支撑,以防止大幅下跌至 1 美元门槛的下限。

BONK:上升通道有望达到 100% 

上周BONK 价格上涨了 35%,1W 图表呈现出看涨吞没蜡烛。此外,该 meme 代币在日线图中呈现上升通道模式,有望突破反弹。 

图片

随着更广泛的市场复苏,BONK 的突破机会正在增加。根据斐波那契水平,本周 meme 币的突破反弹可能达到 1.618 斐波那契水平,即 0.000082 美元。乐观地讲,上涨趋势可能会挑战 0.00010 美元的心理关口。

UNI:价格保持上涨

在 8.80 美元上方形成基础后,Uniswap 开始像比特币和以太坊一样新一轮上涨。UNI 价格加速突破 9.20 美元和 9.50 美元的阻力位。

UNI/USD 对的小时图上突破了连接看跌趋势线,阻力位在 9.50 美元附近。多头甚至将价格推高至 10.50 美元和 11.20 美元阻力位上方。最后,空头出现在 11.75 美元区域附近。

高点形成于 11.78 美元附近,目前价格正在巩固从 8.70 美元的摆动低点到 11.78 美元高点的上行 23.6% 斐波那契回撤位附近的涨幅。

图片

UNI 目前交易价格高于 11.00 美元和 100 小时简单移动平均线。直接阻力位在 11.50 美元附近。下一个关键阻力位在 11.75 美元附近。收盘价高于 11.75 美元可能为短期内进一步上涨打开大门。下一个关键阻力位可能在 12.20 美元附近,多头可能会在此之上测试 12.50 美元的水平。如果再上涨,UNI 可能会跌至 13.50 美元。

Related Reads

Trillion-Dollar Pension Fund Entry? Franklin Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETF Comes with a Built-in Selling Pressure Ceiling

Franklin Templeton has filed to launch two ETFs that embed a "default configuration" logic into Bitcoin investment, aiming to tap into massive pension fund flows. These "Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment Index ETFs" will initially hold 95% equities and 5% Bitcoin, automatically reinvesting stock dividends to buy Bitcoin. However, a quarterly rebalancing rule forces selling of Bitcoin if its allocation exceeds 5%, capping its maximum holding at 20%. While the product cleverly circumvents advisor reluctance and compliance hurdles by labeling itself as a U.S. equity product, its actual Bitcoin buying power is minimal. Given low dividend yields (e.g., ~1% for broad market indices), annual Bitcoin purchases from a fund the size of Franklin's existing Bitcoin ETF would be a mere $3.6 million—negligible against Bitcoin's daily trading volume. Crucially, during bull markets, the fund becomes a programmed, passive *seller* of Bitcoin, potentially creating sustained sell pressure if many similar funds emerge. The strategy leverages investor inertia and automatic enrollment, similar to the success of target-date funds in 401(k) plans. It also uses an offshore Cayman subsidiary for holding Bitcoin and raises a tax complication where investors must pay taxes on dividends they never receive as cash. Although recent U.S. regulatory changes allow crypto in retirement plans, widespread adoption as a default option faces legal hurdles. The core premise remains: the system doesn't need to convince anyone to buy Bitcoin actively; it simply relies on people doing nothing.

marsbit5m ago

Trillion-Dollar Pension Fund Entry? Franklin Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETF Comes with a Built-in Selling Pressure Ceiling

marsbit5m ago

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Largest Bull Suffers $15 Billion Paper Loss

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Major Bull Loses $15 Billion On June 25th, Bitcoin fell below $60,000, hitting a low of $58,030—its lowest level since October 2024. The sell-off triggered over $1 billion in leveraged liquidations in 24 hours, with longs accounting for $788 million. This marks a more than 53% decline from the October 2025 all-time high of $126,198. A critical factor in the downturn is the weakening position of MicroStrategy, the largest corporate Bitcoin holder. With 847,363 BTC at an average cost of $75,651, the company now faces over $14.6 billion in unrealized losses. Its core financing flywheel—raising capital to buy Bitcoin—is stalling. Its variable-rate preferred shares (STRC), a key fundraising tool, have fallen 25% below their $100 target. This raises doubts about its ability to continue providing steady institutional demand for Bitcoin. Simultaneously, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs are experiencing significant outflows, with a single-day net outflow of $469 million on June 24th. This represents the most severe sustained capital flight since their launch. The macroeconomic backdrop remains restrictive, with persistent inflation delaying expected Fed rate cuts. Analysts note a shift in capital allocation, with institutional funds moving away from crypto towards AI infrastructure stocks. Immediate pressure comes from approximately $10 billion worth of Bitcoin options expiring on June 26th, which could increase market volatility. The combined effect of these factors—eroding core demand pillars, macro headwinds, and capital rotation—has decisively broken the $60,000 support level.

Foresight News11m ago

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Largest Bull Suffers $15 Billion Paper Loss

Foresight News11m ago

STRC Falls Below $80, Can Conservative Investors Still Buy the Dip?

The article analyzes whether the STRC (a perpetual preferred stock issued by MicroStrategy) presents a buying opportunity after its price fell below its $100 par value to around $80, offering a seemingly high yield of 13-15%. The core argument is that STRC's discount reflects market skepticism about the sustainability of MicroStrategy's capital structure model, not just temporary panic. This model relies on issuing securities (like STRC) to raise funds to buy more Bitcoin, a "flywheel" that works in a bull market. The recent small sale of BTC to fund dividends, while minor, broke the psychological "never sell" anchor and signaled potential strain. Key risks identified are not a traditional Ponzi collapse but a potential breakdown in the financing narrative: 1) If Bitcoin enters a deep bear market, crushing MicroStrategy's stock premium (mNAV), its ability to raise cheap capital weakens. 2) If STRC remains deeply discounted, it signifies permanently higher funding costs. 3) The high cash dividend yield represents a significant ongoing expense. 4) If selling BTC to pay dividends becomes routine, the bullish narrative reverses. The conclusion is that STRC is not a risk-free high-yield asset. It is a high-coupon bet on whether MicroStrategy's BTC treasury financing model can withstand a bear market. Buying it is a wager that the market will continue to believe in and fund this structure at acceptable costs. The current price asks if this cycle's "casualty" might be a BTC treasury company's融资 model itself.

marsbit27m ago

STRC Falls Below $80, Can Conservative Investors Still Buy the Dip?

marsbit27m ago

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

**Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Names?** In the crypto world, changing a project's name is common—over 16% of projects have done so, including major ones like Polygon (formerly Matic Network). This contrasts sharply with traditional businesses, which fiercely protect brand equity. The core reason is that in crypto, brand loyalty is often weak. Users are frequently investors, airdrop hunters, or yield seekers, not traditional consumers. A name associated with price crashes, hacks, or failed narratives becomes a liability, not an asset. Renaming can be a strategic reset to shed this baggage. Name changes serve as a potent marketing tool. They can signal a genuine pivot in strategy or scope (e.g., EthSign dropping "Eth" as it expanded). However, they are often used to "narrative surf," rebranding to align with hot trends like AI, RWA, or the metaverse (e.g., Elrond → MultiversX). Critically, renaming is also a PR tactic to distance a project from past failures like security breaches (e.g., Anyswap → Multichain). The most significant risk emerges when a name change is coupled with a token migration or swap. This process can allow projects to reset exchange price charts, erase visible historical downtrends, and create an illusion of a fresh start. It often facilitates liquidity resets, where low float can be exploited for pumps. More alarmingly, migrations sometimes mask overhauls to tokenomics, introducing substantial new token supply through "ecosystem funds" or "node rewards," effectively diluting existing holders. The fundamental issue isn't renaming itself, which can be valid for strategic evolution. The problem is when it functions as an escape from history—a way to avoid accountability for past mistakes, failed promises, and poor performance. When a project announces a rebrand, the critical questions are: What tangible new capability or strategy does it represent? Has the tokenomics changed? And what part of its past is it most trying to make users forget?

marsbit33m ago

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

marsbit33m ago

A Trillion-Dollar Entry Point for Pension Funds? Franklin's Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETFs Come with a Built-In Selling Pressure Ceiling

Franklin Templeton filed for two ETFs on June 18 that embed a "default option" logic into Bitcoin investing. These funds—the Franklin US Equity Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment Index ETF and the Franklin US Innovative Equity Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment Index ETF—aim to automatically allocate a portion of investor dividends to Bitcoin, initially with a 95% stock and 5% Bitcoin allocation. The mechanism is designed for financial advisors, not retail investors. By packaging Bitcoin exposure within a standard equity fund label, advisors can bypass internal compliance restrictions against direct cryptocurrency allocation for their clients. Dividends from the stock holdings are automatically used to buy Bitcoin via spot ETFs, futures, or options. However, the structure imposes strict rebalancing rules: if Bitcoin's allocation exceeds 5%, it is trimmed back to 4.5% quarterly, with a hard cap of 20%. This means the fund becomes a systematic seller during Bitcoin price rallies. Realistically, the potential buying pressure is minimal. Based on dividend yields (approximately 1.05% for broad market, 0.52% for innovative equity), the annual inflow into Bitcoin would be a tiny fraction of the fund's assets. For comparison, Franklin's existing Bitcoin ETF ($359 million AUM) would generate only about $3.6 million in annual Bitcoin purchases—negligible against Bitcoin's daily trading volume. The innovative equity fund, heavily weighted in low-dividend stocks like Nvidia, would have even weaker buying power. The product utilizes an offshore Cayman subsidiary to hold Bitcoin, a common compliance tactic for commodity exposure in mutual funds. A key drawback for investors is the tax liability: they must pay taxes on dividends that are automatically converted into Bitcoin, requiring out-of-pocket cash for a gain they never directly receive. For the strategy to scale significantly, such funds would need to become a default or near-default option in retirement plans like 401(k)s. Recent regulatory moves, including a Trump executive order and a Department of Labor proposal offering fiduciary safe harbors for including crypto assets, could pave the way. However, widespread employer adoption likely awaits further legal clarity. Ultimately, the fund's model leverages investor inertia and automated systems, rather than convincing anyone to actively choose Bitcoin. While it creates a new, albeit small, structural buyer, its rebalancing rules also establish a built-in "selling ceiling" that could dampen price upside if similar products proliferate.

Foresight News35m ago

A Trillion-Dollar Entry Point for Pension Funds? Franklin's Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETFs Come with a Built-In Selling Pressure Ceiling

Foresight News35m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片