SOL 价格从兑美元 165 美元的支撑位开始大幅上涨!

币界网Published on 2024-07-27Last updated on 2024-07-29

Abstract

Solana从165美元区域开始再次上涨。SOL价格显示出走强的迹象,并可能进一步突破182.50美元的阻力位。

币界网报道:
Solana从165美元区域开始再次上涨。SOL价格显示出走强的迹象,并可能进一步突破182.50美元的阻力位。

  • SOL价格从兑美元165美元的支撑位开始大幅上涨。
  • 目前价格接近175美元和100小时简单移动平均线。
  • SOL/USD对的小时图上,突破了连接看跌趋势线,阻力位在170美元
  • 如果突破182.50美元的阻力位,该货币对可能实现进一步上涨。

图片


Solana 价格仍保持在 165 美元以上的正区间
Solana价格像比特币和以太坊一样从152.50美元开始下行修正。交易价格跌破了175美元和172美元的支撑位,并一度跌破170美元。
最终,Solana测试了165美元的支撑位,低点形成于165.12美元后,价格再次上涨。突破了170美元和172美元的阻力位,超过了从182.51美元高点到165.12美元低点的下行趋势的50%斐波那契回撤位。
此外,SOL/USD对的小时图上突破了连接看跌趋势线,阻力位在170美元。Solana目前交易价格接近175美元,似乎在从182.51美元高点跌至165.12美元低点的下行趋势的61.8%斐波那契回撤位附近挣扎。

图片


从上行方面来看,Solana价格在175美元附近面临阻力。下一个主要阻力位在182.50美元附近。成功突破并收于182.50美元上方可能为进一步上涨奠定基础,下一个关键阻力位在192美元附近。如果价格继续走高,可能会向200美元迈进。
SOL 中的 Dips 有限制吗?
如果 SOL 未能突破 182.50 美元的阻力位,则可能再次下跌。下行的初步支撑位在 172 美元附近。第一个主要支撑位在 170 美元附近。
跌破 170 美元的水平可能会使价格跌至 165 美元。如果收盘价低于 165 美元的支撑位,价格可能会在短期内跌向 155 美元的支撑位。
技术指标

  • 每小时 MACD:SOL/USD 的 MACD 在看涨区域内加速。
  • 每小时 RSI(相对强弱指数):SOL/USD 的 RSI 高于 50 水平。

主要支撑位:172 美元和 170 美元。
主要阻力位:175 美元和 182.50 美元。

Trending Cryptos

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.

marsbit33m ago

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

marsbit33m 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 News39m ago

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

Foresight News39m 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.

marsbit55m ago

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

marsbit55m 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?

marsbit1h ago

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of SOL (SOL) are presented below.

活动图片