meme币王位易主?PEPE要干翻SHIB了?PEPE开启黄金交叉 预示6月暴涨47% 反转已开始

金色财经Published on 2025-06-20Last updated on 2025-06-20

图片

文章来源:公众号:海绵进化论

目前,PEPE在 meme 币领域处于领先地位。虽然其他币种的走势普遍平缓,但PEPE却展现出强劲势头,看起来只有狗狗币才能与它并驾齐驱。柴犬币或许仍然更受追捧,但如果这种趋势持续下去,PEPE取代 SHIB 的速度可能会比人们想象的要快。

图表也印证了这一点。PEPE正在突破一个扩大的楔形,技术分析师们对黄金交叉形态议论纷纷,这是反弹即将来临的经典信号。所有迹象都表明,6 月份 PEPE 可能飙升 47%,这可能成为今年夏季最大的 meme 币涨幅。

PEPE将在 2025 年引领 meme 币潮流

尽管PEPE的MACD指标仍处于看跌区域,但市场情绪正在转变。直方图上的红色柱状图正在消退,这意味着抛售压力正在减弱。这与近期的反弹走势相符,PEPE在短短几天内上涨了15%,预示着可能出现看涨逆转的开始。

图片

EMA 指标也开始显现出一些迹象。20 日 EMA(短期趋势线)位于 0.00001266 美元左右。如果PEPE能够突破该水平,它很可能会朝着我们之前提到的下一个目标迈进。但如果跌破该水平,下方有一个强劲支撑位,50 日和 100 日 EMA 分别位于 0.00001144 美元和 0.00001140 美元。

到目前为止,所有迹象都表明,市场即将迎来强劲反弹。PEPE只需一次干净利落地推动,就能启动。

Pepe 价格预测:黄金交叉和楔形突破预示着 47% 的上涨

在所有2025年仍在活跃的表情包币中,PEPE显然是涨幅最大的。图表看起来稳健,势头强劲,交易员们目前正关注今年6月PEPE将上涨至0.000018美元。

Pepe 的价格预测最近从扩大楔形形态的下缘清晰反弹,这种形态通常预示着强劲突破。该价格也坚守在 50 日和200 日均线上方,后者刚刚形成了一个黄金交叉,这是多头占据主导地位的经典信号。

目前,PEPE 的下一个关键目标位于 0.5 Fib 水平附近,即 0.000012 美元,但如果这一突破得以顺利推进,我们可能会看到价格一路飙升至 0.00001854 美元。这比目前的价格上涨了 47%,这对持有者来说是一个巨大的胜利,同时也是对其他 meme 币的警告。

PEPE能彻底颠覆 SHIB 吗?

PEPE正全力追赶Shiba Inu 币。价格走势更强劲,图表更清晰,围绕PEPE 的讨论也日益升温。SHIB 仍在努力恢复势头,而PEPE已累计实现两位数涨幅,并有望进一步上涨。随着看涨信号的不断涌现,抛售 SHIB 已不再是“是否”的问题,而只是“何时”的问题。

所有迹象都表明,PEPE 正在经历从“炒作币”到“核心叙事”的关键转变。无论是技术形态、资金流向,还是社群热度和市场情绪,它都在快速积累势能。而在 meme 板块分化越来越明显的当下,PEPE 或将成为唯一的赢家。

市场永远不会等待犹豫的人。47% 的上涨目标已经锁定,接下来只差一次干净利落的突破。是继续拿着疲软的 SHIB,还是换上加速奔跑的 PEPE?选择权始终在你手里,但市场很快就会给出答案。

关注我,一起见证 PEPE 如何撼动 meme 王座。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbit44m ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbit44m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit52m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit52m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Title: STRC Deeply Discounted, mNAV Falls Below Break-even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Redefined The recent volatility in MSTR and STRC highlights the need to reassess the core business model of Bitcoin reserve companies. These entities function more like leveraged, single-asset banks rather than software/tech firms. Consequently, they should be valued using banking metrics, not based on their total Bitcoin holdings. The key valuation metric is mNAV (market net asset value), akin to a price-to-book ratio. It compares the company's market capitalization to the equity value of its Bitcoin holdings after deducting all senior debt and preferred equity (like STRC). As of June 24, Strategy's mNAV was 1.10x. The focus should be on "net Bitcoin per share" (the Bitcoin claim per share after senior claims) and its growth rate, equivalent to a bank's book value and return on assets. Given STRC's 19% discount to its $100 par value (yielding 14.2%), issuing new MSTR equity at the current price to buy more Bitcoin is inefficient. It slightly dilutes the widely watched "total Bitcoin per share" metric while providing minimal improvement to the more critical "net Bitcoin per share." The article analyzes four potential uses for $1 billion in new equity: 1. **Buy Bitcoin:** Least effective. Improves net Bitcoin per share only marginally while diluting total Bitcoin per share. 2. **Repurchase STRC:** Most effective for balance sheet repair. The discount creates immediate value, increasing net Bitcoin per share by 1.0%, reducing debt burden, and lowering future dividend obligations. 3. **Boost Cash Reserves:** Dramatically improves the "cash coverage ratio" for STRC dividends from 9.8 months to 16.8 months, a crucial liquidity metric in a tightening funding environment. 4. **50/50 Split (STRC buyback & cash):** A balanced approach improving all key metrics. Strategy's own Q1 report indicates its internal break-even mNAV for profitable equity issuance to buy Bitcoin is 1.22x. With the current mNAV at 1.10x, such a move would be value-destructive. The core assumptions of its previous expansion model—issuing STRC at par and maintaining ample dividend coverage—have broken down. The recommended path is to use new capital to optimize core financial health: repurchasing discounted STRC and/or bolstering cash reserves. This would repair the balance sheet, signal liquidity strength, support STRC's price, lower its yield, and potentially reopen the par-value issuance channel. The current STRC discount represents a low-cost capital opportunity to restart this positive cycle. Bitcoin reserve companies must be evaluated as banks, focusing on book value, leverage, and liquidity resilience.

Foresight News53m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Foresight News53m ago

Trading

Spot

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 MEME (MEME) are presented below.

活动图片