Ethena team steps in with $12 mln buy – But ENA keeps sliding

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-08Actualizado a 2026-01-08

Resumen

After initially climbing from $0.19, ENA faced rejection at $0.26 and declined for two consecutive days, dropping to $0.22 before a slight rebound. At the time of writing, ENA was trading at $0.23, down 7.27%, indicating strong downward pressure. In response, the Ethena team intervened by purchasing 50 million ENA tokens worth $12.18 million within 24 hours, increasing their total holdings to 789.8 million ENA. Other major holders also increased their accumulations, with a net positive balance change of 88.36 million ENA. Despite these efforts, ENA continued to decline due to aggressive retail selling. On January 8th, sell volume significantly exceeded buy volume, resulting in a negative Buy Sell Delta of -6.85 million. ENA fell below the EMA50, and its Stochastic Momentum Index indicated strengthening bearish momentum. Current conditions suggest further losses toward the $0.20 support level. A reversal would require holding above $0.23 and reclaiming the EMA50 at $0.25 to potentially target $0.30.

After hiking from a low of $0.19, Ethena got rejected at $0.26 and has since declined for two consecutive days. As such, ENA dropped to a low of $0.22 before slightly rebounding.

At press time, ENA traded at $0.23, down 7.27% on the daily charts, indicating sharp downward pressure.

Interestingly, after the market retracement, the Ethena team jumped into the market and attempted to pump the altcoin through accumulation.

Team wallet scoops up $12 million ENA

According to Arkham data, the ENA team wallet scooped up 25 million ENA worth $5.93 million from Bybit.

The team’s move was a buildup to another purchase executed a day earlier, in which the team withdrew 25 million ENA for $6.25 million. In total, they withdrew 50 million ENA worth $12.18 million over a 24-hour period.

Even more importantly, these two activities were a return to an old pattern after offloading a significant amount of tokens a week ago.

A week ago, the team deposited 40 million ENA worth $8.16 million. Now, after closing the gap created with the sale, the wallet’s total holdings rose to 789.8 million ENA, worth $185 million.

Significantly, this team’s move was not an isolated case, as top holders jumped into the market after ENA retraced.

Over the past 24 hours, top holders increased their holdings by 171.65 million ENA, while they offloaded only 83.29 million.

In doing so, Holder’s Balance Change remained positive and settled at 88.36 million ENA, a clear sign of aggressive spot accumulation.

With the team accumulating, backed by other top holders, it signals strong conviction with the market, as they anticipate a market recovery from the current slip.

Historically, increased accumulation from major players has followed price appreciation as demand absorbs the arising selling pressure.

Why did ENA slip?

Despite the team’s continued effort, ENA recorded a sharp drop as other market participants, especially retail, rushed to cash out.

According to Coinalyze, sellers overpowered buyers on the 8th of January, with sell volume at 22.59 million compared to 15.75 million in buy volume.

As a result, the altcoin recorded a negative Buy Sell Delta of -6.85 million, a clear sign of aggressive spot selling. Often, seller dominance has accelerated an asset’s downward pressure, a prelude to lower

Can these purchases prop up ENA?

Ethena’s team to boost ENA’s price movement by absorbing the arising sell pressure failed for now. In fact, ENA fell below EMA50, signaling strengthening bearish pressure.

At the same time, its Stochastic Momentum Index (SMI) made a bearish crossover and dropped deeper into the bearish zone to 42.

This downward spiral suggested strengthened bearish momentum backed by strong seller pressure. Thus, sellers took control of the market, rendering recent purchases inadequate for a trend reversal.

Therefore, prevailing market conditions point to further losses for ENA. Thus, the altcoin could drop towards the $0.20 support level.

However, if the team’s effort is finally positively felt, ENA could reclaim EMA50 at $0.25 and target $0.30. For this outlook to hold, the altcoin must hold above $0.23.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the total amount of ENA tokens and their value that the Ethena team purchased over a 24-hour period?

AThe Ethena team purchased a total of 50 million ENA tokens worth $12.18 million over a 24-hour period.

QWhat was the price of ENA at press time and what was its daily percentage decline?

AAt press time, ENA traded at $0.23, down 7.27% on the daily charts.

QAccording to the article, what does a negative Buy Sell Delta of -6.85 million indicate for ENA?

AA negative Buy Sell Delta of -6.85 million is a clear sign of aggressive spot selling, indicating that sellers overpowered buyers.

QWhat key technical indicator did ENA fall below, signaling strengthening bearish pressure?

AENA fell below the EMA50 (Exponential Moving Average), signaling strengthening bearish pressure.

QWhat is the critical support level that ENA could drop towards if the prevailing market conditions continue?

AIf the prevailing market conditions continue, ENA could drop towards the $0.20 support level.

Lecturas Relacionadas

AI Agent Completely Transforms Web3 Gaming: From the Rugpull Bakery Bot Controversy to the New 2026 Agent Paradigm

This article explores how the AI Agent paradigm is fundamentally transforming Web3 gaming, moving from a disruptive force to a core, legitimized element. It begins with the controversy in the competitive baking game Rugpull Bakery, where automated scripts caused fairness issues. Instead of banning them, the developers integrated AI Agents into the official gameplay by providing technical documentation (skill.md, agent.json), marking a shift towards "Agentic Gaming." The piece outlines three primary implementation models for AI Agents in Web3 games by 2026: 1. **Autonomous Competitors & Economic Entities:** AI Agents act as independent players with unique strategies. Examples include TEN Protocol's poker agents, AI Arena's trainable NFT fighters, and Satoshi Strike Force's "Digital Athletes" trained on player data. The Somnia blockchain is highlighted as a dedicated "Agentic L1" infrastructure supporting this model at scale. 2. **Modular Infrastructure & Programmable Environments:** This model, exemplified by EVE Frontier, allows AI Agents to program game world logic itself. Using "Smart Assemblies" (e.g., Smart Turrets, Smart Gates), Agents can modify shared economic and physical rules on-chain, creating dynamic, player/AI-built worlds. The ERC-8183 standard further enables these automated entities to hire other AI services for complex tasks. 3. **Hybrid Companions & Dynamic Adaptation:** Here, AI serves as a collaborative partner. In Parallel Colony, highly autonomous AI Avatars work alongside human players who provide high-level guidance. Illuvium plans to use AI to make NPCs dynamic and responsive, creating personalized, emergent narratives for each player. The conclusion posits that Web3 gaming has reached a "post-human" inflection point. Blockchains' transparency and programmability, combined with new standards and infrastructure like Somnia, make integrating and governing AI Agents not just viable but essential. The future lies in a symbiotic digital order where players transition from manual laborers to commanders and partners of algorithmic intelligence.

marsbitHace 4 min(s)

AI Agent Completely Transforms Web3 Gaming: From the Rugpull Bakery Bot Controversy to the New 2026 Agent Paradigm

marsbitHace 4 min(s)

Saylor's Purchase of 1550 Bitcoin Is a Bad Trade

**Title: Saylor's Purchase of 1,550 Bitcoins Was a Bad Trade** The article critically analyzes Strategy's recent move of selling 32 bitcoins followed by a much larger purchase of 1,550 bitcoins. While appearing bullish, the author argues this trade is detrimental to MSTR shareholders. The core argument revolves around the concept of "breakeven modified Net Asset Value (mNAV)," a key metric for Strategy. To increase Bitcoin per share (BPS) for MSTR holders, Strategy must issue new shares at a premium high enough that the funds raised can buy more bitcoin than the bitcoin backing each existing share. Currently, this breakeven mNAV is estimated at 1.30. The recent trade failed on two counts: 1. The shares for the $181 million raise were issued at an mNAV *below* the 1.30 breakeven point. Selling "cheap" shares to buy bitcoin actually *reduces* BPS. 2. Only $101.3 million of the raised funds were used to buy bitcoin; the rest went to boost the company's dollar reserves. The breakeven mNAV calculation assumes *100%* of proceeds are used for bitcoin purchases. Diverting funds, even if mNAV were high, dilutes BPS. The result is an estimated 0.19% decrease in Bitcoin per share for MSTR holders. In exchange, Strategy merely extended its operational runway for its dollar reserves from ~6.3 months to 7 months. The author interprets this as Strategy prioritizing the survival and development of its STRC business over its stated core goal of increasing MSTR's BPS. This constitutes a gamble: if sacrificing MSTR value leads to improved market sentiment and a recovery in STRC's price (and thus mNAV), the whole system could work. If not, Strategy may be forced into a cycle of further diluting MSTR to stay afloat, potentially leading to deferred STRC dividends or corporate decline. The article concludes with a hope for price recovery for Bitcoin, MSTR, and STRC.

Foresight NewsHace 15 min(s)

Saylor's Purchase of 1550 Bitcoin Is a Bad Trade

Foresight NewsHace 15 min(s)

The AI Bear Market Lasting Two Days Is Over; Why Did Funds Buy Back Storage Stocks First?

After a severe two-day selloff in early June that erased over $1 trillion from U.S. chip stock market value, capital is flowing back first to the memory sector. The correction was not driven by a collapse in AI demand but rather a market reassessment of high expectations. Stocks like Broadcom faced selling pressure despite strong AI revenue guidance, signaling a shift in focus from who has an "AI story" to who can most rapidly translate AI demand into verifiable profits and earnings per share (EPS). Memory companies, such as Micron and SK Hynix, are leading the recovery because their EPS growth is more immediately verifiable. The AI server boom directly increases demand for high-bandwidth memory (HBM) and high-capacity server DRAM, tightening supply and driving up contract prices for conventional DRAM and NAND Flash. This price increase, coupled with a shift to higher-margin products, flows directly into near-term revenue and profitability, as evidenced in recent earnings reports. In contrast, other AI semiconductor segments like GPUs, ASICs, and optical modules, while central to the long-term AI infrastructure story, face longer and less certain paths to EPS validation. Their growth depends more on future product cycles, customer adoption timelines, and capital expenditure plans. The rebound in memory stocks highlights a market preference for assets with shorter, more transparent EPS conversion cycles following the recent de-risking phase. However, this does not negate the potential of other AI hardware segments should they provide clearer near-term order visibility. The episode has raised the validation bar for all AI-related investments.

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

The AI Bear Market Lasting Two Days Is Over; Why Did Funds Buy Back Storage Stocks First?

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片