PIPPIN down 13%: Smart money selling, long squeeze, and…

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-25Actualizado a 2026-01-25

Resumen

PIPPIN's price crashed over 13% in 24 hours, extending monthly losses to 36%, significantly underperforming the broader crypto market. On-chain data indicates smart money offloaded over $675K of PIPPIN, contributing to heavy sell pressure. The price broke below an ascending trendline, entering a bearish structure and trading choppily between $0.28 and $0.50. A long squeeze accelerated the decline, while traders are now clustering liquidity bets around the $0.39-$0.42 zone, a potential target for a bounce. However, continued selling pressure and market-wide capital rotation from memecoins to stable assets like BTC and ETH suggest ongoing risks. A breakdown below key support at $0.29 could trigger further declines.

PIPPIN price crashed by more than 13% in the past 24 hours, extending the losses to about 36% this month. The memecoin underperformed the crypto market, which was nearly flat over the past few weeks.

Technically, the memecoin is undergoing a deeper correction, which is evident on the charts and in the chain activity.

Smart money offloading PIPPIN

As per StalkChain data, PIPPIN was the most sold token in the last 24 hours. The smart money offloaded more than $675K Pippin [PIPPIN] during this period.

This withdrawal of capital from the memecoin resulted in the sell pressure that brought the memecoin down.

Other memes in this category were Fartcoin [FARTCOIN], WHITEWHALE, and PENGUIN. Inclusion of USDC in this list meant that traders were locking in profits or cutting their losses.

Again, the correction was market-wide, specifically for memecoins. This is because traders were moving from the high-risk tokens like memes to more stable assets like Bitcoin [BTC] and Ethereum [ETH].

PIPPIN price remains choppy

While the smart money is bearish with their actions, the PIPPIN price has been choppy since reaching a peak around $0.70. The memecoin had broken below the ascending trendline, which indicated the price was trading in a bearish structure.

Even the small pumps that were happening between mid-December and now were insignificant, as the price could not break past this consolidation.

The Choppiness Index (CHOP), which was at 49, showed that the PIPPIN price was bouncing between $0.28 and $0.50. This is after peaking around 60, which meant that the price had no clear direction yet.

Furthermore, the seller’s momentum was contributing to this decline in the price of PIPPIN. The red bars were gradually increasing in size as the price approached the support level around $0.29.

Historical data showed that every time the PIPPIN price hit the aforementioned support level, it was followed by a bounce back. That suggested it could rise to $0.40 as the first target.

Conversely, a breakdown of the level would accelerate the decline, increasing the losses. However, this was not guaranteed, as bets to the upside were hitting the markets.

Liquidity magnet sitting above price action

As per CoinGlass data, traders were now betting on price, activating the orders at the $0.39 level. Positions worth thousands of dollars were clustered between $0.39 and $0.42, price magnets that could pull PIPPIN toward this zone.

The clusters came after the liquidation of long orders sitting below $0.36. The long squeeze accelerated the breakdown on the charts.

That said, choppiness on the charts, smart money’s selling pressure, capital rotation, and a long squeeze all contributed to the price crash.


Final Thoughts

  • PIPPIN price declined by 13%, extending the monthly losses to 36%.
  • PIPPIN could bounce back to $0.39, where liquidity clusters were price magnets.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the percentage decline in PIPPIN's price over the past 24 hours and this month?

APIPPIN's price crashed by more than 13% in the past 24 hours, extending the losses to about 36% this month.

QAccording to StalkChain data, what was the primary action of 'smart money' regarding PIPPIN in the last 24 hours?

AAccording to StalkChain data, PIPPIN was the most sold token in the last 24 hours, with smart money offloading more than $675K worth of it.

QWhat does the Choppiness Index (CHOP) value of 49 indicate about the PIPPIN price action?

AA Choppiness Index (CHOP) value of 49 shows that the PIPPIN price was bouncing between $0.28 and $0.50 with no clear directional trend.

QWhat is the significance of the liquidity clusters between $0.39 and $0.42 for the PIPPIN price?

AThe liquidity clusters between $0.39 and $0.42 are price magnets that could potentially pull the PIPPIN price toward that zone, as traders have placed orders there.

QWhat are the two possible price scenarios mentioned for PIPPIN if it reaches the key support level around $0.29?

AHistorically, the price has bounced back from the $0.29 support level, potentially rising to $0.40. Conversely, a breakdown below this level would accelerate the decline and increase losses.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

**Title: Has the "Digital Gold" Narrative for Bitcoin Failed?** The article argues that Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative remains valid despite a recent sharp price decline (from a peak near $126k in Oct 2025 to briefly under $61k in Feb 2026). It presents a long-term investment framework based on three core points: **1. Viewing Bitcoin as an Asset:** Bitcoin is presented as a superior potential store of value compared to gold. Key arguments are its absolute scarcity (21 million cap), superior portability, and transparent auditability via its public ledger. While acknowledging its current use in early, volatile stages (~3-4% global adoption), the author draws parallels to the early, disruptive phases of the internet and e-commerce. **2. Understanding the Recent Downturn:** The current ~50% correction is framed as a predictable, consensus-driven cycle following its post-halving peak (the 2024 halving preceded the Oct 2025 high). A crucial factor is a historic "changing of hands": the influx of new institutional buyers via ETFs allowed early, low-cost holders (miners, OG believers) to take profits. The author notes that while severe, Bitcoin's historical drawdowns (e.g., 93% in 2011, 77% in 2021-22) have been progressively smaller, suggesting maturing holder structure and decreasing volatility over time. **3. The Long-Term Perspective:** The long-term thesis hinges on Bitcoin capturing a portion of gold's market value. With Bitcoin's market cap at ~$1.4 trillion (at $70k) versus gold's ~$20 trillion, significant upside potential exists if the "digital gold" narrative is partially realized. However, the author strongly cautions that short-term risks remain, the bottom is unpredictable, and high volatility is inherent. The real risk is not Bitcoin failing but poor personal position management (over-leverage, wrong capital) and a lack of deep understanding, which can force investors out during severe downturns. The conclusion uses Amazon's 95% crash post-2000 dot-com bubble and subsequent 42x recovery as an analogy. The ultimate question is not if Bitcoin's price will rise, but if an investor's strategy and conviction can withstand the volatility to see the long-term play out. The recent divergence (gold up, Bitcoin down) is posed not as a narrative failure, but as potential evidence of this ongoing, painful transition from a speculative asset to a mainstream allocation.

marsbitHace 6 hora(s)

Has the 'Digital Gold' Narrative for BTC Failed?

marsbitHace 6 hora(s)

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

The article discusses Bitcoin's "digital gold" narrative, its recent price drop, and long-term outlook through the perspective of "Jason". It argues the narrative is not a failure but that Bitcoin represents a superior, new asset class due to its fixed supply (21 million), portability, and auditability. The piece compares its current ~3-4% global adoption rate to early internet/e-commerce, suggesting significant growth potential. Regarding the 2025-2026 price decline (from ~$126k to briefly under $61k), the author views it as a predictable, consensus-driven sell-off within Bitcoin's ~4-year cycle post-halving, exacerbated by a major "handover" from early, low-cost holders to new institutional buyers via ETFs. A key observation is that historical peak-to-trough drawdowns have lessened over time (e.g., 93% in 2011 to ~50% in 2026), indicating maturing volatility as holder structure changes. For the long term, the author uses a simple framework: Bitcoin's total market cap (~$1.4T at $70k) is only about 7% of gold's (~$20T). Even capturing 30-50% of gold's value would imply substantial upside. However, the article strongly cautions against viewing this as investment advice, emphasizing extreme volatility and the critical importance of risk management, position sizing, and deep fundamental understanding to survive severe drawdowns. It concludes by drawing a parallel to Amazon's 95% crash in 2000 and subsequent 42x recovery, stressing that the key is surviving market cycles to realize long-term potential.

链捕手Hace 6 hora(s)

Has BTC's 'Digital Gold' Narrative Failed?

链捕手Hace 6 hora(s)

From Code to Cognition: A Ten-Thousand-Word Guide to the Evolution of the Robot Brain

"From Code to Cognition: The Evolution of Robot Brains" The journey of robotic intelligence has shifted dramatically from manually coded systems to AI-driven brains. For decades, robots relied on layered software stacks—perception, state estimation, planning, control—each handcrafted. While predictable, they lacked adaptability. The 2010s saw deep learning revolutionize perception (e.g., object detection) and control (via reinforcement learning), but learned skills remained narrow. The arrival of Large Language Models (LLMs) marked a turning point. LLMs acted as high-level planners, interpreting natural language instructions and generating sequences of actions for traditional robotic systems to execute. However, true integration came with Visual-Language-Action (VLA) models, which fused vision, language, and motion prediction into a single network. Pioneered by models like RT-2 and open-source projects like OpenVLA, VLAs enable robots to reason and act directly from visual input and commands. The most advanced humanoid robots now employ a "dual-brain" architecture: a slow-thinking, large VLA (System 2) for reasoning and planning, and a fast-reacting, small network (System 1) for high-frequency motion control, sometimes with an even lower-level System 0 for balance. This split balances cognition with the physics of real-time movement. Computation is split between onboard hardware (e.g., NVIDIA Jetson) for safety-critical control loops and cloud/edge servers for non-critical tasks like learning and interfaces. A crucial driver is the open-source ecosystem—models like GR00T and OpenVLA allow startups to build upon pre-trained brains and fine-tune them with their own data, accelerating development. Despite progress, current systems struggle with recovery from errors, sample inefficiency, and long-horizon tasks. This has spurred the rise of **World Models**—neural networks that predict the consequences of actions. By simulating possible futures before acting (like NVIDIA Cosmos or Meta V-JEPA), robots can plan, recover, and generalize better. This represents the next frontier: shifting intelligence from learned reactions to an internal model of physics and cause-and-effect. The field is rapidly evolving. While not yet at its "ChatGPT moment," the convergence of cheaper hardware, scalable simulation, and world models points toward robots that are increasingly capable, adaptive, and useful. The question is shifting from "what can robots do?" to "what *should* they do?"

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

From Code to Cognition: A Ten-Thousand-Word Guide to the Evolution of the Robot Brain

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片