Will MYX set new all-time lows after the $1.81 rejection? Data shows…

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-02-23Actualizado a 2026-02-23

Resumen

A recent analysis of MYX Finance (MYX) highlights a bearish outlook following a failed attempt to sustain momentum. After a brief rally to $1.81, the token experienced significant buyer exhaustion, closing the same session at just $1.02. This rejection has led to sellers taking control, with the loss of the $1 support level indicating potential further declines. Technical analysis suggests that, without nearby long-term support, MYX could potentially fall as low as $0.15. In the short term, any bounce to the $0.80-$0.85 range is viewed as a selling opportunity. Both long and short-term expectations remain bearish.

In a recent AMBCrypto report, the down-only price action of MYX Finance [MYX] was highlighted. A short-term bullish divergence was noted, and a bounce to $1.5 was expected at that time.

MYX bulls were able to drive the bounce as high as $1.81. In doing so, a local bottom at $0.80 was formed. This level was retested as support once again in recent hours of trading.

AMBCrypto reported that $3 and $5 were the major longer-term swing resistances overhead. MYX bulls need to overturn these levels to establish an uptrend. As things stand, the altcoin looks more likely to set new lows than reclaim the overhead supply zones.

MYX buyer exhaustion explained

The 1-day timeframe’s price action illustrated the extremely tough job bulls have on their hands.

On Friday, the 20th of February, the rally rose as high as $1.816, but it lasted only a few hours. The daily session close was at $1.02, a far way from the highs.

It was classic buyer exhaustion.

An upward candle on high volume hunted down the imbalances and short liquidations overhead, as an earlier report warned it might. Short-term buyer enthusiasm and forced short liquidations can only keep the rally going for so long.

Since then, sellers have seized control emphatically.

In August 2025, MYX rallied swiftly from $0.15 to $2.5. Towards the end of that month, the price came back to the psychological $1 level to test it as support.

Therefore, now that this level was ceded to the bears, there was no long-term support nearby. It might seem dramatic to say that $0.15 was the next target, but technical analysis showed that this outcome is possible.

On the 1-hour chart, the imbalance between $0.75-$0.85 was a short-term target. A bounce to this area would likely present a selling opportunity. The OBV was making new lows and the MACD formed another bearish crossover.

Overall, the long and short-term expectations remained bearish for MYX.

Final Summary

The failure to rclaim $1 as support meant that MYX could fall as far south as $0.15.
In the short-term, a bounce to $0.80-$0.85 should be considered a selling opportunity.

Disclaimer: The information presented does not constitute financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice and is solely the writer’s opinion.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the expected bounce level for MYX Finance according to the previous AMBCrypto report?

AA bounce to $1.5 was expected.

QWhat was the major longer-term swing resistance level that MYX bulls need to overcome to establish an uptrend?

A$3 and $5 were the major longer-term swing resistances overhead.

QWhat does the article identify as the classic sign of buyer exhaustion on February 20th?

AThe price rallied to a high of $1.816 but the daily session closed far from the highs at $1.02, which was a classic sign of buyer exhaustion.

QAccording to the technical analysis, what is the potential long-term downside target for MYX after it lost the $1 support level?

AThe potential long-term downside target is $0.15.

QWhat short-term price area does the article suggest would present a selling opportunity for MYX?

AA bounce to the $0.80-$0.85 area would present a selling opportunity.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Will the Next Crypto Bull Run Start with On-Chain Trading of SpaceX?

This article presents a scenario-based forecast for the crypto industry from 2026 to 2029, arguing that the next major cycle will be driven not by technological narratives but by legal access to real-world assets. The author predicts that by mid-2026, pre-IPO perpetual contracts for top private companies like SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic on platforms like Hyperliquid will become the primary gateway for accessing quality assets, as most crypto-native tokens fail to capture real value. The much-hyped AI x Crypto intersection largely fails except for prediction markets, which thrive on betting on AI model supremacy. By 2027, public blockchain foundations are forced to choose between catering to retail speculation or building compliant infrastructure for institutions, with many opting for the latter. Growth in stablecoins and tokenized private credit/equity hits a "triple ceiling" due to regulatory and political uncertainty rather than market demand. The pivotal shift is forecast for 2028. A major liquidation event in pre-IPO perpetuals exposes the structural flaw of synthetic markets lacking a real underlying asset anchor. In response, regulatory changes finally allow the public solicitation of private securities resales to verified accredited investors. This creates a legitimate secondary market for real company equity, which then becomes the core asset class of the new bull market, relegating synthetic perps to a niche role. By 2029, the industry becomes "boring" but foundational. Tokens without claims on real cash flows or assets cease trading. Stablecoin growth is steady but politically capped. Crypto infrastructure fades from view as it gets absorbed into traditional finance backends. The article's central thesis is that the key bottleneck for crypto's next phase is legal and regulatory channels for real asset ownership, not technology.

marsbitHace 36 min(s)

Will the Next Crypto Bull Run Start with On-Chain Trading of SpaceX?

marsbitHace 36 min(s)

Kalshi-CFTC Fight In New Mexico Could Shape Prediction Market Rules

A jurisdictional battle between the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the state of New Mexico over the regulation of prediction markets could set national rules for the industry. At issue is who polices platforms like Kalshi, with the CFTC asserting federal oversight and New Mexico arguing state gaming and consumer protection laws apply, especially for contracts resembling wagers on events like elections or sports. The outcome will determine if prediction markets can scale nationally under a clear federal framework or face a fragmented, state-by-state regulatory landscape. This dispute is significant for the crypto-adjacent trading community, which often engages with these speculative event markets. A clearer rulebook could boost mainstream adoption, liquidity, and integration with crypto infrastructure, while a state-led challenge could stifle growth. The case is particularly sensitive for sports-related contracts, where the line between financial markets and gambling blurs. Ultimately, this legal fight will shape whether prediction markets become a scalable national product or remain constrained by jurisdictional conflicts.

bitcoinistHace 2 hora(s)

Kalshi-CFTC Fight In New Mexico Could Shape Prediction Market Rules

bitcoinistHace 2 hora(s)

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手Hace 7 hora(s)

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

Nvidia's recent announcement to issue at least $20 billion in senior notes, despite holding a strong cash position with over $48.6 billion in free cash flow last quarter, is not a sign of financial need. Instead, it represents a strategic move to leverage its high credit rating (recently upgraded to AA by S&P) to secure low-cost, long-term debt. This capital will support long-term AI infrastructure investments, data centers, R&D, supply chain prepayments, and strategic investments, while allowing the company to continue aggressive shareholder returns through stock buybacks and dividends. The decision reflects a mature capital management strategy: using debt to finance long-term growth assets is more efficient and less dilutive to shareholders than equity financing. It signals that Nvidia, like other tech giants (Alphabet, Meta, Amazon), is entering a new phase of heavy AI capital expenditure, shifting from a pure growth story to a story about capital allocation, credit strength, and long-term ecosystem positioning. The key question for investors is whether Nvidia can maintain its high cash flow generation and ensure that returns from these AI investments justify the cost of capital over the long term. The bond issuance amplifies its expansion capabilities but also ties its valuation more closely to the broader AI investment cycle's sustainability and profitability.

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

marsbitHace 7 hora(s)

Trading

Spot

Futuros