1 billion HYPE burn could shock supply – Can Hyperliquid hold $20?

ambcryptoPubblicato 2025-12-18Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-18

Introduzione

Hyperliquid (HYPE) is showing notable activity as its price slipped below $30 but remained up 3% following a proposal from The Hyper Foundation to burn 1 billion HYPE tokens from the Assistance Fund. If approved by validators on December 24, this burn could cause a supply shock, potentially driving prices upward. However, current market conditions show weak demand, with HYPE down 56% from recent highs and approaching a critical support level at $20. Perpetual futures volume has also dropped sharply. Additionally, an upcoming token unlock of 10 million HYPE in December may introduce short-term selling pressure, partially counteracting the positive impact of the proposed token burn.

Hyperliquid [HYPE] is showing notable fundamental activity.

The token slipped below the $30 level but remained up more than 3% on the day at press time. This modest rally followed a proposal from The Hyper Foundation aimed at reducing supply.

The key question now is whether this move will drive prices higher, or if the upcoming December unlocks will counteract the effect.

Hyper Foundation proposes to burn 1B HYPE

The Assistance Fund held 1 billion HYPE tokens, which the Hyper Foundation proposed to burn. Validators will signal their intention for governance on December 21st, with voting results expected on December 24th, when users can start staking.

At press time, the Assistance Fund held more than a billion tokens valued at more than $37 billion.

If the Foundation’s proposal prevails in the voting stage, it will significantly decrease the total and circulating supply, indicating a positive outlook.

Due to the magnitude of the tokens burned, a supply shock would follow. When supply reduces and meets rising demand, prices tend to move up, a classic trend in supply dynamics.

However, the current scenario did not show evidence of demand, as price and activity were in decline.

Will bulls defend the $20 zone?

On the charts, the HYPE price was breaking lower levels, aligning with the broader crypto market. The altcoin breached the $35 zone, which had previously prevented further breakdown more than five times.

After hitting $27, HYPE was down about 56% and looked headed toward the critical support at $20. However, the shift in supply dynamics could change this outlook.

The $20 level served as both a psychological marker and a previous higher high from April. As such, it represented a potential turning point if the bulls could defend the zone.

HYPE’s price weakness mirrored a sharp drop in Perpetual Futures (Perps) volume. Once accounting for 57% of the market, Perps volume has fallen to just 16%, as of writing.

In practical terms, trading volume declined from a mid‐October peak of about $30 billion to roughly $8 billion.

On the other hand, the Spot Volume was around $200 million from levels above $1.2 billion when HYPE was rallying.

As its activities and prices fall, more selling pressure appears to be building.

Upcoming sell pressure from unlock

While the proposal could help turn around the price direction, the upcoming HYPE token unlocks for December posed a problem.

According to a post by Ali Charts, an additional 10 million tokens will enter the market, bringing the total unlocked since November to 20 million.

While this may not fully offset the impact of burning 1 billion tokens, the increase in circulating supply could still create short‐term selling pressure.


Final Thoughts

  • HYPE proposes to burn about 1 billion tokens and has opened the voting
  • HYPE price struggles as it looks headed toward $20, though a reversal seemed possible given the potential shift in supply dynamics.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main proposal from The Hyper Foundation regarding HYPE tokens?

AThe Hyper Foundation has proposed to burn 1 billion HYPE tokens currently held by the Assistance Fund.

QWhat is the key price level that bulls are trying to defend for HYPE?

ABulls are trying to defend the critical support and psychological level at $20.

QWhat potential market effect could the token burn have if approved?

AThe burn of 1 billion tokens could create a supply shock, which, if met with rising demand, could drive prices higher.

QWhat is a significant factor that could create selling pressure and counteract the positive effect of the burn?

AThe upcoming unlock of an additional 10 million tokens in December could create short-term selling pressure.

QHow has the trading volume for HYPE Perpetual Futures (Perps) changed recently?

AThe Perpetual Futures volume has sharply dropped from a peak of 57% of the market to just 16%.

Letture associate

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbit15 min fa

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbit15 min fa

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

"Standing in the Light: Understanding the Optical Module and CPO Industry Chain" This article analyzes the critical role of optical communication technology, specifically optical modules and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO), as the "nervous system" for modern AI data centers. With exponential growth in AI computational demands (e.g., NVIDIA's Vera Rubin architecture), traditional electrical interconnects using copper cables face severe bottlenecks in bandwidth, power consumption, and signal integrity over distance. The core function of an optical module is to act as a "translator," converting electrical signals from chips into optical signals for transmission over fiber (and vice-versa). Key internal components include lasers, modulators, photodetectors, drivers, and DSP chips. The industry is currently transitioning from 800G to 1.6T modules. However, the future lies in CPO. This next-generation technology integrates the optical engine directly with the switch ASIC/XPU on the same package substrate, drastically reducing power consumption (by ~3.5x according to NVIDIA), overcoming bandwidth density limits, and minimizing signal attenuation compared to traditional pluggable modules. Key challenges for CPO include advanced packaging capacity (dominated by TSMC), thermal management, repairability, and standardization. The article details the broader technology landscape, including Near-Packaged Optics (NPO, a pragmatic intermediate step), Linear-drive Pluggable Optics (LPO), Optical I/O (OIO for chip-level integration), and Optical Circuit Switches (OCS). A comprehensive CPO industry chain is mapped, highlighting shifting power dynamics: * **Architecture Definers:** NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Marvell now hold greater influence. * **Advanced Packaging & Manufacturing:** TSMC is central; Fabrinet is a key EMS player. * **Lasers ("The Heart"):** A strategic bottleneck. EML lasers are led by Lumentum and Coherent (both receiving major NVIDIA investments). CW lasers, favored for CPO/silicon photonics, see strong Chinese players like Source Photonics and Sicoya. * **Silicon Photonics Chips:** The mainstream path for CPO engines, with key players like Broadcom, Intel, Marvell, and China's Accelink. * **Fiber Connectivity Components:** A major new, high-growth market created by CPO, including Fiber Array Units (FAU), Polarization-Maintaining Fiber (PMF), and MPO connectors. Companies like Tianfu Communication and US Conec are leaders. * **Fiber & Cable:** Experiencing a super-cycle (e.g., Corning, Yangtze Optical Fiber). * **PCB/Substrates:** Requiring advanced materials (e.g., Shengyi Tech). * **DSP & SerDes:** Functions are integrated into switch ASICs in the CPO era (e.g., Broadcom, Astera Labs). * **Optical Module Makers:** Transitioning from standalone module suppliers to providers of optical engines and NPO/LPO solutions while riding the current pluggable boom (e.g., Zhongji Innolight, Eoptolink). The investment timeline is segmented: Short-term (2026-2027) features the "last feast" for pluggable modules and CPO's initial rollout. Medium-term (2027-2029) will see CPO expand and NPO peak. Long-term (2029-2032+) involves CPO/OIO penetration into intra-rack scaling. In conclusion, optical interconnects are fundamental to AI infrastructure. The competitive landscape sees US firms leading in architecture and high-end chips, TSMC in advanced packaging, and Chinese firms holding strong positions in modules, connectivity components, CW lasers, and fiber/cable. The future belongs to companies that can navigate the technological shift from "selling shovels" (modules) to "building highways" (CPO/OIO infrastructure).

marsbit25 min fa

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

marsbit25 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片