Uniswap (UNI) Volume Soars 500%, Will the Recent Spike Turn Into a Breakout?

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-02-12Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-12

Introduzione

Despite a generally bearish crypto market, Uniswap (UNI) experienced a significant surge, with its price gaining 5.23% and trading volume soaring over 568% to $1.05 billion. After opening at $3.23, the price climbed to a high of $4.37 before settling at $3.39. However, technical indicators suggest a potential bearish correction. The MACD and signal lines are below zero, indicating a negative trend, and the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) at -0.24 shows strong selling pressure. The RSI at 48.19 is neutral, while the Bull Bear Power (BBP) reading of -0.036 indicates slight bearish dominance. Key support is at $3.31, with resistance at $3.47.

With a 0.45% spike in the market, some of the crypto assets are charted in green. The bearish dominance has erased all the recent gains, keeping the broader sentiment in extreme fear. The largest asset, Bitcoin (BTC), trades around $66.9K, while Ethereum (ETH), the largest altcoin, hovers at $1.9K. Among other altcoins, Uniswap (UNI) lit green on the chart with a 5.23% gain.

The asset opened the day trading at a bottom level of $3.23, and the entry of bulls was lightning-fast, resulting in the UNI price climbing to a high range of $4.37. According to CMC data, at press time, Uniswap traded at $3.39, with its market cap resting at $2.12 billion. Notably, the daily trading volume has increased by over 568% touched the $1.05 billion zone.

Uniswap’s 4-hour trading pattern reveals the negative outlook, and the price could slip to the key support at around $3.31. Assuming the downside correction intensifies, the asset’s price may steadily fall toward $3.23 or even lower. On the flip side, if the UNI bulls reclaimed power against the pressure, the price movement might rise to a retest of the $3.47 resistance. As the token continues to move upward, it will climb high toward the $3.55 range.

Uniswap Faces Bearish Correction on the Charts

When both the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) and the signal lines of Uniswap are below the zero line, displaying its bearish mood. As the downward momentum dominates, the broader trend is negative. Only a bullish move above zero can rescue the asset.

In addition, the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) indicator is located at -0.24, pointing to a strong selling pressure in the UNI market. There is a significant amount of capital outflows, and if the negative reading persists, it likely supports the downside momentum to continue.

Uniswap’s daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) is found at 48.19 suggests neutral momentum. It is neither overbought nor oversold, hovering near the midpoint of 50, and a move above it hints at strengthening bullish pressure, while a drop below 40 may signal growing weakness.

Furthermore, the Bull Bear Power (BBP) reading of -0.036 indicates slight bearish dominance. With the negative value, the sellers have a marginal edge. Also, as the magnitude is very small, the ongoing market momentum of UNI is weak rather than strongly bearish.

Top Updated Crypto News

73% Price Jump and 404% Volume Boom: Can Berachain (BERA) Power Higher?

Domande pertinenti

QWhat was the percentage increase in Uniswap's (UNI) daily trading volume mentioned in the article?

AThe daily trading volume of Uniswap (UNI) increased by over 568%.

QAccording to the technical analysis, what is the key support level for UNI's price?

AThe key support level for UNI's price is around $3.31.

QWhat does the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) indicator value of -0.24 indicate about the UNI market?

AA CMF value of -0.24 indicates strong selling pressure and significant capital outflows in the UNI market.

QWhat is the significance of the Relative Strength Index (RSI) reading of 48.19 for Uniswap?

AAn RSI reading of 48.19 suggests a neutral momentum, meaning the asset is neither overbought nor oversold.

QWhat condition would 'rescue' the asset from its bearish trend according to the MACD analysis?

AA bullish move above the zero line by the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) could rescue the asset from its bearish trend.

Letture associate

RWA Weekly: HSBC and Standard Chartered Secure Hong Kong Stablecoin Licenses; US FDIC Releases Draft Guidelines for Institutional Stablecoin Issuance

RWA Weekly: HSBC and Standard Chartered Secure Hong Kong Stablecoin Licenses; US FDIC Issues Draft Guidelines for Institutional Stablecoin Issuance This week’s RWA sector saw significant growth, with the on-chain total market cap rising to $29.06 billion. Stablecoin market capitalization remained high at $300.65 billion, while monthly transfer volume hit a record $10.21 trillion. Active addresses surged 15.24%, indicating strong retail participation recovery. Regulatory milestones were achieved as Hong Kong granted its first stablecoin licenses to HSBC and Standard Chartered, marking the start of a compliant stablecoin era. The U.S. FDIC released draft guidelines for stablecoin issuance, focusing on reserve management, redemptions, and capital requirements. The U.S. Treasury also proposed rules requiring stablecoin issuers to implement anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance systems. South Korea, Dubai, and Russia advanced their stablecoin and RWA regulatory frameworks. Key project developments include six Swiss banks, including UBS, planning to test a digital Swiss franc in 2026. Securitize began tokenizing shares for Nasdaq-listed Currenc, enabling 24/7 trading. SBI Ripple Asia completed development of a token issuance platform on XRP Ledger. Circle launched CPN Managed Payments to expand stablecoin payment services for institutions. Funding highlights: Pharos raised $44 million in Series A funding to develop its RWA-focused blockchain. GSR led an investment in tokenization platform Libeara. Gobi Partners invested in Transak to expand compliant stablecoin and digital asset payment infrastructure in Asia. S&P Global reported that banks remain cautious about stablecoins, with only 7% of small and mid-sized U.S. banks developing related frameworks. Chainalysis projected stablecoin transaction volume could reach $1,500 trillion by 2035, driven by generational wealth transfer and deeper integration into payment systems. Major tech firms like Meta are increasingly adopting stablecoins as a core payment strategy, signaling a shift toward digital asset-based transaction infrastructures.

marsbit5 min fa

RWA Weekly: HSBC and Standard Chartered Secure Hong Kong Stablecoin Licenses; US FDIC Releases Draft Guidelines for Institutional Stablecoin Issuance

marsbit5 min fa

World Liberty Financial says, ‘We are nowhere near liquidation’ – But fears remain

World Liberty Financial (WLFI), backed by the Trump family, has dismissed concerns over its borrowing activities as unfounded "FUD." The DeFi project admitted to being a major borrower and supplier on WLFI Markets, using 5 billion WLFI tokens (worth $429 million) from its treasury as collateral to borrow over $75 million in USDC. This move drained the platform’s liquidity and raised fears of bad debt and contagion risk. WLFI defended its actions, stating it is "nowhere near liquidation" and can supply more collateral if needed. Additionally, concerns persist over upcoming token unlocks, with 70% of WLFI supply still locked. The token has dropped 15% amid the uncertainty, and analysts warn unlocks could trigger further selling pressure.

ambcrypto49 min fa

World Liberty Financial says, ‘We are nowhere near liquidation’ – But fears remain

ambcrypto49 min fa

In a Losing Bear Market, Who Is Quietly Making a Fortune?

In a bear market where most crypto participants are losing money, a few projects continue to generate significant revenue. A look at Defillama’s revenue rankings reveals that profitable projects share simple and clear revenue models, which fall into two main categories: spread and transaction fees. Spread-based revenue models, used by entities like Tether, Circle, Aave, and Lido, act as capital intermediaries. They profit from the difference between lower funding costs and higher returns from deployed capital, relying on the scale and duration of capital deposits. Transaction fee models, employed by platforms such as Hyperliquid, Polymarket, pump.fun, Aerodrome, and Jupiter, generate income by charging fees on trading activities. Their earnings depend on the size and frequency of transactions. Notable cases include Grayscale (traditional asset management fees), Chainlink (data service fees), and Titan Builder (which profited unusually from a major arbitrage incident). The analysis concludes that sustainable profitability in a bear market comes from straightforward revenue models combined with sophisticated product execution and operational excellence.

marsbit57 min fa

In a Losing Bear Market, Who Is Quietly Making a Fortune?

Amid a prolonged bear market where most crypto participants are losing money, a few projects continue to generate significant revenue. A closer look at Defillama’s revenue rankings reveals that profitable projects share simple and clear revenue models, primarily falling into two categories: spread income and transaction fees. Spread-based revenue models involve acting as capital intermediaries—absorbing funds at lower costs and deploying them at higher yields. Examples include stablecoin issuers like Tether and Circle, which earn from interest on reserve assets like U.S. Treasuries; lending protocols such as Aave, which profit from the spread between borrowing and deposit rates; and liquid staking services like Lido, which retain a portion of staking rewards as fees. Transaction fee models generate revenue by taxing activities like trading, token creation, or other on-chain actions. Platforms such as Hyperliquid and EdgeX (perpetual trading), Polymarket (event prediction), pump.fun and GMGN (meme trading), Aerodrome and Jupiter (spot trading), as well as Phantom (via swap fees) and NFT marketplaces like Courtyard and Fragment, all rely heavily on transaction fees. Notable exceptions include Grayscale (traditional asset management fees), Chainlink (oracle data service fees), and Titan Builder (which profited unusually from a large MEV capture incident). The key insight is that sustainable profitability in a bear market comes from straightforward revenue models combined with sophisticated product execution, liquidity management, and user engagement—not complex or high-risk strategies.

Odaily星球日报1 h fa

Rare Annualized Rate of 400%: Is TradeXYZ Handing Out Money to Oil Bulls?

Amidst volatile oil markets due to geopolitical tensions, Trade.xyz’s WTIOIL-USDC perpetual contract exhibited an unusually negative annualized funding rate of -300% to -400%. This meant long positions received approximately 1% of their position value daily from shorts. The anomaly stemmed from the structure of WTI futures curves in extreme backwardation, where near-month (May) contracts traded at a significant premium to far-month (June) contracts. Trade.xyz’s oracle gradually shifts price weighting from near-month to far-month over five trading days during rollover. Anticipating this decline, traders heavily shorted the perpetual, driving the funding rate deeply negative. Three strategies were discussed: 1. Shorting Trade.xyz’s contract while going long on CME’s far-month futures—initially profitable but later eroded by high funding costs. 2. Shorting far-month futures and longing Trade.xyz’s near-month contract before rollover, which gained traction as arbitrage opportunities emerged. 3. Betting against funding rates via Boros, a rate-trading platform, though limited by low leverage and high slippage. The situation highlights how DeFi traders are adapting to traditional futures mechanics and advanced instruments like rate markets, reflecting the evolving infrastructure of crypto-native trading platforms.

marsbit1 h fa

Rare Annualized Rate of 400%: Is TradeXYZ Handing Out Money to Oil Bulls?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot

Futures