Should PEPE traders brace for volatility as short squeeze potential builds?

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-03-07Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-07

Introduzione

The memecoin market has declined significantly, with PEPE showing particular weakness. Its price is under pressure and trading near local lows, with bearish charts and declining Open Interest. However, a potential short squeeze could occur due to high short liquidation levels overhead. PEPE's price action is heavily dependent on Bitcoin, which may drop further. Traders are advised to wait, as PEPE could either fall lower or bounce sharply, typical of memecoins. The overall outlook suggests more potential losses in the short term, but acknowledges the possibility of rapid rallies even during market stress.

The memecoin market has seen its collective market capitalization drop by 48% over the past year, and 6.9% over the past month, according to CoinMarketCap. According to Glassnode, the memecoin sector has only gained by 2.2% over the past week, compared to the 4.6% DeFi and L2 sectors managed.

Among memecoins, PEPE’s weakness can be highlighted as an outlier. At the time of writing, the short-term and long-term charts were bearish, and the $0.00000336 local lows were under pressure once again.

The Open Interest was in decline as the prices bled to show speculators were not willing to bet on a price recovery. Combined with Bitcoin’s [BTC] fall below $70k, it would seem that the next few days could see further drawdown for PEPE holders.

A short squeeze can materialize in the coming weeks

Just like Bitcoin, PEPE also has a large number of short liquidation levels overhead. The 90-day liquidation map showed that the cumulative short liquidation leverage was much higher than the long liquidation leverage.

In other words, a price move higher would liquidate a lot more short positions than a price move of similar magnitude would wipe out long liquidations. This could be an attractive prospect for counter-trend traders, but they shouldn’t be in a hurry.

Bitcoin has a chance of dropping to $65.3k in the coming days. Whether it can defend the $63k-$65k area, or will plummet to $60k and below, will decide which way PEPE likely goes.

Traders’ call to action – Wait

PEPE has not been trading in a feasible area for swing traders. At press time, it was just below the long-term support at $0.00000342. The downtrend could see it fall to the $0.00000303 extension level to the south just as easily as it could bounce to the $0.00000379 local highs.

What is more likely? It is hard to tell because PEPE will likely closely follow Bitcoin trends. As things stand, BTC looks poised for more downside over the weekend.

Swing traders should remember the magnetic zones above $0.0000038 are a valid target. Memecoins tend to rally quickly before retracing the move, like the mid-February rally to $0.000005 that appeared to break the downtrend but didn’t.


Final Summary

  • PEPE traders should expect more losses since Bitcoin has a bearish short-term bias.
  • Traders should respect the capability of memecoins to blast higher even during times of market stress.

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

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the current trend for PEPE's price according to the article?

AThe short-term and long-term charts for PEPE are bearish, with the local low of $0.00000336 under pressure and a potential further drawdown expected.

QWhy does the article suggest a short squeeze could occur for PEPE in the coming weeks?

AThe 90-day liquidation map shows that cumulative short liquidation leverage is much higher than long liquidation leverage, meaning a price increase would liquidate many more short positions.

QWhat key factor will likely determine the direction of PEPE's price movement?

AThe direction of PEPE's price will likely be decided by whether Bitcoin can defend the $63k-$65k area or if it plummets to $60k and below.

QWhat trading advice does the article give to swing traders regarding PEPE?

ASwing traders are advised to wait, as PEPE is not in a feasible trading area and could either drop to $0.00000303 or bounce to $0.00000379, closely following Bitcoin's trends.

QWhat is the overall market performance of memecoins compared to DeFi and L2 sectors over the past week?

AThe memecoin sector gained only 2.2% over the past week, compared to the 4.6% gain managed by the DeFi and L2 sectors.

Letture associate

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

**Summary: Rising Interest Rates Are Not the Killer of Tech; EPS Is: The "Keep the Strong, Ditch the Weak" Strategy After the AI Theme Plunge** The author argues that the sharp sell-off in tech and AI-related stocks, triggered by a strong US jobs report that heightened Fed rate hike fears, represents a "pullback to pick up passengers" rather than a "car crash." The true end of a tech bull market is not determined by an extra 25 basis point hike, but by industry overcapacity and the disproval of earnings per share (EPS) expectations. Historical analysis shows that during past rate hike cycles, the Nasdaq-100 often outperformed, provided EPS growth remained strong. The current phase is seen as a shift from a "broad narrative-driven rally" to a "focused verification stage" for AI. The investment strategy should be to "keep the strong, ditch the weak." * **Retain exposure** to high-conviction AI infrastructure leaders with clear order visibility, stable margins, strong cash flow, and upward EPS revisions (e.g., AI servers, advanced packaging, optical modules, key cloud suppliers). * **Reduce exposure** to high-beta, narrative-driven stocks with unclear profit paths (e.g., some quantum computing, space, or speculative chip stocks), especially on rebounds. Valuation concerns should focus on whether earnings can catch up to high multiples, not on high P/E alone. Crowded positioning signals a concentration into quality assets, not necessarily a market top. The upcoming Q2 earnings season will be a key validation point. The core principle is to hold stocks with proven EPS, while using macro events (CPI data, central bank meetings) to manage timing and risk.

marsbit35 min fa

Raising Interest Rates Is Not a Tech Killer, EPS Is: A Strategy for Discarding the Weak and Retaining the Strong After the AI Theme's Sharp Decline

marsbit35 min fa

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

SpaceX's potential IPO is priced at $135 per share, aiming to raise $75 billion and valuing the company at approximately $1.77 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO in history. This valuation has sparked intense debate among investors. Bullish analysts, including major underwriters Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, argue the valuation is justified by SpaceX's long-term potential. They see it not just as a rocket company but as a future leader in space infrastructure, with key growth drivers being Starlink satellite internet, low-cost rocket launches, and future AI-related ventures. They project revenues reaching hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars by 2030-2040. ARK Invest's model suggests a 2030 enterprise value could reach $2.5 trillion. Bearish analysts from independent research firms like Morningstar, PitchBook, and New Constructs contend the IPO price is excessively high, already pricing in unrealistic future growth. Using DCF and sum-of-the-parts models, they estimate fair value between $780 billion and $1.7 trillion, significantly below the IPO target. They highlight risks such as the speculative nature of AI projections, over-dependence on Elon Musk, high growth expectations, and corporate governance concerns. Trefis set a target price of just $79 per share. While both sides acknowledge SpaceX's unique position in commercial space, the core disagreement centers on whether the $135 share price offers a reasonable margin of safety or is overly optimistic. Despite the valuation controversy, reported strong demand for the IPO indicates significant market interest.

marsbit2 h fa

The Largest IPO in History Ignites Heated Debate: Is SpaceX Worth $1.77 Trillion?

marsbit2 h fa

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

The article discusses the evolution of on-chain credit, distinguishing three markets: overcollateralized crypto lending, unsecured lending (largely unsuccessful), and asset-backed credit (ABC). ABC, backed by identifiable real-world collateral with legal recourse, is identified as the fastest-growing category and the only one credibly addressing adverse selection—the core problem in credit where the riskiest borrowers self-select. Current growth in on-chain Real World Assets (RWAs), particularly tokenized private credit funds (e.g., Maple Finance, Centrifuge), is substantial but often merely "wraps" existing fund structures, inheriting their risks rather than solving adverse selection at the protocol level. The regulatory landscape is a key driver, with the US GENIUS Act (prohibiting stablecoin issuers from paying yield) and the proposed CLARITY Act (closing loopholes on indirect yield) set to redefine permissible yield-bearing products. This makes vaults (like ERC-4626) the critical architecture—they become the primary compliant vehicle for delivering yield, functioning as issuance, disclosure, distribution, and recovery mechanisms. The author's thesis is that the correct post-GENIUS/CLARITY architecture involves building ABC solutions where credit assessment, structure, and recovery are encoded directly into the smart contract vault layer, moving beyond mere tokenized fund wrappers to solve adverse selection fundamentally and ensure regulatory compliance.

Foresight News3 h fa

After the Passage of the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, What Is the Correct Architecture for On-Chain Yield?

Foresight News3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片