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

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-02-23Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-23

Introduzione

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.

Domande pertinenti

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.

Letture associate

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

Apple Pays Rent Too: The Two-Way Flow of "Traffic Tax" and "AI Capability Rent" Between Tech Giants For over two decades, Google has paid Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine on Safari, a "traffic tax" for a critical user entry point. However, in 2026, the direction of this cash flow partially reversed. Apple agreed to pay Google roughly $1 billion per year to license its Gemini AI models, as Apple's own models reportedly struggled with complex tasks. This creates a unique dynamic: Apple acts as the "landlord" in the established search ecosystem, collecting rent from Google for access. Simultaneously, in the emerging AI arena, Apple becomes the "tenant," paying Google for access to cutting-edge AI capabilities it cannot currently match internally. While Apple claims its new models are "distilled" from Gemini outputs and contain "not a drop" of Google's original code, core dependencies remain. Its knowledge base is refined using Gemini's outputs, and its most powerful cloud model runs on Google's infrastructure. Apple has structured the deal as non-exclusive, allowing it to theoretically switch AI suppliers—a hedge against over-reliance. The future hinges on whether advanced AI models become a commodity (cheap and abundant) or remain a concentrated, scarce resource (expensive and controlled by few). Apple is betting on the former, leveraging its massive device ecosystem to be a powerful, choosy customer. If the latter proves true, its bargaining power could erode. This power dynamic is extending to developers. Apple, Google, and WeChat are all pushing for apps to expose their core functions as standardized "actions" or "intents" that their respective AI assistants (Siri, Gemini, WeChat AI) can directly call. The new scarce resource is no longer just app store visibility, but "being selected by the AI." The currency of "rent" has changed from a 30% revenue share to ceding control over how users interact with an app's functions.

marsbit5 min fa

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

marsbit5 min fa

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

With the excitement around SpaceX's recent public listing reigniting interest in the US stock market, Chinese investors face significant challenges accessing compliant and convenient trading channels following regulatory actions against major online brokers. This article explores the available options, highlighting their risks and limitations. Traditional paths for US stock investments remain problematic. Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Listed Open-Ended Fund (LOF) products, while compliant, suffer from high fees, significant purchase premiums, and a very limited selection of assets. Small, unregulated offshore brokers pose substantial risks, including potential insolvency. While secure, VIP accounts at banks in Hong Kong or Singapore require high minimum deposits (often 1-2 million RMB) and in-person visits, placing them out of reach for most retail investors. The article positions cryptocurrency exchanges, specifically their TradFi (traditional finance on-chain) offerings, as a compelling alternative. Platforms like WEEX are noted for providing access to a wide range of US stocks and ETFs, including SpaceX (SPCXON), through tokenized assets. This method offers advantages such as a single account for both crypto and traditional assets, USDT-based settlement avoiding fiat complexities, flexible leverage, and robust risk management. To attract users, WEEX is promoting a "First Trade Guarantee" campaign. Running from June 15 to July 8 (UTC+8), it features a $30,000 prize pool. Users who trade $500 worth of US stock contracts can qualify for a guarantee on their first eligible trade: 100% loss coverage up to $30 or a 20% bonus on profits up to $30. The campaign is presented as a low-risk opportunity for both crypto natives and traditional investors to experience US stock trading.

marsbit7 min fa

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

marsbit7 min fa

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbit17 min fa

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbit17 min fa

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

Blockchain Finds Its True Path After 18 Years: Becoming the Financial Backbone for AI Agents and Autonomy This analysis explores a pivotal shift in the blockchain and crypto investment landscape, driven by the dominance of AI. Major venture capital firms, including Variant, Paradigm, Haun Ventures, and YZi Labs, are moving beyond pure "crypto" investment theses. They are expanding their focus to AI, robotics, and frontier tech, signaling that blockchain is no longer seen as a standalone sector but as an underlying infrastructure layer. The core argument is that blockchain's killer application may not be user-facing apps, but rather providing the economic rails for the coming wave of AI agents, autonomous robots, and automated systems. Key capabilities like self-custody wallets, programmable stablecoins for micropayments, on-chain identity, and verifiable smart contracts are positioned as essential for a future where machines conduct economic activity. The recent $1.4 billion investment by Tether (via its venture arm) in German robotics company NEURA Robotics exemplifies this, aiming to embed Tether's wallet tools directly into robots for autonomous transactions. While many "AI + Crypto" projects remain superficial, the article concludes that true value lies where crypto is a necessary component—enabling machine-to-machine payments, agent autonomy, verifiable data provenance, and open financial settlement for the AI era. For crypto venture capital, this convergence with AI represents both an adaptation to shifting capital flows and a potential path to unlocking the large-scale, non-speculative utility the industry has long sought.

marsbit37 min fa

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

marsbit37 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片