Jupiter’s 12% surge faces a reality check: On-chain activity hits 2-year low

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-02-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-15

Introduzione

Jupiter (JUP) experienced a significant 12% price surge, driven by hundreds of millions in capital over 24 hours. However, on-chain data reveals a stark contrast, with user activity and transaction volume hitting a two-year low, indicating the rally may be speculative rather than organically driven. Despite weak network usage, Total Value Locked (TVL) increased by $166 million, suggesting genuine capital commitment and longer-term positioning. Derivatives market growth was modest, reinforcing that spot buying and capital locking were primary drivers. Short-term price movement is expected to be influenced by liquidity clusters, with potential resistance near $0.18 and support around $0.15. The sustainability remains in question due to the divergence between price and on-chain fundamentals.

Jupiter [JUP] attracted substantial inflows over the past 24 hours, with capital rising by hundreds of millions of dollars. The wave of buying pressure lifted the token by at least 12% within the same period.

Yet, JUP’s expansion has not been matched by stronger on-chain engagement.

Core network metrics show that user participation and transaction activity remain subdued, creating a widening gap between valuation and protocol fundamentals.

Weak usage undermines rally strength

On-chain data suggests that the recent rally may be driven more by positioning than by organic growth.

Artemis, which tracks daily active or transacting users, showed a sharp decline in participation. The metric has fallen to its lowest level since February 2024, marking a two-year low.

This drop in active users coincides with a contraction in total transactions executed on the protocol. Transaction volume has declined to roughly 1.5 million, a level last recorded on the 19th of January.

Although transaction counts have stabilized within a narrow range in recent sessions, overall activity remains materially below previous highs.

When network usage declines while price accelerates, the divergence often signals speculative momentum rather than sustainable demand.

In JUP’s case, the absence of strong on-chain confirmation raises the risk that the rally may lack structural support.

TVL inflows signal committed capital

Despite weak usage metrics, capital commitment to the protocol has increased.

Total value locked, which measures the amount of assets deposited in liquidity pools and other protocol mechanisms, surged by approximately $166 million over the past day.

At press time, TVL stood at $2.163 billion, according to DeFiLlama.

An increase in TVL typically reflects longer-term positioning, as locked assets reduce circulating supply and indicate investor confidence in the protocol’s yield opportunities or utility.

The sharp rise suggests that a meaningful volume of JUP has moved off the open market and into locked positions.

While it remains unclear whether institutional players or retail investors drove the inflow, the magnitude of the increase points to genuine capital allocation rather than purely short-term trading activity.

Derivatives positioning remains modest

Speculative activity in the derivatives market has also expanded. The OI-Weighted Funding Rate remains positive, indicating that long positions dominate JUP’s perpetual futures market.

However, derivatives exposure alone appears insufficient to explain the scale of the rally. Open Interest rose 13% in the past 24 hours but stood at just $50.29 million at press time, according to CoinGlass.

Compared to the $166 million surge in TVL, derivatives positioning remains relatively small. This comparison strengthens the view that spot-driven inflows and capital locking played a larger role in the recent price advance.

What comes next for JUP?

Liquidity cluster analysis outlines two near-term scenarios.

The bullish case suggests limited upside toward the $0.18 level, where a concentration of liquidity could cap gains.

The bearish scenario, by contrast, presents a broader downside path, with price potentially extending toward $0.15.

Liquidity clusters represent areas of unfilled orders that often attract price movement, as markets tend to gravitate toward zones with concentrated liquidity.

In the short term, momentum will determine direction. Sustained buying pressure could push JUP toward the upper liquidity zone before any correction unfolds.

Conversely, fading momentum may expose the asset to a deeper retracement toward lower support levels.


Final Summary

  • Weak network usage contrasts with rising demand for JUP, raising concerns about the durability of the rally.
  • A $166 million increase in total value locked (TVL) confirms that fresh capital is entering the ecosystem.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat was the percentage increase in Jupiter's (JUP) price over the past 24 hours, and what concerning on-chain trend contradicts this price surge?

AJupiter's price surged by 12% over the past 24 hours. This price increase is contradicted by on-chain activity, which has fallen to a two-year low, showing a sharp decline in user participation and transaction volume.

QAccording to the article, what does the divergence between rising price and declining network usage often signal?

AThe divergence between a rising price and declining network usage often signals that the rally is driven by speculative momentum rather than sustainable, organic demand.

QDespite weak on-chain activity, what metric showed a significant capital inflow, and how much did it increase by?

ADespite weak on-chain activity, the Total Value Locked (TVL) metric showed a significant capital inflow, surging by approximately $166 million in the past day to reach $2.163 billion.

QWhat are the two potential near-term price scenarios for JUP outlined by liquidity cluster analysis?

AThe two potential near-term price scenarios are a bullish case where the price could rise to the $0.18 level, and a bearish case where the price could retrace toward the $0.15 level.

QHow does the scale of derivatives market activity (Open Interest) compare to the TVL inflow, and what does this suggest about the rally's drivers?

AThe derivatives market Open Interest of $50.29 million is relatively small compared to the $166 million TVL inflow. This suggests that spot-driven inflows and capital locking played a larger role in the price advance than derivatives speculation.

Letture associate

Fed's Internal Doves Flock to Hawkish Stance, Warsh's Debut "Between a Rock and a Hard Place"

U.S. Federal Reserve officials who previously advocated for rate cuts, including Governor Christopher Waller, have recently shifted their stance, with many now not ruling out the possibility of future rate hikes. This sets a challenging stage for new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh's first policy meeting. Appointed by President Trump based on his dovish views, Warsh now faces a committee where the debate has pivoted from "when to cut" to "whether to hike," driven by persistent inflation above 3%, a strong labor market, and supply-side pressures from AI infrastructure demands and geopolitical tensions. Key figures illustrate the shift. Governor Waller, once concerned about employment, now says data has pushed him toward considering rate increases. Even moderate voices like Governor Lisa Cook, while expecting inflation to ease, have indicated readiness to hike if it fails to do so. Long-time hawks such as regional Fed presidents Beth Hammack, Lorie Logan, and Neel Kashkari have grown more vocal, arguing that the real policy rate is effectively falling and that action may soon be needed. The upcoming Fed meeting is expected to keep rates steady but will likely remove the "easing bias" from its statement, signaling a neutral stance between cuts and hikes. The quarterly "dot plot" is anticipated to show most officials projecting no cuts this year, with some potentially indicating hikes. Chair Warsh, a critic of the Fed's reliance on forward guidance like the dot plot, must navigate communicating this pivot using tools he has questioned, all while steering policy in a direction counter to the preferences of the president who appointed him. The consensus suggests the Fed's next move could well be a rate increase.

marsbit43 min fa

Fed's Internal Doves Flock to Hawkish Stance, Warsh's Debut "Between a Rock and a Hard Place"

marsbit43 min fa

The Trillion-Yuan Market Cap 'Yi Zhong Tian': Who is the True Value King?

The article analyzes the three leading Chinese optical module companies, collectively nicknamed "Yi Zhong Tian": Xinyisheng, Zhongji Innolight, and TFC Optical Communication. It evaluates their "cost-performance" not by current stock price, but through three lenses: PEG ratio (growth vs. valuation), earnings quality, and premium/discount for certainty. Xinyisheng shows the most attractive PEG ratio and high profitability, but its valuation reflects discounts for risks like high customer concentration and reliance on overseas markets. Zhongji Innolight, the most expensive, commands a premium for its market leadership, dominant share in key products like 800G/1.6T modules, and higher earnings certainty, though it faces geopolitical risks. TFC Optical, as an upstream component supplier ("water seller"), has the highest gross margin and bets on the long-term CPO/NPO architecture trend, but trades at a high valuation with more stable, less explosive growth. The core argument is that while these companies dominate module assembly, the true profit pool and technological moat lie upstream in laser and switch chips, currently controlled by U.S. firms like Lumentum and Coherent. The long-term "cost-performance" for these Chinese leaders hinges on whether the domestic industry, exemplified by companies like Yuanjie Technology, can successfully move up the value chain into high-power laser chips. Otherwise, their high growth may remain confined to the lower-margin assembly segment.

marsbit53 min fa

The Trillion-Yuan Market Cap 'Yi Zhong Tian': Who is the True Value King?

marsbit53 min fa

Has the Crypto Market Bottomed? Here's What Institutions Think

The crypto market is in a period of significant debate, with leading institutions offering differing views on whether a bottom has been reached. Three prominent firms have published detailed analyses: * **Galaxy Digital** argues Bitcoin has **not yet bottomed**. Their analysis of 13 historical indicators across six dimensions (valuation, profit-taking, miner pressure, etc.) shows only four are fully met. They project a potential bottom range between $30k and $54k. * **NYDIG** states a bottom is **possible but not likely**. While metrics are close to historic bear market extremes, they note the absence of a classic panic-selling event. They also suggest increased institutional adoption may have structurally altered the market cycle, potentially leading to a shallower downturn. * **Standard Chartered Bank** asserts the **bottom has already occurred** at around $59k. They cite two key factors: potential US-Iran diplomatic progress and the anticipated SpaceX IPO, which they believe absorbed capital and caused ETF selling pressure that is now subsiding. They forecast a year-end price target of $100k. Despite the surface-level disagreement, the reports share critical common ground more valuable for long-term investors: 1. All three believe the market bottom will form **within this year**. 2. All agree the current price is **closer to the bottom than to previous highs**. 3. All maintain a **bullish long-term outlook** for Bitcoin and a new cycle. The core takeaway is that while the exact bottom price ($40k, $50k, or $60k) is debated, the consensus is that a bottom is imminent. For long-term holders, the primary focus should not be pinpointing the absolute low, but on the future potential for prices to reach $100k, $200k, or higher. The fundamental thesis for Bitcoin—sovereign debt accumulation, inflation, declining trust in centralized institutions, global digitization, and improved accessibility—remains intact and is arguably strengthening. The overall landscape is viewed as more favorable than in previous crypto winters.

marsbit1 h fa

Has the Crypto Market Bottomed? Here's What Institutions Think

marsbit1 h fa

The 'Chip' Challenge and Breakthroughs in China's Optical Industry Chain

China's Photonics Industry: Bottlenecks and Breakthroughs In the global AI race, computing chips dominate the narrative, but the underlying bottleneck increasingly defining the scale of AI clusters is light—or more specifically, optical connectivity. Optical modules, which translate electrical signals to light and vice versa, are crucial for connecting thousands of GPUs in AI data centers, preventing data congestion and ensuring efficient model training. High-speed modules (800G, 1.6T) are now standard, with performance hinging on advanced DSP (Digital Signal Processor) chips. This is where a critical dependency lies. Two US giants—Marvell and Broadcom—collectively dominate over 90% of the high-end DSP chip market. Chinese optical module leaders like Zhongji Innolight and Eoptolink rely on these chips to manufacture modules for overseas AI customers, primarily in North America. While this creates a supply chain vulnerability, complete decoupling is difficult. Marvell derives over half its revenue from Greater China, and the US firms depend on Chinese partners for chip packaging and optical components. The risk from laser chips (e.g., from Lumentum), another key component, is considered more manageable due to multiple global suppliers and faster progress in domestic alternatives from companies like YOFC and Accelink. To mitigate risks, China's industry is pursuing a multi-pronged strategy: diversifying supply chains and locking in long-term orders; fostering a domestic market ecosystem to adopt homegrown DSPs from firms like Huawei HiSilicon and CETC; accelerating R&D in high-speed DSPs and advanced packaging; and investing in next-gen technologies like silicon photonics and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) to reduce reliance on discrete DSPs. The ultimate solution lies not in short-term博弈 but in persistent advancement of domestic high-end chip R&D and manufacturing. While challenges remain in performance, certification, and ecosystem building, China's vast domestic market and manufacturing base provide a crucial buffer, buying time for the industry to achieve greater technological independence.

marsbit1 h fa

The 'Chip' Challenge and Breakthroughs in China's Optical Industry Chain

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare CHECK

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di Checkmate (CHECK) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente CheckmateCHECK.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva Checkmate (CHECK)Dopo aver acquistato Checkmate (CHECK), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia Checkmate (CHECK)Scambia facilmente Checkmate (CHECK) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

629 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2026.01.19Aggiornato il 2026.06.02

Come comprare CHECK

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di CHECK CHECK sono presentate come di seguito.

活动图片