Decoding why PEPE slips despite Bitcoin’s 5% bounce

ambcryptoPublished on 2025-12-23Last updated on 2025-12-23

Abstract

Despite Bitcoin's 5% bounce from $85.5k to $89.7k, PEPE continued its bearish trend, declining 2% in 24 hours and 21% from December's high. Open Interest fell from $121.5M to $114.5M since December 20th, signaling weak bullish sentiment. Technical analysis showed a bearish structure break from the $0.000044-$0.000050 supply zone, with RSI at 40 and declining A/D indicating sustained selling pressure. A short-term bounce to $0.0000420 may offer a selling opportunity, with key resistance levels at $0.0000452 and $0.0000476. The overall outlook remains bearish.

Pepe continued to trend downward and shed 2% in the past 24 hours. It was down nearly 21% from December’s high.

Meanwhile, the recent 5% Bitcoin bounce from Friday’s $85.5k to Monday’s $89.7k has done nothing to help the popular memecoin’s bulls.

Coinalyze data showed that, since the 20th of December, Open Interest slowly dwindled, from $121.5 million to $114.5 million. Alongside the short-term sideways price action, it signaled bearish sentiment within the PEPE market and a total lack of bullish belief.

A report earlier this month highlighted how the long-term PEPE trend was bearish. This finding has not been disproved yet. Here’s what Pepe [PEPE] traders can watch out for in the coming days.

Establishing the bearish strength behind the memecoin

The 1-day chart showed that another bearish structure break occurred last week, on Wednesday, the 17th of December. This break originated from the $0.000044-$0.000050 supply zone (red box).

Any retest of the supply zone would likely result in rejection. This was because the momentum favored the bears, as the RSI’s reading of 40 showed.

The A/D has not halted its decline since the beginning of November, another sign of steady selling pressure.

The 1-hour chart showed a bearish structure in place, and the RSI leaned bearishly as well. Most worrying was the A/D’s sustained slump over the past week, highlighting that selling pressure had not let up.

Exploring the bullish scenario

This is the less likely scenario in the coming days.

Across multiple timeframes, the momentum and volume were bearish, and a bullish breakout appeared unlikely. The 5% Bitcoin [BTC] bounce had no bullish impact on PEPE either.

Traders’ call to action- Remain bearish

As the 1-hour chart showed, a bounce to $0.0000420 would offer a selling opportunity. In case this area is flipped to support, the Fibonacci retracement levels would be the next retracement levels to watch.

Plotted based on the most recent swing move, they were at $0.0000452 and $0.0000476.


Final Thoughts

  • The Pepe price action remained strongly bearish despite the Bitcoin uptick in recent days.
  • There were three key short-term resistance levels to watch that PEPE would likely see a bearish reaction from in the coming days.

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

Related Questions

QWhy did PEPE's price continue to decline despite Bitcoin's 5% bounce?

APEPE's price continued to decline due to bearish sentiment within its market, a steady decrease in Open Interest, and sustained selling pressure, as indicated by the A/D indicator. The bounce in Bitcoin did not translate to bullish momentum for PEPE.

QWhat was the change in Open Interest for PEPE since December 20th?

AOpen Interest for PEPE dwindled from $121.5 million to $114.5 million since December 20th, signaling a lack of bullish belief and bearish sentiment.

QWhat key supply zone did PEPE break last week, and what does it imply?

APEPE broke the $0.000044-$0.000050 supply zone last week, which is a bearish structure break. Any retest of this zone would likely result in rejection due to bearish momentum.

QWhat does the RSI reading of 40 indicate about PEPE's market momentum?

AThe RSI reading of 40 indicates that the momentum favors the bears, suggesting weaker buying pressure and a bearish trend for PEPE.

QWhat are the key short-term resistance levels traders should watch for PEPE?

AThe key short-term resistance levels are $0.0000420, $0.0000452, and $0.0000476. A bounce to these levels would offer selling opportunities, as bearish reactions are expected.

Related Reads

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.

marsbit33m ago

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

marsbit33m ago

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.

marsbit2h ago

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

marsbit2h ago

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 News2h ago

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

Foresight News2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of S (S) are presented below.

活动图片