Bitcoin price has never lost more than 10% in July — Is 2023 different?

CointelegraphPublicado em 2023-07-03Última atualização em 2023-07-03

Resumo

Bitcoin looks primed for a “liquidity hunt” to $35,000, but not everyone is convinced that BTC price upside will last beyond July.

Bitcoin gained 12% in June, but one forecast sees the good times soon fading for bulls.

In a tweet on July 1, popular trader CryptoBullet admitted that July might not offer much more BTC price upside.

Trader: BTC price rally “likely” ending this month

Despite a last-minute dive, thanks to a macro news event, Bitcoin managed to close out the month of June in a solid position.

Data from Cointelegraph Markets Pro, TradingView and CoinGlass confirms that the monthly close came in at $30,465 on Bitstamp.

BTC/USD 1-hour chart. Source: TradingView

Those levels continue to hold into the weekend, with the past month marking Bitcoin’s best June performance since 2019.

By historical standards, July looks even better; throughout its history, BTC price action has never lost more than 10% during the month.

For CryptoBullet, however, “common sense” dictates that BTC/USD should fall below some key moving averages.

“So, June surprised me. We got a pretty bullish monthly close: BTC tested the the MA50, bounced strongly and managed to regain the EMA21 !” he commented on the monthly chart.

Leituras Relacionadas

When Real Estate Ownership Goes Digital: What Happens to Your Rights, Risks, and Liquidity?

"Tokenizing Real Estate: Rights, Risks, and the Path to Liquidity" While tokenizing real-world assets (RWA) gains traction, real estate presents unique complexities. Beyond technical token issuance, critical challenges remain: enforcing legal rights, managing the underlying physical asset, and creating genuine secondary market liquidity. This article explores these issues through OneAsset, a Dubai-based commercial real estate (CRE) tokenization platform. OneAsset moves away from simply offering asset fragmentation. Instead, it focuses on institutional-grade infrastructure, prioritizing asset quality, legal enforceability, and operational fundamentals. Each property is held in an independent, single-asset vault, backed by a legally separate Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for bankruptcy remoteness. Investors acquire tokens representing the economic rights to a specific property, with precise legal claims defined by the underlying SPV structure. OneAsset emphasizes that tokenization cannot transform a poor-quality asset. Its initial focus is on institutional investors and quality Dubai-based CRE, selected for stable tenant cash flows and a clear regulatory environment. The platform integrates compliance by design, aiming to embed investor qualification and transfer rules directly into the token architecture. A core insight is that asset fragmentation does not automatically create liquidity. True liquidity depends on the asset's inherent quality—its location, cash flow, and valuation—as well as sufficient buyer demand. The goal is not just tradability, but making real estate rights more easily priced, verified, and reallocated. Looking ahead, the article discusses the potential for "AiFi" (AI-powered finance). For AI agents to autonomously allocate capital, investment assets like real estate tokens must become truly "machine-readable." This requires a high degree of standardization in legal rights, valuations, cash flows, and compliance data—a direction OneAsset is pursuing through its structured data reporting. In conclusion, real estate tokenization is shifting from a technology narrative to a focus on asset fundamentals. Blockchain can enhance efficiency and programmability, but it cannot replace sound underwriting, property management, or legal execution. The real work begins after the asset is on-chain.

marsbitHá 23m

When Real Estate Ownership Goes Digital: What Happens to Your Rights, Risks, and Liquidity?

marsbitHá 23m

After Affecting Two Generations, Meta Ordered to Pay $18 Billion in Damages

After more than two decades, a legal parallel has emerged. In 1998, major U.S. tobacco companies settled for $206 billion, leading to strict advertising bans and warning labels that significantly reduced smoking rates. On August 26, 2026, Meta reached a landmark settlement with U.S. attorneys general, agreeing to pay up to approximately $18 billion and implement mandatory changes to Facebook and Instagram. This historic settlement, one of the largest against a tech company, stems from allegations that Meta deliberately designed addictive features like infinite scroll and push notifications, harming youth mental health and violating child privacy laws. Facing a potential $1.4 trillion lawsuit and a series of unfavorable jury verdicts, Meta chose to settle on the eighth day of trial to avoid a catastrophic ruling. The core of the agreement is not just the financial penalty, which Meta will pay over 10 years, but a series of strict, 10-year product mandates for young users. These include a hard two-hour daily time limit (combined across apps), a default "nighttime block" from midnight to 6 AM, restricted notifications during school hours, hidden "like" counts, an optional non-algorithmic feed, and stronger age verification. An independent auditor will monitor compliance. Crucially, roughly 30% ($5.3 billion) of Meta's payment is contingent on YouTube and TikTok adopting similar measures and paying around $5 billion each. This move aims to create an industry-wide standard and prevent Meta from being competitively disadvantaged. The settlement is being likened to Big Tobacco's "tobacco moment." By legally framing addictive algorithm design as a "public nuisance," it sets a powerful precedent. Nearly 3,000 similar cases are pending against other social media giants, signaling a fundamental shift in regulatory pressure. The era where platforms could deny the addictive impact of their designs on children is effectively over.

marsbitHá 29m

After Affecting Two Generations, Meta Ordered to Pay $18 Billion in Damages

marsbitHá 29m

Trading

Spot
活动图片