STEPN (GMT) Struggles To Hit $1, Is The Price Running Out Of Steam?

newsbtcPublicado em 2022-09-16Última atualização em 2022-09-16

Resumo

STEPN (GMT) has struggled to show its move in recent months after ranking as the top gainer for several weeks against tether (USDT). The price of STEPN has struggled to...

STEPN (GMT) has struggled to show its move in recent months after ranking as the top gainer for several weeks against tether (USDT). The price of STEPN has struggled to rally to $1 despite the market seeing relief bounces across the market, with many altcoins producing double-digit gains, with the price of STEPN (GMT) showing little or no steam left for a major rally. (Data from Binance)
STEPN (GMT) Token Price Analysis On The Weekly Chart

Weekly GMT Price Chart | Source: GMTUSDT On Tradingview.com
GMT saw a decline in its price from a region of $4 to around 0.63, with an over 70% drop from its all-time high despite having good fundamentals. The price of GMT bounced off after touching a weekly low of $0.63, and the price rallied to $0.95, showing some great strength, but the price was quickly rejected as this area acts as resistance to the price of GMT.
The price of GMT on the weekly chart formed a range between $0.6-$1 as the price continued with little volume, unable to break out of the range channel. For GMT to break out of this range channel, the price needs to be backed with good volume as the resistance at the $1 mark has proven hard for the price of GMT after several rejections at this zone.
GMT price needs to break and close above $1 with good volume for a possible rally to $1.5, where the price would face resistance. A break a close for GMT price above $1 would signal a good relief bounce.
If the price of GMT fails to hold its support at $0.63, seen as a demand zone, we could see the price going lower.
Weekly resistance for the price of GMT – $1-$1.5.
Weekly support for the price of GMT – $0.63.
Price Analysis Of GMT On The Daily (1D) Chart

Daily GMT Price Chart | Source: GMTUSDT On Tradingview.com The daily timeframe for GMT prices continues to weaken as prices continue to respect the downtrend trendline inside an asymmetric wedge. If the price of GMT continues with this structure, we could see the price retesting the support zone at $0.6.
GMT price needs to break out of the downtrend for the price to have an opportunity to trend higher; a breakout from this downtrend structure to the upside would be a first relief sign for bulls.
On the daily timeframe, the price of GMT is currently trading at $0.66, as the price of GMT on the daily chart closed below the 50 Exponential Moving Average (EMA), acting as resistance for GMT price. The price of $0.8 corresponds to the resistance at 50 EMA for the price of GMT. The price of GMT needs to reclaim 50 EMA for a chance to trend to $1; if the price fails to be reclaimed by the price, we could see the price retesting the support at $0.6 or lower.
The Relative Strength Index (RSI) for GMT is above 50 on the daily chart, indicating low buy order volume.
Daily resistance for the GMT price – $0.8-$1.
Daily support for the GMT price – $0.6.

Leituras Relacionadas

XRP Reversal Setup Forms Around Harmonic Pattern And Key Support Zone

XRP is trading at a critical technical support zone, according to a June 20 TradingView analysis. This area combines multiple layers of confluence, including the 0.618 Fibonacci retracement level and the point of control for the current range. Such convergence can intensify the battle between buyers and sellers at this level. The analysis suggests this support could form the basis for a broader harmonic reversal pattern. While not a guarantee, such setups provide a structured framework for identifying potential trend changes, invalidation points, and price targets. For the reversal thesis to gain credibility, XRP needs a decisive bullish reaction from this zone—specifically, a sustained bounce with volume that reclaims nearby resistance, not just a brief wick. Failure to hold support or repeated tests of the area would weaken the bullish argument. The setup is notable but requires confirmation from market price action.

bitcoinistHá 1h

XRP Reversal Setup Forms Around Harmonic Pattern And Key Support Zone

bitcoinistHá 1h

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbitHá 1h

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbitHá 1h

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

The article posits that the global economy is transitioning into a new phase of infrastructure investment. Capital, facing slowing traditional growth engines, is flowing towards emerging foundational systems. This includes space infrastructure (exemplified by SpaceX), AI computing power, satellite networks, data centers, and global payment systems. A key driver is a potential new commodity supercycle fueled by industrial demand from these sectors. Concurrently, the role of blockchain is evolving from speculative assets to a critical settlement layer for the future economy. Digital assets like XRP and XLM, focused on payments and interoperability, are highlighted as potential rails for cross-border settlement, tokenized assets, and machine-to-machine (AI Agent) transactions. The narrative connects figures like Ripple's Jed McCaleb to space ventures, suggesting convergence. The argument emphasizes a shift from speculative narratives to utility-driven value. As AI and space commerce generate new economic activity, and regulatory clarity improves, blockchain networks may underpin real-time value transfer. The conclusion urges investors to consider which networks will form the backbone of this integrated next-generation economic infrastructure.

marsbitHá 2h

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

marsbitHá 2h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbitHá 4h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbitHá 4h

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbitHá 4h