MYX slides 18% while OI climbs to $25M – Is a squeeze brewing?

ambcryptoPublicado em 2026-02-11Última atualização em 2026-02-11

Resumo

MYX Finance (MYX) has declined 18% amid weak fundamentals and revenue struggles. Perpetual futures activity is driving the downturn, with a negative funding rate of -1.0858% indicating dominant short positioning. However, Open Interest increased by 1% to $25 million, suggesting capital remains in the market rather than fleeing. Exchange-level data shows a divergence: while the overall market is bearish, platforms like Bybit show a majority of long positions. Spot markets also saw $224,000 in net inflows, indicating selective accumulation. Liquidity clusters above the current price may act as short-term magnets for an upward move, creating potential for near-term upside volatility despite the broader bearish trend.

MYX Finance [MYX] faces a deteriorating price outlook as the asset extends its losses. The weakness in price aligns with soft fundamentals, as the protocol struggles to generate sufficient revenue to cover operational costs.

In the near term, derivatives activity is driving market direction. Positioning across perpetual markets, whether dominated by longs or shorts, is shaping MYX’s short-term price trajectory.

Funding Rates signal short dominance

Perpetual futures activity has reinforced downside pressure. Over the past 24 hours, MYX declined 18%, at press time, with momentum accelerating during the move.

At the same time, CoinGlass data showed that the Funding Rate dropped to -1.0858%. A negative rate indicates that short positions are paying longs, reflecting a market skewed toward bearish positioning. Current price action confirms that sellers are exerting control.

Notably, the negative Funding Rate has not triggered capital flight. Open Interest (OI) rose by 1%, adding approximately $250,000 and bringing total outstanding positions to roughly $25 million.

Typically, sharp negative funding coincides with declining OI as traders unwind exposure. In this case, capital remains in the market, suggesting active participation rather than broad liquidation.

Exchange-level divergence in positioning

Despite short dominance at the aggregate level, exchange-specific data reveal divergence.

Long/Short Ratios across Binance, Bybit, KuCoin, and BingX show higher long participation. Bybit leads, with 51% of total perpetual volume attributed to long positions.

Bybit’s positioning carries added weight, given its substantial share of MYX’s Open Interest and trading volume. This divergence suggests that while overall funding skews negative, certain trader cohorts are positioning for a potential rebound.

Spot market flows show signs of selective accumulation. In the past 24 hours, MYX recorded about $224,000 in net capital inflows. Compared to its typical daily buy activity, this marks a notable uptick in demand.

Liquidity clusters define near-term structure

The liquidation heatmap highlights significant liquidity clusters above the current price. Such concentrations often act as short-term magnets, as price tends to move toward areas with dense leveraged positions.

The presence of larger clusters overhead increases the probability of a liquidity-driven upside move. Downside liquidity remains visible below current levels, though the depth is comparatively smaller than the upside clusters.

As a result, while the broader trend remains bearish, the current liquidity structure leaves room for short-term upside volatility driven by derivatives positioning and liquidation dynamics.


Final Thoughts

  • Short sellers account for a significant share of liquidity in the derivatives market.
  • Traders on Bybit, CoinEx, and BingX are increasing long exposure despite elevated downside risk.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the current price performance of MYX Finance and by how much has it declined?

AMYX has declined by 18% in the past 24 hours, with the momentum of the drop accelerating.

QWhat does the negative Funding Rate of -1.0858% indicate about market sentiment for MYX?

AThe negative Funding Rate indicates that short positions are paying longs, reflecting a market that is skewed toward bearish (short) positioning and that sellers are in control.

QDespite the negative funding, what happened to Open Interest (OI) and what does this suggest?

AOpen Interest (OI) actually rose by 1%, adding approximately $250,000 to bring the total to $25 million. This suggests capital is remaining in the market for active participation rather than traders broadly liquidating and closing their positions.

QWhich exchange shows a majority of long positions for MYX perpetual futures, according to the Long/Short Ratios?

ABybit leads with 51% of its total perpetual volume attributed to long positions.

QAccording to the liquidation heatmap, where are the significant liquidity clusters located and what is their likely effect?

ASignificant liquidity clusters are located above the current price. These concentrations often act as short-term magnets, increasing the probability of a liquidity-driven upside move as price tends to gravitate toward areas with dense leveraged positions.

Leituras Relacionadas

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

After a year building infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, and Coinbase, the author shares a sobering analysis of the current state of Agent payments. The core finding is a stark lack of genuine, immediate demand across most envisioned use cases. The article breaks down four key market segments: 1. **Agent-to-Merchant (Consumer Shopping):** For most product categories (e.g., clothing, electronics), conversational AI shopping is a step backwards from visual e-commerce interfaces. While agents excel at understanding needs, they can't replace side-by-side product comparison. Real merchant interest is defensive "Agent Engine Optimization," not driven by current customer demand. Potential exists for high-frequency, low-decision purchases (like food delivery) or navigating complex store UIs, but these require massive B2C distribution channels dominated by giants like Amazon. 2. **Agent-to-API (Developer Services):** Developers already have subscriptions and billing relationships for APIs (compute, data). Prepaid balances solve micro-payment issues for low transaction volumes. A deeper structural problem is that major SaaS vendors' business models rely on enterprise contracts, resisting granular pay-per-call pricing. While protocols like MPP and x402 serve the long tail of niche services, this market is small and developers are historically low-willingness-to-pay. 3. **Agent-to-Agent:** This remains largely theoretical with minimal transaction volume. While it represents a long-term bet on a fundamentally new transaction infrastructure (sub-second, micro-penny to million-dollar, multi-party settlements), it does not constitute a present market. 4. **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with existing, paying demand. Integrating AI into financial workflows (trading, portfolio management) is a natural evolution and enables new capabilities like autonomous rebalancing. However, competition favors established, regulated institutions. The "real problem" is not moving money between agents, but the broader challenge of **coordination**—orchestrating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and settling results. Payment is just one component of settlement, which is itself part of coordination. Companies that solve the coordination layer will subsume payment, not the other way around. While well-funded incumbents build defensively for a long-term future, startups must find where the market is today—which, for the author's team, lies outside these four categories in an area of real, growing, and underserved activity.

marsbitHá 39m

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

marsbitHá 39m

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

**Title: It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments** Over the past year, I've worked on infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, Coinbase, and numerous startups. The findings reveal a stark reality: genuine, widespread demand for Agent-based payments does not yet exist. **Key Observations:** * **Agent-to-Merchant (Shopping):** The user experience for AI shopping often falls short, especially for visual product discovery. While AI excels at understanding needs, conversational interfaces can't yet replace browsing and comparing multiple products visually. Current merchant interest is largely defensive ("Agent Engine Optimization") for a future that hasn't arrived. High-frequency, low-friction purchases (like food delivery) are potential fits, but lack open APIs and face high AI inference costs. Simpler, more affordable, or cross-language interactions for complex UIs are a niche opportunity but require massive consumer distribution to scale. * **Agent-to-API (Developer Tools):** Developer payment needs for APIs (computing, data, models) are already met through subscriptions and prepaid credits. The core challenge is not payment friction but supplier economics: most large SaaS providers prefer enterprise contracts over micropayments for API calls. Protocols like MPP and x402 suit the long-tail of smaller services but cater to a developer market historically reluctant to pay for these tools. Major infrastructure needs at the top of the stack are already being addressed. * **Agent-to-Agent (Machine Commerce):** This is a long-term vision with almost no current transaction volume. While a future with high-speed, high-frequency, multi-party machine-to-machine transactions would require novel infrastructure, it remains theoretical. The market is not here yet. * **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with clear, present demand. Financial professionals and DeFi users already pay for tools, and AI augmentation is a natural evolution. Autonomous AI agents can enable entirely new financial strategies. However, competition is fierce from established, regulated incumbents who can more easily layer AI onto their existing products. **The Core Insight:** Companies, especially giants with long time horizons, are building defensively for a potential future of mass machine commerce. For them, early investment is a low-cost hedge. For startups, the current market reality is different. The primary challenge isn't just moving money between agents (payments). The larger, unsolved problem is **orchestration** – coordinating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and then settling. Payment is just a part of settlement, which is just a part of orchestration. Companies that solve the orchestration problem will subsume payments, not the other way around. After a year of building, we see the real, growing, and underserved market opportunity lies in this broader domain of orchestration.

链捕手Há 1h

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

链捕手Há 1h

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

A researcher discovered a critical "infinite mint" vulnerability in the Zcash cryptocurrency's Orchard protocol using Claude Opus 4.8, leading to a swift fix but also a 50% market drop, erasing billions in value. This incident highlights a new era where powerful, accessible AI models are dramatically lowering the barrier to finding software vulnerabilities. Previously, the security community feared specialized models like Claude Mythos Preview, capable of finding decades-old zero-day exploits. The Zcash case, however, involved a publicly available, general-purpose model. This shift makes advanced security auditing—and attack capabilities—accessible to far more people, not just experts. The mass democratization of vulnerability discovery brings a dual challenge: a flood of low-quality, AI-generated false reports that overwhelm maintainers, and the real, rapid uncovering of deep, dangerous bugs. Open-source projects, often understaffed and unfunded, are particularly vulnerable to this "attention DDoS." The article cites examples like curl shutting down its bug bounty program due to the unsustainable workload. Our perceived digital safety has often been luck, relying on the high cost and effort required to find deeply hidden flaws in complex systems, as seen with historical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or Baron Samedit. AI changes this cost structure, effectively "mass-producing flashlights" to illuminate every corner of our codebase. While large companies operate extensive security chains involving external white-hat hackers and massive defensive operations, the global cybersecurity workforce faces a severe shortage, especially of experienced personnel capable of analyzing complex threats and coordinating fixes. The core dilemma emerges: AI makes *finding* bugs cheap and scalable, but *fixing* them remains a slow, expensive, and human-intensive process. The article concludes that AI won't destroy the internet but acts as a bright light, revealing that our digital existence is not inherently secure but is precariously maintained by ongoing human effort. The true cost in the AI era may not be discovery, but whether there will be enough people left willing and able to do the hard work of repair.

marsbitHá 1h

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

marsbitHá 1h

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

"Codex Goal Mode: How to Make AI Work Continuously Toward a Specific Goal" OpenAI's Codex "goal mode" (/goal) transforms the AI from a reactive code assistant into a proactive execution agent capable of working autonomously for hours or even days to achieve a defined objective. To maximize its effectiveness, follow these key principles: 1. **Define Clear, Verifiable Exit Criteria:** The goal prompt should be a concise, measurable success condition, not a lengthy specification. Use quantifiable metrics like "reduce build time by 30%" or "achieve 100% test parity." 2. **Provide Initial Guidance and Tools:** Direct Codex toward likely problem areas and specify available tools (e.g., browsers, testing environments) to prevent it from exploring unproductive paths. 3. **Enable Progress Measurement:** Equip Codex with ways to track advancement, such as creating comparison tools for visual tasks or evaluation sets, ensuring it can gauge its own progress. 4. **Use a Realistic Execution Environment:** For tasks like performance optimization, provide access to environments that closely mimic production (e.g., similar configs, databases) to yield valid results. 5. **Be Cautious with Visual Goals:** Avoid vague "pixel-perfect" instructions. Instead, supplement visual references with functional checklists or design system specifications to prevent Codex from obsessing over minor details. 6. **Implement Progress Tracking:** For long-running tasks, have Codex commit code to draft PRs, update progress documents, or send Slack updates to maintain visibility into its work. 7. **Review and Consolidate Results:** Once the goal is met, instruct Codex to review its work, clean up ineffective experimental code, and reflect on what strategies succeeded or failed. Ultimately, using goal mode shifts the developer's role from writing prompts to managing a persistent engineering agent—defining objectives, establishing metrics, configuring environments, and conducting final reviews.

marsbitHá 2h

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

marsbitHá 2h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片