Will Hyperliquid (HYPE) Overcome $30 Resistance or Face a Short-Term Correction?

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-01-07Última atualização em 2026-01-07

Resumo

Hyperliquid (HYPE) is showing early signs of stabilization, trading near $27.38 with a modest 0.7% gain. After a prolonged downtrend since late October, the token is attempting to form a base near the $25–$26 support zone. Key resistance lies at the 50-day and 100-day moving averages around $31.7 and $37.5, which continue to slope downward, indicating the broader trend remains weak. The RSI is neutral in the mid-40s, suggesting eased selling pressure but limited buying strength. Critical support is at $25, with further downside possible to $23. A break above $28.5–$29.0 could signal improved near-term momentum, but the overall structure requires consolidation.

Hyperliquid is showing early signs of stability after a long period of downside pressure. The token is currently trading near $27.38, posting a modest gain of around 0.7% over the past 24 hours. During the latest session, Hyperliquid recorded an intraday low near $26.53 and climbed to a high of about $28.40 before easing back, reflecting cautious buying activity rather than aggressive momentum.

Looking at recent price action, Hyperliquid has been in a clear downtrend since late October. The price has continued to form lower highs and lower lows, reflecting weak market sentiment through November and December. However, the latest candles indicate a slowdown in selling, with the price attempting to build a base near the $25–$26 zone before pushing slightly higher.

Moving Averages Highlight Resistance Around $31–$37

From a moving average perspective, the broader trend remains weak. Hyperliquid is still trading below both the 50-day and 100-day moving averages, located around $31.7 and $37.5. These averages continue to slope downward, confirming that the larger trend has not yet shifted. Still, the distance between price and the short-term average has narrowed, which may support a period of consolidation rather than further sharp declines.

The RSI on the daily chart is hovering in the mid-40s range. That suggests neutral momentum, selling pressure has eased, but buying strength is still limited. The indicator does not signal strong upside yet, but it also does not show oversold conditions.

In terms of key levels, the $25 area remains an important support zone, followed by a deeper support zone near $23 if weakness returns. This level has held during recent pullbacks and will be crucial for maintaining short-term stability. On the upside, immediate resistance is seen near $28.5–$29.0, followed by the $31 level, where the 50-day moving average sits. A move above these levels would be needed to improve the short-term structure.

Overall, Hyperliquid’s price action points to early signs of stabilization after a long decline. While the broader trend is still recovering, holding above key support levels could allow the token to move into a consolidation phase in the near term.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the current trading price of Hyperliquid (HYPE) and its 24-hour performance?

AHyperliquid is currently trading near $27.38, posting a modest gain of around 0.7% over the past 24 hours.

QWhat key resistance levels does Hyperliquid face according to the moving averages?

AThe 50-day moving average is located around $31.7 and the 100-day moving average is near $37.5, creating a resistance zone between $31–$37.

QWhat does the RSI indicator suggest about Hyperliquid's momentum?

AThe RSI on the daily chart is hovering in the mid-40s range, suggesting neutral momentum with eased selling pressure but limited buying strength.

QWhat are the important support levels for Hyperliquid mentioned in the article?

AThe $25 area is an important support zone, followed by a deeper support zone near $23 if weakness returns.

QWhat price action pattern has Hyperliquid been showing since late October?

AHyperliquid has been in a clear downtrend since late October, forming lower highs and lower lows, reflecting weak market sentiment through November and December.

Leituras Relacionadas

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbitHá 17m

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

In a candid interview, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang challenged competitors like Google and Amazon, admitted past strategic errors, and criticized U.S. export controls on AI chips. He framed Nvidia’s role as turning “electricity in, tokens out,” emphasizing the complexity and value of AI inference. Huang dismissed rival custom chips like Google’s TPU and Amazon’s Trainium as inflexible and niche, claiming their growth relies heavily on clients like Anthropic. He also acknowledged missing early investment opportunities in OpenAI and Anthropic. On China, Huang warned that export restrictions risk pushing the country toward self-sufficiency and could cost U.S. leadership in AI. Finally, he explained Nvidia’s acquisition of Groq as a move to serve premium, low-latency token markets. Throughout, Huang emphasized ecosystem trust and Nvidia’s central role in global AI infrastructure.

marsbitHá 23m

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

marsbitHá 23m

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

ARK Invest, a major investor in SpaceX, provides an analysis following SpaceX's confidential IPO filing on April 1, 2026, targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and up to $75 billion in funding for a Nasdaq listing around June 2026. This would be the largest IPO in history. The valuation implies a price-to-sales ratio of ~95x based on ~$18.5B in projected 2025 revenue. ARK argues this reflects future potential, not current reality. Key drivers include Starlink, with over 10M users and $20B+ in 2026 revenue, launch services which have reduced costs by ~95% since 2008, and the strategic merger with xAI in February 2026, enabling vertically integrated AI and orbital computing. ARK’s investment thesis is based on SpaceX's proven execution of ambitious goals, like reusable rockets and global satellite internet. The firm notes that significant value creation often occurs pre-IPO, and its Venture Fund offers exposure to SpaceX’s earlier private stages. Post-IPO, the fund will manage the position per standard lock-up and rebalancing processes, maintaining flexibility to reinvest in other private innovations. The analysis is based on public estimates and ARK research; the S-1 filing is not yet public. This is not investment advice.

marsbitHá 24m

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

marsbitHá 24m

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

The article discusses the legislative stalemate in the US over the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (CLARITY Act), which aims to regulate crypto assets. A key point of contention is whether stablecoins should be allowed to pay interest, with crypto companies opposing a ban and banks supporting it. Moody's analyst Abhi Srivastava states that, for now, stablecoins do not pose a significant threat to traditional banks due to existing efficient payment systems and the current prohibition on yield-bearing stablecoins. This limits their appeal for pulling deposits from banks at scale. However, with the stablecoin market cap exceeding $300 billion and growth in tokenized assets, banks could face future pressure from deposit outflows. The crypto industry warns that failure to pass the bill could lead to stricter regulatory crackdowns. Negotiations continue with little progress, despite both sides desiring a resolution.

bitcoinistHá 1h

Stablecoin Hype Overblown? Moody’s Says Banks Aren’t In Danger

bitcoinistHá 1h

Not a Price Hike, but a Supply Cut? Oil Prices Have Crossed the Tipping Point

The global oil market has passed a critical point, shifting the focus from price increases to potential physical supply shortages. The core issue is a time mismatch: even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens, shipping disruptions have already caused significant delays, which will continue to deplete onshore crude inventories for weeks. Refinery behavior acts as an amplifier. Reduced runs in Asia and Europe don’t reflect weaker demand but instead shrink product inventories, raising fuel prices and refining margins, which in turn encourages higher runs—creating a self-reinforcing cycle. If the Strait remains closed beyond April, traditional pricing models may fail. The market could face an unprecedented physical shortfall of 11-13 million barrels per day—roughly four times historical disruption levels. In such a scenario, price becomes an inadequate balancing tool. The only way to rebalance the market would be policy-driven demand destruction, similar to COVID-era lockdowns. Current prices around $95/barrel are insufficient to balance the market. Key signals to watch include inventory levels, policy announcements, and the pace of involuntary demand contraction. Geopolitically, the situation appears likely to worsen before improving, with little room for compromise between the US and Iran.

marsbitHá 2h

Not a Price Hike, but a Supply Cut? Oil Prices Have Crossed the Tipping Point