Pippin rallies despite ‘insiders control 80%’ claim – $0.50 breakout next?

ambcryptoОпубліковано о 2025-12-18Востаннє оновлено о 2025-12-18

While the short-term frenzy cooled, Pippin respected its ascending structure. The memecoin rebounded after dipping to $0.27 earlier.

Pippin defended the $0.40 support zone and climbed 14.77% to a session high of $0.455. At press time, Pippin [PIPPIN] traded at $0.447, up 10.32% on the daily chart.

Over the past month, the memecoin’s market cap rose from $308 million to $445 million, reflecting steady capital inflows.

So, what fueled the rebound?

Robinhood listing shifts sentiment

Surprisingly, after a glorious month, Pippin received a significant endorsement and got listed on Robinhood. Listing on Robinhood is often perceived positively in the market, indicating the project has achieved a substantial level of reputation.

Usually, a new exchange listing expands the user base and increases the capital pool. This explains the recent jump in market cap by over $100 million.

What’s driving Pippin uptrend?

Besides Robinhood listing, massive capital flowed into the Pippin Futures market.

According to CoinGlass data, Futures Inflows totaled $452.54 million over the past 24 hours. Futures Outflows stood at $448.86 million.

As a result, Futures Netflow jumped to $3.67 million at press time, an 80% drop from $40 million three days ago, a clear sign of aggressive Futures accumulation.

Coupled with that, Top Addresses increased their holdings by 10.45 million tokens over the past 24 hours. Equally, these addresses boosted their holdings by 21% to 813 million over the past month.

Such sustained accumulation even during an uptrend signaled conviction in the market, as they anticipate further gains.

Holder concentration raises red flags

Despite the rally, Pippin faced growing scrutiny over supply concentration.

A Bubblemaps investigation, published two days earlier, reported that insiders controlled 80% of PIPPIN’s supply, worth about $380 million.

The analysis showed 27 wallets holding the majority of tokens with similar transfer patterns. Sixteen wallets initially received tokens from centralized exchanges, an unusual distribution pattern.

The other 11 wallets associated with CEX exchanges hold 9% of the total supply, with these two batches having market at grip.

Such market control leaves the market suspicious and worried at the same time. Although Pippin is still pumping, the question is for how long?

Can the momentum hold?

Following the rebound, momentum indicators strengthened.

On the daily chart, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) rose to 74, entering overbought territory. The Relative Vigor Index (RVGI) also crossed higher to 0.205.

Such readings typically reflect strong upside momentum driven by aggressive demand.

If buying pressure holds, Pippin could attempt to flip $0.50 into support and test new highs. However, risks tied to wallet concentration remained significant.

Any coordinated selling from large holders could trigger sharp downside moves. Under that scenario, price could revisit the $0.30 zone.

Final Thoughts

Pippin’s rebound demonstrated how listings and leverage can quickly reinforce momentum.
Still, a heavy concentration of supply may shape how durable that strength becomes.

Трендові криптовалюти

CitreaCTR

wrapped stUSDTWSTUSDT

Velodrome FinanceVELODROME

BrevisBREV

ZRX（0X）ZRX

Пов'язані питання

QWhat recent event significantly boosted Pippin's market sentiment and user base?

APippin received a significant endorsement and got listed on Robinhood, which is often perceived positively and indicates the project has achieved a substantial level of reputation, expanding its user base and capital pool.

QWhat was the key finding of the Bubblemaps investigation regarding Pippin's token distribution?

AThe Bubblemaps investigation reported that insiders controlled 80% of PIPPIN's supply, worth about $380 million, with 27 wallets holding the majority of tokens and showing similar transfer patterns.

QWhat do the momentum indicators (RSI and RVGI) suggest about Pippin's current price action?

AThe Relative Strength Index (RSI) rose to 74, entering overbought territory, and the Relative Vigor Index (RVGI) crossed higher to 0.205, reflecting strong upside momentum driven by aggressive demand.

QWhat are the potential price targets for Pippin if the current buying pressure holds?

AIf buying pressure holds, Pippin could attempt to flip the $0.50 level into support and test new highs.

QWhat is the major risk associated with Pippin's high wallet concentration mentioned in the article?

AThe major risk is that any coordinated selling from the large holders who control a majority of the supply could trigger sharp downside moves, potentially causing the price to revisit the $0.30 support zone.

Пов'язані матеріали

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that the core limitation of blockchain technology is not the scalability trilemma, but its fundamental lack of privacy, which acts as a barrier to institutional capital. It defines blockchain as a slow, expensive, shared computer whose primary value is "permissionlessness" (no administrator) and verifiable trust. While this is ideal for native financial assets like stable币, which now process trillions, two critical flaws remain for mainstream adoption: regulatory legitimacy and a default transparency that leaks all financial activity. The author contends that transparency is not a feature but a tax, quantified through MEV extraction, making the public ledger unusable for serious institutions. However, modern cryptography, specifically zero-knowledge proofs, now offers a solution: "provable privacy." This allows users to prove compliance (e.g., solvency, KYC) without revealing underlying data. This fusion of privacy and auditability resolves the transparency-compliant privacy-compliance dichotomy, enabling a purely upgraded system where transactions are verified but not broadcasted. Closing these flaws is presented as the essential bridge to onboard the next wave of trillions in capital.

marsbit1 год тому

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

marsbit1 год тому

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手1 год тому

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手1 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit3 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit3 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手5 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手5 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit6 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'