Uniswap: Why UNI stalls below $6 even as whales keep buying

ambcryptoОпубліковано о 2026-01-17Востаннє оновлено о 2026-01-17

Анотація

Uniswap (UNI) has struggled on the price charts over the past three weeks, failing to rally despite the broader altcoin market showing strength. Although the 'UNIfication' proposal passed with overwhelming support in late December, subsequent developments like the 100 million UNI burn and fee adjustments were insufficient to drive bullish momentum. On-chain data from Santiment indicates that the top 100 largest wallets have been buying, accumulating 12.41 million UNI over eight weeks—a pattern that has historically preceded price increases. However, the token's price action remains bearish, with UNI trading below key moving averages. Short-term holders are taking profits during brief rallies, and weak demand has kept prices below $6. A drop below $4.73 would reinforce the bearish trend, suggesting cautious investors should wait for stronger signs of strength before entering.

Uniswap [UNI] faced a tough time on the price charts over the past three weeks. Many altcoins followed Bitcoin [BTC] higher in the first week of January, making strong gains. Some tokens continued to show strength.

UNI was the opposite. It showed bullish impetus a month ago, as the ‘UNIfication’ proposal crept closer to being passed. The vote concluded on the 25th of December and was passed with far more votes than the quorum required, highlighting its popularity.

The 100 million UNI burn, Uniswap Labs turning off frontend fees, and fee switches flipped on supported protocols were not enough to drive a rally. This relative weakness against Bitcoin and the wider market was concerning for bulls.

Analyzing the Uniswap on-chain and price action clues

In a post on X, crypto data intelligence platform Santiment pointed out that the top 100 largest wallets were accumulating. In the past 8 weeks, these wallets have added 12.41 million UNI tokens.

Their accumulation trends tie in well with the token’s price action, the post read. Going by past trends, the increased accumulation from the top wallets recently was awaiting a bullish reaction.

Will Uniswap prices rally from here?

The 180-day mean coin age plunged rapidly in the past three weeks. The dormant circulation metric also saw a large spike on the 26th of December. This signaled numerous previously idle tokens moving.

The mean coin age has not begun to trend higher, showing network-wide accumulation trends were lacking in the past two weeks. The 180-day MVRV ratio was still deeply negative, but it was the shorter-term MVRV that signaled a profit-taking threat.

Recently, the metric briefly moved into positive territory to show that short-term holders were at a profit. The demand was weak after the ‘UNIfication’ news, which saw prices slump below $6 once again, reflecting a lack of market conviction.

The price trend on the 1-day timeframe was firmly bearish. The failure to follow through after the breakout past $6 in December, combined with the A/D indicator, reflected sporadic buying pressure.

UNI was below its 20 and 50 DMAs. A drop below $4.73 would reinforce the bearish bias. Investors looking to buy UNI based on the top 100 wallets can use this level as their invalidation.

The more cautious investors can wait for the token to show strength before looking to buy it.

Final Thoughts

Santiment data showed that the top 100 wallets were accumulating UNI, a pattern that generally sees prices rally.
As things stand, this reaction hasn’t begun yet. On-chain metrics showed that short-term holders were happy to exit the market after a brief rally.

Пов'язані питання

QAccording to the article, what on-chain data did Santiment report about the top 100 UNI wallets?

ASantiment reported that the top 100 largest wallets have been accumulating UNI, adding 12.41 million tokens over the past 8 weeks.

QWhat was the outcome of the 'UNIfication' proposal vote that concluded on December 25th?

AThe 'UNIfication' proposal was passed with far more votes than the required quorum, highlighting its popularity.

QWhat does the article identify as a key bearish price level for UNI that would reinforce the negative bias?

AA drop below the $4.73 price level would reinforce the bearish bias for UNI.

QWhat did the 180-day mean coin age and dormant circulation metrics signal about UNI's network activity?

AThe 180-day mean coin age plunged rapidly, and the dormant circulation saw a large spike, signaling that numerous previously idle tokens were moving and that network-wide accumulation trends were lacking.

QWhy did the article state that the short-term MVRV ratio signaled a threat of profit-taking?

AThe short-term MVRV ratio briefly moved into positive territory, indicating that short-term holders were at a profit and were therefore a threat to sell and take those profits.

Пов'язані матеріали

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit30 хв тому

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit30 хв тому

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

A zero-knowledge proof tool can help modern Bitcoin wallets migrate assets before quantum attacks in milliseconds. However, approximately 1.1 million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto before 2012 are fundamentally unprotected by such solutions, as they reside in older P2PK addresses lacking the hierarchical structure required for this cryptographic rescue. This exposes a critical divide: post-2012 HD wallets can potentially "upgrade" signatures using tools like Project Eleven's, while early coins are cryptographically isolated. The community faces a political, not technical, dilemma with four contentious options: 1) Let quantum attackers seize the coins, risking market instability; 2) Hard fork to freeze vulnerable addresses, seen as violating property rights; 3) Implement extreme spending limits to slow any attack; 4) Redistribute "orphaned" coins, breaking immutability. Each solution threatens a core Bitcoin tenet. The market is already pricing in this governance risk, as evidenced by institutional divestment citing uncertainty. The true crisis isn't the arrival of quantum computing, but the community's inability to reconcile its foundational principles with an existential technological shift.

marsbit37 хв тому

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

marsbit37 хв тому

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Matt Hougan, Bitwise's CIO, identifies the fusion of traditional finance and on-chain finance as the core driver for the next crypto bull market. He expects this cycle, propelled by real-world utility and global finance adoption, to be the largest yet, centered on stablecoins, asset tokenization, 24/7 trading, instant settlement, and institutional DeFi growth. The article outlines two primary investment approaches tied to this trend. The first focuses on native crypto applications with strong revenues and sustainable tokenomics, exemplified by Hyperliquid (HYPE). Its Layer-1 chain is gaining significant trading volume from traditional assets like oil and equities. Its model of using 99% of revenues for token buybacks is a key strength. The second approach targets established traditional firms building at scale on crypto rails, like Robinhood. The launch of its Robinhood Chain, enabling global trading of tokenized stocks and DeFi activities, represents a major move towards this fusion. The author also notes other serious contenders like Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, and JPMorgan. Ultimately, the thesis is that the most profound success will come when blockchain technology seamlessly integrates into finance, becoming invisible to end-users. Investors are advised to position ahead of this convergence.

Foresight News42 хв тому

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Foresight News42 хв тому

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit49 хв тому

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit49 хв тому

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit58 хв тому

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit58 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот