Market Signal Briefing

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

The crypto market keeps reaching new local lows, according to CoinStats.

XLM chart by CoinStatsXLM/USDThe rate of Stellar (XLM) has declined by 2.11% since yesterday. Over the last week, the price has fallen by 16.6%.

Image by TradingViewOn the hourly chart, the price of XLM is about to break the local support at $0.1743. If bears' pressure continues and the daily bar closes below that mark, one can expect a test of the $0.17 zone tomorrow.

Image by TradingViewOn the bigger time frame, the rate of XLM is on the way to the support at $0.16. The volume remains high, which means buyers are not ready yet to seize the initiative.

You Might Also Like

In this case, an ongoing decline to the aforementioned level is the more likely scenario for the next days.

Image by TradingViewFrom the midterm point of view, sellers are also more powerful than buyers. If a breakout of the $0.16 level happens, the accumulated energy can be enough for a more profound drop to the $0.14-$0.15 zone.

XLM is trading at $0.1736 at press time.

Original U.Today article

Sun, 1/02/2026 - 17:43

Can traders witness Bitcoin (BTC) testing the $74,000 zone soon?

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

A further drop remains the more likely scenario for most of the coins, according to CoinStats.

Top coins by CoinStatsBTC/USDThe rate of Bitcoin (BTC) has declined by 5.35% over the last day.

Image by TradingViewOn the hourly chart, the price of BTC is about to fix below the local support at $77,181. If it happens, the decline may lead to a test of the $75,000-$76,000 zone tomorrow.

Image by TradingViewOn the bigger time frame, the rate of the main crypto is far from the main levels. In this case, one should focus on the candle closure in terms of yesterday's bar low.

You Might Also Like

If it happens below $75,555, the decline is likely to continue to the $70,000 zone.

Image by TradingViewFrom the midterm point of view, the nearest level at $73,794 plays an important role in terms of further price movements. If a false breakout happens, there is a possibility to see a bounce back to the $76,000-$78,000 range.

Bitcoin is trading at $77,118 at press time.

Related articles

2 mins mins

Key Points:

261,854 SOL tokens, valued at approximately $30 million, were unstaked and transferred.Step Finance has initiated an investigation and notified authorities.Market reactions indicate a drop in SOL’s price and trading volume. Step Finance’s treasury and fee wallets were compromised, with 261,854 SOL tokens (worth around $30 million) stolen, as reported by SolanaFloor and Step Finance’s official post on X.

This breach highlights ongoing security challenges within DeFi, affecting market trust and causing an 80-93% drop in STEP token value post-disclosure.

Step Finance Hack: $30M in SOL Tokens Unstaked An attack on Step Finance resulted in the unstaking and transfer of 261,854 SOL tokens, valued at approximately $30 million. The incident was first reported by SolanaFloor. Step Finance has announced an investigation into the breach and stated:

The hack on Step Finance’s treasury wallets alarms DeFi users about security issues prevalent in the ecosystem. Immediate market reactions are expected as more details emerge.

BingX offers exclusive rewards and top-tier security for new and high-volume crypto traders.

“We are investigating the attack on treasury and fee wallets, have notified authorities, implemented remediation, and are working with cybersecurity firms; more details forthcoming; user funds not exposed.” SOL’s Market Impact and Price Trends After Breach Did you know? Historical trends suggest investments in cybersecurity and the development of safeguard technologies could shape future outcomes.

Solana (SOL) currently trades at $101.33, with a market cap of approximately CoinMarketCap. Recent data (CoinMarketCap) indicates a 24-hour trading volume of roughly $7082 million, marking a 6.57% decrease. Price trends show a 2.25% drop in the past day and a more significant 17.04% decline over the week. The trading volume decrease and continual price drops point to heightened risks. The blockchain’s infrastructure may face increased scrutiny as trading dynamics shift.

Solana(SOL), daily chart, screenshot on CoinMarketCap at 17:39 UTC on February 1, 2026. Source: CoinMarketCap Coincu’s research highlights the potential for increased regulatory scrutiny as DeFi attacks rise. This data points toward potential shifts in regulatory approaches and technological advancements for securing decentralized assets.

DISCLAIMER: The information on this website is provided as general market commentary and does not constitute investment advice. We encourage you to do your own research before investing.

Rate this post

Altcoin season may still be ahead, according to a growing body of technical signals suggesting the market is preparing for another explosive expansion.

A new chart analysis shared by one market observer points to a familiar historical sequence that preceded major altcoin rallies, raising expectations that the next cycle could dwarf prior runs.

Data highlighted by analyst Mark Chadwick shows altcoins following the same structural pattern seen before the 2017 and 2021 surges. In both cases, the market formed a macro base, transitioned into a golden cross, and then entered a parabolic expansion phase.

The results were dramatic. Altcoins recorded gains of roughly 82x in 2017 and about 115x in 2021. This time, the setup is emerging after a multi-year compression period, with momentum reset and the broader trend structure still intact.

Chadwick suggests that early positioning feels uncomfortable, whereas late participation has historically felt obvious. This dynamic has often marked the beginning of past alt seasons.

Advertisement  

In support, analyst Javon Marks cites altcoin dominance charts that typically evolve through three major phases. These phases often resemble wedge-like formations followed by decisive breakouts.

According to Marks, the second-phase breakout is when alt season typically begins in earnest. Current dominance levels are now hovering in an area consistent with another Phase Two breakout, implying that a third phase dominated by altcoins could follow.

However, metrics from Alphractal indicate that most altcoins now have a Long Short Ratio above 1, signaling crowded long positioning.

Even large-cap assets are affected. XRP, for instance, currently shows an LSR of 3.06, an unusually elevated reading.

The data also reveal a pattern in which long bias increases as market capitalization decreases, and this setup has historically preceded heightened volatility and pressure on long positions.

Ultimately, the charts suggest that while the structural conditions for an altcoin season may be forming, the path forward could be volatile before any sustained expansion unfolds.

The XRP price was caught in the latest crypto market-wide selloff, falling to an intraday low of $1.57 within the past 24 hours. The sudden drop brings into focus XRP’s higher-timeframe structure, which is teasing a break below the 33-month exponential moving average. 

According to a technical assessment shared on X by crypto analyst Egrag Crypto, the recent drop below the 33-month exponential moving average does not automatically signal the end of XRP’s cycle, but XRP must close above an exact level to avoid a macro bearish confirmation.

The 33 EMA Breakdown Signal At the time of writing, XRP is back to trading around $1.65, stabilizing after a volatile few hours that forced many traders to reassess the broader structure. However, according to technical analysis by Egrag Crypto, the most recent crash saw XRP breaking a bit below the 33 EMA on the monthly candlestick timeframe chart.

Egrag based the recent price action around one critical condition: a confirmed monthly close below $1.60 and the 33 EMA. According to the analyst, such a close would mark a macro bearish confirmation based on historical structure, not sentiment or opinion. 

The chart he shared highlights how XRP has respected the 33 EMA as a long-term trend reference across multiple cycles, with violations often preceding extended corrective phases. As shown in the chart below, the XRP price has been trading above the 33-EMA since early 2025, even during periods of corrections. However, XRP is now trading dangerously close to this EMA, and there is now a risk of a breakdown.

XRP Price Chart. Source: @egragcrypto On X

What This Means For XRP’s Price Structure There’s a risk that XRP can transition into a macro bear structure. At the same time, there’s enough reason to suggest an upside bounce for the cryptocurrency. A major point in Egrag’s analysis is historical performance that shows XRP’s strongest upside expansions did not require a clean bull-market environment.

XRPUSD now trading at $1.66. Chart: TradingView Therefore, there are two historical analogs of how XRP can play out from its current range around $1.60. The first is a repeat of the 2021-style move. This move, measured from similar structural conditions, would imply an upside expansion of roughly 340% with a price target around the $7 region.

The second one is a repeat of the 2017 cycle. Comparison to the 2017 cycle projects a much larger structural expansion of about 1,600%, which would align with the $27 zone highlighted on the chart above. In both cases, the rallies originated from oversold conditions and compression ranges, not from a strong bullish macro confirmation like many would expect.

According to the analysis, a breakdown below $1.60 could still lead to panic selling and reinforce fear narratives of a macro bear market, yet those same conditions have previously been the zones where late sellers exit just before volatility expands upward.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Pi Network’s token price is tanking. The digital currency project faces another massive unlock of roughly 137 million tokens next month, and traders aren’t happy about it.

The February release comes right after Pi Network dumped over 139 million tokens into the market in January. That’s a lot of new supply hitting exchanges in just two months. Investors are getting nervous about what all these tokens will do to prices. The project launched with promises of creating an easy-to-use cryptocurrency, but these phased unlocks are testing everyone’s patience. Market watchers say the sheer volume of tokens getting released could flood the market and push prices down even further.

Things look pretty rough already.

January’s token dump already hammered Pi Network’s price, and now everyone’s bracing for round two. The token’s been trading around $0.0025 lately, which shows just how cautious investors have become. And February 15 is the date everyone’s circling on their calendars – that’s when the next wave hits. Traders are basically holding their breath, waiting to see if the market can absorb all this new supply without completely cratering.

Michael Li from Crypto Insights thinks Pi Network’s unlock strategy is weird compared to other projects. “The scale of these releases is unusual,” Li said. “Markets can react in unpredictable ways when you’re talking about this much supply hitting at once.” He’s not wrong – most crypto projects try to space out their token releases more gradually.

But Pi Network’s team isn’t saying much about any of this. They’ve been pretty quiet about how the February unlock might mess with their long-term plans. That silence is making investors even more jittery. Without clear communication from leadership, people are left guessing about what comes next.

The project’s community is scrambling to figure out damage control. Online forums are buzzing with ideas about how to keep the token’s value from completely tanking. Some users want Pi Network to delay the release or spread it out over more time. Others think the team should buy back tokens to offset the new supply. It’s basically a grassroots effort to save their investment.

Crypto exchanges are getting ready for chaos too. Binance saw trading volume jump 15% after January’s unlock, and they’re expecting even more action next month. That kind of volatility usually means wider price spreads and more opportunities for day traders to make quick profits. But it also means regular investors might get burned if they’re not careful.

Pi Network did announce one thing – they’re hosting a live Q&A session on February 10. The development team will answer community questions about the upcoming unlock. It’ll stream on their official channels, which is probably the first real communication they’ve had with investors in months. Better late than never, but people are frustrated it took this long.

Sandra Lee, a blockchain analyst who spoke with CoinTelegraph, thinks the unlocks could actually test how strong Pi Network’s market really is. “Some investors are scared, but others might see this as a chance to buy tokens at cheaper prices,” Lee said. She’s probably right that strategic communication from the team could make or break how this whole thing plays out.

The timing couldn’t be worse for Pi Network. Crypto markets have been pretty volatile lately, and adding more supply pressure isn’t helping anyone’s confidence. The project’s original vision was to create a user-friendly digital currency that regular people could actually use. But right now, it feels more like a speculative trading vehicle that’s hemorrhaging value.

Community discussions are getting heated as February 15 approaches. Some members think the price dips are temporary and that more tokens in circulation will eventually help with adoption. Others are calling for the team to halt future unlocks until market conditions improve. The debate shows just how divided the community has become over the project’s direction.

Exchanges like Coinbase are also watching Pi Network closely. They know that increased volatility usually means more trading fees for them, but it also creates customer service headaches when prices swing wildly. The February unlock could test their systems if trading volume spikes like it did in January.

Pi Network’s leadership team hasn’t given any hints about whether they might adjust their unlock schedule. The February release was planned months ago, but market conditions have changed since then. Without flexibility from the development team, investors are basically stuck riding out whatever happens next.

The project’s whitepaper originally outlined these phased unlocks as necessary for building liquidity and encouraging participation. But the reality is hitting different than the theory. When you dump this many tokens into a relatively small market, prices tend to suffer. And Pi Network’s market isn’t exactly huge to begin with.

As February 15 gets closer, the crypto community is watching Pi Network as a case study in token economics. How the project handles this unlock could influence how other cryptocurrencies approach their own supply management. The stakes are higher than just Pi Network’s price – it’s about whether phased unlocks actually work in practice.

For now, Pi Network investors are basically playing a waiting game. The February unlock is happening whether they like it or not. The only question is how bad the damage will be and whether the project can recover from it. Based on January’s performance, the outlook isn’t exactly optimistic.

Post Views: 1

By the end of 2025, a corner of the market most Ethereum traders rarely watch had built a position large enough to matter for everyone else.

Everstake’s annual Ethereum staking report estimates that public companies’ “digital asset treasuries” collectively held roughly 6.5–7.0 million ETH by December, which is more than 5.5% of the circulating supply.

Graph showing the cumulative ETH digital asset treasury holdings by public companies from March 2025 to December 2025 (Source: Everstake)The number is huge, but the more important part is why these companies chose ETH in the first place.

Bitcoin’s corporate-treasury playbook is built around scarcity and reflexivity: buy coins, let the market re-rate the equity wrapper at a premium, then issue stock to buy more coins.

Ethereum adds a second leg that Bitcoin can’t. Once ETH is acquired, it can be staked, meaning it can earn protocol-native rewards for helping secure the network. Everstake frames that reward stream at roughly 3% APY for treasury-style operators.

A corporate ETH treasury is trying to be a listed vehicle that holds ETH, earns additional ETH through staking, and convinces equity investors to pay for that packaged exposure. The main bet is that the wrapper can compound its underlying holdings over time, and that public markets will finance the growth phase when sentiment is favorable.

The basic mechanics of stakingEthereum runs on proof-of-stake. Instead of miners competing with computers and electricity, Ethereum uses “validators” that lock ETH as collateral and run software that proposes and attests to blocks.

When validators do the job correctly, they receive rewards paid by the protocol. When they go offline or misbehave, they can lose part of their rewards and, in more severe cases, a portion of the locked ETH through slashing.

Staking is attractive to institutions because the rewards are native to the protocol, not dependent on lending assets to a borrower. It still carries operational risk, but that is dampened by the fact that the core source of yield is the network itself.

Everstake’s report says that by the end of 2025, about 36.08 million ETH was staked, which it describes as 29.3% of supply, with net growth of more than 1.8 million ETH over the year.

That matters for treasuries because it shows staking has become a large, established market rather than a niche activity.

The ETH treasury flywheel: premium financing plus protocol yieldEverstake describes two levers that treasury companies are trying to pull.

The first is mNAV arbitrage. If a company’s stock trades at a premium to the market value of its underlying assets, it can issue new shares and use the proceeds to buy more ETH.

If the premium is large enough, that can increase ETH per share for existing shareholders even after dilution, because investors are effectively paying more for each unit of Ethereum exposure than it costs to acquire ETH directly.

The loop works as long as the premium holds and capital markets stay open.

The second lever is staking rewards. Once the ETH is held, the company can stake it and receive additional ETH over time.

Everstake frames the staking leg as roughly 3% APY, with the key point being low marginal costs once infrastructure is in place. A treasury that stakes wants to compound in token terms, not just ride price appreciation.

Together, the pitch for treasury staking is straightforward. The premium finances growth when markets are optimistic, and staking produces steady accumulation when markets are quieter.

Both mechanisms aim at the same output: more ETH per share.

The three treasury staking playbooksEverstake’s report concentrates the sector into three large holders and assigns each a role in the story.

It estimates BitMine holds about 4 million ETH, the figure that dominates Everstake’s “hockey stick” chart. Everstake also says BitMine is moving toward staking at an even bigger scale, including plans for its own validator infrastructure and disclosures that “hundreds of thousands of ETH” were staked via third-party infrastructure by late December 2025.

SharpLink Gaming holds about 860,000 ETH, staked as part of an active treasury approach where staking rewards are treated as operating income and remain on the balance sheet.

The Ether Machine holds about 496,000 ETH, with 100% staked. Everstake cites a reported 1,350 ETH in net yield during a period as evidence of what a “fully staked” model looks like.

Those numbers are evidence that the strategy is being institutionalized. These aren’t small experiments for the companies. Their positions are large enough that staking venue, operational posture, disclosure practice, and risk controls become part of the product.

Where institutions stake, and why “compliance staking” existsThe most practical insight in Everstake’s report is that staking is splitting into lanes.

Retail often stakes through exchanges for simplicity, and DeFi-native users chase liquidity and composability through liquid staking tokens.

Institutions often want something closer to traditional operational separation: defined roles, multiple operators, auditability, and a structure that fits existing compliance expectations. Everstake points to Liquid Collective as a compliance-oriented staking solution and uses its liquid staking token LsETH as a proxy for institutional migration.

The report says LsETH grew from about 105,000 ETH to around 300,000 ETH and links that growth to outflows from Coinbase exchange balances as a sign of large holders moving away from exchange custody while still preferring “enterprise-grade” staking structures.

It adds an exchange snapshot that reinforces the point. Everstake says Coinbase’s share fell by roughly 1.5 million staked ETH, from 10.17% to 5.54%, while Binance increased from 2.02 million to 3.14 million ETH, with the share rising from 5.95% to 8.82%.

CryptoSlate Daily Brief

Daily signals, zero noise.Market-moving headlines and context delivered every morning in one tight read.

5-minute digest 100k+ readers

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.

You’re subscribed. Welcome aboard.

The figures matter less as a verdict on either venue and more as evidence that staking distribution changes meaningfully when large players reposition.

For treasury companies, that staking-lane question is structural.

If the strategy depends on staking rewards to support compounding, then operator diversification, slashing protection, downtime risk, custody architecture, and reporting practices stop being back-office details and become core parts of the investment case.

The rails underneath the trade: stablecoins and tokenized TreasuriesEverstake doesn’t treat corporate treasuries as a standalone phenomenon, but ties them to Ethereum’s institutional pull in 2025: stablecoin liquidity and tokenized Treasury issuance.

On stablecoins, Everstake says total stablecoin supply across networks surpassed $300 billion, with Ethereum L1 plus L2s holding 61%–62%, or about $184 billion. The argument is that Ethereum’s security and settlement depth keep attracting the on-chain dollar base that institutions actually use.

On tokenized Treasuries, Everstake says the market was approaching $10 billion and puts Ethereum’s ecosystem share at about 57%. It frames Ethereum L1 as a security anchor for major issuers and cites products such as BlackRock’s BUIDL and Franklin Templeton’s tokenized money fund.

This context is important for the treasury trade.

A public company trying to justify a long-term ETH position and a staking program needs a narrative that goes beyond crypto speculation.

Tokenized cash and tokenized Treasuries are easier to defend as structural adoption than most other on-chain categories, and their growth makes it simpler to explain why the asset securing the ledger might matter over a longer horizon.

The risks that can break the Ethereum staking modelEverstake includes a warning about concentration and correlated failures.

It cites a Prysm client outage in December 2025, saying validator participation dropped to around 75% and 248 blocks were missed, and uses the event to argue that client herding can create network-wide fragility.

That risk matters more if large public treasuries consolidate into similar infrastructure choices, because their staking decisions can influence concentration. It also matters because staking returns are only clean when operations are resilient.

While downtime, misconfiguration, and slashing might sound abstract to companies, they are as much part of the business as staking is.

The second risk is capital markets, because mNAV arbitrage is a good mechanism only when markets are strong. If the equity premium compresses, issuing stock becomes dilutive rather than accretive, and the loop stops working.

Staking yield doesn't fix that on its own, because yield is incremental while equity financing is the growth engine.

A third risk is governance and regulation.

Treasury companies operate inside disclosure and custody regimes that can tighten quickly. The strategy depends on maintaining a structure that auditors, boards, and regulators can tolerate, especially if staking becomes a material contributor to reported income.

The ETH treasury trade is built on a simple proposition: accumulate ETH, stake it to grow holdings in token terms, and use public-market access to scale faster than a private balance sheet could.

Whether it survives as a durable category will depend on two measurable things: how well these companies operationalize staking without creating hidden fragility, and how consistently their equity wrappers can hold premiums that make the financing loop work.

Mentioned in this articlePosted in

New study shows excess leverage flushed in Q4, as realized price metrics and profitability data point to a healthier Bitcoin structure.

Bitcoin (BTC) is trading in a very tight range below $79,000 amidst macro tailwinds. Most crypto assets followed a similar trajectory. But experts are constructive on BTC.

In a joint report by Coinbase and Glassnode, the firms stated that the largest cryptocurrency appears to be on firmer ground than many altcoins that are still dealing with the fallout from last October’s sharp selloff.

Bitcoin’s Healthier Start to 2026 Coinbase and Glassnode believe that the crypto markets are entering 2026 in a healthier condition after excess leverage was largely flushed out of the system during the fourth quarter. The two firms said this view is reflected across several on-chain technical indicators. One of them, the entity-adjusted Net Unrealized Profit/Loss (NUPL), revealed that investor sentiment fell from the “Belief” phase to “Anxiety” following the October sell-off and stayed there through the quarter.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s realized price has continued to rise into early 2026. This shows that the market’s overall cost basis is increasing over time. Bitcoin’s spot price remains above this realized price, which means the average holder is still in profit rather than at a loss.

The Market Value to Realized Value (MVRV) ratio, which compares the current market price to the realized price, is around 1.5. This indicates that the crypto asset is trading at roughly a 50% premium to its on-chain cost basis.

On-Chain Signals During the fourth quarter of 2025, the share of BTC supply held in profit fell sharply. The report explained that this drop suggests that prices between $80,000 and $85,000 may have served as an accumulation zone for model-based strategies. The report also pointed to changes in dormant and active supply.

Bitcoin supply that moved within the past three months rose by 37% in the fourth quarter, while the share of supply that had not moved for more than a year fell by 2%. This change indicates that the market may have entered a high-velocity distribution phase during that period.

You may also like: Bitcoin (BTC) Price Tanks Toward $80K as Liquidations Approach $1B Bitcoin Price Holds Steady Despite Partial US Government Shutdown Bitcoin Whale Accumulation Hits Highest Level Since 2024 Amid BTC Price Weakness There has also been a decline in the Puell Multiple, which fell to 0.9 in the fourth quarter. This indicates that miners were earning about 10% less than the average of the previous year.

Additionally, Net long-term holder positions and changes in exchange balances, together, signaled profit-taking between July and September. But similar behavior was not clearly observed during the fourth quarter of 2025.

Tags:

TLDR: CryptoQuant CEO states Bitcoin won’t crash 70% unless MicroStrategy’s Saylor liquidates his holdings significantly.  MicroStrategy holds $2.2 billion cash reserves with no short-term debt pressure forcing Bitcoin sales near $76K basis.  Bitcoin’s Realized Cap has flatlined indicating no fresh capital inflows while early holders continue profit-taking.  Current bear market likely to form wide sideways consolidation rather than sharp decline seen in previous cycles.
Bitcoin appears protected from severe 70% crashes characteristic of previous bear markets unless MicroStrategy’s Michael Saylor liquidates his holdings, according to CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju.

The analyst’s assessment challenges traditional cycle expectations while acknowledging persistent selling pressure in the current market environment.

The cryptocurrency faces downward momentum as fresh capital inflows have ceased, yet structural differences suggest this downturn may unfold differently than historical precedents.

Early holders continue distributing profits accumulated during the ETF-driven rally, but MicroStrategy’s position remains a critical stabilizing factor.

CryptoQuant Analysis Points to Different Cycle Dynamics Ki Young Ju emphasized that MicroStrategy’s involvement fundamentally alters this cycle’s potential outcomes. The company served as a major driver of Bitcoin’s rally toward $100,000, accumulating substantial holdings that now influence market structure.

In his analysis, the CryptoQuant CEO stated that “MSTR was a major driver of this rally. Unless Saylor significantly dumps his stack, we won’t see a -70% crash like previous cycles.”

This observation reflects MicroStrategy’s unique position as a publicly-traded entity with long-term conviction rather than a speculative trader.

Bitcoin is dropping as selling pressure persists, with no fresh capital coming in.

Realized Cap has flatlined, meaning no fresh capital. When market cap falls in that environment, it's not a bull market.

Early holders are sitting on big unrealized gains thanks to ETFs and MSTR… https://t.co/OnnzQMy6Ra pic.twitter.com/J0yTtCTQjr

— Ki Young Ju (@ki_young_ju) February 1, 2026

Traditional bear markets witnessed 70% declines when overleveraged entities faced forced liquidations and margin calls.

However, the analyst noted that such catastrophic drops require significant selling from major holders. The company’s holdings represent patient capital unlikely to flee during temporary price weakness. This dynamic provides a floor beneath the market that did not exist in earlier cycles.

Despite this cushion, Ki Young Ju warned that selling pressure continues without clear signs of a bottom. He explained that “Bitcoin is dropping as selling pressure persists, with no fresh capital coming in. Realized Cap has flatlined, meaning no fresh capital.”

The analyst further noted that “when market cap falls in that environment, it’s not a bull market.” Early Bitcoin holders sitting on substantial unrealized gains have distributed their positions since early 2024, though institutional inflows previously absorbed this supply.

The analyst predicted this bear market will likely form a different pattern than previous cycles. He stated that “selling pressure is still ongoing, so the bottom isn’t clear yet, but this bear market will likely form a wide-ranging sideways consolidation.”

This forecast differs markedly from the 2018 and 2022 bear markets that featured severe drawdowns. Market participants should prepare for extended sideways price action instead of quick capitulation events that characterized previous cycles.

MicroStrategy’s Balance Sheet Shields Against Forced Selling Analyst Anıl provided additional context regarding MicroStrategy’s financial position and its implications for Bitcoin’s downside risk.

The company holds Bitcoin with an average cost basis around $76,000, close to current market prices. According to Anıl, “Michael Saylor (Strategy) faces no short-term debt pressure that would force selling Bitcoin bought at a $76K cost basis. All liabilities are long-term.” This structure eliminates the refinancing pressures that historically triggered forced liquidations.

Michael Saylor (Strategy) faces no short-term debt pressure that would force selling Bitcoin bought at a $76K cost basis. All liabilities are long-term.

Bitcoin trading back near cost levels looks like an attempt to pressure Saylor — and it’s likely to be short-lived.

Strategy… pic.twitter.com/JyZNnoLBs0

— anıl (@anlcnc1) February 1, 2026

The analyst characterized recent price action near MicroStrategy’s cost basis as tactical maneuvering by market participants. Anıl observed that “Bitcoin trading back near cost levels looks like an attempt to pressure Saylor — and it’s likely to be short-lived.”

This assessment suggests that current weakness represents temporary positioning rather than fundamental deterioration. The company maintains resilience through careful balance sheet management.

MicroStrategy’s financial strength extends beyond debt management to include substantial liquidity reserves. Anıl noted that “Strategy also holds $2.2B in cash reserves set aside for tough times.”

These reserves provide the company with offensive capabilities rather than forcing defensive actions. The analyst added that he “wouldn’t be surprised to see Saylor start accumulating Bitcoin again around cost levels using that cash. Maybe this week, maybe next.”

This cash position fundamentally changes Bitcoin’s risk profile during downturns. The analyst’s expectations flip traditional bear market dynamics where large holders typically reduce exposure.

MicroStrategy’s structure eliminates the forced selling catalysts that triggered previous cycle collapses. The company operates without leverage constraints or margin requirements that plagued earlier institutional participants, supporting CryptoQuant’s thesis that severe crashes require Saylor’s active participation as a seller.

Active Currencies 18953

Market Cap $2,699,996,205,679.20

Bitcoin Share 57.54%

24h Market Cap Change $-0.13

AMBCrypto

Crypto market’s weekly winners and losers – HYPE, CC, SOL, WLFI

Journalist

Posted: February 2, 2026

This hasn’t been a great week for crypto.

Bitcoin [BTC] slipped toward the $78K mark at press time, while Ethereum [ETH] gave up ground too. Most major tokens spent the week in the red, and optimism is a bit harder to find.

So buckle up, grab your coffee, and settle in! Here’s a look at the biggest moves from the past week.

Hyperliquid [HYPE] swims against the tide

Samyukhtha L KM is a Financial Journalist and Market Analyst at AMBCrypto whose work is defined by one central question: Is the latest trend in blockchain hype, or history in the making? Her expertise is built on a strong academic foundation, with a Master’s in Journalism and Mass Communication from Amity University and a Bachelor’s in Commerce from the University of Madras. This dual qualification equips her with a unique skill set: the financial acumen to dissect market mechanics and the journalistic rigor to investigate and communicate complex subjects with clarity. Samyukhtha specializes in analyzing the socio-economic impact of blockchain adoption and assessing the viability of new market narratives. This includes a focus on high-velocity, community-driven assets such as memecoins, where she evaluates sentiment and fundamentals. She is dedicated to providing readers with insightful, well-researched commentary that looks beyond immediate market moves to understand the long-term implications of decentralized technology.

Bitcoin’s sharp weekend drop triggered fresh liquidations, with analyst Eric Crown warning the market may face months of further downside. Feb 1, 2026, 7:06 p.m.

Bitcoin’s price sank sharply over the weekend, sliding below $78,000 — its lowest level since April — as profit-taking collided with thinning liquidity and a scarcity of fresh buyers.

Traders told CoinDesk that a rally once backed by corporate demand, particularly from Strategy’s (MSTR) bitcoin purchases, has run out of steam, leaving markets vulnerable to forced selling and derivative liquidations.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW

For some market analysts, Saturday’s slide fits into a broader bearish pattern that has been emerging for months. Eric Crown, a former options trader at NYSE Arca, has argued since late October that bitcoin is in a sideways-to-downside phase, and that the optimism around a return to new highs — or a rotation from metals back into crypto — is misplaced “hopium” for bulls.

“It’s been my view since [the] end of October that BTC is in a sideways and downside phase… I do not think 80K is a macro low for bitcoin,” Crown, who now posts updates on the crypto market with more than 200,000 subscribers, told CoinDesk, underlining that recent price action may be part of a larger corrective regime.

And the action in the options market backs up this bearish sentiment. Options traders are now increasingly betting that prices will fall below $75,000 and ditching their bullish bets of reaching $100,000. So much so that the dollar value of the number of active bitcoin put options contracts at the $75,000 level listed on Deribit platform now stands at $1.159 billion, almost matching the so-called notional open interest of $1.168 billion locked in the $100,000 call option.

Read more: Here's why bitcoin traders are now betting billions on a drop below $75,000 and bailing on price rising higher

Bearish signalsCrown points to several technical indicators that have historically foreshadowed deeper corrections.

The monthly MACD — a technical trading indicator — crossed down in November, a rare signal that has preceded extended downturns in previous cycles.

Additionally, the weekly 21 vs. 55 EMA (another technical indicator) recently crossed into bearish territory. When this happens, it is typically followed by multi-month losses. And the 2025 yearly chart closed as a "shooting star," a candlestick pattern that often signals a medium-term reversal.

Chart showing monthly MACD crossover (TradingView)

Bitcoin to $50,000?Making matters worse for bulls, bitcoin has diverged from traditional markets since October, declining while equities and other risk assets held up — a pattern Crown sees as typical of late-cycle risk-off behavior.

“People generally sell the more speculative assets first,” he said.

Beyond technicals, Crown highlights the speculative wash-out from October’s crash, which eliminated many leveraged altcoin positions and left traders wary of re-entering at elevated levels.

Read more: Crypto’s $19 billion '10/10' nightmare: Why everyone is blaming Binance for the bitcoin crash that won't end

While not as extreme as some cyclical bears, Crown suggests bitcoin may fall to even lower levels — potentially into the mid-$50,000 to low-$60,000 zone — before stabilizing.

In fact, he says that range represents an area he’s personally eyeing to add to his long-term positions, framing the current market as a potential value-accumulation phase rather than the end of crypto’s broader cycle.

Sun, 1/02/2026 - 19:19

Despite investor ridicule on social media, the firm remains insulated from immediate financial distress.

Cover image via U.Today Just hours after Strategy’s massive Bitcoin position briefly dipped into the red, Strategy's Michael Saylor took to X (formerly Twitter) with a cryptic but characteristic show of defiance: "More Orange."

The two-word post was accompanied by a chart from StrategyTracker showing the company’s history of Bitcoin accumulations.

In the visual language of Strategy’s die-hard fanbase, "orange" refers to the orange dots on the chart that signify purchase events. 

HOT Stories

The "underwater" scareThe tweet comes at a precarious moment for the Tysons Corner-based software firm turned Bitcoin treasury. 

According to data released Sunday, Strategy now holds a staggering 712,647 BTC. However, the company’s aggressive purchasing spree has pushed its average cost basis up to $76,038 per coin.

You Might Also Like

Early Sunday morning, Bitcoin’s price slipped to approximately $75,500, technically dragging the value of Strategy's holdings below what they paid for them. It was a symbolic blow that invited immediate "investor ridicule" on social media, with detractors pointing out that the company’s $55.8 billion reserve was, for the first time in months, underwater.

Despite the online noise, financial analysts note that the company is not facing an existential crisis.

"Friendly reminder that MSTR's debt is unsecured. The earliest puttable debt is 2028. And it has enough cash on hand to pay dividends for 2.5 years. Nothing at all happens to MSTR at BTC cost basis. Zero risk of near-term leverage blow-up," analyst Brian Brookshire has stated. 

Related articles

One did really well, while the other stayed flat.

Last year, I took two Buffett stocks and put them head to head: Coca-Cola (KO +1.88%) and Domino's Pizza (DPZ +0.80%). Coca-Cola is Buffett's longest-held stock, and Domino's is a fairly new addition. And while their business models are different and they operate in different industries, they're both leading consumer goods stocks that offer value to investors.

I suggested that Coca-Cola was likely to be the winning stock in 2025, and I was right. Can it continue? Let's revisit the debate and see who might win in 2026.

Image source: Domino's.

Why Coca-Cola won the match last year Neither Coca-Cola nor Domino's beat the market last year, but Coke stock came pretty close, while Domino's remained nearly flat.

KO Total Return Level data by YCharts

When I chose it last year, I noted the company's longer track record of reliability and its higher dividend yield. I felt at the time that those features would be important to the market in 2025, as it was entering a new year after two years of double-digit gains.

In the end, growth won out, and the market delivered a third consecutive year of double-digit gains, but Coca-Cola got high marks anyway for its stability and local production in the face of rising tariffs.

Today's Change

(

1.88

%) $

1.38

Current Price

$

74.81

Matchup 2026 Now that the market is entering a new year after three years of double-digit gains, does this thesis still hold true?

Coca-Cola has been performing well over the past year, and its localized production is earning it a thumbs-up from the market.

In the most recent quarter, which was the 2025 third quarter (fourth-quarter earnings will be released on Feb. 10), sales increased 5% year over year, and comparable operating margin rose from 30.7% to 31.9% year over year. The company has pricing power, and it has been able to keep up with higher costs by raising prices as well as changing packaging and size. It continues to see ways to become more efficient and launch new products, and its model of acquiring global brands adds new revenue sources.

It also stands out for its dividend. Coca-Cola is a Dividend King, and it has raised its dividend for the past 63 years straight, rain or shine. The dividend typically yields around 3%, but today it's 2.9% because the stock has performed so well.

Today's Change

(

0.80

%) $

3.25

Current Price

$

410.33

Domino's has been reporting similar mid-single-digit sales growth recently, but the market hasn't rewarded it. Global retail sales increased 6.3% year over year in the 2025 fiscal third quarter (ended Sept. 7), with comparable sales up 5.2%. Restaurants in general have been under pressure in the high-inflation environment, even though pizza is a food that's cheap and resilient. The market may be seeing more limited upside for Domino's right now given continued pressure.

One thing I will say in Domino's favor is that not having moved last year gives it a nice springboard starting out in 2026. However, even in this feature, Coca-Cola may have an edge because it's slightly cheaper than Domino's, trading at 24 times trailing-12-month earnings versus Coke's 23.

I think this is a tough call for 2026, but the edge might go to Domino's this year. It continues to grow, and the market might recognize its resilience.

Moog Flying High On Exceptional Growth And Sector Popularity

There are a number of valid reasons Ford is an attractive long-term investment, but it must fix these two things for investors.

There are a host of reasons to be drawn to shares of Ford Motor Company (F 0.86%) these days.

Some investors might decide to scoop them up because they see the stock as a value proposition with a price-to-earnings ratio of only 11. Others could be lured by Ford's lucrative dividend which yields almost 4.5%, with annual special dividends sprinkled in when cash flow is strong.

Still other investors might bet on Ford's strength in highly profitable full-size trucks, SUVs, and its commercial Ford Pro business that generates recurring revenue. And finally, some may see long-term potential through artificial intelligence and driverless vehicles.

Whatever the reason, Ford investors should also keep an eye on two challenges that the automaker needs to fix. Here's what they are.

An award no auto wants Recalls are simply part of the business in the automotive industry and companies are no stranger to spending capital on warranty and recall costs. Unfortunately for Ford investors, the automaker has grown increasingly accustomed to recalls and not only recorded a significant 89 recalls in 2024 but obliterated that with its newly set record of 153 recalls last year that spanned roughly 13 million vehicles.

Today's Change

(

-0.86

%) $

-0.12

Current Price

$

13.88

These recall developments have been known to rear their ugly head during Ford's earning reports, including during the second quarter of 2024 when Ford's warranty costs spiked $800 million and caused the automaker to miss Wall Street estimates. Further, beyond the direct numbers, leading the industry in recalls for numerous years has a detrimental impact on the company's brand image and ability to "conquest" customers from a competing brand -- one of the most difficult and expensive things to do in the loyal automotive industry.

While Ford has increased its efforts on quality in recent years after CEO Jim Farley made it a focus, and most of the issues are blamed on much older vehicles in the global fleet, you can see the chart shows it's been a trend for some time.

Data source: Ford SEC filings. Chart by author. 

Reversing steep losses After seeing markets in Europe and China surge ahead in electric vehicle adoption, the U.S. industry jumped on the opportunity to hype EVs and the future. Companies touted multibillion-dollar investments in electrification, battery development, and infrastructure buildout, but the market didn't gain traction nearly as quick as automakers hoped.

The lack of a quickly developing market has dinged many automakers on the bottom line, with Ford's Model-e division, responsible for its EVs, losing over $5 billion in 2024 alone. That's a massive loss, but also a massive opportunity for investors if Ford can quickly reverse those losses into profits.

Image source: Ford Motor Company.

Ford intends to do just that, and through assembly line innovations as well as a new low-cost Universal EV Platform, it will launch a more affordable midsize electric pickup in 2027 with a price tag of around $30,000. The crucial part of that development is that Ford expects the new pickup to be profitable early in its life cycle.

Further, Ford took a large $19.5 billion special charge to pivot its strategy away from full-electric vehicles until they are more profitable, and instead focus on hybrids that can sometimes be even more profitable than their gasoline-powered counterparts.

What it all means There are plenty of reasons for investors to take a hard look at Ford as a long-term investment. It has a solid balance sheet, a lucrative dividend, and high upside with a future increasingly linked to AI and driverless vehicles. But investors need to keep an eye on current events, too, such as Ford's costly recalls and heavy EV losses in the near term. As Ford turns those problems around, it'll be a more sound long-term investment.

Investors have been waiting for that blowout earnings report. It just might have come in a place they weren't expecting.

NEW YORK, Feb. 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Ardent Health, Inc. (NYSE: ARDT) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Ardent securities between July 18, 2024 and November 12, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: bgandg.com/ARDT.

Ardent Case Details

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

(1) Ardent Health’s third quarter 2025 revenue was overstated due to inadequate determinations of accounts receivable collectability following the Company’s transition to a new revenue accounting system and “recently completed hindsight evaluations of historical collection trends”; 

(2) the Company’s 2025 EBITDA guidance was overstated and would be reduced by $57.5 million at the midpoint, or approximately 9.6%, due to “persistent industry-wide cost pressures,” including “payer denials”; and 

(3) as a result, Defendants’ statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

What's Next for Ardent Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm’s site: bgandg.com/ARDT. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in Ardent you have until March 9, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to Ardent Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys’ fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for Ardent Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Contact Info

Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or Nathan Miller
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
917-590-0911 | [email protected]

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

NEW YORK, Feb. 01, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized investor-rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against BellRing Brands, Inc. (NYSE: BRBR) and certain of its officers.

This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired BellRing securities between November 19, 2024 and August 4, 2025, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: bgandg.com/BRBR.

BellRing Case Details

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose materially adverse facts. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that:
      (1)   the Defendants failed to disclose to investors that its strong sales results did not reflect increased end-consumer demands or brand momentum;
      (2)   rather, customers accumulated excess inventory as a safeguard against product shortages that had previously constrained BellRing’s supply;
      (3)   once customers gained confidence that product shortages were a thing of the past, they promptly reduced their inventory by selling through existing products and cutting back on new orders; and
      (4)   following the destocking, the Company admitted that competitive pressures were materially weakening demand.

What's Next for BellRing Investors?

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm’s site: bgandg.com/BRBR. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 917-590-0911. If you suffered a loss in BellRing you have until March 23, 2026, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff.

No Cost to BellRing Investors

We, Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman LLC, represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys’ fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful.

Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC for BellRing Securities Class Action?

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. More at www.bgandg.com

"Our practice centers on restoring investor capital and ensuring corporate accountability, which serves to uphold the essential integrity of the marketplace," said Peretz Bronstein, Founding Partner of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, or Instagram.

Contact Info

Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or Nathan Miller
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
917-590-0911 | [email protected]

Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Tom Yeung here with your Sunday Digest. 

It would have been easy to overlook Nvidia Corp. (NVDA) in 2022, the year ChatGPT was launched. Chipmakers were notoriously cyclical beasts, and Nvidia had its own history of losing money. Any investors who bought Nvidia in 2021 would have been sitting on 50% losses by the time ChatGPT hit the market. 

Or in 2000… 2004… 2009… 2011… or 2018.  

In fact, Nvidia fell at least 50% in 13 of the 26 years since the firm went public. PC demand is extremely lumpy. So, much like autos and airlines, the chipmaking industry was marked by high investment costs, cyclical demand, and a regular parade of high-profile bankruptcies. 

However, ChatGPT has created a lasting significant change in chip appetite. Unlike regular PC users, data centers that run these AI models demand more… more… more computing power every day and are willing to pay for it.  

Nvidia’s latest GB200 Blackwell Superchip now sells for up to $70,000 apiece… provided you can get your hands on one. Even its last-generation H100 chips routinely exchange hands for over $20,000 on the secondary market. 

No PC gamer – Nvidia’s pre-2022 main clients – would ever spend those sums on a graphics card for their home computer. 

In addition, every cloud computing giant has become terrified of falling behind in the AI race. America’s (and China’s) largest tech firms are paying top dollar for the best hardware, pushing prices of AI chips to sustained record prices. 

That’s caused operating margins at Nvidia to quintuple to 62% from its pre-ChatGPT average. When you’re selling high-end chips for $70,000 that only cost $17,000 to produce, it’s hard not to print money. Analysts are projecting profits to triple by 2028, which could send Nvidia’s justified value per share into the $250 range. (I had previously projected a $160 split-adjusted value by 2027 when the stock was still at $72.) 

Still, I know that many of you have not yet jumped in on Nvidia. The stock is wildly expensive on a traditional basis, and besides, who wants to buy a stock that’s already risen 1,050% with only another 32% upside to fair value? Any investor over 40 will remember what happened to 1999 tech stock valuations, 2007 Florida real estate prices, and 2014 energy companies. 

That’s why Luke’s latest presentation is so interesting. On January 27, he unveiled his Genesis Portfolio, an eight-stock portfolio designed to ride the next leg of AI-led innovation even higher. Nvidia might only have 32% upside from here… but Luke’s eight picks are only getting started. In fact, some of these are household AI names that are sitting right under Wall Street’s noses. You can catch up with that free broadcast here. 

In the meantime, I’d like to illustrate this potential with two of my own picks that are leading the way in semiconductor innovation.  

And much like Nvidia at $72, these two have incredible upside that Wall Street hasn’t fully realized yet… 

The Broadcom Alternative  Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) is often talked about as “the next Nvidia.” The high-profile company has become a leader in custom AI accelerator chips, and Wall Street analysts are quick to point out that AI data centers would be impossible to build without Broadcom’s networking chips. 

It doesn’t matter how quickly a GPU can process data if there’s a data bottleneck preventing it from reaching the processor. 

However, Broadcom’s visibility on Wall Street has pushed shares to unusual heights, limiting future gains. The stock has risen 500% since ChatGPT’s launch, and my models calculate just another 52% upside to $506 if things go the company’s way. You would need cash-flow assumptions that border on fantasy to get much higher. 

Instead, my award for fantastic potential returns is Marvell Technology Inc. (MRVL), a Broadcom rival that’s starting from a far smaller base. The company trades at just a third of its larger rival on a price-to-sales basis, and my models project a 76% upside to a $147 justified value on relatively conservative assumptions. Using more aggressive figures suggests potential 100% upside. 

In short, Marvell has assembled a broad portfolio of networking and processing chips. Its optical chips (which use light waves instead of electrical signals) are considered world class, and its processing products are among the best in the business. Microsoft Corp.’s (MSFT) North American data centers currently source 100% of their optical chips from Marvell. 

The Silicon Valley-based company is also a leader in custom chips – something that put Broadcom on the map. Data centers are increasingly seeking to lower inference costs (the costs associated with running existing AI models) and often build custom chips that are designed specifically for the task.  

Marvell’s custom silicon has been particularly popular with Amazon.com Inc (AMZN), and management expects the company’s custom chip business to grow 20% next year as more customers sign on. In addition, Marvell plans to acquire Celestial AI for roughly $3.3 billion, which will help the combined firm further expand optical chip products. 

Together, that means Marvell’s profits will grow far faster than Broadcom’s in the coming years. And given Marvell’s discount to its larger rival, it becomes clear which innovator to buy. 

The AI Chip Builder  At this point, virtually everyone knows Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSM), the company that makes chips for Nvidia, Apple Inc. (AAPL), Broadcom, Intel Corp. (INTC), and more. In fact, the Taiwanese firm is the only company in the world that can consistently produce at the 4-nanometer (nm) node – the microscopic technology that powers every chip in Nvidia’s latest Blackwell series (including that $70,000 GB200 Superchip).  

It’s a monopoly hiding in plain sight. 

What most people don’t realize is that TSM shares have risen only 300% since ChatGPT was launched and are only up 180% in the past five years. Shares trade at just 24 times forward earnings, giving TSM a potential 110% upside to $705 in my longer-range models. 

The investment thesis here is clear: Taiwan Semiconductor makes the world’s best chips, and no company comes close. 

For instance, the only other firm that can produce 4nm nodes at scale is Samsung Electronics. However, the advanced technology has been a – as one tech writer recently put it – “nightmare for the Korean giant” to implement. According to industry analysts, Samsung barely achieves a 60% yield on 4nm chips, which means 40% of its production must get scrapped. 

The performance gap is even starker at the more advanced 3-nanometer node. Here, Taiwan Semi achieves a 90% yield, compared to under 50% at Samsung. Alphabet, Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD), and Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) reportedly switched their 3nm chips to TSM, and other firms are reportedly considering the same. Analysts expect Nvidia’s next-generation “Rubin” GPUs to rely entirely on TSM production. 

In fact, TSM has already begun volume production of its next generation 2nm technology – years ahead of its closest rivals. 

These results were on full display during TSM’s latest earnings call on January 15, where financial figures crushed Wall Street forecasts. Management now expects revenue to grow in the mid-20% annually (up from previous forecasts of 20%) through 2029, and that AI revenues should jump 50% annually (up from mid-40%). 

That’s why it makes little sense for TSM to be valued as a commoditized contract manufacturer. Chip manufacturing has turned into a high-end winner-takes-all market, and investors are belatedly realizing the true value of Taiwan Semi. 

The Six Sectors of Innovation  Last week, I talked about two biotech companies and a drone maker at the cutting edge of American innovation. These companies represent two key areas that the U.S. government has identified as crucial technologies to fund, no matter the cost. 

Marvell and Taiwan Semi represent another area of intense government investment. Under the Biden administration, TSMC alone received $6.6 billion in grants and $5 billion in low-cost loans to build three chip factories in Arizona. It might receive even more funding indirectly under the Trump administration through Project Stargate, a $500 billion project aimed at building American AI infrastructure. 

Luke believes this is only the start. In his latest presentation, he outlines six core sectors that should receive enormous amounts of government funding in the coming years as America races to stay ahead: 

Artificial Intelligence   Quantum Computing   Nuclear Energy   Biotech   Semiconductors   Advanced Manufacturing  And to capitalize on this surge, Luke has created what he’s called the Genesis Portfolio – a group of eight elite companies that focus on these sectors. 

He outlines all this and more in that free broadcast. Check it out.  

Until next week, 

Thomas Yeung, CFA 

Market Analyst, InvestorPlace 

Thomas Yeung is a market analyst and portfolio manager of the Omnia Portfolio, the highest-tier subscription at InvestorPlace. He is the former editor of Tom Yeung’s Profit & Protection, a free e-letter about investing to profit in good times and protecting gains during the bad.

HomeETFs and Funds AnalysisETF Analysis

SummaryLeveraged ETFs often underperform their underlying index due to beta-slippage.Monthly and yearly drift can be monitored to assess the performance of leveraged ETFs relative to their underlying index.UDOW's average 12-month drift is -2.43%, with compounding volatility eroding returns, especially during market whipsaws.UDOW is best used for short-term trading strategies, not as a buy-and-hold vehicle.Quantitative Risk & Value members get exclusive access to our real-world portfolio. See all our investments here » trendobjects/iStock via Getty Images

ProShares UltraPro Dow30 ETF (NYSEARCA:UDOW) is quite popular among short term traders, with about 43% of assets under management changing hands every trading day on average. However, it is not a long-term investment: its 3X daily leverage factor on

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Technology stocks are likely to continue leading the broader market higher in 2026, fueled by the artificial intelligence boom.

The benchmark S&P 500 index returned 16.4% during 2025, far outpacing its average annual gain of 10.6% dating back to its inception in 1957. However, had investors bought the Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT 1.69%) at the start of last year instead, they would have earned a much higher return of 21.2%.

This Vanguard exchange-traded fund (ETF) exclusively invests in companies from the information technology sector, which includes many of the artificial intelligence (AI) powerhouses that have propelled the broader market higher over the last few years.

The Vanguard ETF has beaten the S&P 500 every year since it was established in 2004, so its outperformance last year certainly wasn't a one-off. Here's why I think it will crush the market again in 2026.

Image source: Getty Images.

Hundreds of leading tech stocks packed into one ETF The Vanguard Information Technology ETF holds 320 stocks from 12 different subsegments of the technology industry. The semiconductor subsegment is the largest by far, representing 32.4% of the value of the ETF's entire portfolio. That shouldn't come as a surprise considering top AI chipmakers like Nvidia, Broadcom, Micron Technology, and Advanced Micro Devices have a combined value of $7 trillion.

Systems software is the second largest subsegment in the Vanguard ETF, with a 17.7% portfolio weighting. It features companies like Microsoft and Palantir Technologies, which sell AI software primarily to enterprise customers. It also includes Oracle, which is a hybrid software and AI infrastructure company, in addition to AI cybersecurity powerhouses like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike.

As you can tell, the Vanguard ETF offers exposure to the entire AI space, from hardware suppliers to software developers. But it doesn't stop there, because it also invests in consulting companies, application developers, internet service providers, and suppliers of equipment and components other than chips specifically, all of which are also playing a key role in the AI revolution.

I mentioned nine stocks above by name. Since the AI boom started gathering momentum at the beginning of 2023, each one of them has at least doubled, with an average return of 655% (and a median return of 353%). The S&P 500 climbed by 81% over the same period, so having such a high exposure to those stocks is a key reason for the Vanguard ETF's consistent outperformance.

PLTR data by YCharts

The Vanguard ETF can beat the S&P 500 again in 2026 The Vanguard Information Technology ETF has produced a compound annual return of 14.1% since its inception in 2004, so it has outperformed the S&P 500, which climbed by an average of 10.6% annually over the same period.

AI stocks are likely to drive another strong return for the Vanguard ETF during 2026. Semiconductor fabricators and equipment suppliers like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, Texas Instruments, and ASML Holding each reported their latest quarterly operating results over the last couple of weeks, and they revealed a continued surge in demand.

This implies chip suppliers like Nvidia, AMD, Broadcom, and Micron are experiencing significant demand from major data center operators like Microsoft, so the entire AI value chain continues to fire on all cylinders.

Today's Change

(

-1.69

%) $

-12.88

Current Price

$

747.92

Before AI burst onto the scene, the Vanguard ETF sourced its incredible returns from other tech revolutions like the dawn of the smartphone, cloud computing, and enterprise software. And like every technology that came before it, AI will eventually take a back seat to make way for the next big thing, with quantum computing, autonomous vehicles, and robotics being the obvious candidates right now.

Simply put, the technology sector is extremely versatile, which is why the Vanguard Information Technology ETF could be a great addition to a diversified portfolio. All signs point to another outperformance relative to the S&P 500 in 2026, so investors who lack exposure to the tech sector might want to consider making a move.

Anthony Di Pizio has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends ASML, Advanced Micro Devices, CrowdStrike, Micron Technology, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, Palantir Technologies, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, and Texas Instruments. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom and Palo Alto Networks. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

The YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF has a huge yield and is focused solely on Strategy Inc.

If you're a dividend investor, buying cryptocurrencies probably won't be very appealing. However, the YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (MSTY +3.86%) offers you a way to get exposure to Bitcoin while also providing you with dividends. That sounds great, until you hear the dividend yield. But the problem isn't that the yield is too low. Read on before you make your final investment decision.

What does the YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF do? From a big-picture perspective, the YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF is an option-income exchange-traded fund (ETF). Its options approach focuses on just one company: Strategy (MSTR +4.73%). Strategy makes AI-powered enterprise analytics software, but the real reason investors buy and sell the stock is likely the fact that it also describes itself as "the world's first and largest Bitcoin treasury company." In other words, it's a way to invest in Bitcoin without having to buy Bitcoin.

Image source: Getty Images.

That said, the YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF doesn't actually own any Strategy stock. It uses a complex options strategy to generate income and provide investors with exposure to the performance of Strategy stock. However, the ETF is clear that the options strategy "will cap its potential gains if MSTR shares increase in value." So the real goal here is to generate income from a cryptocurrency-linked stock.

That sounds great until you see the yield. If you annualize the weekly dividend paid on Jan. 21, 2026, the yield comes out to 75%. That's a shockingly high number, and one that most dividend investors would treat with extreme caution.

MSTY data by YCharts.

Not a great fit for most investors That caution would be warranted. The ETF explains: "Previous distributions have included a combination of ordinary dividends, capital gain, and return of investor capital, which may decrease a fund's NAV and trading price over time. As a result, an investor may suffer significant losses to their investment." The ETF's total return over the past year was negative 42%. One year isn't a particularly long time if you are a long-term investor, but that's a truly horrible return. 

It gets worse. Total return includes reinvested dividends. If you had spent the dividends, you would have watched the ETF's value decline by nearly 80%. Note, too, that the dividend can change dramatically from payment to payment. If anything, the YieldMax MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF looks like an overrated crypto play, particularly if you're trying to generate a reliable and sustainable income stream.

Reuben Gregg Brewer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Combined, NIO, Li, and XPeng sold 74,861 in January, up 1% from a year ago, but the slowest growth since January 2023

Company Retains Ludlow Consulting to Elevate Institutional-Grade Messaging, Media Relations and AI-Enabled Investor Engagement

SUNNY ISLES BEACH, FL / ACCESS Newswire / February 1, 2026 / Elektros Inc. (OTC PINK:ELEK), a hard-rock lithium mining developer with operations in Sierra Leone, today announced it has retained Ludlow Consulting as its strategic communications advisor to enhance corporate messaging, media visibility, and shareholder engagement.

For investors evaluating opportunities in critical minerals and the clean energy supply chain, Elektros believes its current market positioning represents a compelling entry-level opportunity within the lithium sector. The Company is focused on building the communications and advisory foundation needed to support long-term visibility and execution milestones.

The engagement is designed to support the Company's next phase of growth through the development of an integrated public relations, media relations, and investor relations framework aligned with public company best practices and compliance standards.

Under this advisory mandate, Elektros will be guided in modernizing shareholder communications through AI-enhanced investor relations solutions. This includes strategic support for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) knowledgebase integration for virtual investor-facing communications, institutional-grade investor materials, and targeted digital outreach to mining-sector stakeholders.

Ludlow Consulting will also advise on establishing a corporate advisory board comprised of mining, critical minerals, and institutional resources expertise to support Elektros' long-term corporate positioning and execution strategy.

"In today's market, strong communications and disciplined stakeholder engagement are essential to building credibility and long-term shareholder value," said Thomas Bustamante, Founder of Ludlow Consulting. "Our mission is to help Elektros create consistent, professional messaging and a modern investor relations foundation that can scale alongside the Company's operational progress."

"We feel incredibly fortunate to be developing our lithium opportunity in Sierra Leone at a moment when demand for critical minerals is accelerating worldwide," said Shlomo Bleier, CEO of Elektros. "We have an exceptional team with boots on the ground, and we're proud of the coordination, discipline, and commitment it takes to build a special company around a resource that is becoming increasingly vital to the clean energy transition. We believe Elektros is positioned on the forefront of hard-rock lithium development, and we're grateful - and we thank God - to have the people, partners, and momentum to move forward into the next phase, including initial stockpiling efforts. This is only the beginning. We look forward to providing updates as milestones are achieved, and we are proud to have Ludlow Consulting on our team as we advance in the clean energy sector."

For more information, visit www.elektros.energy/investors.

About Elektros, Inc.

Elektros Inc. (OTC PINK: ELEK) business plan is to develop an artisanal mining operation based in Sierra Leone, Africa. This operation focuses on hard-rock lithium exploration, development, and the eventual exportation of mined material to lithium refineries in the United States. www.elektros.energy

Why Lithium Matters Now

Lithium is a critical ingredient in modern rechargeable batteries, powering electric vehicles and enabling grid-scale energy storage. As EV adoption expands and energy security becomes a central priority worldwide, access to reliable lithium supply is increasingly viewed as strategic.

Selected Industry Commentary on Lithium's Importance

Reuters: "Lithium [is a] key element for electric vehicle ramp up."

Bloomberg: "Lithium ... [is] a key ingredient in the batteries that power electric vehicles."

Financial Times: "Lithium price squeeze adds to cost of the energy transition."

Benzinga: "Lithium - a critical battery metal."

Wall Street Journal: "Lithium is the new gasoline for the electric-vehicle era."

Elektros believes Sierra Leone and the broader African region have an important role to play in responsibly developing critical mineral supply chains, including lithium resources needed to support EV manufacturing and energy storage worldwide.

Cautionary Language Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

This release contains "forward-looking statements" that include information relating to future events and future financial and operating performance. The words "may," "would," "will," "expect," "estimate," "can," "believe," "potential," and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or results and involve risks and uncertainties.

Contact

Elektros, Inc.
IR and Media Inquiries
Email: [email protected]
Ludlow Consulting
Email: [email protected]

Elektros Inc. is a small company today, but we aspire to build toward the scale, discipline, and market leadership demonstrated by leading companies in the lithium sector - and we aim to join that peer group in the near future.

SOURCE: Elektros, Inc.

Bitcoin treasuries are designed to look uncomfortable in drawdowns, because the trade they're running is simple: take a volatile asset, put it on a corporate balance sheet, and finance more of it through capital markets. When Bitcoin drops, the mark-to-market hit is the point, not the punchline.

The real question is whether the company can keep its funding machine running long enough for volatility to swing back the other way.

Bitcoin's price of about $78,500 on Feb. 1 turns the conversation about unrealized losses into a stress test for everyone who bought closer to the cycle highs, and a reminder that early adopters still sit on large buffers even when headlines look ugly.

Strategy holds 712,647 BTC at an average cost of about $76,037 per BTC, putting it roughly $1.76 billion in the green on paper.Metaplanet holds 35,102 BTC at $107,716, roughly $1.03 billion underwater.Trump Media holds 11,542 BTC at $118,529, roughly $462 million underwater.Tesla holds 11,509 BTC at $33,539, roughly $517 million in the green.Coinbase holds 14,548 BTC at $71,465, roughly $102 million in the green.CompanyBTC holdingsAvg cost per BTCRough unrealized P/LNotesStrategy712,647$76,037+$1.76 billionAverage cost disclosed.Metaplanet35,102$107,716-$1.03 billionAverage cost disclosed.Trump Media11,542$118,529-$462 millionAverage cost disclosed.Tesla11,509$33,539+$517 millionAverage cost disclosed.Coinbase14,548$71,465+$102 millionAverage cost disclosed.Bullish24,300N/A (estimate)~-$723 millionNo cost basis shown on BitcoinTreasuries. Estimate assumes an average entry near the Aug. 31, 2025, close of $108,248.American Bitcoin Corp5,843N/A (estimate)~-$153 millionNo cost basis shown on BitcoinTreasuries. Estimate anchors to the May 31, 2025, close of $104,654 (proxy around “held since” timing).For companies where BitcoinTreasuries shows the balance but not the average cost, any “unrealized loss” math becomes an estimate.

Bullish, for example, is listed at 24,300 BTC with no cost basis. If you treat the August 31, 2025, close of $108,248 as a rough proxy for the period when late-cycle treasuries were building positions, that would imply something like $621 million of paper losses at today’s price, but that's just a very rough and very pessimistic assumption.

American Bitcoin Corp is listed at 5,843 BTC with no disclosed average cost. If you anchor to the May 31, 2025, close of $104,654 as a proxy around its “held since” date, you get an estimated $128 million drawdown.

MARA is listed at 53,250 BTC with no disclosed average cost, which makes any full-position loss estimate speculative.

That discomfort is why the framing around “unrealized losses” keeps coming back. It takes a volatile treasury asset and forces it through a quarterly scoreboard. But that scoreboard is also what these companies chose when they decided to run Bitcoin as a balance-sheet strategy rather than a trade.

Paper losses are normal because volatility is the productIf a company wants Bitcoin’s upside, it has to accept Bitcoin’s downside in public. That is the trade-off for having an asset that can move tens of thousands of dollars inside a year. When the market's weak, the paper losses grow fast, and they look even larger if the buyer came late.

Metaplanet is a good example of this because its disclosed average cost is still above the current price. At 35,102 BTC and $107,716 per coin, it's carrying a large mark-to-market gap as Bitcoin sits near $78,500.

Trump Media shows the same pattern, with an even higher average cost per coin and a smaller stack. In both cases, the headline number can look like failure when the market is down, even though the strategy never promised smooth quarters.

Tesla and Coinbase can weather a drawdown with more ease because their average costs are far below today’s market price. That difference in entry point is often treated like luck, but it also describes a structural divide: early adopters get time, while late adopters need financing as their cushion.

Strategy sits somewhere in the middle. Its overall average cost is below the current spot price, so the base position is still positive. But its recent purchases have been happening at far higher levels than that average, which is why the company can be up on the lifetime stack while still adding fresh tranches that go underwater quickly.

That's why unrealized losses aren't the core risk here. The core risk is whether the company can keep financing purchases and servicing obligations through the downcycle without being forced to sell.

The real risk is the funding stack, not the red number

A Bitcoin treasury strategy is a funding strategy with a Bitcoin wrapper. Once you accept that, riding out volatility stops being a motivational line and becomes a balance-sheet problem.

Strategy is the clearest case because it has a steady cadence of buys. It reported 22,305 BTC purchased between Jan. 12 and Jan. 19, and disclosed another 2,932 BTC purchased between Jan. 20 and Jan. 25, bringing holdings to 712,647 BTC.

Those purchases are what's keeping the market assured that the machine keeps running. That kind of confidence is valuable when price is up because it supports the story that the equity can be used as a bridge to more Bitcoin. But it becomes fragile when price is weak, because it shows the bridge is getting more and more expensive.

If the stock price falls faster than Bitcoin, dilution becomes heavier per unit of BTC acquired. If capital markets tighten, the cost of raising money climbs. If the equity trades at a discount to the underlying BTC value, issuing stock feels punitive and can feed a loop where each raise weakens the per-share claim.

That's because what forces selling is a mismatch between cash needs and financing options, not the losses themselves. In theory, a company can sit on large paper losses indefinitely if it has time, liquidity, and no hard maturities that demand action at a bad moment.

However, a company's paper losses can also be cornered if it has a near-term obligation that can't be refinanced, or if it relied on a market premium that disappeared.

Miners complicate the picture because they can add BTC through production rather than purchases, but they still face the same funding problem through a different channel: operating costs.

CryptoSlate Daily Brief

Daily signals, zero noise.Market-moving headlines and context delivered every morning in one tight read.

5-minute digest 100k+ readers

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.

You’re subscribed. Welcome aboard.

For example, MARA is listed at 53,250 BTC, and it also disclosed a direct market purchase of 400 BTC last October.

If you treat that October price regime as representative of late-cycle buys, the paper loss on high-cost tranches can be large even if the company's full stack has a much lower average cost from earlier mining and accumulation.

The point here isn't to pin MARA to a single loss number. The point is that miners also end up managing timing risk when they choose to hold through a drawdown instead of selling to smooth cash flow.

For newer entrants to the Bitcoin treasury game, the same logic applies with fewer cushions.
Bullish is listed at 24,300 BTC and shows no public average cost on BitcoinTreasuries. If that stack was largely assembled around late-2025 price levels, the mark-to-market hit can be brutal at $78,500, but what matters is whether the company’s operating cash flows and financing runway can tolerate that hit.

“Ride it out” is a policy choice that shows up in the next buyThe best way to understand a company's Bitcoin treasury strategy is to watch what happens when it gets the chance to buy while it's underwater.

Metaplanet bought 4,279 BTC on Dec.30, 2025, and sits with an average cost above the Jan. 30 spot price. If it continues to buy into weakness, it's choosing to widen exposure while the scoreboard is negative, betting that the long-duration payoff matters more than short-term optics.

If it slows down, it means it's choosing to protect liquidity and reduce the chance that funding needs collide with price weakness. Neither choice is better; they're just different risk budgets.

Trump Media sits in the same late-entry category on BitcoinTreasuries’ data, with a high average cost and a large unrealized loss at current prices.

The practical question is whether it treats Bitcoin as a long-duration treasury reserve that can be ignored through volatility, or as a market-facing strategy that has to be defended through continuous capital market support.

That's almost completely opposite from Strategy, which keeps buying even when the market's spiraling down, because stopping will most likely be seen as the machine breaking. That's the hidden contract treasury firms sign with their investors: volatility is fine, but inconsistency is expensive.

Meanwhile, Tesla and Coinbase show how some companies remain virtually unaffected by a market that's deep in the red.

When a company’s average cost sits below spot, drawdowns don't produce the same existential narrative, even though Bitcoin is just as volatile for them as it is for everyone else. Those companies can afford to wait a little longer because the market isn't asking them to explain why they bought the top.

Paper losses matter because they test whether the strategy was built for survival or for optics. A Bitcoin treasury strategy only fails in a drawdown when the company loses the ability to wait.

Everything else, including the red number, is just the cost of playing the game.

Mentioned in this articlePosted in