Market Signal Briefing

These two companies have very different risk-reward profiles.

Recursion Pharmaceuticals (RXRX 0.49%), a small-cap biotech company, has one claim to fame: It currently owns the largest artificial intelligence (AI) supercomputer in the pharmaceutical industry, which it is using to help accelerate the slow process of drug development. If successful, Recursion Pharmaceuticals could deliver outstanding returns to investors. However, there is arguably a far better -- and safer -- way for investors to profit from the potential revolution AI could bring in drug discovery, and that's to invest in Eli Lilly (LLY 0.47%).

Image source: Getty Images.

The problem with Recursion Pharmaceuticals
Recursion Pharmaceuticals utilizes a proprietary operating system (OS) and an AI-powered algorithm that continuously runs virtual experiments, testing compounds against a library of human genes to predict which ones are most likely to be effective in treating specific diseases. The biotech hopes that its strategy will help improve the success rate of compounds that enter human clinical trials, the majority of which never reach the market.

Today's Change

(

-0.49

%) $

-0.02

Current Price

$

4.09

Recursion Pharmaceuticals also argues that it could reduce the time from discovery to the start of clinical trials. All of this would lead to less time and money spent on developing therapies that are just as effective as those of its peers. However, Recursion Pharmaceuticals has yet to demonstrate that it can deliver on its claims. It doesn't have a single product on the market. None in phase 3 studies either.

Despite its partnerships with several pharmaceutical leaders, including Merck and Roche, its research has yielded mostly empty results so far. At this point, the stock looks very risky -- just as pre-commercial biotech companies tend to be.

Why Eli Lilly is a better option
Eli Lilly is a well-established pharmaceutical company with a portfolio of products that consistently generate revenue and earnings. The company's top line has been growing at a good clip in recent quarters, and, as the leader in the weight loss market, its outlook for the next five years (or so) appears attractive.

Today's Change

(

-0.47

%) $

-5.07

Current Price

$

1074.68

Here's the relevance to Recursion Pharmaceuticals. Eli Lilly recently announced that it would build an AI supercomputer, which, once complete, will be the largest in the pharmaceutical industry, overtaking Recursion's. Eli Lilly will seek to use the same approach as its much smaller peer. The pharmaceutical giant has an advantage: It possesses a wealth of data on past clinical trial successes and failures that it can utilize to train its AI drug discovery models.

That could grant it a leg up over smaller players in this niche. AI may indeed hold the power to revolutionize the way we develop drugs, and investing in Eli Lilly is a far safer way to profit from that, considering its strong underlying business, consistent financial results, and secure prospects. Recursion Pharmaceuticals may have more upside potential, but it also carries far more risk. Therefore, investors, particularly those who are not comfortable with heightened volatility and want to capitalize on this opportunity, should consider Eli Lilly.

This news release constitutes a “designated news release” for the purposes of the Company's prospectus supplement dated March 28, 2025, to its short form base shelf prospectus dated March 6, 2025. Edmonton, Alberta – January 1, 2026 – TheNewswire - Bitcoin Well Inc. (“ Bitcoin Well ” or the “ Company ”) ( TSXV: BTCW; OTCQB: BCNWF ), the non-custodial bitcoin business on a mission to enable independence, announces a shares-for-debt settlement, the grant of stock options, and related early warning disclosure.

HomeStock IdeasLong IdeasHealthcare 

SummaryVanda Pharmaceuticals is buy-rated following FDA approval of Nereus for motion sickness, with shares offering upside into 2026 catalysts.VNDA's Q3 saw strong Fanapt sales growth, but higher R&D and SG&A drove a $22.6M net loss, reflecting a strategic investment phase.The company maintains a robust $293.8M cash position, is guiding to $210–230M in 2025 revenue, and has ample runway to fund multiple late-stage launches.Nereus's differentiated mechanism and premium pricing potential face TAM and competitive risks; 2026 catalysts include Bysanti PDUFA and the Nereus launch.Jirapong Manustrong/iStock via Getty Images

Thesis Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. (VNDA) has seen a quick run-up in stock price over the New Year. This is, of course, due to the FDA's approval of Nereus for the treatment of motion

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.

Luis Alvarez/DigitalVision via Getty Images

The Buy Thesis

Gladstone Commercial (GOOD) is trading at a multiple that is far too low for its quality of earnings. Specifically, a 9X multiple implies low quality earnings or high risk while GOOD’s cashflows are quite durable.

I believe the market is missing 2 key aspects of GOOD:

Property quality (post transition) Tenant quality In this article we will exhaustively examine GOOD’s transition from a mostly office portfolio to 70% industrial. REIT transitions of this kind can have a wide range of outcomes so we will compare GOOD’s transition to that of peers to ascertain relative fundamental performance.

We will then discuss valuation relative to peer triple nets and a fair value estimate given the current state of GOOD’s assets and balance sheet. Over time, we believe GOOD will be repriced at a multiple more appropriate for its durable industrial leases. We see fair value at $15.25 per share representing a 14X multiple on forward AFFO.

The massive portfolio transition

Asset classes often fall in and out of favor in unpredictable ways. The market has a bad tendency to celebrate companies that happen to move into favor and punish those that fall out of favor.

In many cases in favor or out of favor stems from luck as much as skill.

I am of the belief that analysis of a company’s decisions should be based on information that was known at the time rather than letting such analysis be subject to hindsight bias.

With this in mind, we shall examine 3 REITs that had predominantly office portfolios at the end of 2015:

GOOD Lexington Industrial Trust (LXP) SL Green (SLG) Full benefit of hindsight tells us that office has been a horrendous asset class in the last 10 years. However, at the time, very few could have predicted that.

I specifically chose 2015 as the starting point for this analysis because that was a time when office was broadly regarded as a high-quality institutional asset class. It was the major real estate sector and broadly endorsed as a legitimate sector in which to invest.

As such, I don’t think any of these 3 companies should be viewed as bad decision makers for having largely office portfolios at the end of 2015. We know now that it was a mistake, but it was not known at the time. Instead, I want to focus on what the companies did as information started to trickle in that office might become a troubled asset class.

Around 2017-2019, there were starting to be minor fundamental signs that office was weakening. Developers built quite a bit of new office supply at the same time as corporations on average decided they no longer needed as much space per worker. Vacancy started to creep up and approach double digits.

At that time, it appeared to be a normal real estate cycle. Real estate sectors get oversupplied and then developers cut back causing supply and demand balance to restore over time. However, the normal cyclical imbalance was followed by a black swan event, COVID, which seems to have forever changed the office landscape in the form of permanent demand reduction.

The pandemic suddenly and forcefully ushered in work-from-home as a competitor to office space. It is unknown how the balance between in-office and work-from-home will shake out in the long run but clear that demand for office space is lower than pre-pandemic.

Due to the unforeseeable nature of the pandemic, I don’t think these companies can be judged for having office going into it. Instead, I want to focus on how they responded as news revealed that office fundamentals were weakening, first in a gradual fashion (oversupply) and then in a shocking fashion (COVID).

GOOD, LXP and SLG each took different routes to cure the challenges presented by the weakening of office.

SLG stayed the course – keeping an office focus but pivoting to extremely high quality assets. LXP aggressively transitioned from office to industrial. GOOD slowly transitioned from office to industrial Due to their office concentrations, each of these companies was thrust into a challenging environment in which they were almost guaranteed to lose earnings (or AFFO/share due to being REITs).

If you stayed in office, you lost AFFO/share because the black swan event caused elevated vacancy including tenant default and non-renewal.

If you sold your office assets, you lost AFFO/share because offices traded at very high cap rates due to being out of favor. Office sales were often at double digit cap rates while industrial assets available for purchase had low cap rates. Selling high NOI yield assets to buy low NOI yield assets causes immediate loss of AFFO/share.

Thus, it was a triage situation. Each company had to try to increase quality of earnings while retaining as much AFFO/share as possible.

At the end of 2015, LXP was 50.1% office.

LXP

GOOD was 52% office as of 12/31/15

GOOD

And SLG was almost entirely office.

Thus, one would expect SLG to have lost the most AFFO/share and LXP and GOOD to lose less but still be hurt.

Here are the results:

SLG had $5.30 AFFO/share in 2015 and is down to $2.35 (consensus estimate) in 2026

They lost over half of their AFFO/share but that unfortunately is par-for-the-course for pure-play office REITs in the last decade. SLG is, in my opinion, an excellent company. It just shows how remarkably difficult the asset class has been.

LXP had $4.25 AFFO/share in 2015 and is down to $3.39 in 2026.

LXP aggressively sold office assets and put the proceeds into industrial. This involved selling at high cap rates and buying at low cap rates causing swift losses to AFFO/share. They essentially sacrificed volume of cashflow to increase the quality of cashflow.

Both the selling and buying were done at market rates. In theory, such transactions are NPV neutral.

GOOD had $1.20 AFFO/share in 2015 and is down to $1.09 in 2026.

GOOD managed to lose only 9% of its AFFO/share while LXP and SLG lost 20% and 56%, respectively.

2MC

That is a notable magnitude of fundamental outperformance.

How did GOOD transition to industrial with minimal dilution?

GOOD was significantly more patient than LXP in their transition. In recognizing that the spread between office and industrial cap rates was sizable, GOOD opted to not do a wholesale transition and instead do it piece by piece opportunistically. I believe GOOD achieved better than market value through the following:

Strong tenant relationships driving abnormally high office re-leasing Ad hoc acquisition process affording abnormally high cap rates on industrial acquisitions Gladstone Management has a hands-on approach to tenant relationships. With closer relationships to their tenants they had more insight into which tenants were going to renew and which were not.

To the extent office assets have tenants that want to renew, those assets are not liabilities. GOOD was able to renew or extend leases on a large portion of their office assets, such that they only needed to be sold in a trickle rather than a portfolio-wide liquidation.

Selling office at 10% cap rates and buying industrial at 6% cap rates is a massive hit to AFFO/share. This is largely what LXP suffered in their transition to an industrial REIT.

GOOD mitigated AFFO losses by not having to sell as much and perhaps more importantly getting a less painful spread when they did transition. Rather than buying at market cap rates, GOOD sourced industrial acquisitions at cap rates in the 8%-10% range.

Higher cap rates through deal specific advantages

Generally buying cap rates in the 8%-10% range would come with significantly higher risk, but GOOD has other strategies for increasing the cap rate.

Triple net assets are often priced based on the credit rating of the tenant. Properties leased to high credit tenants trade at cap rates as much as 200 basis points below those with lower credit tenants.

Marcus and Millichap

The Marcus and Millichap data above is for net lease retail, but similar spreads exist for industrial as well.

GOOD has in-house credit underwriting expertise. That is one of the core functions of Gladstone Management. As such, GOOD can find unrated tenants who are investment grade quality but simply have not gone through the expensive process of getting an official credit rating.

That means other buyers are treating the tenant as low quality so the asset trades at cap rates as much as 200 basis points higher. GOOD can essentially get investment grade equivalent tenants without the investment grade price tag.

Similar extra value can be attained from buying non-standard properties. Large institutional buyers often have specific criteria they are looking for in properties. Logistics assets are in vogue while manufacturing properties are less sought after.

Similarly, there are property specific anomalies like non-standard shapes or unusual designs that deter large buyers. Behemoths like Prologis (PLD) can’t really spend time scouring the property specific details of a $2 million property. Larger buyers prefer assets that fall into specific cookie-cutter specs.

Assets that fall outside of those specs are much less picked over. In looking at smaller properties in an ad-hoc manner, GOOD can get higher cap rates. They mitigate risk in taking on these less typical properties by ensuring that the tenants are very committed to the properties. It could be staff with specialized skills only found in select areas or tenants that have already committed large capital investment into the property.

Through the use of the above tactics, GOOD was able to make its transition to industrial far less painful on the AFFO/share front.

As an example, GOOD’s recent property acquisitions look like this from GOOD’s filing:

“Acquired properties: Purchased a fully-occupied, six-facility portfolio, with an aggregate of 693,236 square feet of rental space, for $54.8 million, at a weighted average cap rate of 9.53%;”

Despite the exceedingly high cap rates, GOOD does not sacrifice on tenant quality.

GOOD

More than half of GOOD’s tenants are IG or IG equivalent which is higher than the majority of triple net REITs.

Why GOOD stock has gotten cheap

The trading behavior of REITs has been fairly simple lately: The market rewards historical AFFO/share growth and punishes historical AFFO/share weakness.

GOOD lost AFFO/share in recent years (due to aforementioned pandemic black swan).

S&P Global Market Intelligence

The market is punishing its stock heavily. In my opinion, the market’s judgement is far too backward looking and has left GOOD at far too low of a multiple relative to its forward prospects.

Far too often I see the merits of a company judged based on factors outside of their control.

A bad company that happens to be in a winning sector will often outperform a good company in a bad sector.

However, that outperformance is fleeting. Times change and that sort of luck is unlikely to repeat. I think GOOD’s stock is being unfairly maligned because it happened to be in a tough sector.

Yes, it did sustain damage from COVID, but that is a 1-time problem that is unlikely to repeat. Our analysis shows that GOOD had excellent damage control in a black swan downside scenario.

While peers LXP and SLG lost 20% and 56% of AFFO/share respectively, GOOD only lost 9%.

That is substantial fundamental outperformance and bodes well for GOOD going forward.

As of today, both GOOD’s portfolio and its balance sheet are in healthy shape, and the company is positioned to start growing AFFO/share.

Balance sheet

GOOD has modestly reduced its leverage.

S&P Global Market Intelligence

GOOD’s debt is split between property level mortgage debt and company level credit facilities.

GOOD

The credit facilities are floating rate, tied to SOFR. In 2026 this is likely favorable with respect to interest expense. Market consensus is that there will be 2 additional cuts in 2026 (50 basis points) on top of the 3 cuts (75 basis points) in 2025.

CME Group

While the cuts so far have not resulted in 10-year treasury yields going down, SOFR moves almost in lockstep with the Fed Funds rate.

S&P Global Market Intelligence

Thus, the 75 basis points in 2025 reduce GOOD’s cost of variable rate debt by 75 basis points and a potential further 50 basis points of cuts would reduce it even more.

Variable rate debt is certainly a risk in addition to being an opportunity, I’m merely pointing out that the market expected scenario is that interest expense will go down for GOOD in 2026 and be a net tailwind.

GOOD’s portfolio going forward

Office properties had 2 main problems:

The threat of non-renewal High expense (Tenant improvement cost and leasing commissions) upon tenant turnover. GOOD has largely overcome these problems. With its slow yet continuous transition over the past 10 years, GOOD is down to only 28% office with the bulk of its portfolio now in industrial assets.

GOOD

The industrial leases have embedded escalators of ~3% providing a base lift to rental streams.

In the portion of GOOD’s portfolio that remains office they have largely termed out the leases. GOOD has an overall WALT (weighted average remaining lease term) of 7.5 years. As leases expired, GOOD had significant success in renewing or finding new tenants.

In 2025, GOOD signed 13 leases on 857K square feet.

GOOD

I found the leasing costs to be quite favorable.

Industrial leasing costs are usually about 8% as evinced by the data in Prologis’ 10-Q.

PLD

Office leasing can often cost as much as 20% of lease value.

GOOD’s 2025 leasing had an aggregate TI and LC of $7.96 per foot which equates to $1.09 per foot per year of lease term. When compared to fixed GAAP rent of $15.26 per foot, that is a 7.14% expense ratio.

It is not free, but far better than would be expected for a mixed industrial/office portfolio.

In today’s environment, office is recovering but still somewhat weak. Industrial is generally stable and healthy. Between the contractual escalators and the favorable re-leasing I anticipate GOOD’s overall portfolio to generate slight AFFO/share growth in the ballpark of 1%-2% annually.

Consider this growth within the context of valuation.

Valuation

Below we have charted the AFFO multiple of each triple net REIT against the Debt to EBITDA (x axis).

Portfolio Income Solutions

We have similar data charts continuously updated on Portfolio Income Solutions for a variety of REIT sectors.

As one would expect, higher leverage correlates with lower AFFO multiple, so the best fit line forms a sort of leverage neutral average valuation. Companies below the line are trading cheaply relative to peers and GOOD has the largest vertical deviation below the line.

We see GOOD as substantially undervalued.

Worth noting is that the above chart is agnostic to property type. Industrial is arguably a higher quality property type within triple net because it typically has higher annual escalators.

Thus, as a predominantly industrial triple net, GOOD could theoretically trade above the leverage neutral AFFO multiple.

LXP, which we discussed earlier as not handling the transition as smoothly as GOOD, trades at 15X forward AFFO.

GOOD is a much better company than LXP (my assessment of management, properties and balance sheet) but does still own 28% office, so I think a fair value multiple for GOOD is 14X AFFO.

14X forward AFFO implies a fair value of $15.25. That implies nearly 50% upside from today’s price.

Risks to GOOD

While GOOD has some minor hedging, the large portion of variable rate debt presents interest rate risk. Although it has upside potential in a reduced rate environment, GOOD investors would be wise to keep an eye on SOFR.

GOOD’s dividend presents risk to the stock price but not necessarily to fundamentals. The 11.3% dividend yield is quite nice, but it does put them at some risk of cutting. GOOD pays $1.20 dividends annually (paid monthly) which means their payout ratio on AFFO is over 100%.

Dividend payout ratio does not really impact fundamental value. I think GOOD is worth $15.25 whether they are paying the current $1.20 per share or paying $0.80 per share.

Either way the company is earning $1.09 in AFFO and it is the cashflows that create the value.

However, the REIT market can be quite fickle when it comes to dividends and have an almost emotional response. Thus, a potential dividend cut could result in a tantrum selloff.

The bottom line

At 9X forward AFFO GOOD is substantially undervalued relative to its forward prospects. GOOD has assembled a durable income stream of mostly industrial assets with built-in lease escalators. We see fair value at $15.25.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

Last year, one of the better performers among the Magnificent 7 was Meta Platforms Inc. (NASDAQ: META). But its third-quarter earnings report raised investor concerns about the company’s massive capital spending on artificial intelligence initiatives. In addition, Meta said it planned to make significant cuts to the budget of its Reality Labs metaverse division in the coming year. The stock is down 9.3% since the quarterly report was released.

Strong quarterly reports earlier in 2025 (despite a tax charge) had lent credence to the claim that Meta would continue to outshine its competitors over the coming year. The share price hit an all-time high of $796.25 back in August. The stock is trying to recover from the pullback in November, and it is now up 12.6% year over year, narrowly underperforming the broader market. Furthermore, the near-term future of the economy is uncertain—just like the markets themselves—and Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg is a controversial figure. Certainly, Zuckerberg’s sudden shift to the metaverse and brand name change to Meta Platforms raised a few eyebrows several years ago.

Now, the Meta Platforms CEO is shifting the company’s focus and riding a powerful, bullish trend. Against this complex backdrop with many moving parts, investors should consider the wide range of Meta stock price targets and formulate a strategy for all possible outcomes. To help, 24/7 Wall St. conducted some analysis. Let’s jump in.

Why Invest in Meta Platforms?

Let’s start by addressing the elephant in the room. Investors should not rely on Meta Platforms’ Reality Labs metaverse business to drive the company’s near-term future growth. In Q3 2025, Reality Labs generated $470 million in revenue, up from $370 million in revenue in the prior quarter. However, during that same time frame, Reality Labs recorded a loss from operations of $4.43 billion.

Fortunately, it appears that the CEO’s attention has turned to a different tech field lately. In particular, Zuckerberg seems to expect AI to be Meta Platforms’ key driver going forward. AI integrations into Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp could provide an economic moat for Meta Platforms if new features translate to greater user engagement. WhatsApp, in particular, has seen notable growth with more than 3 billion monthly users now.

Meta’s AI focus evidently helped the company succeed in the third quarter of the year despite losses in its metaverse business. Impressively, Meta Platforms grew its revenue 26% year over year to $51.2 billion, beating Wall Street’s consensus call for $49.5 billion. Furthermore, excluding a one-time tax charge, the company’s earnings per share (EPS) surged 20% to $7.25, easily outpacing the analysts’ consensus estimate of $6.74.

There’s no doubt that Zuckerberg is all-in on the AI revolution now. He envisions a future in which AI will be used for “a lot” of “social tasks.” And he believes it’s “really compelling” that AI will “get to know you better and better.” Some reporters have expressed skepticism of an AI-infused future. Yet, if Meta Platforms can parlay machine learning into profits, investors shouldn’t dismiss the growth potential of Meta stock.

Another key driver for Meta Platforms is its Threads short-form messaging platform. Granted, Threads is still playing catch-up to the popular X platform, which is owned by Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Still, Threads is making inroads as its monthly active user count grew from 320 million in 2024’s fourth quarter to 350 million in Q1 of 2025. That’s not at the level of X, which reportedly has more than 580 million monthly active users. Yet, perhaps AI feature integration can make Threads even more competitive with X in the coming quarters.

The company projects fourth-quarter 2025 revenue in a range from $56 billion to $59 billion. That is expected to be driven primarily by ongoing strength in its advertising business, bolstered by the positive impact of AI-driven enhancements to ad targeting and user engagement across its family of apps.

Meta Platforms as a Stock

It is impossible to know how the economy will perform going forward. Similarly, it remains unclear whether Meta Platforms will achieve significant returns on its AI investments. These unknowns will not stop analysts from publishing their Meta stock price predictions, though.

Oppenheimer and Benchmark downgraded the stock following the third-quarter earnings release, citing increased capex concerns. However, BofA Securities has reiterated its Buy rating on the shares, keeping its price target at $900 and affirming long-term confidence in Meta, citing its user base and potential AI integration opportunities. Cantor Fitzgerald also reaffirmed its positive stance by reiterating an Overweight rating and $920 price target. It anticipates that improvements in AI execution will lead to a “sentiment reversal” for the company in 2026.

The aforementioned uncertainties are reflected in the wide range of Wall Street analysts’ price targets for Meta Platforms. The Zuckerberg-led firm has a high price target of $1,117.00, a median price target of $837.15, and a low target price of $685.00. However, the consensus recommendation of 67 analysts covering the stock remains to buy shares.

Estimate
Price Target
Change From Current Price

Low
$685.00
2.9%

Median
$837.15
25.7%

High
$1,117.00
67.7%

Meta Platforms 2026 Outlook

Meta Platforms raised its 2025 capex estimate from a range of $66 billion to $72 billion to a range of $70 billion to $72 billion. By now, you can probably guess what Meta Platforms is spending those extra billions on. If you guessed AI, you are correct. More specifically, Meta Platforms’ management anticipates “additional data center investments to support our artificial intelligence efforts as well as an increase in the expected cost of infrastructure hardware.”

Hence, the multi-billion-dollar question is whether Meta Platforms can effectively leverage its costly AI enhancements. That’s difficult to predict. The same goes for the state of the economy, which might not support an increase in ad spending if macroeconomic conditions deteriorate in the remainder of this year.

24/7 Wall St.’s Meta forecast is a more bullish than the mean forecast, calling for the share price to rise to $935.29 by the end of 2026. That implies a run of 40.4%. It is based on the company’s ability to sustain strong ad revenue while increasing efficiency. This should drive its bottom line despite higher capital expenditures for AI objectives.

Ultimately, your price target for Meta Platforms stock should depend on whether you expect the company to take full advantage of ramped-up AI features. If so, then get ready for Meta Platforms stock to eventually head for new all-time highs. However, it may be a bumpy ride along the way.

Meta’s Heavy AI Spending Justified Says Pro. Is He Right?

Felix Pinkston
Jan 01, 2026 11:42

MATIC price prediction shows potential for 18-37% gains to $0.45-$0.52 range within 4-6 weeks, contingent on breaking critical $0.58 resistance level amid neutral RSI conditions.

MATIC Price Prediction: Targeting $0.45-$0.52 Recovery by February 2026
Polygon's native token MATIC is positioned at a critical juncture as we enter 2026, trading at $0.38 with technical indicators presenting a mixed but cautiously optimistic outlook. Our comprehensive MATIC price prediction analysis reveals potential for significant upside movement, though key resistance levels must be conquered first.

MATIC Price Prediction Summary
• MATIC short-term target (1 week): $0.42 (+10.5%)
• Polygon medium-term forecast (1 month): $0.45-$0.52 range (+18% to +37%)
• Key level to break for bullish continuation: $0.58
• Critical support if bearish: $0.35-$0.33

Recent Polygon Price Predictions from Analysts
The latest analyst sentiment shows a cautious but optimistic Polygon forecast consensus. Blockchain.News presents the most bullish MATIC price prediction with targets of $0.45-$0.52 in the medium term, emphasizing the critical importance of breaking the $0.58 resistance barrier. This aligns with our technical analysis showing this level as the primary obstacle to bullish continuation.

CoinCodex's AI-driven model offers a more conservative short-term MATIC price target of $0.1040, suggesting minimal movement, while Coinbase projects a modest long-term target of $0.13 over five years. The divergence in these predictions reflects the current uncertainty in MATIC's direction, with most analysts agreeing that breaking key resistance levels will be crucial for confirming any bullish momentum.

MATIC Technical Analysis: Setting Up for Potential Breakout
Current Polygon technical analysis reveals MATIC trading below all major moving averages except the 7-day SMA ($0.37), indicating the token is still in a corrective phase. The price sits at $0.38, positioned at the daily pivot point, suggesting a critical decision zone.

The RSI reading of 38.00 places MATIC in neutral territory with room for upward movement without reaching overbought conditions. However, the MACD histogram at -0.0045 shows bearish momentum persists, though the relatively small magnitude suggests this bearish pressure may be weakening.

Volume analysis shows moderate trading activity at $1,074,371 on Binance spot, which needs to increase significantly to support any meaningful price breakout. The Bollinger Bands position at 0.29 indicates MATIC is trading in the lower portion of its recent range, potentially setting up for a mean reversion trade.

Polygon Price Targets: Bull and Bear Scenarios
Bullish Case for MATIC
Our bullish MATIC price prediction scenario targets the $0.45-$0.52 range within 4-6 weeks. This represents the convergence zone of the 50-day SMA ($0.45) and the upper Bollinger Band resistance around $0.52.

For this bullish case to materialize, MATIC must first reclaim the 20-day EMA at $0.42, then challenge the critical $0.58 resistance level. A decisive break above $0.58 would likely trigger momentum buying, potentially pushing MATIC toward the $0.65-$0.70 zone where the 200-day SMA currently resides.

Key catalysts supporting this Polygon forecast include potential network upgrades, increased DeFi activity, and broader cryptocurrency market recovery. The technical setup suggests MATIC has established a base around current levels, with the 52-week low of $0.37 providing strong psychological support.

Bearish Risk for Polygon
The bearish scenario for our MATIC price prediction involves a breakdown below the immediate support at $0.35, which could trigger selling pressure toward the strong support zone at $0.33. This level represents both a technical support confluence and proximity to the 52-week low.

Risk factors include continued bearish MACD momentum, failure to reclaim moving average resistance levels, and potential broader market weakness. A break below $0.33 could signal a more prolonged correction, potentially testing the $0.28-$0.30 zone.

Should You Buy MATIC Now? Entry Strategy
Based on our Polygon technical analysis, the current risk-reward setup presents mixed signals. Conservative buyers should wait for a clear break above $0.42 (20-day EMA) before initiating positions, with a MATIC price target of $0.45-$0.52.

Aggressive traders might consider accumulating near current levels ($0.38) with strict stop-losses below $0.35. The key question of "buy or sell MATIC" depends on risk tolerance, but the technical setup suggests more upside potential than downside risk at current levels.

Position sizing should remain conservative given the bearish MACD momentum, with maximum 2-3% portfolio allocation recommended. Stop-loss levels should be placed below $0.35 for long positions, representing approximately 8% downside risk from current levels.

MATIC Price Prediction Conclusion
Our comprehensive MATIC price prediction forecasts a potential 18-37% upside move to the $0.45-$0.52 range over the next 4-6 weeks, contingent on breaking the critical $0.58 resistance level. The confluence of analyst targets and technical indicators supports this Polygon forecast, though execution remains dependent on broader market conditions.

Confidence Level: Medium (65%)

Key indicators to monitor for confirmation include MACD turning positive, RSI breaking above 45, and volume expansion on any upward moves. Invalidation of this bullish MATIC price prediction would occur on a decisive break below $0.35, potentially triggering deeper correction toward $0.33 support.

Timeline for this prediction spans 4-6 weeks, with the first major test occurring at the $0.42 resistance level within the next 7-10 days.

Image source: Shutterstock

matic price analysis
matic price prediction

If you followed Bitcoin ETFs day to day in 2025, you probably developed the same habit everyone did: you checked the print at night, read one sentence about “risk-on” or “risk-off,” then tried to map a clean story onto a messy market.

The problem is that daily flows are noisy by design. They're the residue of dozens of different motives that just happen to share the same wrapper: financial advisers rebalancing model portfolios, hedge funds adjusting basis trades, wealth platforms handling subscriptions and redemptions, and long-only allocators adding or trimming exposure because their investment committee finally met.

Sometimes the ETF tape tracks price, sometimes it tracks calendar mechanics, but sometimes it tracks nothing you can see on a price chart.

So a year-end scoreboard is a better way to read it. We isolated the days that actually moved the cumulative numbers and ask a simpler question: why did capital move in size on those sessions, and not on the 200 other trading days?

Using Farside’s ETF data, the largest 2025 flow days cluster into two windows. One is early January, when flows were enormous and largely one-directional. The other is late February, when redemptions hit a peak and the tape briefly looked ugly.

What follows is the clean version: five biggest inflow days and five biggest outflow days of 2025, with the number attached to every entry, then the real-world context that best explains why those numbers printed.

Why these were the “big” daysA quick note on language: the figures below are net daily flows (in US$m) across the US spot Bitcoin ETF complex. That means creations and redemptions have already been netted out across issuers.

Big inflow days usually show up when one of two things happens:

price action becomes hard to ignore (under-exposure starts to feel career-risky), ormacro conditions stop being hostile enough to justify staying sidelined.Big outflow days tend to be the mirror image:

risk gets reduced abruptly (sometimes for macro reasons, sometimes for portfolio rules), oran existing position is being unwound in a hurry (often because the original reason for holding it changed).The five largest inflow daysTop inflowsRankDateTotal net flow (US$m)What likely sparked it (plain-English)117 Jan 20251,072.8A “green light” day for adding exposure: broad-based creations once price and sentiment leaned positive.206 Jan 2025978.6New-year positioning: portfolios putting risk back on early, using ETFs as the easiest BTC expression.303 Jan 2025908.1Re-entry flow: allocators acting early rather than waiting for perfect macro clarity.421 Jan 2025802.6Continuation buying: follow-through after the first wave of January allocations.515 Jan 2025755.1Model rebalances and catch-up exposure: “we’re behind” money moving in size. 1. Oct. 6, 2025: +$1.21 billion — performance chasing, openlyThis was the single largest net inflow day of the year. Bitcoin was already moving higher, momentum had flipped decisively positive, and the market narrative had shifted from hesitation to acceptance that the post-summer range was over.

The important detail is that this flow followed price strength rather than anticipating it. Institutions that had stayed light through months of chop finally acted once the breakout felt durable. ETFs became the default vehicle for that decision: liquid, regulated, and operationally simple.
This was not speculative enthusiasm. It was the cost of being under-exposed becoming too visible to ignore.

2. Nov. 12, 2025: +$873 million — macro relief dayThe second-largest inflow day arrived without fireworks. Bitcoin was firm but not vertical. What changed was the macro backdrop. Interest-rate expectations softened, broader risk markets steadied, and uncertainty that had lingered through early autumn eased.

ETF inflows that day were broad-based across issuers, pointing to asset-allocation decisions rather than fast directional trades. For many portfolios, this looked like a risk budget being reopened after weeks of caution.

In other words, Bitcoin ETFs absorbed capital when conditions felt manageable, not when headlines were loudest.

3. Jan. 10, 2025: +$640 million — anniversary positioningEarly January brought one of the year’s largest inflow sessions, tied loosely to the anniversary period of spot ETF approvals and the symbolic “one year in” framing around institutional Bitcoin access.

Price action was stable, volatility was subdued, and the inflows appeared driven by portfolio resets rather than urgency. This was fresh annual capital entering allocations, not traders reacting to news.
These kinds of days rarely grab attention, but they tend to anchor longer-term positioning.

4. July 19, 2025: +$512 million — summer rotationMid-summer inflows stood out because they arrived during what is usually a low-liquidity, low-conviction period. Bitcoin had recovered from earlier weakness, and risk appetite was selectively returning.

This flow looked like rotation capital: funds reallocating from weaker assets into Bitcoin exposure via ETFs once downside risk felt better defined. The lack of volatility surrounding the move reinforced that this was not panic buying.

5. Dec. 17, 2025: +$457.3 million — the snap-backThe final major inflow day came immediately after two heavy outflow sessions. Rather than extending the sell-off, ETFs flipped decisively positive.

This mattered more than any single inflow earlier in the year. It showed that demand had not disappeared; it had simply stepped aside temporarily. Once year-end selling pressure eased, capital returned quickly and cleanly through ETFs.

The five largest outflow daysTop outflowsRankDateTotal net flow (US$m)What likely sparked it (plain-English)125 Feb 2025(1,113.7)Capitulation-style de-risking: widespread redemptions across issuers in a single session.208 Jan 2025(568.8)Fast pullback after early allocations: some buyers came in, then trimmed quickly as conditions shifted.324 Feb 2025(565.9)Position unwinds before the peak outflow day: de-risking that built into Feb. 25.427 Jan 2025(457.6)Rotation out of risk: sharp redemptions consistent with a short-term “risk-off” impulse.520 Feb 2025(364.8)Early phase of the February drawdown in flows: redemptions spreading before the extreme day. 1. Dec. 15, 2025: –$357.6 million — classic year-end de-riskingThe largest outflow day of the year landed squarely in mid-December. Bitcoin had already logged substantial gains for the year, liquidity was thinning, and portfolios were being tidied up.

Nothing about the tape suggested distress. Volatility stayed contained, and price action remained orderly. This was calendar behavior, with funds trimming exposure ahead of reporting periods and holidays.

2. Dec. 16, 2025: –$277.2 million — sequencing, not escalationThe following session printed another large outflow, bringing the two-day total to over –$630 million. Headlines framed this as accelerating pressure.

Market structure said otherwise. The selling looked paced, not forced. The absence of disorderly price moves strongly suggested that these redemptions were planned reductions spread across sessions, not a rush to exit.

3. Sept. 3, 2025: –$241 million — macro anxietyEarly September brought a sharp outflow session tied to renewed macro uncertainty. Risk assets broadly softened, and Bitcoin was not spared.

Unlike December’s calendar-driven selling, this episode reflected risk aversion. Even so, ETF redemptions remained orderly, and price declines stayed within recent ranges.
This was investors stepping back, not abandoning the trade.

4. June 4, 2025: –$198 million — post-rally digestionAfter a strong late-spring run, one of the largest outflow days appeared as Bitcoin consolidated. Profit-taking showed up through ETFs rather than spot exchanges or derivatives.

This behavior is telling. When investors want to reduce exposure without drama, ETFs are often the first place they go.

5. Aug. 8, 2025: –$176 million — quiet summer risk controlThe final entry on the outflow list came during a slow summer stretch. Volumes were light, conviction was thin, and modest redemptions translated into large net figures simply because activity elsewhere was muted.

These are the days that look worse on paper than they feel in real time.

Conclusion: what to take into 2026The temptation with ETF flow coverage is to treat every print as a verdict. But the scoreboard makes the year’s flow story easier to live with: most days were small, and a handful of days carried the narrative weight.

The five biggest inflow sessions show that when portfolios decide to add Bitcoin exposure in size, they do it quickly and through the path of least resistance. The five biggest outflow sessions show the same thing in reverse: when risk has to come off, the ETF wrapper is an efficient exit.

That is the real end-of-year takeaway. The wrapper did not remove volatility from Bitcoin, and it did not guarantee permanent inflows.

It did something more practical. It made Bitcoin legible to the portfolio machinery that runs modern markets, for better and for worse. When conditions were friendly, money came in fast. When they weren’t, money left fast.

Either way, it moved through a structure that is now mature enough to handle size.

Mentioned in this article

Peter Zhang
Jan 01, 2026 12:00

LINK price prediction shows potential 26% upside to $15.50 over the next month, with technical analysis revealing mixed signals but emerging bullish momentum indicators.

As we enter 2026, Chainlink (LINK) presents an intriguing technical setup that has analysts divided on near-term direction but increasingly optimistic about medium-term prospects. With LINK currently trading at $12.29, our comprehensive analysis of recent predictions and technical indicators suggests a measured bullish outlook for the Oracle giant.

LINK Price Prediction Summary
• LINK short-term target (1 week): $12.80 (+4.1%) - Testing EMA 26 resistance
• Chainlink medium-term forecast (1 month): $14.50-$15.50 range (+18% to +26%)
• Key level to break for bullish continuation: $13.97 (immediate resistance)
• Critical support if bearish: $11.61 (strong support level)

Recent Chainlink Price Predictions from Analysts
The latest wave of analyst predictions reveals a fascinating divergence in LINK price prediction methodologies. Short-term focused analysts from CoinCodex and Changelly are targeting the $12.00-$12.50 range, citing extreme fear sentiment (Fear & Greed Index at 23) and technical bearish signals. However, medium-term Chainlink forecast models paint a notably different picture.

Blockchain.News stands out with their $15.50 target, identifying a potential 21% upside based on mixed technical signals and key resistance at $14.50. This aligns closely with CoinCheckup's projection of $14.15 by late January, representing a 13.33% increase. The most bullish long-term prediction comes from CryptoDisrupt at $36.13, though this appears disconnected from current technical realities.

What's particularly noteworthy is CoinDCX's $27.00 medium-term target, which factors in anticipated institutional interest and real-world integrations - fundamental drivers that pure technical analysis might miss.

LINK Technical Analysis: Setting Up for Gradual Recovery
Current technical indicators present a mixed but increasingly constructive picture for our LINK price prediction. The RSI at 42.67 sits in neutral territory, suggesting neither oversold nor overbought conditions - a healthy reset from previous extremes. More encouraging is the MACD histogram reading of 0.0401, indicating emerging bullish momentum despite the negative MACD line at -0.3343.

The Bollinger Bands configuration tells an important story. With LINK positioned at 0.3630 within the bands and trading below the middle band at $12.51, there's room for mean reversion toward the upper band at $13.33. This technical setup often precedes consolidation breakouts.

Volume analysis from Binance spot market shows $18.28 million in 24-hour trading, which while modest, provides sufficient liquidity for institutional accumulation without significant price impact. The Average True Range of $0.63 indicates manageable volatility levels conducive to systematic buying.

Chainlink Price Targets: Bull and Bear Scenarios
Bullish Case for LINK
Our primary LINK price target of $15.50 represents a measured 26% upside from current levels, supported by multiple technical confluences. The path higher requires breaking through immediate resistance at $13.97, which aligns closely with the Bollinger Band upper boundary.

Should LINK successfully reclaim the $14.50 level identified by multiple analysts, it would trigger a technical breakout pattern with measured moves toward $16.02 (strong resistance) and potentially the psychological $20.00 level. The bullish case gains credence from the oversold nature of the recent decline from the 52-week high of $26.79.

Key technical requirements for this Chainlink forecast include:
- RSI breaking above 50 to confirm momentum shift
- MACD line crossing above signal line
- Volume expansion on breakout attempts above $13.97

Bearish Risk for Chainlink
The bearish scenario for our LINK price prediction centers on a failure to hold the critical $11.61 support level. A breakdown below this strong support could trigger algorithmic selling toward the 52-week low of $11.65, with limited technical support until the $10.50-$11.00 zone.

Risk factors monitoring includes continued macro headwinds affecting risk assets, potential regulatory uncertainty in the Oracle space, and broader cryptocurrency market weakness. The distance of 54.12% from the 52-week high indicates significant technical damage that requires time to repair.

Should You Buy LINK Now? Entry Strategy
Based on our Chainlink technical analysis, the current price level of $12.29 presents a reasonable risk-adjusted entry point for medium-term holders. However, tactical traders should consider a more nuanced approach:

Conservative Entry: Wait for a pullback to the $11.75-$12.00 range (near strong support) with stop-loss at $11.50.

Aggressive Entry: Current levels with initial stop-loss at $11.61, targeting the $15.50 LINK price target.

Accumulation Strategy: Dollar-cost average between $11.75-$12.50 over the next 2-3 weeks, capitalizing on expected consolidation.

Position sizing should remain conservative given the mixed technical picture, with maximum allocation of 2-3% of portfolio for risk management.

LINK Price Prediction Conclusion
Our comprehensive analysis yields a MEDIUM-HIGH confidence prediction for LINK reaching $15.50 by February 2026, representing a 26% upside potential. This Chainlink forecast is supported by improving momentum indicators, reasonable valuation levels, and a confluence of analyst targets in the $14.50-$15.50 range.

The key technical indicator to watch for confirmation is the RSI breaking decisively above 50, combined with MACD crossover signals. For invalidation of our bullish LINK price prediction, monitor the $11.61 support level - a breakdown below this level would necessitate a reassessment of the medium-term outlook.

Timeline for this prediction centers on the next 4-6 weeks, with initial confirmation expected if LINK can reclaim the $13.50-$14.00 zone by mid-January 2026. Whether to buy or sell LINK at current levels depends on individual risk tolerance, but the technical setup favors patient accumulation for medium-term oriented investors.

Image source: Shutterstock

link price analysis
link price prediction

Voyager suit against Mark Cuban and Dallas Mavericks tossed on jurisdiction grounds.

Summary

Class-action suit over Voyager promotions dismissed for lack of Florida jurisdiction.
Judge said national marketing, press events, and app promo didn’t target Florida residents.
Plaintiffs can refile elsewhere as Voyager’s 2022 collapse keeps spawning litigation.

A U.S. federal judge dismissed a cryptocurrency investor lawsuit against Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks on Friday, ruling that plaintiffs failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendants in Florida.

Judge Roy K. Altman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida determined that insufficient legal connection existed between Florida and the alleged promotional activity to justify hearing the case, according to court documents.

The lawsuit, filed in 2022, alleged that Cuban and the Mavericks used their public platform to promote Voyager Digital’s products, contributing to investor losses after the crypto lender’s bankruptcy. The case was part of broader litigation targeting celebrities, athletes and sports teams accused of promoting crypto platforms that subsequently collapsed.

The ruling focused on jurisdictional limits rather than assessing whether the promotions were misleading or improper. The court found that nationwide or online promotions do not automatically constitute purposeful targeting of Florida residents under the state’s long-arm statute or constitutional due-process standards, according to the order.

The judge dismissed the case without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs the possibility of refiling claims in another jurisdiction.

Plaintiffs cited remarks Cuban made at an October 2021 Mavericks news conference in which he stated he had personally invested in Voyager. The complaint also referenced a Mavericks promotion offering $100 in Bitcoin to customers who downloaded the Voyager app, opened an account, deposited $100 and completed a trade.

Cuban’s legal team argued that neither Cuban nor the Mavericks specifically targeted Florida residents and that Cuban had repeatedly cautioned people to exercise care with their money when discussing crypto investments publicly, according to court filings.

Cuban crypto and Dallas Mavericks suit dismissed
Brown Rudnick, the law firm representing Cuban and the Mavericks, stated the dismissal followed years of litigation and jurisdictional discovery. The firm said the court rejected the notion that broad national marketing campaigns alone can establish jurisdiction in any state where an investor claims harm.

“We couldn’t be more pleased with the absolute right result,” lead counsel Steve Best told ESPN, according to the firm. Best added that while plaintiffs may seek another venue, the defense is prepared to contest the claims wherever they are brought, noting that Cuban “doesn’t settle when he believes he is on the right side of the law.”

Voyager filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in July 2022 following market losses and counterparty failures. The company reportedly held more than $5 billion in assets and served nearly 3.5 million customers at its peak in 2021, according to company data.

The collapse triggered multiple lawsuits against executives, partners and promoters as investors sought to test legal boundaries of crypto marketing and celebrity endorsements.

Cuban sold his majority stake in the Mavericks to casino magnate Miriam Adelson in late 2023, though he retained a minority interest and continued involvement in basketball operations, according to reports.

U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds drew in nearly 67% of over $31.77 billion in inflows recorded by all crypto ETFs in 2025, with most of it flowing into BlackRock’s flagship BTC fund, IBIT.

Summary

Crypto ETFs drew in nearly $32 billion from investors in 2025.
Bitcoin ETFs accounted for nearly 67% of the combined inflows from the crypto ETFs.
Bitcoin price has charted a bearish triangle and several other bearish patterns.

According to data from Farside Investors, the 11 spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a total of $21.4 billion in net inflows in 2025. BlackRock’s IBIT bagged the lion’s share of inflows, with $24.7 billion flowing into the fund.

While most other Bitcoin ETFs saw a marginal increase in net inflows, Grayscale’s GBTC fund dragged them back with $3.9 billion in outflows, marking a combined outflow of $3.1 billion for the year.

At press time, the combined flows of IBIT since launch stood at $62 billion, over five times that of Fidelity’s FBTC, its nearest competitor.

Q4 2025 came out as the only negative quarter in the year, with net outflows of $1.15 billion. For context, the second and third quarters were boonful, as they drew in $12.8 billion and $8.8 billion, respectively.

Despite leading the crypto ETFs in inflows, the BTC ETFs still fell significantly short of the $35.2 billion in net inflows seen in 2024.

Looking at their Ethereum counterparts, the nine Ether ETFs netted $9.6 billion from investors in 2025, marking a fourfold jump in inflows from 2024. It should, however, be noted that 2025 was the first full year these ETFs could be traded, owing to their launch after mid-2024.

Spot Solana ETFs, which are comparatively a much newer addition to the market, have recorded around $765 million in net inflows since their launch in late October last year.

Despite the strong performances by both Bitcoin and Ether ETFs for most of the year, data from Glassnode has presented a cautious outlook. Notably, demand for spot Bitcoin and Ether ETFs has significantly faltered in December, which signals a potential slow start for these crypto ETFs as they move into 2026.

Such an outlook seems increasingly likely, especially as Bitcoin and the crypto market in general have fallen sharply since mid-October. This downturn was fueled by a mix of macroeconomic and geopolitical factors that dampened investor sentiment, and the trend dragged on to the end of the year.

Bitcoin price analysis
Bitcoin (BTC) price was trading at $87,719 at last check on Jan. 1, Asian time, down nearly 30.5% from its all-time high reached in October 2025.

The leading crypto asset has formed multiple bearish patterns on the daily chart that signal a potential continuation of its downtrend over the coming months.

These include a death cross formed when the 50-day SMA crosses below the 200-day one and a bearish flag, as reported by analysts at crypto.news earlier.

At press time, the formation of a symmetrical triangle pattern was also observed on the daily chart. The pattern is characterized by two converging trendlines shaping into a symmetrical triangle.

Bitcoin price has formed a symmetrical triangle pattern on the daily chart — Jan. 1 | Source: crypto.news
A breakdown from the lower trendline typically leads to further downside for an asset’s price. At press time, Bitcoin price was close to confirming a bearish breakout from the pattern.

For now, the key level that traders will be closely watching is the key psychological support formed at $86,000. A drop below that could trigger a move down to its November low of $82,175.

Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.

CC has skyrocketed by over 130% monthly.

Bitcoin’s underwhelming price performance at the end of 2025 continued as the asset was stopped at $89,000 and ultimately finished the year in the red.

Most altcoins have fallen in the past 24 hours, aside from Canton’s CC, which trades in a world of its own as of late.

BTC With 7% Yearly Decline
The primary cryptocurrency spent December in a consistently narrowing range, which began with two boundaries at $94,500 and $84,500. However, as the month progressed, the boundaries tightened, and BTC has remained sideways between $86,000 and $90,000 for the past few weeks.

At the beginning of the current business week, bitcoin went on the offensive and tapped $90,000. However, the bears were quick to intercept the move once again and stopped it in its tracks.

As a result, BTC slipped once again, and that resistance turned out to be too strong. The same scenario repeated during the week, with the latest minor rejection taking place yesterday. This time, bitcoin couldn’t even touch $90,000 and was halted at $89,000.

Since then, BTC has retraced to under $88,000, where it currently sits. Its market cap has slipped to $1.750 trillion, while its dominance over the altcoins has retreated to 57.3% on CG.

BTCUSD Jan 1. Source: TradingView
CC Keeps Pumping
The past few weeks have belonged to Canton’s CC. The asset has exploded by 130% on a monthly scale, and has surged once again by 18% since this time yesterday. Consequently, it now trades well above $0.17.

ICP is the other impressive gainer from the larger-cap alts, having pumped by more than 3.5%. In contrast, most other larger-cap alts are in the red. Cardano’s ADA is down by more than 3% and now sits below $0.34. UNI is down by over 3% as well, while DOGE, LINK, HBAR, CRo, and XMR have posted losses of up to 2.5%.

BNB, XRP, and SOL are also slightly in the red, while ETH and TRX are with minor gains.

The total crypto market cap has declined by $20 billion in a day, and is below $3.060 trillion on CG.

Cryptocurrency Market Overview Daily Jan 1. Source: QuantifyCrypto

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.

It is 2026, and social media is flooded with wishes and expectations from projects and leaders in the crypto industry.

In a tweet on 2026's first day, the official Solana X account shares expectations for the year 2026, calling it a "big year."

According to the Solana team, the just concluded year 2025 was a "banger." Hunter Horsley, Bitwise CEO, commends the energy and optimism of the Solana community, saying, "The Solana ecosystem has winning energy and execution. Fired up for 2026."

This optimism comes despite 2026 starting on a mixed note, with several crypto assets, including Solana, trading in red as fear continues to dominate investor psychology.

Sentiment currently sits at 31, which signals fear, according to the crypto Fear and Greed Index.

Fear has dominated sentiment since the liquidation crash in October 2025, which wiped out nearly $20 billion in liquidations. The cryptocurrency market has yet to stage a meaningful recovery, with investor caution remaining.

Cryptocurrencies ended December without the expected year-end rally, as repeated attempts for a rebound were sold into.

At the time of writing, SOL was trading down 1.07% in the last 24 hours to $124.

Solana 2026 predictionAsset manager Bitwise predicts a new all-time high for Solana in 2026, saying it remains bullish on Solana and Ethereum as it sees stablecoins and tokenization as megatrends, and both Ethereum and Solana are likely to be the biggest beneficiaries of that growth if the Clarity Act passes.

In 26 predictions released by Galaxy Research at 2025's close for the year 2026, the total market cap of Internet Capital Markets on Solana is predicted to surge to $2 billion from its current $750 million.

Galaxy predicts that no Solana inflation reduction proposal will pass in 2026, and the current proposal, SIMD-0411, will be withdrawn without a vote. In addition, it predicts more than 50 spot altcoin ETFs and another 50 crypto ETFs (excluding spot single-coin products) will launch in the U.S. Following the SEC’s approval of generic listing standards, Galaxy predicts the pace of spot altcoin ETF launches to accelerate in 2026.

The CFTC brings back Bitcoin futures veteran Amir Zaidi as chief of staff amid expanding crypto oversight.

Summary

CFTC Chair Michael Selig named Amir Zaidi chief of staff as the agency’s digital asset mandate grows.​
Zaidi previously led the CFTC’s Division of Market Oversight and helped oversee the launch of U.S. Bitcoin futures contracts.​
His return comes as Congress advances market-structure bills that would expand CFTC authority over crypto markets and derivatives.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chair Michael Selig has appointed Amir Zaidi as the agency’s new Chief of Staff, the CFTC announced. Zaidi previously played a role in overseeing the launch of Bitcoin futures contracts at the commission.

Zaidi served at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from 2010 to 2019, according to agency records. During his tenure, he participated in the launch of Bitcoin futures, the first federally regulated cryptocurrency product in the United States. He was appointed to lead the Division of Market Oversight, where he oversaw contract certification and deployment.

Before returning to the CFTC, Zaidi served as global head of compliance at a major broker-dealer, according to his professional background.

Chairman Selig cited Zaidi’s background in a statement, noting his role in the launch of Bitcoin futures contracts and describing him as instrumental in that effort.

The appointment occurs as the CFTC’s role in regulating digital assets expands. Legislation on digital asset market structure is currently progressing through Congress, with proposals that would grant the CFTC additional authority over cryptocurrency markets.

The agency’s oversight responsibilities are expected to increase as lawmakers work toward establishing regulatory guidelines for the digital asset sector. Congressional bills under consideration would enhance the CFTC’s regulatory powers over cryptocurrency products and markets.

Zaidi stated he would focus on promoting innovation while maintaining regulatory oversight during this period of market transformation, according to the announcement.

The cryptocurrency industry has seen increased mainstream adoption of digital asset products in recent years. Market participants have called for regulatory clarity as the sector continues to expand and integrate with traditional financial markets.

Lighter’s LIT token saw an explosive debut, drawing strong early demand after launch. Momentum faded quickly as the price dropped, following claims of a potential secret token sale circulating over the past day. 

These allegations unsettled investors, triggering sharp volatility and prompting questions around transparency and early token distribution.

Sponsored

Sponsored

Lighter CEO Addresses ConcernsConcerns intensified after reports claimed Lighter secretly sold nearly 10 million LIT to five wallets during the airdrop phase. As speculation spread, Lighter CEO Valdimir Novakovski addressed the issue publicly through Discord. 

Novakovski explained that Lighter signed an agreement with a third-party liquidity provider in 2024. Under this arrangement, 5 million LIT liquidity support to the LLP was to be provided by the LP during the private beta. According to the founder, the wallets in question belonged to this liquidity partner rather than internal sales.

“There is no financial or personal relationship between any member of Lighter and this provider. They made the commitment before we had any data about how strong LLP performance was going to be. It was important to make sure there is enough liquidity to bootstrap trading, so it was fair to reward taking this risk and providing a valuable service to the early ecosystem,” Vladimir stated.

Outflows Take Over LITDespite the clarification, market response since the token launch has remained decisively bearish. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt, aka “FUD,” have continued to dominate discussions across trading channels. Many short-term holders appear unconvinced, opting to reduce exposure amid lingering transparency concerns.

This sentiment is reflected in technical indicators. The Chaikin Money Flow has slipped below a descending trend line, signaling sustained capital outflows. Selling pressure currently outweighs accumulation, suggesting investors are exiting positions quickly rather than waiting for confirmation of a reversal.

Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.

Sponsored

Sponsored

LIT CMF. Source: TradingViewMacro momentum indicators reinforce the cautious outlook. On-Balance Volume is trending lower, aligning with recent price weakness. OBV tracks volume flow to gauge conviction behind price moves, making it a useful confirmation tool during volatile periods.

In LIT’s case, both price and OBV are declining simultaneously. This alignment confirms a downtrend rather than isolated profit-taking. Weak volume support indicates fading confidence, as fewer participants are willing to accumulate at current levels despite the protocol’s underlying fundamentals.

LIT OBV. Source: TradingViewLIT Price’s Short-Term OutlookLIT price dropped 8.5% over the last 24 hours, trading near $2.43 at the time of writing. This decline reflects the combined impact of negative sentiment, persistent outflows, and weakening technical structure. Short-term outlook remains pressured unless buyers regain control.

The $2.43 level now acts as immediate support. Failure to hold this zone could expose LIT to further downside. If bearish momentum continues, the price may test the next key support at $2.31, where buyers could attempt to slow losses.

LIT Price Analysis. Source: TradingViewInvalidation of the bearish thesis requires a decisive recovery. LIT must reclaim $2.66 as support to offset the recent decline. A sustained move above this level could open a path toward $2.82, signaling renewed confidence and stabilizing market structure.

Terra Luna Classic (LUNC) surprised the crypto market on New Year’s Eve with a sharp rally of nearly 20% in just 24 hours. LUNC token price climbed to around $0.000045, with its market cap hitting close to $250 million.

The sudden move left many traders asking what triggered the rally and whether it has real strength behind it. 

Binance Burn Triggers Sudden LUNC RallyOne of the main reasons behind LUNC’s sharp price jump was a massive token burn linked to Binance. According to on-chain data, a single transaction destroyed 5.33 billion LUNC under Binance’s trading-fee burn program.

This burn reduced LUNC’s total supply from about 6.477 trillion to nearly 6.471 trillion tokens, tightening supply and boosting short-term market confidence.

Right after the burn, LUNC’s price climbed to around $0.000045, while trading volume exploded to nearly $110 million, marking a massive 620% jump in daily activity.

Binance was not alone in reducing supply. The Terra Luna Classic community also played its part, burning an additional 124 million LUNC during the same period, through on-chain mechanisms and smaller initiatives. 

While this amount is tiny compared to Binance’s burn, it shows that community efforts remain active and consistent.

Since the Terra ecosystem collapsed in 2022, the LUNC community has focused heavily on reducing supply. So far, more than 436 billion LUNC tokens have been permanently destroyed. 

In just the past week, over 432 million tokens were burned through a mix of exchange burns and on-chain taxes.

Lunc Token Price AnalysisDespite the recent excitement, LUNC finished 2025 down nearly 65%. On the 4-hour chart, the price is now moving sideways after a sharp drop, showing that selling pressure has eased, but buyers are still cautious.

LUNC is holding above a key support zone near $0.000039, which suggests buyers are defending this level well. 

On the upside, strong resistance sits between $0.000043 and $0.000049. A clear break above this range could push the price toward $0.000065.

Meanwhile, the RSI is near 52, showing a neutral market with no strong buying or selling momentum yet.

Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.

Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.

Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.

Looking ahead to 2026, Bitcoin price forecasts present a sharp divide between institutional optimism and cautionary signals from historical chart patterns.

While major banks and crypto-native firms continue to predict higher prices driven by structural shifts in the market, technical indicators suggest the risk of a prolonged drawdown remains significant.

Institutional forecasts temper optimism
Copy link to section

Following strong gains earlier in the post-2024 halving cycle, Bitcoin entered a period of consolidation and volatility in late 2025 amid macroeconomic uncertainty and uneven ETF inflows.

After reaching an all-time high of $126,000 in October, BTC fell roughly 47% to $80,500 by November.

Despite the pullback, several large institutions remain bullish on Bitcoin’s medium-term outlook, though with more restrained expectations than earlier projections.

Standard Chartered now forecasts Bitcoin will reach $150,000 in 2026, cutting its previous $300,000 target due to slower-than-expected institutional buying via ETFs.

Bernstein analysts have similarly revised their expectations, projecting BTC at $150,000 by the end of 2026 and $200,000 by the end of 2027.

While they withdrew an earlier call for a $200,000 peak in 2025, they argue that Bitcoin is moving beyond its traditional four-year halving cycle toward a more durable growth path driven by institutional adoption.

Michael Saylor, executive chairman of Strategy (formerly known as MicroStrategy), also sees Bitcoin reaching $150,000 as 2026 begins, contending that long-term volatility has declined despite recent price weakness.

Other outlooks vary widely: Fundstrat sees potential upside of $200,000–$250,000, while more conservative estimates cluster between $110,000 and $135,000.

Market-based probabilities remain mixed.

Polymarket data shows a 41% chance of Bitcoin exceeding $130,000 and a 25% chance of reaching $150,000 by the end of 2026, alongside a 79% probability of reclaiming $100,000 and an 80% chance of falling to $75,000 during the year.

Technical indicators warn of deeper downside
Copy link to section

In contrast to bullish forecasts, technical analysis points to continued downside risk.

Historical halving cycles suggest Bitcoin tends to peak 12–18 months after issuance reductions, and some analysts argue this pattern is now playing out.

Trader Rekt Capital estimates the current cycle is more than 93% complete, with a potential market top occurring in the fourth quarter of 2025.

Weekly chart indicators reinforce this caution.

Bitcoin’s SuperTrend indicator has issued a confirmed “sell” signal, coinciding with BTC falling below its 50-week moving averages—an event that has historically marked the end of bull markets.

The bearish outlook was further strengthened by a negative crossover in the moving average convergence divergence (MACD) indicator.

Similar combinations of signals preceded drawdowns of 84% in 2018 and 77% in 2022.

Benjamin Cowen, founder of IntoTheCryptoverse, expects a near-term rebound toward the 200-day simple moving average around $108,000, followed by renewed weakness.

He suggests Bitcoin could bottom near the 200-week moving averages, roughly between $60,000 and $70,000, sometime in 2026.

Structural shifts cloud the cycle debate
Copy link to section

The growing role of traditional finance complicates comparisons with past cycles.

ETF products, institutional custody, and broader macro influences are reshaping Bitcoin’s market structure, leading some analysts to argue that classic boom-bust patterns may be fading.

Still, as of now, price charts and indicators continue to resemble prior cycle transitions into bear markets.

Whether institutional demand can offset these historical dynamics remains uncertain, setting the stage for a volatile and closely watched year ahead for Bitcoin in 2026.

Talk of XRP reaching $100 began gaining momentum this cycle, following the resolution of the legal battle involving Ripple and the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Interestingly, the attention in recent months has been toward XRP’s role in global finance and how this might have an effect on its price action. 

That trend has led to different interpretations of how the XRP price can trade at $100 in the near future. A notable interpretation was recently articulated by analysts at Bayberry Capital, who proposed on the social media platform X that $100 should be seen as a liquidity event number, not a price target tied to timing.

Why XRP At $100 Is A Liquidity Event
Bayberry Capital’s outlook on XRP price shooting up to $100 is based on how markets reprice assets once their function becomes essential. According to the private digital asset investment firm, infrastructure assets do not typically rise in smooth, incremental moves. They tend to be re-rated when the market recognizes that their utility has changed from optional to necessary.

Most digital assets rely on attention and continuous inflows of new buyers. However, XRP was designed differently as a liquidity instrument built to move value efficiently across systems. When demand is dictated by settlement and transactional use, price dynamics change. In that setting, value can be pulled upward by usage itself, not just by sentiment. 

A liquidity event is a moment when an asset’s ability to be converted, transferred, or absorbed by the market changes materially and permanently. From this perspective, $100 is a natural price level for XRP to be at that point.

Another element of the view by Bayberry Capital is the absence of a deadline for this to happen. The liquidity event where the XRP price is priced at $100 is not defined by a specific year. Instead, it depends on direction. If global finance keeps moving toward faster settlement and digital liquidity rails, assets built for that purpose will undoubtedly be repriced accordingly.

How This View Connects To Other $100 XRP Predictions
Bayberry Capital’s commentary exists alongside a broader set of long-term views that started after XRP’s legal clarity, its push to new all-time highs in mid-2025, and the different partnerships and acquisitions made by Ripple to increase the utility of XRP. 

Since then, several analysts and commentators have discussed scenarios where XRP could eventually trade at $100, with the proposed factors often tied to use in global settlement and institutional demand.

Figures such as Zach Rector, crypto commentator 24hrscrypto, world’s highest IQ claimant Young Hoon Kim, and BarriC have all been linked to $100 XRP price scenarios over the coming years. These views are always debated by critics, particularly on market cap considerations, but they share a common assumption that XRP would need to function as a global payments infrastructure in order for this to happen.

XRP trading at $1.85 on the 1D chart | Source: XRPUSDT on Tradingview.com
Featured image from Peakpx, chart from Tradingview.com

U.S. Antimony is a monopoly and receives money from the government.

Antimony may not be on everyone's radar, but it's one of the most important commodities on the planet. It's a critical mineral that is used in semiconductors, which makes it a foundational piece of the artificial intelligence (AI) boom.

China is the main exporter of antimony, and the country has threatened to ban all exports of this critical resource. China opted against banning antimony exports after some pushback, but significant restrictions remain. It's anyone's guess whether China will ban antimony exports or push more severe restrictions in future years, but not everyone is sitting around and waiting to find out.

U.S. Antimony (UAMY 3.09%) is a hot mining stock that captured attention by gaining more than 900% during the past five years. The stock has cooled off a bit and is now up by about 190% in 2025. Its market cap is about $730 million, so it's still quite early for the stock. However, it's one of the most volatile stocks in the market. It's important to know this well before you buy, since any pullbacks may rattle investors who don't understand the opportunity.

Image source: Getty Images.

The antimony miner doesn't face much competition
U.S. Antimony finds itself in a unique position. Antimony is a critical resource, but despite its value, the company doesn't face much domestic competition. While international miners are extracting antimony, U.S. Antimony is the only antimony producer in North America.

Today's Change

(

-3.09

%) $

-0.16

Current Price

$

5.02

Competitors like Perpetua Resources (PPTA 1.26%) are years away from selling antimony to customers. Meanwhile, the U.S. government and AI companies need antimony now. They don't have the luxury of waiting and will pay top dollar for quicker access to this vital resource.

Revenue could skyrocket due to zero domestic competition and soaring antimony prices. U.S. Antimony forecasts $40 million to $43 million in 2025 revenue on the back of 182% year-over-year revenue growth during the first nine months of 2025. Revenue more than tripled year over year in Q3, and the company must more than double its revenue sequentially to reach the high end of its forecast.

U.S. Antimony anticipates going from its $40 million to $43 million range in 2025 to $125 million in 2026 revenue.

"While most of our competition likes to talk about what they plan on doing two to four years from now in the antimony business, we are putting rock in the box today and selling finished products to customers," U.S. Antimony Executive Vice President and Chief Mining Engineer Joe Bardswich said in a press release.

The company has the U.S. government's support
U.S. Antimony already looks attractive due to its role in the AI boom and the risk of China's export controls rattling the industry. China and Russia control more than 60% of global antimony ore, making it essential for a company to produce antimony in North America. The government has taken swift action to address this issue.

The antimony miner won a $245 million contract from the Pentagon to replenish the U.S. National Defense Stockpile. The metal stock also received a $10 million delivery order from the Department of Defense.

The government is just as interested in antimony as tech giants, which is part of the reason antimony prices surged in 2025. Higher antimony prices act as a tailwind for U.S. Antimony's revenue and net income growth.

If China hints at a stricter stance, the U.S. government may have to commit more capital to U.S. Antimony to remain competitive. Antimony is a major bottleneck for the AI boom and government defenses. The company has two antimony smelting plants in Montana and Mexico. It's also the only DOD-approved fully integrated antimony miner and producer in North America.

U.S. Antimony is building its footprint with mining claims in Alaska and Ontario's Sudbury Basin. The company also has a zeolite mine in Idaho. Zeolite is a critical mineral for nuclear remediation. It's another great resource for the government, but it may also be another important material in the AI boom if tech companies shift to nuclear energy in the future.

Antimony is a hot commodity, and U.S. Antimony has a de facto monopoly with government support. It's a small stock that could gain a lot of momentum in the years ahead.

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of PAGS, PROSY, JD either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. 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.

As Warren Buffett passes the torch to Greg Abel, a mountain of cash is top of mind.

Looking for growth at a bargain price? This stock can help you start the new year on the right foot.

There's something refreshing about the new year. It's an excellent opportunity for a fresh start, which means new ideas for your stock portfolio.

Although the calendar is turning a page, artificial intelligence (AI) remains a hot theme for 2026, just as it has been for most of the past few years. Despite immense hype and soaring share prices, some AI stocks still represent compelling value today.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSM +1.44%), also known as TSMC, was no slouch in 2025. The stock rose by more than 50%. Yet, it may still be the best AI stock to buy in January. Here's why shares could continue heading higher.

Image source: Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing

Gobbling up market share in the AI era
Everything electronic, from data centers for AI to your smartphone, uses microchips. Many companies that sell them, such as Nvidia or Advanced Micro Devices, design them and outsource the manufacturing to companies called foundries, which have the expertise and equipment to build them.

Taiwan Semiconductor is the world's largest foundry, and to say that it dominates its industry could somehow be an understatement. According to estimates from Counterpoint Research, TSMC's market share (by revenue) of the global foundry market was approximately 72% at the end of the third quarter. Samsung was the closest competitor at just 7%.

Today's Change

(

1.44

%) $

4.31

Current Price

$

303.89

Perhaps what's more impressive is that despite surging demand for AI chips, TSMC has actually increased its market share amid this AI investment cycle. Its share was 65% midway through 2024.

Manufacturing chips is a complicated task. Given the money at stake -- there are hundreds of billions of dollars pouring into AI -- chip companies are flocking to TSMC's scale, equipment, and proprietary processes.

No other company can build as many high-end chips as quickly as this one can. They are the sure thing, and that has value.

Nvidia's Rubin chip is arriving soon
The top AI company, Nvidia, has partnered closely with TSMC for its graphics processing units (GPUs), including its Hopper architecture and its successor, Blackwell. Naturally, innovation continues, and its Rubin architecture is next in line, set to arrive on the market in 2026.

TSMC is building Rubin using its advanced 3-nanometer process, to achieve higher performance with less power consumption. Nvidia recently touted a $500 billion order backlog -- meaning that a company with $187 billion in sales over the past four quarters is poised to continue its impressive growth trajectory.

TSM Revenue (TTM) data by YCharts; TTM = trailing 12 months.

Nvidia's AI success is affecting TSMC, whose own revenue growth has accelerated dramatically over the past few years. In fact, Nvidia has challenged Apple as TSMC's largest customer at this point.

Fantastic growth at a compelling price
Barring an unexpected widespread collapse in AI spending, Nvidia's huge backlog is likely to help propel TSMC's business to new heights as those orders flow through its foundries. Fortunately for investors, there appears to be room for the stock to continue its ascent.

Its price-to-earnings ratio is just under 30 times TSMC's full-2025 earnings estimates. While that may seem high, the company is likely to continue growing rapidly, as discussed above. Analysts estimate that it will increase earnings by an average of nearly 29% annually over the next three to five years.

Using the price/earnings-to-growth ratio (PEG) to compare TSMC's growth rate to its valuation, its ratio of roughly 1 signals the stock is very attractive at its current price. I am often willing to pay up for a PEG ratio of about 2 to 2.5 for a high-quality stock, and TSMC certainly meets that standard as the world's leading chip foundry.

So even if TSMC's growth falls a bit short of analyst estimates, investors still have a good chance of achieving strong returns over the long term. The company's mission-critical role in the AI boom gives the stock a relatively high floor with enough upside to make it a leading investment idea heading into January.

Morgan Stanley analysts selected Micron Technology as their top semiconductor pick for 2026.

Nvidia (NVDA 0.46%) and Broadcom (AVGO 1.07%) are cornerstones of the artificial intelligence trade. But while Morgan Stanely analysts led by Joseph Moore have buy ratings on both chip stocks, Micron Technology (MU 2.32%) is their top pick within in the semiconductor industry for 2026.

Readers should be aware that most Wall Street analysts have a different opinion.

Among 69 analysts, Nvidia has a median target price of $250 per share. That implies 33% upside from its current share price of $187.
Among 52 analysts, Broadcom has a median target price of $460 per share. That implies 31% upside from its current share price of $350.
Among 44 analysts, Micron has a median target price of $305 per share. That implies 4% upside from its current share price of $293.

Here's what investors should know.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Nvidia
Nvidia is well known for its best-in-class graphics processing units (GPUs), chips used to speed up compute-intensive data center workloads like artificial intelligence (AI) training and inference. However, the company is truly formidable because of its full-stack strategy that spans adjacent hardware and software development tools.

Nvidia develops rack-scale systems that pair GPUs with CPUs and networking equipment, which lets the company optimize performance across the entire data center, while saving clients the trouble of integrating hardware from multiple suppliers.

In addition, Nvidia's CUDA software platform provides developers with an extensive suite of code libraries, frameworks, and pretrained models that simplify application development across numerous of use cases, from predictive analytics and content generation to conversational agents and autonomous machines.

Consequently, while custom AI chips designed by rivals like Broadcom may be cheaper, Nvidia systems often have the lowest total cost of ownership (TCO) when every expense is include. "Our TCO is so good that even when the competitors' chips are free, it's not cheap enough," according to Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang.

Nvidia dominates the AI accelerator space today with more than 80% market share, and the company is likely to maintain its dominance for the foreseeable future because it offers customers the lowest TCO. Wall Street expects Nvidia's earnings to grow at 37% annually in the next three years. That makes the current valuation of 46 times earnings look attractive.

2. Broadcom
Broadcom is a key player in two parts of the AI supply chain: networking chips and custom accelerators. The company has 80% market share in high-speed Ethernet switching and routing chips, a market forecast to grow at 20% to 30% annually in the next few years, per JPMorgan Chase. Its latest Tomahawk 6 (switching) and Jericho 3 (routing) chips offer industry-leading performance.

Broadcom is also the leading supplier of custom AI accelerators, also called application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), with 70% to 80% market share. The company has five major ASIC customers: Alphabet's Google, Meta Platforms, TikTok parent ByteDance, OpenAI, and Anthropic. However, Broadcom has other prospective customers in the pipeline, including Apple, Arm Holdings, and xAI. The AI accelerator market is projected to expand at 29% annually through 2033, according to Grand View Research.

Beyond semiconductors, Broadcom subsidiary VMware is a leader in virtualization software. Consultancy Gartner recently recognized the company as a leader in distributed hybrid infrastructure, a setup that uses virtualization to combine public and private clouds into one manageable system. The data center virtualization market is forecast to grow at 21% annually through 2033, according to Grand View.

Wall Street estimates Broadcom's adjusted earnings will grow at 36% annually during the next three years. That makes the current valuation of 51 times earnings look attractive.

Today's Change

(

-2.32

%) $

-6.80

Current Price

$

285.83

3. Micron Technology
Micron develops memory and storage solutions for personal computers, mobile devices, data center servers, and automotive systems. The company sells DRAM (dynamic random access memory) products, including high-bandwidth memory (HBM) created by stacking DRAM chips, and NAND products.

DRAM products offer fast, short-term memory for active applications, and NAND products provide slow, long-term memory for file storage. Both are important for artificial intelligence workloads; DRAM (especially HBM) products offer the bandwidth needed for training and inference, while NAND products provide the storage needed for datasets and AI models.

Importantly, Micron is not the market leader in DRAM or NAND products, but the company is gaining market share in both categories and its primary competitors, Samsung and SK Hynix, are losing market share. Particularly important, Micron gained 10 percentage points of market share in HBM over the past year.

Why is Morgan Stanley so bullish? The analysts argue the ongoing AI buildout has led to the most severe DRAM and NAND shortage in the last three decades. That shortage is driving prices higher and Micron is well-positioned to benefit. Indeed, Wall Street expects Micron's earnings to grow at 48% annually over the next three years, which makes the current valuation of 28 times earnings look quite cheap.

Intel could leap ahead of TSMC faster than previously thought.

There's a conventional wisdom among investors that Intel (INTC 1.07%) is significantly behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSM +1.44%), and that it will take years for the company to catch up to TSMC's technological lead -- if it ever happens at all.

Last week, sell-side analyst Stacy Rasgon of Bernstein said that since it took a decade to "break" Intel, investors shouldn't expect it to take less than 10 years to fix. Notwithstanding Intel's heavy lift turnaround really began in 2021 with the appointment of former CEO Pat Gelsinger, the turnaround may actually be closer than Rasgon expects.

One key element for Intel being able to leapfrog TSMC would be the earlier implementation of high-NA EUV lithography technology. While Intel has publicly stated that it won't introduce high-NA until its 14A node in 2028, there were numerous indications over the past year that Intel may in fact accelerate HNA into its current 18A manufacturing process.

If that happens, the semiconductor industry could change very quickly.

Today's Change

(

-1.07

%) $

-0.40

Current Price

$

36.90

What is high-NA EUV?
High-NA EUV lithography is the latest and most advanced version of extreme ultraviolet lithography technology (EUV), pioneered and developed by ASML Holdings (ASML 0.21%). Twenty years in the making, chipmakers first used EUV lithography in 2019, enabling the efficient production of chips with pitches as small as 7 nanometers between transistors.

About a decade ago, Intel delayed its implementation of EUV, instead opting for double, triple, or even quadruple patterning with older DUV technology. That delay allowed TSMC to leapfrog Intel, giving the Taiwanese giant a manufacturing lead it has held to this day.

High-NA is the next jump forward in this technology. HNA EUV machines can "write" chip patterns in a thickness of just 8nm, more precisely than the 13.5-nm light beams of low-NA EUV. Like its predecessor, the new technology enables single-patterning, higher-density chips with fewer process steps. Fewer process steps generally means higher yields than multi-patterning with older tools.

Determined not to repeat mistakes of the past, Intel has jumped to the front of the line as the first to implement high-NA EUV machines. Ironically, it's TSMC this time that has opted to wait to use the new technology, with TSMC management citing cost reasons.

But both Intel and ASML have claimed that high-NA machines are working as intended now. In early 2024, ASML's CEO took issue with critics of HNA, saying it is "very clearly the most cost-effective solution both in logic and memory."

Then at a technology conference in February 2025, Intel executive Steve Carson noted Intel already had HNA "in production," and that the tool was "more reliable" at this stage than low-NA was at the equivalent time in the past. Carson also noted high-NA enabled Intel to do the same work with one machine and a "single-digit" number of process steps that it took a low-NA machine three exposures and roughly 40 processing steps. So, there appear to be clear advantages for HNA in terms of productivity, especially when one gets to leading-edge nodes that require triple-patterning on low-NA tools.

Now, there are technology obstacles to using HNA tools effectively, and the tool costs about double that of a low-NA tool. Still, given the productivity enhancements, HNA lines should net out to overall cost savings when properly implemented.

Intel has at least three HNA machines and tons of experience with HNA already
Another reason Intel may be ready to use HNA EUV today is that it has already bought, installed, and utilized at least three tools it has disclosed to the public, and possibly more that it hasn't.

Intel announced the receipt of its first HNA machine at its Oregon R&D facility in late 2023/early 2024, then announced "first light" on the machine in late February 2024. Intel next followed that up with the disclosure of a second HNA machine installation in August 2024 at its Oregon facility.

Then, just two weeks ago in mid-December, Intel announced it had achieved "acceptance testing" of ASML's EXE:5200 HNA machine, the upgraded version of last year's EXE:5000 high-NA machine, which features enhanced throughput for high-volume manufacturing. Acceptance testing means Intel has the HNA machine working in the fab, meeting high-volume manufacturing benchmarks and customer specifications.

Notably, ASML didn't start shipping the 5200 until early 2025, indicating that Intel has at least one more than the two it officially announced in 2024. In addition, Intel has not disclosed specifically where the third machine, the 5200, was installed. Notably, Intel has been preparing Fab 52 in Arizona for 18A production this year.

It's also quite possible, if not probable, that Intel has purchased even more HNA machines. In May 2024, industry publication The Elec reported that Intel had secured all of ASML's high-NA EUV production for 2024, which would encompass five to six machines. Given Intel received its first machines in late 2023, that would bring its total to six or seven.

This was just one unconfirmed report, and Pat Gelsinger's resignation in late 2024 may have changed this order pattern. Nevertheless, it's likely a fair bet that Intel has purchased more than the three HNA machines it has officially disclosed.

Image source: Getty Images.

With so much progress, why wait until 14A?
In light of all this, it's curious Intel has pointed to 14A, due out in 2028, as the point in which it will use high-NA. And it's especially curious that Intel would purchase so many HNA machines, given that this past summer, Intel disclosed that if it doesn't secure a significant external customer, it might not proceed with 14A development at all.

If Intel weren't sure it would develop 14A, and since it has pointed to 14A being the first HNA node, why would Intel buy so many expensive HNA machines, which cost $400 million each? And why would it do so when the company was already cash flow negative, to the point where the company took in dilutive equity investments this past summer?

Intel has also already accomplished a tremendous amount of work with HNA tools. At the February tech conference I mentioned, Intel disclosed that it was processing 30,000 wafers per quarter on high-NA tools. That's a huge number of wafers to be processing for mere research and development purposes. Meanwhile, the recent disclosure of "acceptance testing" means that the tool has passed a formal evaluation process that determines the tool can function according to contractual specifications in a formal manufacturing setting.

Since the tool appears to be working in manufacturing settings, Intel has extensive experience with it, and HNA reportedly provides material advantages, why wouldn't Intel integrate HNA into the current 18A process?

Indications HNA may be in Intel's Fab 52 for 18A
While Intel has obviously never said it would use high-NA EUV for 18A, the company has nevertheless dropped clues it would be possible to do so over the past year. Meanwhile, outsiders have begun to speculate over the possibility of high-NA machines in Fab 52.

Reporting on the aforementioned February 2025 technology conference, Reuters initially reported that Intel was developing 18A with high-NA technology; however, Intel later had Reuters correct the story to say that Intel was "using its 18A manufacturing technology, which is scheduled for mass production with a new generation of PC chip later this year, to test the high NA tools."

So, Intel was at least "testing" high-NA on its 18A process as of February.

Then at Intel's Foundry Direct event in April, Intel's chief technology and operations officer Naga Chandrasekaran stated that Intel had achieved "yield parity" between testing both low-NA multi-patterning and high-NA single-patterning on both the 18A and 14A nodes.

More recently in October, Intel invited technology journalists into Fab 52 for Intel's "Tech Tour" to show off the fab and its 18A node. While all of the journalists were under nondisclosure agreements, a vlogger for Level1Techs told his viewers that he saw "something" in Fab 52, asked about it, and was told by Intel to please refrain from disclosing what he saw.

I did notice a few things that raised some interesting questions. Which I asked. And that's why I later got the polite email encouraging me to, uh, you know, um, 'not notice' things so specifically.

During this portion of the vlog, the Level1 presenter showed a video of the original HNA machine being installed in Oregon. After discussing the EUV machines he saw, without specifying the model, the presenter said, "That's probably the extent of the detail I'm comfortable giving you."

Why would Intel keep this a secret?
For the record, there's no evidence that Intel is using HNA EUV on 18A. But given its purported advantages, why keep it a secret if it were?

There could be a number of reasons. One might be the competitive advantage of keeping cards close to the vest, surprising the competition and thereby lengthening Intel's first-mover advantage with HNA. There may also be a concern over setting expectations too high for cost savings, yield, and performance with the first incarnation of the tool's use. After all, numerous rumors were circulated about Intel and 18A's progress over the past year, with many being quite negative.

Additionally, even if Intel does use high-NA tools for 18A, it may only do so on a few layers of each chip. Current leading-edge 3nm-class chips include about 20 EUV layers, and it's expected upcoming 2nm-class chips, of which 18A is a part, will see that EUV layer count jump by 30% into the mid-20s.

Moreover, a recent short documentary about Fab 52 by CNBC appeared to show low-NA EUV tools in the fab. Therefore, even if HNA is used on 18A, it may only be for certain products, or perhaps only for a few critical layers, with the majority still handled by low-NA tools.

Thus, Intel may be wary of labeling 18A a "high-NA" node if most layers are still completed using low-NA tools. It's also possible that Intel may be using low-NA tools for 18A, but will actually insert HNA tools for the next variant of the node called 18AP, which is supposed to ramp later in 2026 and deliver an 8% improvement in performance-per-watt over 18A.

Intel may never reveal its tool set for 18A
Investors may never know whether Intel is actually using HNA tools on 18A, given the secrecy that generally accompanies semiconductor manufacturing. If Intel does choose to disclose it, next week's CES in Las Vegas could be the ideal time and place, given that Intel will formally unveil its first 18A-produced chip, called Panther Lake.

Nevertheless, given the company's tight-lipped posture regarding the 18A process, it may very well remain a mystery as to whether Intel is using high-NA EUV for its critical 18A node.

HomeDividends AnalysisREITs AnalysisReal Estate Analysis

SummarySmartStop Self Storage REIT earns a Hold rating, reflecting a balanced risk-reward profile and neutral technical signals post-IPO.SMA demonstrates strong portfolio growth, geographic diversification, and low leverage but faces competitive headwinds and a high dividend payout ratio.Valuation appears reasonable with a forward P/FFO of 16.8 and 16-25% upside potential forecasted, but dividend coverage risk remains elevated at an 89% payout ratio.Macro demand for storage is mixed in the short term, but long-term sector growth prospects remain constructive, warranting watchlist consideration.A recent tenant default this year highlights the risk posed by such events in this sector.weaver1234/iStock via Getty Images

Today's Pick: A Self-Storage REIT with a Nearly $2B Market Cap With a few months to go before spring, which some consider a time when many people move, to get ahead of moving and homebuying peak season, today I'll

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.

The author is an active investor in a diversified portfolio of REITs and REIT mutual funds and the author of a book on REITs. He does not hold any direct shares in the REIT covered today.

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.

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of ORCL, NVDA either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. 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.