hodler

23 Mar 2026, 09:10

Solana token flips accelerate as average holding time drops to one minute

Solana token trading has completely changed its profile in two years. On average, token holders only retain new assets for 62 seconds. Solana token trading is shifting from community-based activity to a bot-driven frenzy. In 2024, Solana meme tokens could last for weeks, building communities and going through multiple price cycles. Some projects relied on long-term holding and took months or years to climb to new highs. Average time for holding tokens has fallen steeply and continues its downward trend. In 2026, holders traded tokens as fast as 44 seconds. As of March 22, the median holding time is around 62 seconds. Solana meme traders kept decreasing their holding time, which is now around 62 seconds on average, showing no long-term trust in tokenized and meme projects. | Source: Dune Analytics . Some tokens are still held as reserves, and even meme projects have whales that wait for months. Yet overall, meme tokens on Solana no longer build communities or rely on guaranteed holding. Investors are also more skeptical, especially after January 2025, when multiple high-profile meme tokens ended up with rug pulls. Since then, the holding time has gradually dropped, with only small exceptions. Solana trenches returned with more active trading One of the reasons for Solana token trading was the return of Pump.fun as one of the influential token creation hubs. With close to 30K tokens daily and around 100 to 300 graduating assets, Pump.fun ensured a never-ending flow of new assets. Traders did not get attached to any of those assets, but tried to use the short-term trading opportunities. They were also aware that most tokens ended up with rug pulls or selling, never graduated, or were only traded for less than a month after moving to a DEX. Pump.fun also drew in a predominance of new wallets, making up around 30% of daily activity. Despite this, the new traders remained skeptical and joined the short-term holder trend. Launchpad platforms are now set up for more aggressive trading, which includes rapid scalp trading, live streams with rug pulls, and potentially malicious wallets. Launchpads are not limiting this type of trading, and may in fact encourage some of the aggressive practices to boost fees. Solana bot activity slows down Solana bot volumes are part of the overall automation. However, with faster meme trading, classic trading bots are still slowing down. The bot-driven volumes on Solana are down to $81B daily, from a $200B peak in late January. Older legacy tokens and other trades are now slower, while meme tokens run with much lower valuations and volumes. SOL has stalled at $86.24, trading as a utility token, with no breakouts expected. The token supports the ecosystem successfully, but has not inspired a rush of new investments. The behavior of meme tokens reflects the current trend where crypto is used for its short-term growth potential, but not as a reliable long-term investment. Memes turned into one of the most successful use cases, but the rush to aggressive short-term trading may decrease mainstream adoption and turn Solana token trading into a closed ecosystem for advanced insiders. Want your project in front of crypto’s top minds? Feature it in our next industry report, where data meets impact.

23 Mar 2026, 09:10

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Critical $68,000 Support Level That Could Spark the Next Major Move

BitcoinWorld Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Critical $68,000 Support Level That Could Spark the Next Major Move Bitcoin, the world’s leading cryptocurrency, is currently trading at a pivotal junction near $68,000, a level that on-chain analysts identify as potentially decisive for its medium-term trajectory. This crucial price point, observed in global markets on April 15, 2025, represents more than just a number on a chart; it embodies the collective psychology and cost basis of some of the market’s most influential participants. The coming days could determine whether Bitcoin consolidates for another attempt at record highs or faces a more significant structural correction. Bitcoin Price Analysis: Decoding the $68,000 Whale Support Zone On-chain analyst Axel Adler Jr. recently highlighted the $68,000 level as a key benchmark. According to his analysis, this price represents the average acquisition cost, or cost basis, for cryptocurrency whales holding between 100 and 1,000 BTC. This cohort of large holders often acts as a stabilizing force in the market. Their aggregate cost basis frequently forms a strong psychological support line. When the price approaches this level, these entities are statistically less likely to sell at a loss, which can create a floor for the asset’s value. Conversely, Adler identified a significant resistance ceiling at $80,000. This figure correlates with the average cost basis for investors in U.S. spot Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs). The convergence of these two levels—support at $68,000 and resistance at $80,000—has created a well-defined trading range that has contained Bitcoin’s price action for the past several weeks. Market participants are now closely watching for a decisive break in either direction. Understanding On-Chain Metrics and Market Structure Beyond simple price levels, analysts use sophisticated on-chain data to gauge market health. One critical metric is the realized price , which calculates the average price at which all coins in a specific cohort last moved on the blockchain. This differs from the spot market price and provides insight into the overall profitability of holders. Adler notes the realized price for addresses holding 10 to 100 BTC sits near $47,000, establishing a deeper, secondary support level. Recent data suggests a nuanced market dynamic. The realized price for major buyers has shown a slight decrease over the past month. This trend typically indicates that these large players are averaging down —purchasing more assets at lower prices to reduce their overall average cost—rather than being driven by explosive new demand from first-time buyers. This behavior often precedes a period of consolidation before a potential trend continuation. The Role of ETF Flows and Macroeconomic Context The introduction and sustained activity of U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have fundamentally altered the market’s demand profile. These regulated investment vehicles provide a bridge for traditional institutional capital to access Bitcoin. Consequently, their aggregate cost basis has become a new, powerful technical level. Sustained net inflows into these ETFs are often necessary to overcome the selling pressure represented by the $80,000 resistance level tied to their investors’ average entry point. Furthermore, the broader macroeconomic environment continues to exert influence. Traders monitor Federal Reserve policy signals, inflation data, and bond yields, as these factors impact risk asset appetite globally. Bitcoin’s correlation with traditional equity markets, particularly technology stocks, has fluctuated but remains a consideration for institutional allocators deciding on capital deployment into the digital asset space. Potential Scenarios and Price Trajectories Analysts outline two primary paths forward, hinging on Bitcoin’s ability to hold the $68,000 zone. The first, and more bullish scenario, involves a successful defense of this support. If Bitcoin maintains its current range and begins to build a base, the next logical technical targets become the $75,000 and $80,000 resistance levels. A breakthrough above $80,000 could trigger a wave of buying from previously hesitant investors and potentially unlock a path toward new all-time highs. The second, more cautious scenario involves a breakdown. A sustained move below the $68,000 whale support level would represent a deterioration in market structure. Such a break could increase selling pressure as stop-loss orders are triggered and sentiment sours. The next major support would then be tested near the $47,000 realized price level for mid-tier holders. This scenario would likely prolong the current consolidation phase and require a longer period for the market to rebuild bullish momentum. Conclusion The current Bitcoin price analysis underscores the critical nature of the $68,000 level. This price point acts as a confluence of technical support and on-chain psychology, primarily reflecting the average cost basis of significant whale entities. The market’s next major move will likely be determined by Bitcoin’s interaction with this zone. A hold could pave the way for a test of higher resistances, while a break could signal a deeper corrective phase. As always, market participants are advised to monitor volume, on-chain flows, and broader macroeconomic indicators alongside pure price action for the most complete picture. FAQs Q1: What does ‘cost basis’ mean in cryptocurrency analysis? A1: Cost basis refers to the average price at which an investor or a group of investors acquired their assets. In on-chain analysis, it’s calculated by tracking the price of coins when they last moved on the blockchain, providing insight into whether holders are in profit or loss at current prices. Q2: Why is the $68,000 level specifically important for Bitcoin? A2: According to the cited analysis, $68,000 represents the average cost basis for ‘whales’ holding 100-1,000 BTC. This makes it a strong psychological support level, as these large holders are less inclined to sell at a loss, potentially creating a supply floor. Q3: What is the ‘realized price’ and how is it different from the market price? A3: The realized price is an on-chain metric that calculates the average price at which each coin in circulation was last transacted on the blockchain. It reflects the aggregate cost basis of the network. The market price is simply the current trading price on exchanges. The difference between them can indicate overall market profitability. Q4: How do U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs influence Bitcoin’s price? A4: ETFs create a massive new source of regulated demand. Their daily net inflows or outflows directly affect buying and selling pressure. The aggregate average purchase price of ETF shares can form significant technical resistance or support levels, as seen with the $80,000 level mentioned. Q5: What does ‘averaging down’ suggest about market sentiment? A5: When large holders (whales) are ‘averaging down,’ it means they are buying more assets as the price declines to lower their overall average cost per coin. This behavior often indicates a long-term bullish conviction and a belief that current prices are a buying opportunity, rather than panic selling. This post Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Critical $68,000 Support Level That Could Spark the Next Major Move first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

23 Mar 2026, 09:05

Strategy Faces Setbacks As Saylor Signals Fresh Bitcoin Move Amid Price Slide

Michael Saylor signaled a continuing Bitcoin acquisition drive at Strategy. The company faces significant unrealized losses and halted an equity fundraising plan. Continue Reading: Strategy Faces Setbacks As Saylor Signals Fresh Bitcoin Move Amid Price Slide The post Strategy Faces Setbacks As Saylor Signals Fresh Bitcoin Move Amid Price Slide appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .

23 Mar 2026, 09:05

Oil Demand Elasticity: Sobering Analysis Reveals Limited Price Relief Ahead – Societe Generale

BitcoinWorld Oil Demand Elasticity: Sobering Analysis Reveals Limited Price Relief Ahead – Societe Generale Global energy markets face a sobering reality in 2025 as new analysis from Societe Generale indicates that oil demand elasticity provides only limited relief for consumers and economies worldwide. The French multinational investment bank’s latest research, examining price sensitivity across major consuming regions, reveals structural constraints that may prolong elevated energy costs despite market fluctuations. This comprehensive assessment arrives during a period of significant transition for global energy systems, where traditional fossil fuel dynamics intersect with accelerating renewable adoption. Market analysts particularly note the timing of this report, coming amid ongoing geopolitical tensions and evolving climate policies that continue to reshape energy investment landscapes. Understanding Oil Demand Elasticity Fundamentals Demand elasticity measures how quantity demanded responds to price changes. For oil, this relationship proves particularly complex. Short-term elasticity typically remains low because consumers cannot quickly alter consumption patterns. People still need to commute, and industries require energy inputs. Consequently, price spikes often cause economic pain rather than immediate demand destruction. Societe Generale’s analysis specifically examines medium to long-term elasticity across different economic sectors. The research incorporates data from transportation, manufacturing, and residential heating sectors. Furthermore, the study compares elasticity variations between developed and emerging economies. Developed nations generally show slightly higher elasticity due to better infrastructure alternatives. Emerging economies, however, demonstrate more rigid demand patterns as industrialization continues. Several key factors influence oil demand elasticity significantly. Substitution possibilities represent the primary determinant. Electric vehicles, public transit, and telecommuting options all affect transportation elasticity. Industrial processes face greater challenges finding petroleum substitutes. Income levels also play a crucial role. Higher-income consumers absorb price increases more easily than lower-income households. This creates disproportionate economic impacts across different demographic groups. Government policies increasingly shape elasticity through fuel efficiency standards and carbon pricing mechanisms. Societe Generale’s models account for all these variables across multiple scenarios. The analysis employs sophisticated econometric techniques developed over decades of energy market research. Societe Generale’s Critical Market Assessment Societe Generale’s energy analysts conducted extensive modeling using historical consumption data and forward-looking scenarios. Their methodology incorporates price data from the past two decades, including the 2008 spike, 2014-2016 downturn, and recent volatility. The research team examined consumption patterns across North America, Europe, and Asia. They particularly focused on China’s evolving demand profile as its economy matures. The analysis reveals that global oil demand elasticity averages approximately -0.1 in the short term. This means a 10% price increase typically reduces demand by only 1%. Medium-term elasticity improves slightly to around -0.3, but still indicates limited responsiveness. The bank’s commodity strategists identify several concerning trends. Transportation sector elasticity has decreased in recent years despite electric vehicle adoption. This paradox emerges because remaining gasoline users often lack alternatives. Commercial trucking and aviation continue showing particularly low elasticity. Industrial demand demonstrates even more rigidity as manufacturing processes require specific petroleum products. Petrochemical feedstocks exhibit almost no price sensitivity below certain threshold levels. These findings challenge optimistic assumptions about market self-correction mechanisms. The research suggests that traditional supply-demand balancing may require longer adjustment periods than previously expected. Comparative Elasticity Across Regions Region Short-Term Elasticity Medium-Term Elasticity Key Factors North America -0.08 -0.25 Vehicle fleet age, suburban sprawl European Union -0.12 -0.35 High fuel taxes, transit infrastructure China -0.05 -0.20 Industrial composition, urbanization rate India -0.04 -0.15 Subsidy structures, development stage Economic Implications and Market Consequences Limited demand elasticity creates several important economic consequences. First, price volatility transmits more directly to consumer budgets and business costs. With weak demand response, supply disruptions cause sharper price increases. These increases then persist longer before consumption adjustments occur. Second, inflation dynamics become more challenging for central banks. Energy price shocks feed more quickly into broader price indices. Monetary policymakers face difficult trade-offs between controlling inflation and supporting economic growth. Third, government fiscal positions come under pressure. Many nations implement fuel subsidies or tax adjustments during price spikes. These measures strain public finances, particularly in emerging economies. The investment implications are equally significant. Energy companies face different decision frameworks when demand proves relatively inelastic. Production investment cycles may lengthen as price signals become less reliable for forecasting future demand. Renewable energy adoption could accelerate as consumers and businesses seek alternatives to volatile oil markets. However, transition timing remains uncertain because infrastructure changes require substantial lead time. Financial markets must price these complex dynamics into energy securities and related investments. Societe Generale’s analysis suggests that traditional energy investment models require substantial revision. The bank recommends scenario-based approaches that incorporate multiple elasticity assumptions. The Energy Transition Context Global energy transition efforts interact crucially with oil demand elasticity. Electric vehicle adoption rates directly affect transportation sector elasticity over time. However, the analysis reveals important nonlinearities in this relationship. Early EV adoption among wealthier consumers has limited impact on overall elasticity. Only when mass-market segments transition does elasticity improve substantially. This creates a potential lag effect where elasticity remains low during critical transition years. Industrial decarbonization faces even greater challenges. Many manufacturing processes lack commercially viable electrification alternatives. Green hydrogen and other solutions remain in developmental stages for most applications. Policy interventions can potentially accelerate elasticity improvements. Carbon pricing mechanisms make alternatives more economically attractive. Infrastructure investments in public transit and EV charging networks reduce switching costs. Research and development funding for industrial alternatives creates future options. However, Societe Generale’s analysis indicates that these measures require consistent implementation over extended periods. Political cycles and competing priorities often disrupt policy continuity. The research suggests that near-term oil demand will likely remain relatively inelastic despite transition efforts. This creates challenging interim periods where consumers face high costs without immediate alternatives. Historical Perspective on Elasticity Trends Examining historical data reveals important patterns in oil demand responsiveness. The 1970s oil shocks initially produced significant demand destruction through conservation and substitution. However, elasticity decreased during the 1990s and 2000s as economies became more service-oriented. The 2008 price spike demonstrated surprisingly weak demand response despite record price levels. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented demand collapse unrelated to price mechanisms. The subsequent recovery revealed pent-up demand that overwhelmed price signals. These historical episodes inform Societe Generale’s modeling approach. The analysis distinguishes between price-induced demand changes and those caused by external factors. This distinction proves crucial for accurate forecasting and policy design. Geopolitical Factors and Supply Considerations Global geopolitical developments significantly influence oil market dynamics alongside demand factors. Production decisions by major exporting nations interact with demand elasticity to determine market outcomes. When demand proves inelastic, supply adjustments create disproportionate price effects. This reality grants substantial market power to major producers with spare capacity. Recent production agreements among OPEC+ members demonstrate this dynamic clearly. The group’s coordinated output decisions substantially impact prices precisely because demand responds weakly. Non-OPEC production trends also matter significantly. United States shale production responsiveness has decreased in recent years due to capital discipline among producers. This reduction in supply elasticity compounds the demand-side challenges identified in Societe Generale’s analysis. Energy security concerns have resurfaced prominently in policy discussions. Many nations seek to reduce import dependence through domestic production and alternative energy sources. However, these efforts face economic and technical constraints. Domestic production often involves higher costs than imported alternatives. Alternative energy sources require substantial infrastructure investments. Societe Generale’s research suggests that comprehensive energy strategies must account for limited demand elasticity. Policies that assume rapid demand adjustment to price signals may prove ineffective. Instead, the analysis recommends diversified approaches combining supply development, demand management, and transition acceleration. Conclusion Societe Generale’s comprehensive analysis reveals that oil demand elasticity offers only limited relief for global energy markets. The research demonstrates that price signals alone cannot quickly balance supply and demand under current conditions. This reality has important implications for consumers, businesses, and policymakers worldwide. Energy costs may remain elevated and volatile despite market fluctuations. The transition to alternative energy sources becomes increasingly urgent but faces substantial implementation challenges. Market participants must develop strategies that account for these persistent dynamics. Continued research and monitoring of elasticity trends will prove essential for navigating evolving energy landscapes. Ultimately, understanding oil demand elasticity provides crucial insights for economic planning and investment decisions in an uncertain energy future. FAQs Q1: What exactly is oil demand elasticity? Oil demand elasticity measures how much consumption changes when prices change. Specifically, it quantifies the percentage change in quantity demanded resulting from a 1% price change. Low elasticity means consumption responds weakly to price fluctuations. Q2: Why does oil have particularly low demand elasticity? Oil exhibits low elasticity because substitutes are limited in the short term. Transportation systems, industrial processes, and heating systems often require petroleum products specifically. Changing these systems requires substantial time and investment. Q3: How does Societe Generale’s analysis differ from previous research? Societe Generale incorporates recent data on electric vehicle adoption, post-pandemic recovery patterns, and evolving industrial consumption. The analysis also examines regional variations more granularly than many previous studies. Q4: What are the practical implications for consumers? Consumers should expect continued price volatility with limited relief from reduced consumption. Developing personal alternatives like fuel-efficient vehicles or telecommuting options becomes increasingly valuable for managing energy costs. Q5: How might government policies improve demand elasticity? Policies can enhance elasticity by accelerating alternative infrastructure development, implementing carbon pricing, supporting research into substitutes, and improving public transportation systems to provide viable alternatives to petroleum-based mobility. This post Oil Demand Elasticity: Sobering Analysis Reveals Limited Price Relief Ahead – Societe Generale first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

23 Mar 2026, 09:02

Someone Burned over $2,000 in Fees On 4 XRP Payments. Here’s What Happened

Activity on the XRP Ledger has increased in recent days as more developers experiment with automation, AI tools, and new scripts. This rise in activity has created new opportunities for builders, but it has also led to costly mistakes. Vet (@Vet_X0), a validator on the XRP Ledger, issued a clear warning after several transactions burned large amounts of XRP in fees over a short period. Last 2 days someone burned in 4 payments over $2,000 in transaction fees on XRP. We are seeing a lot more activity on XRP, perhaps due to people vibe coding with AI new tools and scripts. Often times resulting in complex queries hitting public infra or scripts spamming… pic.twitter.com/4SOIrZkIdh — Vet (@Vet_X0) March 21, 2026 Rising Activity Brings Costly Mistakes Vet reported that 2 days ago, someone burned more than $2,000 in transaction fees across 4 payments. The images show several transactions in which the fee matched the full amount being sent. Payments of 200 XRP, 350 XRP, 355 XRP, and 690 XRP were all consumed by fees, while the transactions still showed as successful. This means the sender paid extremely high fees to complete each transaction. He explained that the network is seeing more activity , possibly due to developers using AI tools to write code and automate actions. He noted that this sometimes makes script sending complex queries to public infrastructure or repeatedly sending transactions that are not handled properly. When fee settings are wrong or scripts loop without control, large amounts of XRP can be burned quickly . Vet issued a direct warning, stating, “Have fun using the XRP Ledger, but be careful when using it with funds.” He also added that AI is only as good as the person directing it, placing responsibility on developers to monitor and control what their scripts are doing. Why Developers Are Building on XRPL The XRP Ledger continues to attract developers because of its speed, low standard fees, and built-in features. Transactions settle in seconds , and fees are normally a fraction of a cent. Developers do not need complex smart contracts to perform many functions, making building faster and more efficient. These advantages make the network attractive for payments, tokenization, and automated financial tools. As AI coding tools become more popular, more people are experimenting with automated trading, payment routing, and liquidity tools on the ledger. We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1 — TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025 AI tools offer numerous advantages, and these are being introduced into the XRP ecosystem . However, those who don’t understand how the system works may not benefit from these advantages, as Vet’s post shows. What Developers Should Watch The recent fee burns show how powerful and fast the XRP Ledger is, but they also show the importance of proper testing. Developers should test scripts on test networks before using real funds. They should set maximum fee limits and include safeguards that stop repeated transactions if something goes wrong. Oversight matters when automation controls real value. Disclaimer : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses. Follow us on X , Facebook , Telegram , and Google News The post Someone Burned over $2,000 in Fees On 4 XRP Payments. Here’s What Happened appeared first on Times Tabloid .

23 Mar 2026, 09:00

Ethereum Bottom Signal? Analyst Maps Out Road To $10,000

Ethereum may be nearing a major inflection point, according to market analyst Ali Martinez (@alicharts on X), who argues that a confluence of technical structure and on-chain valuation data is beginning to tilt the setup back in bulls’ favor. In a post on X, Martinez said Ethereum is showing signs of a “major structural shift,” pointing to a multi-year ascending triangle on the weekly chart, a recent test of support near $1,800, and a historically significant drop in the MVRV ratio. Taken together, the message was clear: the recent weakness may have looked less like a breakdown and more like a reset inside a larger bullish structure. Ethereum’s Path To $10,000? Martinez framed the chart setup as the backbone of the thesis. “From a technical standpoint, ETH continues to trade within a well-defined ascending triangle on the weekly chart,” he wrote. “The recent move toward $1,800 served as a critical reaction point, aligning with the rising trendline of this multi-year structure.” In other words, the analyst is not treating the bounce as an isolated event. The relevance comes from where it happened: directly at a level he views as structurally important in the context of a long-duration pattern. Related Reading: Ethereum Investor Druckenmiller Predicts Stablecoin-Led Payment Systems That technical argument was paired with an on-chain signal Martinez described as even more consequential. He said Ethereum’s MVRV ratio recently fell below 0.8, a threshold he characterized as a rare valuation reset. “Historically, this is a ‘Generational Buy’ zone. We saw similar resets before the major bull rallies of the past,” he wrote. “The fact that this on-chain reset happened exactly as price tested the triangle’s support adds massive weight to the bullish thesis.” The logic of the call rests on that overlap. A chart support test on its own can invite skepticism, especially after prolonged weakness. But Martinez’ argument is that Ethereum is not only holding a key structural zone; it is doing so while on-chain data suggests the asset has entered an area associated with deep undervaluation in previous cycles. That does not guarantee a trend reversal, but it does sharpen the significance of the current range. Related Reading: Tom Lee Says Ethereum Looks Ready To Exit Crypto Winter He also pointed to a momentum shift on lower timeframes. According to Martinez, the daily Supertrend indicator has now turned green for the first time since May of last year, suggesting the long stretch of consolidation may be giving way to a new directional move. In his telling, the market is moving out of a “sideways grind” and beginning to rebuild upward momentum. From there, Martinez laid out the price levels that could define whether the thesis holds. He identified $2,356 as the first major level Ethereum needs to reclaim, followed by $2,647 and $3,639 as mid-term breakout targets. Beyond that, he marked $4,632 and $5,624 as longer-term expansion zones. The larger prize, however, sits further out. “A sustained move above $2,356 would be our first confirmation that ETH is moving out of ‘accumulation’ and into a true bull market expansion,” he wrote. “If it can clear the previous all-time high region near $4,900, the door opens for a move toward $10,000, as it will signal a breakout of the ascending triangle.” For now, the thesis remains conditional rather than complete. Martinez described the $2,000 to $1,800 range as a “prime accumulation zone,” while adding that the bull market is not “guaranteed” yet. That caveat matters. His case for a durable bottom depends on Ethereum holding the $1,800 floor and then reclaiming higher resistance levels in sequence. If that happens, the current setup could be remembered as an early-stage reaccumulation phase rather than just another bounce inside a broader range. At press time, ETH traded at $2,054. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com