Bitcoin (BTC) Faces Troubles Defending the $9,000 Level

A run above $10,000 has been delayed for weeks, as Bitcoin consolidates around $9,000.

In the past few weeks, the volatility of Bitcoin (BTC) remained relatively low. But late on Thursday, the asset slid for a while below $9,000. Later, BTC regained positions to $9,002.70. Volumes remain low, mostly due to the outflow of Japanese investors. However, the $9,000 level proved hard to defend, and within hours, BTC sank back again to $8,765.28.

The drop has happened across the market, after a relatively successful week, showing that rapid shakedowns in prices are not out of the question.

For now, BTC volumes remain below the usual $7 billion in 24 hours. Trading against the Japanese Yen takes up to 43% of the market, and the share of the USD is 25%. But about 20% of BTC trades are against the Tether (USDT) asset, again showing the significant influence of the liquidity injection.

 

But this price movement is only seen as a temporary glitch by some. The predictions for Bitcoin remain extremely bullish, and one of the sources is the mining industry. At the moment, the Bitcoin network hashrate has stabilized around its recently achieved peak of 30,000,000 TH/s, and the building of new mining facilities continues.

Some believe that the incentive to mine will keep Bitcoin alive, and even boost its price to reach mining breakeven levels.

The analysis of mining gives an optimistic, but also realistic price prediction, seeing BTC prices move between $20,000 and $60,000.

At the same time, altcoins have proven that they are capable of charting independent paths. The price dominance of Bitcoin shrank again to 36.6%, while altcoins grew in terms of market capitalization.

Some altcoins, such as Decred (DCR), Ethereum (ETH) and others have greeted the potential for ASIC mining. Based on the principle that “miners follow the money”, similar mining economies may form around the most prominent proof-of-work coins.

Tags

Bitcoin News

Source: Read Full Article

Leave a Reply