Christian Langalis, famously known as “Bitcoin Sign Guy,” has auctioned the “Buy Bitcoin” sign he displayed during Janet Yellen’s 2017 Congressional testimony for 16 BTC, approximately million dollars at current prices. The sign was listed on the Scarce City marketplace, and was drawn on a yellow legal pad with a Uniball Vision pen. Langalis […]
Bitcoin News
Janet Yellen Calls for Crypto Regulation in Congressional Testimony, Citing Financial System Risks
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, in her forthcoming appearance before the House Financial Services Committee, is set to emphasize the potential dangers the cryptocurrency industry presents to financial stability, advocating for legislative action to regulate digital assets effectively.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen Urges Congress to Act on Crypto Regulation Amid Financial System Concerns
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is set to speak on the potential risks posed by the crypto industry to the financial system, including the instability of stablecoins, the danger of runs on crypto platforms, and the volatility of crypto-asset prices in her testimony before the House Financial Services Committee on Tuesday. Yellen’s prepared remarks, which were shared ahead of the session, spotlight the government’s increasing focus on digital assets as a significant area of concern.
Leading the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), a coalition of federal financial regulators tasked with ensuring the stability of the country’s financial system, Yellen will present the council’s latest annual report and express the need for legislative action to regulate the crypto sector.
Yellen remarks in her prepared statement:
The council is focused on digital assets and related risks such as from runs on crypto-asset platforms and stablecoins, potential vulnerabilities from crypto-asset price volatility, and the proliferation of platforms acting outside of or out of compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
This appearance comes at a time when the crypto industry continues to recover from high-profile setbacks, including the collapse of the FTX exchange, which Yellen had previously likened to the “Lehman moment” for crypto, referencing the 2008 financial crisis-triggering fall of Lehman Brothers.
Yellen’s statement emphasizes the need for Congress to pass legislation to address these concerns, particularly the regulation of stablecoins and the spot market for crypto-assets that are not classified as securities. She states, “Applicable rules and regulations should be enforced, and Congress should pass legislation to provide for the regulation of stablecoins and of the spot market for crypto-assets that are not securities.”
The FSOC’s 2023 annual report, released in December, had already pointed out the price volatility and interconnectedness within the crypto industry as key concerns. With Yellen’s testimony, the council’s stance on the urgent need for regulatory measures becomes clearer, signaling a concerted effort to mitigate the systemic risks associated with digital assets.
Lawmakers are working on several pieces of legislation, focusing not only on stablecoins but also on broader market structure issues and anti-money laundering measures.
Do you think Yellen is in favor of crypto regulation that will give regulatory clarity, but not stifle growth and innovation? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
FTX Engineer Reveals $8B Bug, Lavish Spending, and Political Donations in Explosive Testimony Against Bankman-Fried
Nishad Singh, former director of engineering at FTX, testified this week against his former boss Sam Bankman-Fried, detailing a software bug that hid billions in missing funds and excessive spending on celebrities and real estate.
Singh Points Finger at Billion Bug and Bankman-Fried’s Spending Sprees
Nishad Singh told the court that a coding error he helped create prevented proper accounting of FTX and Alameda Research, allowing Alameda to secretly build up an billion negative balance using customer funds.
“The bug prevented the correct accounting for the fiat@ FTX account – the error grew to billion,” Singh said. “I overheard a conversation between Gary and Adam Yedidia about it.” The courthouse play-by-play was published by Matthew Russell Lee from the Inner City Press.
The ex-director also described Bankman-Fried’s lavish expenditures, including a million penthouse in the Bahamas that Singh called “too ostentatious.” He said FTX spent over billion on celebrity endorsement deals, real estate, and parties.
“I saw them in the Albany penthouse. This a photo of Katy Perry in green, Orlando Bloom in a [hat], Michael Kives – and Sam,” Singh said about one event attended by celebrities. He expressed concerns to SBF about the deals, but said Bankman-Fried dismissed his objections.
Singh told prosecutors he felt “betrayed” and questioned Bankman-Fried about Alameda’s growing debt, but said SBF was “unsurprised.” After an hour-long private talk on a penthouse balcony, Singh said he still feared leaving and precipitating FTX’s collapse.
The former engineer described SBF’s physical “twitches” and said Bankman-Fried pressured him to take over duties so SBF could spend time on deals. “Sam said, I need you Nishad to take this kind of work off my plate,” Singh recalled. “I was afraid.”
Though concerned, Singh followed orders to process political donations through his personal account at Wells Fargo. He described a Signal chat for laundering funds called “Donations Processing” involving SBF’s brother Gabe. SBF’s brother Gabe was in charge of Guarding Against Pandemics (GAP).
Singh testified he used Prime Trust and Wells Fargo accounts to funnel contributions – illegally provided by Alameda – to Democrats at SBF’s direction. The donations were allegedly made in Singh’s name for “optics,” he said.
After pleading guilty, the former FTX engineer is now a cooperating witness against Bankman-Fried. His testimony provides an inside account of misused customer funds, known coding errors, and the high-rolling lifestyle around SBF that contributed to FTX’s stunning collapse.
What do you think about Nishad Singh’s testimony on Monday? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
BlockFi CEO’s Key Testimony: Insights Into Alameda’s Financial Stability In FTX Trial
The trial against FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried took an intriguing turn as Zac Prince, the CEO of defunct crypto lender BlockFi, provided testimony in a Manhattan federal courtroom.
Prince’s appearance provided valuable insights into the intricate relationship between BlockFi, FTX, and Alameda Research.
BlockFi’s Bankruptcy Rooted In Alameda And FTX
According to a Bloomberg report, Prince revealed that BlockFi had substantial exposure to Alameda and FTX, estimated at around billion, at the time of BlockFi’s failure in November 2022.
Prince asserted that if the loans to Alameda were still in good standing and the funds on FTX were available, BlockFi would not have filed for bankruptcy. This statement suggests that BlockFi’s financial troubles were closely tied to the collapse of Alameda and FTX.
Prince’s testimony diverged significantly from Caroline Ellison, the government’s star witness, who portrayed Bankman-Fried as the mastermind behind a fraudulent scheme using FTX customer funds for speculative trading at Alameda.
Prince’s account positioned BlockFi as a victim of Bankman-Fried’s alleged schemes, claiming that BlockFi made loans to Alameda based on misleading balance sheets.
Defense lawyers sought to emphasize that BlockFi willingly provided the loans to Alameda, with knowledge of the associated risks.
Creditors Accuse BlockFi Of Inadequate Due Diligence
Prince discussed BlockFi’s due diligence process regarding Alameda’s collateral, comprised of tokens affiliated with FTX. The judge requested plainer terms during Prince’s explanation, prompting an analogy using car loans.
Per the report, the prosecution questioned the adequacy of BlockFi’s due diligence, as creditors accused the company of failing to recognize warning signs before offering substantial loans to Alameda.
Prince’s testimony highlighted that providing “unaudited balance sheets” is an industry norm for borrowers seeking loans. The defense sought to establish that BlockFi knew the risks of lending to Alameda and acted within industry norms.
Zac Prince’s testimony in the trial against Sam Bankman-Fried provided a deeper understanding of the intertwined relationships within the crypto industry. BlockFi’s exposure to Alameda and FTX and its subsequent bankruptcy offered insights into the potential repercussions of alleged fraudulent activities.
The differing narratives presented by the prosecution and defense underscore the complexities of the case. As the trial unfolds, the court will continue to examine the details surrounding BlockFi’s lending practices and the extent of Bankman-Fried’s involvement in the alleged schemes.
It is important to note that BlockFi can no longer be utilized for crypto-related activities, as the company declared bankruptcy and suspended withdrawals in November 2022. The bankruptcy filing indicates that BlockFi owes between billion and billion to over 100,000 creditors.
Featured image from NBC, chart from TradingView.com
It ‘Felt Good’ to Come Clean — Caroline Ellison Reveals Intricacies of FTX Operations in Court Testimony
In a recent courtroom showdown, Caroline Ellison, the former CEO of Alameda Research, provided key insights into the operations of FTX and its alleged improprieties. Her revelations, documented by Inner City Press correspondent Matthew Russell Lee, could play a critical role in the ongoing fraud trial against Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX.
Former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison Dives Deep Into the FTX Debacle
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Kaplan reminded Caroline Ellison of her oath, marking the beginning of a series of revelations about the inner workings of FTX. Mark Cohen, representing Sam Bankman-Fried, delved into specifics, asking Ellison about the “fiat account.” Ellison confirmed its existence, revealing that while she was uncertain about the exact number of sub-accounts, saying there were “at least dozens,” according to the X stream published by Matthew Russell Lee from the Inner City Press.
As the line of questioning progressed, Ellison was probed about her time at Alameda and her interactions with Sam Bankman-Fried. She conceded to Cohen’s assertions that she found some of Bankman-Fried’s claims to be accurate once she joined Alameda. When questioned about Bankman-Fried’s character, she stated he was “ambitious” and he encouraged her to adopt the same trait.
The dialogue took an interesting turn when Cohen broached the topic of Solana, the layer one (L1) blockchain Bankman-Fried championed. Ellison plainly admitted her lack of enthusiasm for it, a sentiment contrasting starkly with Bankman-Fried. The duo’s contrasting personalities were further highlighted when Ellison acknowledged their different reactions to stress and divergent fashion sensibilities.
The discussions grew tense as Cohen introduced various exhibits and statements, met with objections from the prosecution, questioning their relevance. In a notable moment, Ellison expressed her concerns about Alameda potentially jeopardizing FTX customers’ funds. She revealed that she had shared these concerns not only with Bankman-Fried but also with other colleagues, namely Gary Wang and Nishad Singh.
Cohen’s cross-examination took a financial turn when he asked about Ellison’s attempts to hedge financial risks in September 2022. Ellison recounted her calculations, suggesting that billions should be sold to hedge, but also admitting to the uncertainty of the situation. A significant revelation came when she mentioned a loss of 0 million due to the depreciation of UST, an algorithmic coin tied to Luna and the Terra blockchain.
In the final moments before the lunch break, Cohen touched upon an alleged bug in the system, and Ellison detailed the bug was discovered in May. The line of questioning, led by Bankman-Fried’s lawyer focused on Alameda’s financial intricacies. He probed Ellison about Alameda’s liquid assets, to which she confirmed the company’s lack thereof. A significant revelation was made when she disclosed Alameda’s repayment of “-10 billion” in the summer, with “ billion” being repaid just in June.
Cohen’s examination took a deeper dive into specific exchanges between Ellison and various entities. Discussing her communication with Genesis on June 18, Ellison revealed it revolved around “sending the balance sheet” and that there were “eight” versions of it. A particularly noteworthy quote emerged when she was questioned about third-party loans.
“It might look like Alameda was funneling money to FTX executives,” Ellison candidly shared. The narrative further unwound as Cohen brought up Bankman-Fried’s attempts to raise money from a Saudi prince, and Ellison’s skepticism of FTX’s potential investment in a company named Modulo.
Towards the end, Cohen referenced a tweet by Ellison, where she claimed that Alameda had returned most of its loans. Ellison clarified, stating, “Not really. We returned third party loans, by taking out more loans from FTX.” As the discussion shifted to an all-hands meeting in Hong Kong, Ellison mentioned that Sam Bankman-Fried had hinted at starting a new company.
The cross-examination concluded with a significant admission by Ellison, confirming that she had indeed informed employees about alleged wrongdoing within the company. In a riveting turn of events, a re-direct by government prosecutors centered on pinpointing the individuals involved in the alleged malfeasance.
When questioned about who was involved in the purported wrongdoing, Ellison unhesitatingly responded, “I said Sam, Gary, Nishad and I – and that the decision to repay loans with customer funds was Sam’s.” As the inquiry delved deeper into her motivations for disclosure, Ellison poignantly remarked, “We had already failed. So I could,” Russell Lee’s account of the situation detailed.
At the end of the testimony, Bankman-Fried’s lawyer claimed Caroline Ellison “went beyond the scope of the agency.” The Federal prosecutors responded that “Ms. Ellison said she would always defer to Sam. Here Mr. Bankman-Fried was aware she was going to have this meeting. He did not seek to remove her [as] CEO – instead, he provided input. So she was his agent.”
What do you think about Ellison’s testimony against Bankman-Fried? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
No Love For FTX: Ex-Girlfriend Delivers Scathing Testimony Against Sam Bankman-Fried
The trial of the former CEO of the defunct crypto exchange FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), resumed on October 10. As expected, the prosecution called Alameda Research’s ex-CEO and SBF’s ex-girlfriend, Caroline Ellison, to testify against the defendant.
Ellison Does More Damage To Sam Bankman-Fried Defense
According to a thread on the X (formerly Twitter) platform by Inner City Press, which was present at the trial, Ellison confirmed what was already known as she stated that she and the defendant dated for a couple of years with their on-and-off relationship, beginning in the summer of 2020.
However, any affection or feelings that she may have had for the defendant didn’t seem to hinder her as she lived up to the hype as the prosecution’s star witness, providing key insights into how Sam Bankman-Fried allegedly misappropriated FTX’s customers’ funds through Alameda which she headed before its collapse.
During her testimony, she admitted that she had committed fraud alongside the defendant. Specifically, she stated that Sam Bankman-Fried directed her to commit these crimes. As to her involvement, she collaborated Wang’s testimony while stating Alameda (and her, by extension) took “several billions of dollars” from FTX customers and used these monies for investments.
Meanwhile, Ellison confirmed that Sam Bankman-Fried was the one who set up the systems and directed the trading firm to take the money. Besides using FTX’s customers’ funds for investments, Alameda also took around million to repay its lenders. She also manipulated Alameda’s balance sheets, making the firm look risky to potential lenders.
Prosecution Uses Ellison To Drive Home Major Allegations
In its opening statement, the Prosecution alleged that Sam Bankman-Fried diverted customers’ fiat deposits to a bank account linked to Alameda, which Ellison confirmed on the stand. She stated that FTX received money into Alameda’s bank accounts between 2021 and 2022. The total sum deposited was between 10-20 billion dollars.
Alameda used some of these deposits to repay loans, investments, and stablecoin conversions like USDC. According to her, this summed up to about billion. It didn’t stop there, though, as the trading firm used the other money for other Alameda-related purposes.
Sam Bankman-Fried and his lawyers have, at different times, tried to lay a foundation that SBF wasn’t in charge of Alameda and didn’t know what was going on at the trading firm after he stepped down as the CEO.
However, Ellison rebutted this on the stand as she stated that things didn’t change much, even when she became the co-CEO alongside Sam Trabucco, as she checked everything with Sam Bankman-Fried and directly reported to him. He also had the power to fire her.
Wire fraud on lenders to Alameda Research and conspiracy to commit wire fraud on lenders to Alameda Research is part of the seven charges brought against SBF. As such, Ellison’s testimony is deemed critical (as someone with first-hand knowledge) in the prosecution’s bid to prove these crimes beyond reasonable doubt.
Inside Caroline Ellison’s Explosive Testimony — Former Alameda CEO Accuses SBF of Directing Fraud at FTX
In bombshell testimony on Tuesday, Caroline Ellison, former CEO of Alameda Research, accused Sam Bankman-Fried of directing her and others to commit fraud under his leadership at FTX and Alameda. Taking the stand in a red dress, Ellison stated “Alameda took several billions of dollars from FTX customers and used it for investments.”
Caroline Ellison Exposes Alleged FTX Fund Siphoning and Political Payoffs
According to reporting by Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press, who streamed the proceedings from the courtroom, Caroline Ellison detailed how she and her colleagues improperly used billions in customer funds from FTX to pay back loans and make speculative investments for Alameda Research.
Lee reported that Ellison claimed she engaged in fraud at Sam Bankman-Fried‘s direction, alleging he “set up the systems and told us to take the money.” The former Alameda CEO estimated that between to billion in FTX customer funds were deposited into Alameda accounts and used for the crypto hedge fund’s purposes. Federal prosecutor Danielle Sassoon asked Ellison directly how Alameda also defrauded its lenders.
Ellison stated:
I sent balance sheets that made Alameda look less risky than it was.
When asked by prosecutors if she was concerned about Alameda tapping FTX customer funds, Ellison admitted she thought customers were unaware and that Bankman-Fried told her “not to worry” and that auditors wouldn’t look into it. She also described helping prop up the price of FTX’s native token FTT by purchasing it when the price fell below , allegedly at Bankman-Fried’s urging. She explained the ins and outs of Alameda’s mystery bank account dubbed “fiat@.”
Ellison’s testimony directly implicated Bankman-Fried in the alleged fraud scheme. Her statements appear to support federal prosecutors’ charges that the founder of FTX misappropriated billions in customer funds to cover losses at Alameda Research. Ellison’s account also highlighted the blurred lines between the two companies under Bankman-Fried’s leadership. Ellison also mentioned all the political donations FTX executives gave U.S. bureaucrats. She stated:
Sam gave million to Biden, he thought it bought him access.
Ellison touched on her intermittent romantic ties with the ex-FTX chief over the years. The spotlight remains on Ellison’s testimony, set to resume tomorrow, while prosecutors anticipate summoning more witnesses as the week progresses. Her account stands as the most incriminating testimony against Bankman-Fried to date.
What do you think about Ellison’s testimony against Bankman-Fried? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Bankman-Fried’s Legal Team Cries Foul Over Ukrainian Customer Testimony
Attorneys for Sam Bankman-Fried have written a letter to the judge, requesting the court block a government witness, a Ukrainian customer who “lost a substantial portion” of his life savings due to the FTX collapse. Bankman-Fried’s lawyers believe the witness’s testimony about hardships faced due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be irrelevant to the charges and highly prejudicial, as it would appeal unfairly to the jury’s sympathies.
Bankman-Fried’s Attorneys Oppose Ukrainian Witness Testimony in FTX Legal Battle
On Oct. 2, 2023, the law firm Cohen & Gresser submitted a letter to the judge presiding over the criminal case against the former FTX boss Sam Bankman-Fried. The government wants to allow a customer witness from Ukraine to testify remotely and detail how he “lost a substantial portion” of his life savings due to FTX’s demise. The lawyers insist allowing the Ukrainian witness to testify remotely would violate Bankman-Fried’s Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him.
The lawyers further added that a customer from a country under a foreign invasion should be excluded. “The proposed testimony that is unique to this witness would apparently reference hardships and individual circumstances created by the Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Bankman-Fried’s lawyer Mark Cohen wrote. The attorney added:
Such testimony would be irrelevant to the charged crimes and would serve only to elicit the jury’s sympathy and outrage.
In another letter, Cohen argues against customer witnesses and investor testimony. The lawyer calls the request premature because the court should not rule on the admissibility of testimony in the abstract without knowing the specific statements at issue. The letter further notes that customer testimony about their subjective understanding of FTX’s custody of assets is irrelevant and investor testimony about materiality is improper.
“The government seemingly wants evidence regarding how customers (and other putative victims) understood the relationship they chose to enter with FTX to be admissible only if offered by the government but excluded if offered by the defense,” Cohen contends. The lawyer’s letter adds:
Having previously argued that it is irrelevant whether customers were ‘negligent, gullible, or insufficiently vigilant,’ the government now insists that testimony that customers’ beliefs and their understanding – whether correct or incorrect – of alleged statements by Mr. Bankman-Fried is ‘directly relevant’ to a critical issue. The Government cannot have it both ways.
The letter urges the denial of the government’s motion as premature and unfounded. It argues the defense should be permitted to cross-examine any witnesses allowed to give these categories of testimony. “At a minimum, if the court permits the government to elicit testimony of customers’ personal understandings and beliefs, the defense must be allowed to probe the nature, basis, and factual accuracy of those views,” Cohen concludes.
What do you think about the letters Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyers wrote concerning specific witnesses? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Bankman-Fried Trial to Feature Customer, Investor, and Co-Conspirator Testimony
In a letter to the judge published Saturday, prosecutors laid out plans to call customers, investors, and co-conspirators to testify in next week’s trial of Sam Bankman-Fried. The former CEO of cryptocurrency exchange FTX faces charges of fraud and conspiracy for allegedly misusing customer funds.
Investors and Customers to Testify in Fraud Trial of Crypto Magnate Sam Bankman-Fried
Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial, slated to begin next week, will feature investors and customers, according to a letter penned by Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Additionally, there will be co-conspirator testimonies from FTX senior personnel such as Zixiao (Gary) Wang, Caroline Ellison, Nishad Singh and Ryan Salame.
Prosecutors say customer testimony will show that users deposited funds on FTX expecting the company would keep the assets safe and separate from its own funds. This relates to charges that Bankman-Fried violated customers’ trust, the letter discloses. Investors who bought FTX shares will testify about promises Bankman-Fried allegedly made that the exchange served as a custodian protecting user assets.
“The testimony of actual investors regarding their expectations for how FTX would operate as a ‘custodian’ for its customers, as the defendant represented, is directly relevant to how a reasonable investor would have viewed those representations when made about a cryptocurrency exchange,” the letter states.
Finally, cooperating witnesses like Singh, Ellison, Wang, and Salame who pleaded guilty to conspiring with Bankman-Fried will explain their understanding of his instructions and statements. Prosecutors argue in the letter that this reveals how the scheme operated. The high-profile trial is slated to begin next Tuesday in New York federal court. Bankman-Fried faces up to 115 years in prison if convicted on all counts.
What do you think about customers and investors testifying against the former FTX boss Sam Bankman-Fried? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
XRP Price At Risk? SEC Chair’s Congressional Testimony Fuels Ripple’s Legal Battle
The cryptocurrency sector, particularly Ripple Labs, has been embroiled in a scenario of concern and uncertainty following a contentious exchange between the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) chair, Gary Gensler, and the House Financial Services Committee in Congress which could affect the XRP price.
Despite Ripple’s partial legal victory against the SEC, Gensler’s stance remains unchanged, as he emphasized the regulatory body’s determination to pursue an interlocutory appeal in the ongoing case. This has raised further questions and apprehension within the industry.
Congressman Highlights Ripple Case’s Far-From-Over Status
During the hearing, Congressman Stephen F. Lynch expressed his concern about the potential pattern whereby court battles become the norm to determine the classification of individual tokens as securities.
While Gensler did not respond directly, he mentioned the SEC’s filing for an interlocutory appeal, highlighting the regulator’s intent to continue the legal battle. Lynch acknowledged that the case is far from over.
On August 17, Judge Torres granted the SEC’s request to file an interlocutory appeal, granting the regulatory body an opportunity to present a compelling case to the Second Circuit.
However, it’s important to note that this permission only allows the SEC to file the motion for an interlocutory appeal, presenting a significant opening for the regulator to challenge the previous ruling and seek a different outcome.
These recent developments, as highlighted by Congressman Lynch, indicate that the ongoing Ripple case may take considerable time to resolve.
As a result, XRP is likely to remain stagnant, trapped in a consolidation phase, or potentially retracing beyond its current levels. This could potentially push the cryptocurrency to pursue another annual low, extending beyond the .4225 mark reached on August 17.
XRP Price Analysis Points To Potential Macro Uptrend
Despite the legal battles and the uncertainty surrounding the current state of the crypto market, some signs might point to a different scenario, where XRP could follow a macro uptrend.
Technical analysis highlights a pattern resembling the last market cycle, which consists of five phases: rise, crash, retrace, reaccumulation, and eventual breakout.
Drawing parallels to previous cycles, many coins have experienced explosive growth beyond their previous all-time highs after the reaccumulation phase.
For instance, Bitcoin went through its reaccumulation phase during the COVID-19 pandemic. Still, due to the ongoing lawsuit, XRP has entered a more prolonged reaccumulation phase in the form of an Elliott wave triangle, similar to the previous cycle.
Currently, the market is in phase E, which suggests a potential retracement upwards, followed by another dip to lower levels. Eventually, there is anticipation for a breakout from this massive triangle, leading to a new all-time high likely to occur next year or the year after.
While some argue that the XRP price fate depends on Bitcoin’s performance, it is worth noting that when comparing XRP to BTC, it is also within an accumulation range and exhibits a bullish outlook. From this perspective, XRP is expected to outperform other alternative coins significantly.
However, for the XRP price to sustain an extended uptrend in the near term, it must overcome significant resistance levels that pose potential challenges. In the immediate time frame, XRP faces a resistance at .5132, followed by two additional formidable barriers, which are expected to be particularly challenging in the coming weeks.
XRP’s 50-day and 200-day Moving Averages (MAs) are currently positioned at .5194 and .5318, respectively. These MAs, once considered reliable support levels, have failed to hold, necessitating a significant catalyst for XRP to surpass them.
This is evident in the chart, depicting the partial victory on July 13, when XRP surged above both MAs. However, since August, XRP has been trading below them.
Featured image from Shutterstock, chart from TradingView.com