Connect with us

Will this time be different? Bitcoin eyes drop to $35K as BTC price paints ‘death cross’

While recent bearish crossovers between Bitcoin‘s 50-day and 200-day exponential moving averages failed to push prices lower, this time could be different.
Bitcoin (BTC) formed a trading pattern on Jan. 8 that is widely watched by…

Published

on

While recent bearish crossovers between Bitcoin‘s 50-day and 200-day exponential moving averages failed to push prices lower, this time could be different.

Bitcoin (BTC) formed a trading pattern on Jan. 8 that is widely watched by traditional chartists for its ability to anticipate further losses.

In detail, the cryptocurrency's 50-day exponential moving average (50-day EMA) fell below its 200-day exponential moving average (200-day EMA), forming a so-called “death cross.” The pattern appeared as Bitcoin underwent a rough ride in the previous two months, falling over 40% from its record high of $69,000.

BTC/USD daily price chart. Source: TradingView

Death cross history

Previous death crosses were insignificant to Bitcoin over the past two years. For instance, a 50-200-day EMA bearish crossover in March 2020 appeared after the BTC price had fallen from nearly $9,000 to below $4,000, turning out to be lagging than predictive.

Additionally, its occurrence did little in preventing Bitcoin from rising to around $29,000 by the end of 2020, as shown in the chart below:

BTC/USD daily price chart featuring March 2020 death cross. Source: TradingView

Similarly, a death cross appeared on the Bitcoin daily charts in July 2021 that — like in March 2020 — was more lagging and less predictive. Its occurrence did not lead to a massive selloff. Instead, BTC‘s price merely consolidated sideways before rallying to $69,000 by November 2021.

BTC/USD daily price chart featuring death cross. Source: TradingView

But, the bearish moving average crossovers in both the instances, as mentioned above, accompanied a piece of good news which may have limited their impact on the Bitcoin market.

For instance, the Bitcoin price recovery in July 2021 came majorly in the wake of rumors that Amazon would start accepting cryptocurrencies for payments — that later turned out to be false — and following a conference, dubbed “The B-Word,” which saw Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood speaking highly in favor of Bitcoin.

Similarly, Bitcoin recovered sharply from its below $4,000-levels in March 2020, primarily after the United States Federal Reserve announced its loose monetary policies to contain the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic-led stock market crash.

The death cross this time looks dangerous

Bitcoin‘s latest decline reflected growing investor concern about the Fed‘s decision to aggressively unwind its loose monetary policies — including the dialing back of its $120 billion a month asset purchasing program followed by three rate hikes — in 2022.

Typically, rising interest rates make holding volatile assets like Bitcoin less appealing than government bonds, which offer guaranteed yields.

“This is proof that bitcoin acts like a risk asset,” Noelle Acheson, head of market insights at crypto lender Genesis Global Trading, told the Wall Street Journal, adding that the short-term holders would be the “closest to the exit.”

Related: Bitcoin may pass $30K September lows, trader warns

As a result, the overall reduction in cash liquidity, coupled with the death cross formation, could trigger further selloffs in the Bitcoin market. However, that is unless the BTC price rebounds from its current support level around $40,000, the 0.382 Fib line shown in the chart below.

BTC/USD daily price chart featuring Fib retracement levels. Source: TradingView 

Nonetheless, a break below $40,000 may risk sending the Bitcoin price to the next Fib line support near $35,000.  

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph.com. Every investment and trading move involves risk, you should conduct your own research when making a decision.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

The investment case for copper miners – elevated prices are firmly supported by supply bottlenecks

A combination of the Covid pandemic disrupting production and supply chains across the globe and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine almost a year…
The post…

Published

on

A combination of the Covid pandemic disrupting production and supply chains across the globe and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine almost a year ago has led to significant volatility in commodity prices in recent years. Copper prices have been no exception, shooting up 127.66% from a low of $2.17 in mid-March 2020 to an all time record high of $4.94 on February 28 2022.

They subsequently dropped almost 35% between that high and a recent low last July before climbing over 30% against since. It’s been a rollercoaster couple of years for copper, which is used for everything from electronics to equipment manufacturing, building construction, infrastructure and transport.

Copper prices – 10 year chart

Source: MacroTrends

Why are copper prices rising as the economy slows?

Ordinarily, a backdrop of the highest inflation levels in decades, rapidly rising interest rates, geopolitical challenges and a Covid hangover degrading near-term global growth prospects would be expected to weigh on the price of copper and other industrial commodities. But over the past 3 months the price of copper has risen by over 20% as the world economy has deteriorated and demand outlook dwindled.

The recent surge in the price of copper is partly the result of a softer dollar and the end of China’s zero-Covid policy leading to market optimism demand for the metal and other industrial commodities will rise again. However, it’s mainly down to a supply squeeze that has in large part been due to temporary factors such as weather conditions and labour challenges reducing the output of currently active mines.

But while those issues will abate, supply tightness appears baked in for copper for several years to come as a result of underinvestment in new mines and extending current projects. There have been very few significant new copper deposit discoveries in recent years and that is expected to lead to a disconnect between supply and forecast demand over the next several years.

Electric vehicles and renewable energy infrastructure should see demand for copper rise significantly over coming years. Cyclical industries like construction should also bounce back as the global economy recovers from its current downturn, recovering to at least previous levels, on top of new demand resulting from electrification.

Based on current mining output and known new discoveries and miner pipelines, the evidence suggests copper supply will remain tight for years into the future. With that in mind, which copper miners could be worth a closer look from investors?

Antofagasta

Antofagasta

One of the world’s biggest copper miners, FTSE 100 constituent Antofagasta’s activities are mainly concentrated in Chile. While it also produces gold and silver like most copper miners (the metals are typically found in close proximity to each other), Antofagasta’s valuation is most influenced by copper prices and tracks them relatively closely.

The miner is also expected to increase its copper output over the next several years so will be even more tied to the metal’s price trends than now. Antofagasta published a Q4 production update earlier this month, revealing that it exceeded its revised full-year target of producing 646,200 tonnes of copper. It aims to produce between 670,000-710,000 tonnes in the current year, despite rising global inflation that has increased input costs. The net cash costs per pound, however, are expected to stay similar to last year’s.

If the company goes ahead with a proposed second concentrator at its Centinela operation, its annual production could reach 900,000 tonnes by 2026. In the first half of last year the miner had a net-debt-to-equity ratio of 5% and operating profits 64 times higher than net interest costs. The means the company is in the financial position to expand production as part of its five-year plan and absorb potential disruptions or delays to capital investments.

But after a 53% rise in the Antofagasta share price over the past six months, does it still represent the kind of value that should tempt investors to take a closer look? The Telegraph’s Questor investment column thinks it does based on the miner’s long term prospects and a price-to-earnings ratio of just 15 that offers a good safety margin with the FTSE 100 close to its all time high.

BHP Group

BHP Group

Headquartered in Australia with a dual listing in London BHP is one of the world’s biggest miners and was last year the second largest copper producer behind the Chilean state-owned miner Codelco. It’s not as pure a play on copper prices as Antofagasta because it also produces larges quantities of iron ore, nickel, coking and energy goal and gold amongst its metals and minerals portfolio.

But copper prices are very important to BHP and it is investing in increasing its output. Its dominant market position and the volume of its output means it will benefit if prices do hit record levels in 2023 as some analysts predict. However, with share price gains of 25% in the past 6 months and a potential hit to iron ore demand if the global economy struggles for a period, upside at the current valuation is questionable.

Southern Copper

Southern Copper

NYSE-listed Southern Copper is another relatively pure play on copper, though it does also produce smallish quantities of other metals and minerals. Its mines are located across Central and South America, in Mexico, Peru, Argentina, Ecuador and Chile.

The companies gross profits have have rising in recent years from $3.79 billion in 2019 to $7.15 billion in 2021. That’s expected to have dropped for 2022 when full year accounts are released but due to investment in expanding existing projects which should allow it to increase production, and profits, in the long term.

Basically, if the copper price stays strong over the next several years, Southern Copper could prove a wise investment. But it is very closely tied to copper prices so vulnerable to any negative turn the market for the commodity might take.

Investors convinced of the prospects for copper prices in the medium to long term might also consider copper ETFs, which build in some diversity across miners. The biggest is the U.S.-traded Global X Copper Miners ETF.

The post The investment case for copper miners – elevated prices are firmly supported by supply bottlenecks first appeared on Trading and Investment News.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

‘The Scandal Would Be Enormous’: Pfizer Director Worried About Vax-Induced Menstrual Irregularities

‘The Scandal Would Be Enormous’: Pfizer Director Worried About Vax-Induced Menstrual Irregularities

Project Veritas on Thursday released a…

Published

on

'The Scandal Would Be Enormous': Pfizer Director Worried About Vax-Induced Menstrual Irregularities

Project Veritas on Thursday released a new segment of undercover footage of Pfizer director Jordon Walker in which the Director of R&D within the company's mRNA operation expressed concern over how the COVID-19 vaccine may be affecting women's reproductive health.

"There is something irregular about the menstrual cycles. So, people will have to investigate that down the line," Walker told an undercover journalist he thought he was on a date with.

"The [COVID] vaccine shouldn’t be interfering with that [menstrual cycles]. So, we don’t really know," he added.

Walker also hopes we don't discover that "somehow this mRNA lingers in the body and like -- because it has to be affecting something hormonal to impact menstrual cycles," adding "I hope we don’t discover something really bad down the line…If something were to happen downstream and it was, like, really bad? I mean, the scale of that scandal would be enormous."

Watch:

 

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/02/2023 - 19:30

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Growing Number Of Doctors Say They Won’t Get COVID-19 Booster Shots

Growing Number Of Doctors Say They Won’t Get COVID-19 Booster Shots

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A…

Published

on

Growing Number Of Doctors Say They Won’t Get COVID-19 Booster Shots

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A growing number of doctors say that they will not get COVID-19 vaccine boosters, citing a lack of clinical trial evidence.

I have taken my last COVID vaccine without RCT level evidence it will reduce my risk of severe disease,” Dr. Todd Lee, an infectious disease expert at McGill University, wrote on Twitter.

A vial of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is seen in a file photograph. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Lee was pointing to the lack of randomized clinical trial (RCT) results for the updated boosters, which were cleared in the United States and Canada in the fall of 2022 primarily based on data from experiments with mice.

Lee, who has received three vaccine doses, noted that he was infected with the Omicron virus variant—the vaccines provide little protection against infection—and described himself as a healthy male in his 40s.

Dr. Vinay Prasad, a professor of epidemiology and biostatics at the University of California, San Francisco, also said he wouldn’t take any additional shots until clinical trial data become available.

“I took at least 1 dose against my will. It was unethical and scientifically bankrupt,” he said.

Allison Krug, an epidemiologist who co-authored a study that found teenage boys were more likely to suffer heart inflammation after COVID-19 vaccination than COVID-19 infection, recounted explaining to her doctor why she was refusing a booster and said her doctor agreed with her position.

She called on people to “join the movement to demand appropriate evidence,” pointing to a blog post from Prasad.

“Pay close attention to note this isn’t anti-vaccine sentiment. This is ‘provide [hard] evidence of benefit to justify ongoing use’ which is very different. It is only fair for a 30 billion dollar a year product given to hundreds of millions,” Lee said.

Dr. Mark Silverberg, who founded the Toronto Immune and Digestive Health Institute; Kevin Bass, a medical student; and Dr. Tracy Høeg, an epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, joined Lee and Prasad in stating their opposition to more boosters, at least for now.

Høeg said she did not need clinical trials to know she’s not getting any boosters after receiving a two-dose primary series, adding that she took the second dose “against my will.”

I also had an adverse reaction to dose 1 moderna and, if I could do it again, I would not have had any covid vaccines,” she said on Twitter. “I was glad my parents in their 70s could get covid vaccinated but have yet to see non-confounded data to advise them about the bivalent booster. I would have liked to see an RCT for the bivalent for people their age and for adults with health conditions that put them at risk.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted emergency use authorization to updated boosters, or bivalent shots, from Pfizer and Moderna in August 2022 despite there being no human data.

Observational data suggests the boosters provide little protection against infection and solid shielding against severe illness, at least initially.

Five months after the authorization was granted, no clinical trial data has been made available for the bivalents, which target the Wuhan strain as well as the BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants of Omicron. Moderna presented efficacy estimates for a different bivalent, which has never been used in the United States, during a recent meeting. The company estimated the booster increased protection against infection by just 10 percent.

The FDA is preparing to order all Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines be replaced with the bivalents. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which issues recommendations on vaccines, continues advising virtually all Americans to get a primary series and multiple boosters.

Professor Calls for Halt to Messenger RNA Vaccines

A professor, meanwhile, became the latest to call for a halt to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which are both based on messenger RNA technology.

At this point in time, all COVID mRNA vaccination program[s] should stop immediately,” Retsef Levi, a professor of operations management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in a video statement. “They should stop because they completely failed to fulfill any of their advertised promise[s] regarding efficacy. And more importantly, they should stop because of the mounting and indisputable evidence that they cause unprecedented level of harm, including the death of young people and children.”

Levi was referring to post-vaccination heart inflammation, or myocarditis. The condition is one of the few that authorities have acknowledged is caused by the messenger RNA vaccines.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/02/2023 - 19:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending