Connect with us

Analysis

Bitcoin SV [BSV] Price Analysis: Early week high subsides; pushes token to biggest loser in top-15

Avatar

Published

on

Bitcoin SV [BSV] Price Analysis: Short-term stay for the Bears as BSV drops from early-week high
Source: Pixabay

After dropping briefly to a low of $127.41 billion at the close of trading day on February 27, the market cap is back up to $130 billion, mirroring the market cap 24-hours hence. Bitcoin SV [BSV] pumped up earlier this week following a support announcement from CoinGate, since then the coin has been correcting downwards.

At press time, Bitcoin SV is the biggest loser in the top-15 coins, with a 4.65 percent decline against the US dollar. The coin is currently trading at $68.51 with a market cap of $1.21 billion, trailing Binance Coin by just over $200 million.

In terms of exchange dominance, Bit-Z holds the most BSV trade volume, accounting for $14.52 million, or 12.81 percent, in the trading pair, BCHSV/BTC. Followed by IDCM, holding $9.57 million or 8.47 percent and $9.38 million or 8.28 percent in the trading pairs, BCHSV/BTC, and BCHSV/USDT, respectively.

1-hour:

After two successive uptrends, Bitcoin SV is going through a mild price decline from $76.81 to $70.53, following the price uptick from $69.05 to $74.16.

Bitcoin SV finds immediate support, recorded during to the market correction, at $67.24. The coin poses an immediate resistance as recorded by its rise and rapid fall, at $76.71.

The Bollinger Bands points to a mild increase in volatility of the coin, with the Moving Average line indicating a bearish market for the coin in the short term.

The Chaikin Money Flow tool shows that the amount of money inflow into BSV has decreased as the CMF line has slipped below 0.

The Awesome Oscillator shows that the coin’s short-term momentum is less than its long-term momentum, however, since the concluding bars are green, bullish tendencies are likely.

1-day:

Source: Trading View

The coin has been declining since the close of December, with a severe drop noticed in late January, when the coin dropped down from $75.28 to $65.69. Following which the coin shot up from $69.03 to $75.22.

Bitcoin SV finds long-term resistance at $75.79, which the coin broke and fell below during the recent rise. The immediate support level of the coin stands at $61.64.

The Parabolic SAR shows bullish tendencies for the coin in the one-day chart, as the price has not shot down considerably.

The Relative Strength Index shows that the investor interest in the coin has been on the rise, surging from 39.02 to the current valuation of 50.71.

The MACD Line shows that the coin is looking to break into the bullish zone, following an almost two-month stint with the bears.

Conclusion:

Bitcoin SV has been brought down from the bullish high it saw earlier this week, which pushed the coin above Cardano and about $50 million from Binance Coin. The market correction bears have brought the prices down, leading to an increase in volatility. However, the Awesome Oscillator points to bullish activity, which indicates that the bears’ visit might be short-stayed. In the long-term, investor interest is on an incline while the MACD looks to break into the bullish zone as the Bitcoin SV market looks to finally resurge.





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


News

Bitcoin and Ethereum Classic find themselves on opposite ends of the 51% attack spectrum

Avatar

Published

on

Bitcoin and Ethereum Classic find themselves on opposite ends of the 51% attack spectrum
Source: Unsplash

Every revolutionary product comes with its own fallacy. However, to its internal metrics, in order for that product to remain adherent to the principle it hopes to expound, the cryptocurrency world is no less. Bitcoin [BTC] and other Proof-of-Work [PoW] cryptos have an in-built fallacy as well, the dreaded “51 percent attack.”

A recent study by cryptocurrency analytics firm LongHash, detailed the cryptocurrencies that are the closest to being subjected to the aforementioned attack.

The report looked at ten of the most significant PoW coins including, Bitcoin, Ethereum [ETH], Bitcoin Cash [BCH], Litecoin [LTC], Dash [DASH], Bitcoin SV [BSV], Zcash [ZEC], Monero [XMR], Ethereum Classic [ETC], and Bitcoin Gold [BTG].

Prior to detailing the study, Longhash listed out the two key points required to execute a 51 percent attack. First, a single mining pool/entity/individual would have to control over 50 percent of a network’s mining power. Second, the energy expenses related to the same, based on renting or sheer purchase of mining power.

Dividing the parameters of performance into two key parts, LongHash initially looked at the one-hour attack cost based on data from OnChainFX as on June 19, and consequently, the percentage of mining power available for rent on NiceHash. The matrix for an unsuccessful attack would be a high one-hour attack cost with low power availability, deeming the network “quite safe.”

Source: LongHash

Bitcoin took the top spot, with the report stating that there exists “very little power available to rent,” coupled with a “very high hourly attack cost.”

Traversing down the estimate cost Y-axis, several coins are scattered including, LTC, ETH, BCH, ZEC, BSV, DASH, and XMR, citing low power available via NiceHash. However, the estimated cost to rent the mining power is fairly low.

The report added,

“Most tokens, however, are clustered in the bottom-right corner of our chart, with low mining power availability and hourly attack costs north of $10,000, which makes them appear relatively safe.”

Moving horizontally further down the total mining power X-axis, BTG is the sole cryptocurrency exhibiting around 35 percent mining power availability on Nice Hash, with the lowest estimated cost to rent 51 percent of mining power for sixty minutes.

The biggest worry by far, was Ethereum Classic. The ETH hardfork had more than 80 percent of its mining power available on NiceHash, while the hourly attack was estimated to cost less than $10,000.

Earlier this year, the ETC network was the subject of a 51 percent attack, with several exchanges pausing ETC-related transactions in the process. The attack led to several cases of network double-spends and re-organisations totaling around $1.1 million or 219,500 ETC.





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading