2026-01-18 10:27:57

As of 17:30 today, BTC short-term quote is 95,180 USDT, with a gain of only 0.21%, repeatedly fluctuating within the narrow range of 94,800-95,600 USDT. Weekend trading is light, and the market sentiment is cautious, with both bulls and bears repeatedly tugging near the previous high of 94,760 USDT—whether to break through or pull back, the answer is about to be revealed.

**Market Situation Breakdown**

The price is oscillating around 95,000 USDT, with candlesticks mostly small red and green, indicating that buying momentum is clearly waning. The previous high of 94,760 USDT is critical—holding it can maintain a high-level consolidation, but losing it could trigger a risk.

Volume performance is somewhat sluggish. In the past hour, there has been little movement, and the 24-hour trading volume has shrunk by 47.99% compared to yesterday, indicating that institutional funds are hesitant even within large trading zones (94,000-95,200 USDT). The true direction requires volume confirmation to be certain.

Support levels are around 94,760-95,000 USDT (previous high rebound + short-term moving average resonance), while resistance is locked at 95,500-95,600 USDT (recent volatility ceiling).

**Technical Analysis Breakdown**

In the moving average system, the 1-hour 5 and 10-period MA are already flat and intertwined. The medium-term MA is inclined upward, but the daily MA100 is still pressing down, indicating that medium-term selling pressure has not been fully released.

MACD is near the zero line, with very weak momentum bars; RSI is stuck around 50 in the neutral zone, neither overbought nor oversold. Under the resistance of multi-timeframe resonance, several attempts to push higher have been repelled.

From a trend perspective, this is a weak consolidation after a breakout—after peaking four hours ago, it quickly pulled back. Support is temporarily effective but momentum is clearly insufficient. Combined with the structural slow bull rhythm led by institutions since 2026, the next move after this wave of consolidation depends heavily on key levels. Reckless chasing or panic selling carries high risk; it’s better to wait for a breakout signal before taking action.

BTC-2,29%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

17 Likes

Reward
17
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DeFiGrayling

· 23h ago

Is this another deadlock situation? Are the institutions all sleeping in?

View OriginalReply0

GasGuru

· 23h ago

Still repeatedly struggling at the 94760 level, can we break through this time? With such a significant decrease in volume, still trying to push upward, probably just fooling us into buying in. As expected, weekends are just zombie trading, so boring. Let's wait until a breakdown occurs; chasing the rally now is just asking for death. MA100 is still pressing down, don't expect the bulls to turn around so easily. With such poor trading volume, are institutions also yawning? Supporting the market at 94760? I think it's doubtful; it feels like we're going to fall. When will the breakdown signal come? I really can't wait any longer. Lingering around the zero axis without movement, indeed lacking momentum, I'll just watch it stay still. Another weak consolidation, does it have to fall to 94000 to feel comfortable?

View OriginalReply0

AllInDaddy

· 23h ago

Such a sharp decrease in volume, institutions are all watching cautiously. This is a test of your mindset.

View OriginalReply0

DeFiDoctor

· 23h ago

The consultation records show that the current clinical presentation of BTC is a typical "momentum exhaustion syndrome." The 47.99% decrease in trading volume is already a clear sign of capital outflow. The MA100 is still pressing down, and the RSI is firmly stuck in the neutral zone at 50. In plain terms, it's waiting for a breakout signal to confirm the direction.

View OriginalReply0