Andy Millette

+ All Metal Charts
+ All Crypto Charts

Industry News

  • Bessent Dismisses CEO Recession Fears: ‘Focus on Main Street, Not Wall Street’

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is urging top CEOs to stop worrying about tariffs, promising clarity within 90 days on trade policy, taxes, and deregulation. This reassurance comes as major business leaders express recession concerns, with JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon predicting a downturn and Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon noting increased recession risks. Even Bessent’s former mentor Stanley Druckenmiller has criticized tariffs exceeding 10%. Consumer-facing companies are already feeling the impact, with Constellation Brands reporting decreased spending on restaurants and consumer goods affecting their beer sales. Bessent has dismissed these Wall Street concerns, emphasizing the administration’s focus on Main Street over Wall Street. The post Bessent Dismisses CEO Recession Fears: ‘Focus on Main Street, Not Wall Street’ appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • S&P Warns of Potential US Credit Downgrade as Debt Reaches 100% of GDP

    S&P Global Ratings has issued a warning that it may further downgrade the United States’ credit rating from its current AA+ status, citing unsustainable debt levels and ongoing political dysfunction. In an April 14 report, S&P indicated that upcoming budget negotiations will be crucial in determining US creditworthiness. The US has already experienced credit downgrades, with S&P first reducing the rating in 2011 during a debt ceiling crisis when national debt was $15 trillion (66% of GDP). Today, that debt has ballooned to $36 trillion, with public debt now representing approximately 100% of GDP. This deteriorating fiscal outlook prompted Fitch The post S&P Warns of Potential US Credit Downgrade as Debt Reaches 100% of GDP appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • Chinese Officials Outline Path to Resolving US Trade War

    China has outlined several conditions for restarting trade talks with the Trump administration, including more respectful rhetoric from US officials, consistency in the US position, and addressing China’s concerns about sanctions and Taiwan. Beijing also wants a designated point person with Trump’s support who can help prepare a deal for Trump and Xi Jinping to sign. The ongoing trade dispute, with 145% US tariffs on most Chinese goods since Trump took office, threatens global economic stability and has led to broad Chinese public support for retaliation against the US. The post Chinese Officials Outline Path to Resolving US Trade War appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • Gold Passes $3,300/oz as Metals Bull Market Rages

    As markets grapple with tariff chaos, gold soars to a record $3,300/oz. See why metals are outperforming while traditional investments falter. The post Gold Passes $3,300/oz as Metals Bull Market Rages appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • US Challenges China’s Mineral Dominance with New Tariff Investigation

    President Trump has ordered an investigation into possible tariffs on all critical mineral imports to the US, citing national security concerns. The probe will examine market dynamics for minerals like cobalt, nickel, rare earths, and uranium. This move comes as the US remains heavily dependent on China and other countries for processed minerals essential to the economy. China recently retaliated against Trump’s tariffs by restricting rare earth exports, highlighting America’s vulnerability in this sector. The post US Challenges China’s Mineral Dominance with New Tariff Investigation appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • Gold Soars Past $3,300 as Trump’s Mineral Tariff Probe Sparks Safe-Haven Rush

    Gold prices hit a new record high of $3,317.90 per ounce on Wednesday as investors sought safe-haven assets following President Trump’s probe into potential tariffs on critical mineral imports. This move, seen as targeting China, comes alongside new export restrictions on AI chips to China. According to a BofA survey, “long gold” has now surpassed U.S. tech as the most crowded trade, with 73% of respondents believing U.S. market exceptionalism has peaked. ANZ has raised its year-end gold price forecast to $3,600. The post Gold Soars Past $3,300 as Trump’s Mineral Tariff Probe Sparks Safe-Haven Rush appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • Recession Fears Fuel Gold’s Rise as Major Banks Raise Price Targets to $3,500+

    Goldman Sachs and UBS have issued new bullish forecasts for gold prices, raising their targets significantly. Goldman Sachs analysts now predict gold will reach $3,700 per ounce by the end of 2024 and climb to $4,000 by mid-2026. UBS is similarly optimistic, forecasting $3,500 per ounce by December 2025. These upgraded forecasts follow gold’s impressive 6.6% surge last week, which pushed prices to a record high above $3,245 per ounce on Monday. Both banks had previously upgraded their outlooks in March, reflecting strong consensus on gold’s prospects amid global market uncertainty, particularly related to President Trump’s trade policies. Goldman has The post Recession Fears Fuel Gold’s Rise as Major Banks Raise Price Targets to $3,500+ appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • How Gold Protects Your Portfolio During Recessions

    When the economy starts to falter, smart investors often reach for gold. Acting as a proven gold recession hedge throughout market cycles, this precious metal offers a financial sanctuary during uncertain times. But why exactly do gold and silver become so valuable when times get tough?  Throughout history, gold has been the go-to safe haven when other investments start to crumble. While stocks dive and real estate cools during recessions, gold often follows its own path — one that can help keep your overall wealth intact.  What Makes Gold Special During Tough Economic Times?  When recession hits, traditional investments typically The post How Gold Protects Your Portfolio During Recessions appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • Fed’s Waller: Economic Slowdown from Trump Tariffs May Prompt Rate Cuts

    Fed Governor Chris Waller stated that if President Trump’s large tariffs remain in place, the Federal Reserve may need to cut interest rates sooner than planned. Despite potential inflation spikes up to 5%, Waller believes any tariff-induced inflation would be temporary, and the threat of economic slowdown would outweigh inflation concerns. He outlined two scenarios: a “large tariff” scenario (25% average rate) that might require immediate action, and a “smaller tariff” scenario (10% average rate) that would allow for more gradual policy adjustments. The post Fed’s Waller: Economic Slowdown from Trump Tariffs May Prompt Rate Cuts appeared first on GoldSilver.

  • America’s Trade Dilemma: Tough Talk, Selective Tariffs in China Showdown

    The US has shown weakness in its trade war with China by creating carve-outs for consumer electronics from its recent 145% tariffs. While the White House defends these exceptions as strategic, critics see them as evidence of America’s vulnerable position against a well-prepared China. The US faces a difficult balance – imposing tariffs to bring manufacturing home while simultaneously hurting American manufacturers who depend on Chinese parts. China, having prepared for this confrontation, has responded with a mix of countermeasures including tariffs, export restrictions on critical minerals, and targeting American firms. The post America’s Trade Dilemma: Tough Talk, Selective Tariffs in China Showdown appeared first on GoldSilver.

Company Press Releases

Mexico’s Legal Framework for Mining to be Clarified by Mid-Year

Published: Friday, March 14, 2025 Mexico’s legal framework for mining is set to become clearer by mid-year when the government expects to publish the regulations required to implement the amended mining law, which was reformed in May 2023. After six years of uncertainty due to a freeze on the granting of concessions and delays in issuing key permits for mining operations, the Claudia Sheinbaum administration, which took office in October, is signaling greater openness toward the sector, which is considered strategic for the economy and the energy transition. In this context, the government and the private sector, led by the mining chamber (Camimex), are working together to develop a regulatory framework to provide greater certainty for operations, according to Fernando Aboitiz, head of the extractive activities coordination unit at the economy ministry. Speaking at the Mexico Mining Forum 2025 PDAC in Toronto, Canada, Aboitiz said: “By June, we will have

Read More »

ANGKOR RESOURCES COMMENCES DRILLING AT ANDONG

MEAS WILD BOAR PROSPECT, CAMBODIA February 20, 2025 GRANDE PRAIRIE, ALBERTA (February 20, 2025): ANGKOR RESOURCES CORP. (TSXV: ANK) (“ANGKOR”) commenced diamond drilling with our partners B.S.N. Ratanak Sambath Co. Ltd. on the Wild Boar prospect of the Andong Meas tenement in Ratanakiri Province. The drill program initially will be three 200-meter holes and one 100-meter hole. Drill locations were selected to test the recent magnetics completed and high-grade surface samples found across the anomaly plus the trenching program of 2023. The prospect had significant results from float samples ranging up to 70 grams per tonne of gold across an area roughly one kilometre from north to south and 500 metres wide. (see map on following page) Read full press release here

Read More »

PTX Metals – February 2025 Corporate Presentation

Focused on High-Quality Gold and Copper-Nickel-PGE Assets Located in World-Acclaimed Mining Camps of Northern Ontario February 5, 2025 Forward-Looking Statement This presentation has been prepared by PTX Metals Inc. and should be read in conjunction with the Company’s final listing applications to the TSX Venture Exchange (2005) and Canadian Securities Exchange (2017), its management discussion and analysis documents, and other SEDAR filings. This presentation does not constitute a prospectus or public offering for financing. Interested investors should seek advice from their investment advisors. This presentation contains “forward-looking statements” which reflect the Company’s expectations with respect to future events and are based on information currently available to the Company. Wherever possible, words such as “may”, “would”, “could”, “will”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “plan”, “expect” and similar expressions have been used to identify these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve significant known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions. A number of factors could cause actual

Read More »

Andy's Corner & VixChange Stories

VIXCHANGE Logo
Vixchange

End-of-the-Year Market Update

In 1999, I was a young trader working for a small hedge fund. The stock market was going straight up, the economy was doing great, and commodities markets were forgotten

Read More »

It was July 2007

It was July 2007.  On a whim, I sent an email to Aaron Krowne, founder of the website ML-IMPLODE.com.  I learned that he was a grad student at Emory University

Read More »

Crypto News

  • CoinDesk Announces Eric Trump as a Headline Speaker at Consensus 2025

    The president’s son will discuss his mining venture American Bitcoin alongside Asher Genoot, Chief Executive Officer of Hut 8.

  • Market maker deals are quietly killing crypto projects

    The right market maker can be a launchpad for a cryptocurrency project, opening the door to major exchanges and providing valuable liquidity to ensure a token is tradeable — but when the wrong incentives are baked into the deal, that market maker can become a wrecking ball.One of the most popular and misunderstood offerings in the market-making world is the “loan option model.” This is when a project lends tokens to a market maker, who then uses them to create liquidity, improve price stability, and help secure listings at a cryptocurrency exchange. In reality, it has been a death sentence for many young projects.But behind the scenes, a number of market makers is using the controversial token loan structure to enrich themselves at the expense of the very projects they’re meant to support. These deals, often framed as low-risk and high-reward, can crater token prices and leave fledgling crypto teams scrambling to recover.“How it works is that market makers essentially loan tokens from a project at a certain price. In exchange for those tokens, they essentially promise to get them on big exchanges,” Ariel Givner, founder of Givner Law, told Cointelegraph. “If they don’t, then within a year, they repay them back at a higher price.”What often happens is that market makers dump the loaned tokens. The initial sell-off tanks the price. Once the price has cratered, they buy the tokens back at a discount while keeping the profit.Source: Ariel Givner“I haven’t seen any token really benefit from these market makers,” Givner said. “I’m sure there are ethical ones, but the bigger ones I’ve seen just destroy charts.”The market maker playbookFirms like DWF Labs and Wintermute are some of the best-known market makers in the industry. Past governance proposals and contracts reviewed by Cointelegraph suggest that both firms proposed loan option models as part of their services — though Wintermute’s proposals call them “liquidity provision” services.DWF Labs told Cointelegraph that it doesn’t rely on selling loaned assets to fund positions, as its balance sheet sufficiently supports its operations across exchanges without relying on liquidation risk. “Selling loaned tokens upfront can damage a project’s liquidity — especially for small- to mid-cap tokens — and we’re not in the business of weakening ecosystems we invest in,” Andrei Grachev, managing partner of DWF Labs, said in a written response to Cointelegraph’s inquiry.Related: Who’s really getting rich from the crypto bull run?While DWF Labs emphasizes its commitment to ecosystem growth, some onchain analysts and industry observers have raised concerns about its trading practices.Wintermute did not respond to Cointelegraph’s request for comment. But in a February X post, Wintermute CEO Evgeny Gaevoy published a series of posts to share some of the company’s operations with the community. He bluntly stated that Wintermute is not a charity but in the “business of making money by trading.” Source: Evgeny GaevoyWhat happens after the market maker gets the tokens?Jelle Buth, co-founder of market maker Enflux, told Cointelegraph that the loan option model is not unique to the well-known market makers like DWF and Wintermute and that there are other parties offering such “predatory deals.”“I call it information arbitrage, where the market maker very clearly understands the pros and cons of the deals but is able to put it such that it’s a benefit. What they say is, ‘It’s a free market maker; you don’t have to put up the capital as a project; we provide the capital; we provide the market-making services,’” Buth said.On the other end, many projects don’t fully understand the downsides of loan option deals and often learn the hard way that they weren’t built in their favor. Buth advises projects to measure whether loaning out their tokens would result in quality liquidity, which is measured by orders on the book and clearly outlined in the key performance indicators (KPIs) before committing to such deals. In many loan option deals, KPIs are often missing or vague when mentioned.Cointelegraph reviewed the token performance of several projects that signed loan option deals with market makers, including some that worked with multiple firms at once. The outcome was the same in those examples: The projects were left worse off than when they started.Six projects that worked with market makers under the loan option agreement tanked in price. Source: CoinGecko“We’ve worked with projects that were screwed over after the loan model,” Kristiyan Slavev, co-founder of Web3 accelerator Delta3, told Cointelegraph.“It’s exactly the same pattern. They give tokens, then they’re dumped. That’s pretty much what happens,” he said.Not all market-maker deals end in disasterThe loan option model isn’t inherently harmful and can even benefit larger projects, but poor structuring can quickly turn it predatory, according to Buth.A listings adviser who spoke to Cointelegraph on the condition of anonymity echoed the point, emphasizing that outcomes depend on how well a project manages its liquidity relationships. “I’ve seen a project with up to 11 market makers — about half using the loan model and the rest smaller firms,” they said. “The token didn’t dump because the team knew how to manage price and balance the risk across multiple partners.”The adviser compared the model to borrowing from a bank: “Different banks offer different rates. No one runs a money-losing business unless they expect a return,” they said, adding that in crypto, the balance of power often favors those with more information. “It’s survival of the fittest.”But some say the problem runs deeper. In a recent X post, Arthur Cheong, founder of DeFiance Capital, accused centralized exchanges of feigning ignorance of artificial pricing fueled by token projects and market makers working in lockstep. “Confidence in the altcoin market is eroding,” he wrote. “Absolutely bizarre that CEXs are turning an absolute blind eye to this.”Still, the listings adviser maintained that not all exchanges are complicit: “The different tier exchanges are also taking really extreme actions against any predatory market makers, as well as projects that might look like they rugged. What exchanges do is they actually immediately lock up that account while they do their own investigation.”“While there is a close working relationship, there is no influence between the market maker and the exchange of what gets listed. Every exchange would have their own due diligence processes. And to be frank, depending on the tier of the exchange, there is no way that there would be such an arrangement.”Related: Crypto’s debanking problem persists despite new regulationsRethinking market maker incentivesSome argue for a shift toward the “retainer model,” where a project pays a flat monthly fee to a market maker in exchange for clearly defined services rather than giving away tokens upfront. It’s less risky, though more expensive in the short term.“The retainer model is much better because that way, market makers have incentives to work with the projects long term. In a loan model, you get, like, a one-year contract; they give you the tokens, you dump the tokens, and then one year after that, you return the tokens. Completely worthless,” Slavev said.While the loan option model appears “predatory,” as Buth put it, Givner pointed out that in all these agreements, both parties involved agree to a secure contract.“I don’t see a way that, at this current time, this is illegal,” Givner said. “If somebody wanted to look at manipulation, that’s one thing, but we’re not dealing with securities. So, that gray area is still there in crypto — [to] some extent the Wild West.”The industry is becoming more aware of the risks tied to loan option models, especially as sudden token crashes increasingly raise red flags. In a now-deleted X post, onchain account Onchain Bureau claimed that a recent 90% drop in Mantra’s OM token was due to an expiring loan option deal with FalconX. Mantra denied the claim, clarifying that FalconX is a trading partner, not its market maker.Edited LinkedIn copy of Onchain Bureau’s LinkedIn post. Source: Nahuel AngeloneBut the episode highlights a growing trend: The loan option model has become a convenient scapegoat for token collapses — often with good reason. In a space where deal terms are hidden behind NDAs and roles like “market maker” or “trading partner” are fluid at best, it’s no surprise the public assumes the worst.“We’re speaking up because we make money off the retainer model, but also, this [loan option model] is just killing projects too much,” Buth said.Until transparency and accountability improve, the loan option model will remain one of crypto’s most misunderstood and abused deals.Magazine: What do crypto market makers actually do? Liquidity or manipulation

  • Market maker deals are quietly killing crypto projects

    The right market maker can be a launchpad for a cryptocurrency project, opening the door to major exchanges and providing valuable liquidity to ensure a token is tradeable — but when the wrong incentives are baked into the deal, that market maker can become a wrecking ball.One of the most popular and misunderstood offerings in the market-making world is the “loan option model.” This is when a project lends tokens to a market maker, who then uses them to create liquidity, improve price stability, and help secure listings at a cryptocurrency exchange. In reality, it has been a death sentence for many young projects.But behind the scenes, a number of market makers is using the controversial token loan structure to enrich themselves at the expense of the very projects they’re meant to support. These deals, often framed as low-risk and high-reward, can crater token prices and leave fledgling crypto teams scrambling to recover.“How it works is that market makers essentially loan tokens from a project at a certain price. In exchange for those tokens, they essentially promise to get them on big exchanges,” Ariel Givner, founder of Givner Law, told Cointelegraph. “If they don’t, then within a year, they repay them back at a higher price.”What often happens is that market makers dump the loaned tokens. The initial sell-off tanks the price. Once the price has cratered, they buy the tokens back at a discount while keeping the profit.Source: Ariel Givner“I haven’t seen any token really benefit from these market makers,” Givner said. “I’m sure there are ethical ones, but the bigger ones I’ve seen just destroy charts.”The market maker playbookFirms like DWF Labs and Wintermute are some of the best-known market makers in the industry. Past governance proposals and contracts reviewed by Cointelegraph suggest that both firms proposed loan option models as part of their services — though Wintermute’s proposals call them “liquidity provision” services.DWF Labs told Cointelegraph that it doesn’t rely on selling loaned assets to fund positions, as its balance sheet sufficiently supports its operations across exchanges without relying on liquidation risk. “Selling loaned tokens upfront can damage a project’s liquidity — especially for small- to mid-cap tokens — and we’re not in the business of weakening ecosystems we invest in,” Andrei Grachev, managing partner of DWF Labs, said in a written response to Cointelegraph’s inquiry.Related: Who’s really getting rich from the crypto bull run?While DWF Labs emphasizes its commitment to ecosystem growth, some onchain analysts and industry observers have raised concerns about its trading practices.Wintermute did not respond to Cointelegraph’s request for comment. But in a February X post, Wintermute CEO Evgeny Gaevoy published a series of posts to share some of the company’s operations with the community. He bluntly stated that Wintermute is not a charity but in the “business of making money by trading.” Source: Evgeny GaevoyWhat happens after the market maker gets the tokens?Jelle Buth, co-founder of market maker Enflux, told Cointelegraph that the loan option model is not unique to the well-known market makers like DWF and Wintermute and that there are other parties offering such “predatory deals.”“I call it information arbitrage, where the market maker very clearly understands the pros and cons of the deals but is able to put it such that it’s a benefit. What they say is, ‘It’s a free market maker; you don’t have to put up the capital as a project; we provide the capital; we provide the market-making services,’” Buth said.On the other end, many projects don’t fully understand the downsides of loan option deals and often learn the hard way that they weren’t built in their favor. Buth advises projects to measure whether loaning out their tokens would result in quality liquidity, which is measured by orders on the book and clearly outlined in the key performance indicators (KPIs) before committing to such deals. In many loan option deals, KPIs are often missing or vague when mentioned.Cointelegraph reviewed the token performance of several projects that signed loan option deals with market makers, including some that worked with multiple firms at once. The outcome was the same in those examples: The projects were left worse off than when they started.Six projects that worked with market makers under the loan option agreement tanked in price. Source: CoinGecko“We’ve worked with projects that were screwed over after the loan model,” Kristiyan Slavev, co-founder of Web3 accelerator Delta3, told Cointelegraph.“It’s exactly the same pattern. They give tokens, then they’re dumped. That’s pretty much what happens,” he said.Not all market-maker deals end in disasterThe loan option model isn’t inherently harmful and can even benefit larger projects, but poor structuring can quickly turn it predatory, according to Buth.A listings adviser who spoke to Cointelegraph on the condition of anonymity echoed the point, emphasizing that outcomes depend on how well a project manages its liquidity relationships. “I’ve seen a project with up to 11 market makers — about half using the loan model and the rest smaller firms,” they said. “The token didn’t dump because the team knew how to manage price and balance the risk across multiple partners.”The adviser compared the model to borrowing from a bank: “Different banks offer different rates. No one runs a money-losing business unless they expect a return,” they said, adding that in crypto, the balance of power often favors those with more information. “It’s survival of the fittest.”But some say the problem runs deeper. In a recent X post, Arthur Cheong, founder of DeFiance Capital, accused centralized exchanges of feigning ignorance of artificial pricing fueled by token projects and market makers working in lockstep. “Confidence in the altcoin market is eroding,” he wrote. “Absolutely bizarre that CEXs are turning an absolute blind eye to this.”Still, the listings adviser maintained that not all exchanges are complicit: “The different tier exchanges are also taking really extreme actions against any predatory market makers, as well as projects that might look like they rugged. What exchanges do is they actually immediately lock up that account while they do their own investigation.”“While there is a close working relationship, there is no influence between the market maker and the exchange of what gets listed. Every exchange would have their own due diligence processes. And to be frank, depending on the tier of the exchange, there is no way that there would be such an arrangement.”Related: Crypto’s debanking problem persists despite new regulationsRethinking market maker incentivesSome argue for a shift toward the “retainer model,” where a project pays a flat monthly fee to a market maker in exchange for clearly defined services rather than giving away tokens upfront. It’s less risky, though more expensive in the short term.“The retainer model is much better because that way, market makers have incentives to work with the projects long term. In a loan model, you get, like, a one-year contract; they give you the tokens, you dump the tokens, and then one year after that, you return the tokens. Completely worthless,” Slavev said.While the loan option model appears “predatory,” as Buth put it, Givner pointed out that in all these agreements, both parties involved agree to a secure contract.“I don’t see a way that, at this current time, this is illegal,” Givner said. “If somebody wanted to look at manipulation, that’s one thing, but we’re not dealing with securities. So, that gray area is still there in crypto — [to] some extent the Wild West.”The industry is becoming more aware of the risks tied to loan option models, especially as sudden token crashes increasingly raise red flags. In a now-deleted X post, onchain account Onchain Bureau claimed that a recent 90% drop in Mantra’s OM token was due to an expiring loan option deal with FalconX. Mantra denied the claim, clarifying that FalconX is a trading partner, not its market maker.Edited LinkedIn copy of Onchain Bureau’s LinkedIn post. Source: Nahuel AngeloneBut the episode highlights a growing trend: The loan option model has become a convenient scapegoat for token collapses — often with good reason. In a space where deal terms are hidden behind NDAs and roles like “market maker” or “trading partner” are fluid at best, it’s no surprise the public assumes the worst.“We’re speaking up because we make money off the retainer model, but also, this [loan option model] is just killing projects too much,” Buth said.Until transparency and accountability improve, the loan option model will remain one of crypto’s most misunderstood and abused deals.Magazine: What do crypto market makers actually do? Liquidity or manipulation

  • Ethereum Is What Bitcoin Was Meant to Be

    The other major cryptocurrency is becoming the global settlement layer for on-chain assets, says Advantage Blockchain’s Alec Beckman.

  • Bitcoin tipped for 2023-style rebound as Goldman says dollar 'overvalued'

    Bitcoin (BTC) centered on $84,000 at the April 16 Wall Street open amid hopes that a weak US dollar would fuel a bull market comeback.BTC/USD 1-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingViewBitcoin analysis calls for 2023 rally repeatData from Cointelegraph Markets Pro and TradingView showed BTC/USD consolidating after a swift comedown from local highs the day prior.That volatility had accompanied ongoing developments in the US-China trade war, with crypto and risk assets staying sensitive to headlines and statements from parties such as US President Donald Trump.The S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite Index traded down 1.4% and 2.2%, respectively, at the time of writing.Gold remained the standout winner, having set new all-time highs above $3,300 per ounce on the day.“Unlike gold, BTC has not caught a safe-haven bid,” trading firm QCP Capital summarized in its latest bulletin to Telegram channel subscribers. “The ‘alternative store of value’ narrative isn't gaining traction in the current macro regime. Positioning remains defensive. Participants are still focused on hedging their downside until greater clarity emerges.”Gold/USD price 1-hr candle chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingViewLooking for potential tailwinds, market participants focused on the US dollar’s inability to reclaim prior support after sliding precipitously as the trade war took hold.The US dollar index (DXY) hovered near multiyear lows after rejecting at the psychologically significant 100 mark.US Dollar Index price 1-hr candle chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView“DXY is dropping at its fastest pace since 2023,” popular trader BitBull told followers in a post on X.BitBull drew comparisons to BTC price performance from the time, with early 2023 seeing Bitcoin and altcoins emerge from the pit of the 2022 bear market.“Back then, $BTC had already bottomed (Q4 2022) and went on to rally 200%+ within a year,” he continued.“I guess it’s time for btc to repeat the 2023-24 rally.”Source: X/@AkaBull_Andre Dragosch, European head of research at asset management firm Bitwise, meanwhile flagged Goldman Sachs research seeing further DXY downside to come.“NOTE: US Dollar is still significantly overvalued according to GS,” he commented alongside a Goldman chart of dollar strength versus US growth performance. “Lots of room for USD depreciation = upside potential for BTC to re-rate.”Source: X/@Andre_DragoschBTC price gives cautious bullish hintsBitcoin traders eyed various positive chart signals on the day, with these including a potential bottom formation on the 4-hour chart.Related: Can 3-month Bitcoin RSI highs counter bearish BTC price 'seasonality?'“Forming an Inverse Head & Shoulders Pattern on the 4H timeframe, if we manage to hold a Higher Low in the coming days,” popular trader Luca suggested.Source: X/@MirageMogulCrypto trader, analyst and entrepreneur Michaël van de Poppe hoped for a fresh retest of resistance, for him one of two key areas of interest.“Bitcoin is still nicely consolidating between the two levels,” he concluded. “The test at $87K did happen, and I think that we'll see a big breakout once we'll retest it again. What's next? Likely a run to ATH at the end of this quarter.”Source: X/@CryptoMichNLThis article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.

What to Expect

I expect that the world is entering a time where there will be resource scarcity due to the under development of natural resources in global systems, global order and global supply chains. It is now more important than ever to understand the opportunities and the risks involved in natural resource investing. I promise you that I will bring you the best unfiltered information on natural resources, investing and global events. Whether you are a seasoned investor or just starting out, you’ll find valuable insights in the videos and on the podcast.