2026-01-03 07:22:28

ZEC's recent pressure is quite significant. From a technical perspective, levels above 550 are essentially historical trapped positions, and the rebound momentum has always been insufficient. The funding rate is still at -2, indicating that market sentiment has already turned notably weak. In comparison, RIVER is also stuck, and the entire sector appears weak and powerless.

Rather than stubbornly holding onto spot positions and waiting for a rebound, it might be better to consider hedging with short positions. The advantage of entering now is that you don't have to worry too much about funding rate erosion—negative rates are essentially subsidizing shorts. In the short term, there seems to be no reason to believe this pressure can be broken, and once a waterfall decline forms, the speed can be surprisingly fast.

The key is to wait for that moment. Once a valid breakdown occurs, participants will quickly follow, and the opportunity for gains will be right in front of you.

ZEC11.63%

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SchrodingerProfit

· 01-06 05:54

This level 550 is really tough; holding onto spot positions blindly is too passive. Not earning from negative fee rates is a bit foolish. --- Once it breaks down, a bunch of people will get liquidated. --- RIVER can't even move it; this sector really lacks momentum, and the short hedge strategy still works. --- The waterfall came unexpectedly; watching the show and making money from the perspective of being a spectator feels pretty comfortable. --- Holding spot for so long, might as well try a different approach since the fee rate is still paying out of pocket.

View OriginalReply0

MissedAirdropAgain

· 01-06 03:25

Negative fees are still subsidizing the short sellers; this buying and selling is indeed cost-effective. Just wait for that node, and it'll be over.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoCrazyGF

· 01-05 08:35

Negative fee rate subsidy for short sellers is a tough move, but I still think ZEC is too complicated to figure out, and the rebound probability isn't that small.

View OriginalReply0

StableGenius

· 01-03 07:52

lol the negative funding rate arbitrage play here is actually *chef's kiss* — everyone's too busy copium-ing on their bags to notice they're literally paying shorts to exist. that's the tell right there, empirically speaking.

Reply0

GasWaster69

· 01-03 07:52

Negative fees are subsidizing shorts? I don't quite understand this logic. Who is actually giving money to whom?

View OriginalReply0

FlippedSignal

· 01-03 07:51

The 550 level is indeed tough; I agree with the logic of negative fee rate subsidies for shorts, but it feels like we've been waiting for that "key point" these past couple of days... --- Rather than hedging, isn't it better to go short directly? I think, though, it's still a bit early. --- Once the waterfall starts, it can be rapid, but the prerequisite is to break the level first. We're still testing it now. --- The entire sector is weak, which is a signal, but don't expect a reversal too much. --- Getting paid to hold at -2 fee rate for free, I need to look into this more. --- There are too many trapped orders above 550, no wonder the rebound is weak...

View OriginalReply0

SillyWhale

· 01-03 07:47

Negative fees subsidize shorts. I've heard this logic too many times. So, what's the result?

View OriginalReply0

ForumLurker

· 01-03 07:33

Negative fee rate to free-ride short sellers, this move is indeed quite something. Above 550, it's all trapped traders, with no strength for a rebound at all.

View OriginalReply0