ETHEUR
Ethereum / Euro
crypto Composite

BTC is at $76,869 this morning after another flush. 527 million in long liquidations on 24 hours, mostly from leverage builds that got too confident the 80k breakout was happening.
The underlying story is macro. April PPI printed at 6 percent, way hotter than expected. CPI hit 3.8 percent year over year, the highest since May 2023. Core stuck at 2.8. The probability of a rate hike by December went from 21.5 percent to 25 percent in a week, and the probability of any cut through 2027 just collapsed to basically zero.
So the entire "we wait for the pivot and BTC rips" thesis that fueled the run from January is on pause. The Fed is not your friend right now.
But here is the other side. Long term holders are sitting on 14.84 million BTC that has not moved in 155 plus days. April saw 2.44B in net spot ETF inflows, the strongest month since October 2025. Jane Street is rotating into ETH (82M added, 70 percent BTC reduction). So there is real demand, just not in size.
ETH is the one to watch in my opinion. The ratio chart looks like 2021 setup pre rotation. SOL already did its thing, up 13 percent on the week, breaking 90 to 95 with 39M of ETF inflows.
So the real question. Do you think this is the start of a bigger correction back to 65 to 70k, or just shaking out leverage before the next leg toward 90? And does ETH outperform from here?

Question about CoW Swap: I want to go from ETH -> USDC, but the UI says I can't edit the USDC value, only ETH. So... I have to just keep plugging in numbers into ETH until I hit the value of USDC I want?

>I think you're assuming that ETH is going to continue having years of lagging performance. Either that, or you're directly factoring your past returns into your calculations of your future returns.
i am simply factoring in opportunity cost, which is a critical metric for me as an investor
>The market doesn't care about cost basis. Future returns are measured from now, today, $2100 ETH. It seems obvious to me that an ETH allocation could quite possibly return 50% on investment within the next year. That puts ETH at just over $3k. 50% returns within a year would be pretty great, even considering how the S&P could continue to run.
it seems to me that you and i are coming at this from two very different perspectives, which is why we are talking past each other

i'm an investor. my goal is to dca and hold. from that specific pov, eth has been a disappointment. the actual return on dca over the last few years is far worse than other major assets, resulting in a massive opportunity cost

it is glaringly obvious that over the last few years, the market has heavily rewarded short term traders over long term conviction holders. a dynamic that wasn't true in eth's earlier history
if you held a belief that eth would break past $5k (or around $6k if you account for inflation) - which, for me, wasn't an unreasonable expectation for this cycle - you were consistently punished with massive opportunity cost. meanwhile, traders who *don't* believe in its long term growth, the ones selling the tops at $4k and buying back lower at $2k, are the ones who made bank.

you couldn't do that with btc (or even bnb). if you tried to flip btc at $60k because you didn't believe it could break its previous ath, you missed out on $100k+ btc

with eth, you have literally been rewarded for the past few years by *not* believing it can sustainably break its ceiling. that makes it a fantastic playground for traders, but a massive opportunity cost trap for long term investors

> even if eth continues improving slowly, the market can still decide that:
>
> - grow rate is no longer exceptional
> - upside is less asymmetric than before
> - other assets offer better expected returns
IMO, the market has already decided on all of that. I don't think there's much room left for more people to decide who haven't already decided.
But that's just your opinion versus mine. Valuation is subjective at the end of the day.
> and even if your crystal ball turns out to be right and capital eventually rotates back into eth, the rotation still needs to be large enough to outweigh the opportunity cost of sitting through years of lagging performance
I think you're assuming that ETH is going to continue having years of lagging performance. Either that, or you're directly factoring your past returns into your calculations of your future returns.
The market doesn't care about cost basis. Future returns are measured from now, today, $2100 ETH. It seems obvious to me that an ETH allocation could quite possibly return 50% on investment within the next year. That puts ETH at just over $3k. 50% returns within a year would be pretty great, even considering how the S&P could continue to run.
It could also keep dipping far below $2100. But again, I really think that all gets into the realm of opinion.

You can swap stETH to ETH through a deep route like CoW or 1inch. the real comparison is stETH discount plus fees versus the value of getting liquidity immediately

ETH which took no part in the pump, leads the dump, nothing has changed as I see.

>Ok then, so in that case, you must've been intentionally strawmanning me and suggesting that I was saying "we shouldn't compare assets" when I literally never said anything of the nature. As a reminder, you said "claiming we shouldn't 'comparing assets' is wild." Yet my original post never said or suggested that as I was talking about the nature of using this kind of data being misleading.
that is exactly why you are being pedantic. you hyper focused on my shorthand phrasing and interpreted it in the most uncharitable way possible to dodge the actual point.
your main argument was that "the price over the last x years posts comparing assets tell us absolutely nothing useful". i fully addressed that. in the very next sentences, i gave a concrete example proving that those multi-year comparisons are highly informative to investors. if my goal were to strawman you, i would have removed the timeframe from the entire debate. i can add "over the last x years" right back into my shorthand phrasing (i.e. "comparing asset over the last x years") and it wouldn't change the fact that your point was thoroughly disproven
>The results of which are completely different if you compare 1 year, or 7 years, or pick a different month as your baseline - one could easily justify taking quarterly close numbers or DCAing over longer time frames in lump sums. The resulting data is all very different. Again, we can justify whatever timeline we want to spin our own narrative. It's not very helpful for finding the objective truth. That's the point I'm making, you seem to be conflating it with me saying ETH has performed well for some reason.
you are fundamentally conflating basic data variability with "spinning a narrative"
yes, if you look at sth like a 1-year timeframe, the sample size is too small and volatile to draw conclusions. but a 3-5 years timeframe captures an entire market cycle. it includes the peaks, the crashes and the accumulation bottoms. this isn't an arbitrary snapshot used to "spin a narrative". it is a statistically significant dataset that reveals long term market momentum and structural regression
your claim that one could "justify any timeline" to spin a narrative is completely false here. whether you look at a 3-year, 5-year or 7-year continuous timeframe, the overarching trend remains completely undeniable: after its initial explosive start, eth has been consistently losing momentum. you cannot find a macro timeline that magically reverses this trend to paint a bullish picture
>The other thing is that your post is one of literally dozens I've seen in the last month which are all effectively the same but funnily enough, they all have different timeframes and different conclusions!
none of those other posts used a dca model, which is the absolute gold standard metric for evaluating a realistic, long term investment

yes, simply cherry pick two arbitray dates as snapshots making it easy to manipulate the conclusion. but a dca strategy doesn't rely on lucky timing or arbitrary endpoints. it evaluates an asset by tracking hundreds of consecutive, uninterrupted data points across an entire cycle.
grouping a comprehensive, continuous dca dataset with lazy "point a to point b" snapshot posts is completely disingenuous. some of those other posts might be spinning a narrative, but a multi-year dca shows the literal, mathematical reality of an investor's performance

It feels easier because we're in BTC's cycle bear market and ETH is a leveraged trade against BTC (more to the downside than the upside).

ETH.D and ETH/BTC both crashing hard 👀

>**Blockchain for diet,**
>**Innovation stays quiet,**
>**Until a riot.**
~Daily haiku until we’re at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap

I am seriously not sure if ETH is going to make it anymore. By make it I mean increase the ratio to above 0.04…

For ETH/USDC at that size you're likely getting sandwiched on top of the pool fee, try an, RPC with MEV protection and use the DefiLlama aggregator since it skips the frontend fee and routes smarter. If you ever need to actually exit to fiat after swapping, [Stable.com](http://Stable.com) has a cleaner off-ramp flow than what I'd used before.

For the love of God dont buy that shit. ETH is so ass

Been watching the gas fees and they're actually not terrible today, might be good time for some DeFi moves. Anyone else notice the correlation between macro news and ETH price action has been getting weaker lately? Feels like we're finally decoupling from traditional markets bit by bit

> your statistics analogy completely collapses here. a "break in scale" is a visual trick used to isolate and exaggerate a tiny blip. a 5-year timeframe, especially for weekly dca (which is what i posted yesterday), is the exact opposite of an isolated snapshot: it requires a continuous systematic purchase every single week.
>classic redditor. hiding behind pedantry to dodge the actual argument.
Ah, got it. You're "not like the other redditors".
>i never misread your claim
Ok then, so in that case, you must've been intentionally strawmanning me and suggesting that I was saying "we shouldn't compare assets" when I literally never said anything of the nature. As a reminder, you said "claiming we shouldn't 'comparing assets' is wild." Yet my original post never said or suggested that as I was talking about the nature of using this kind of data being misleading.
The results of which are completely different if you compare 1 year, or 7 years, or pick a different month as your baseline - one could easily justify taking quarterly close numbers or DCAing over longer time frames in lump sums. The resulting data is all very different. Again, we can justify whatever timeline we want to spin our own narrative. It's not very helpful for finding the objective truth. That's the point I'm making, you seem to be conflating it with me saying ETH has performed well for some reason.
The other thing is that your post is one of literally dozens I've seen in the last month which are all effectively the same but funnily enough, they all have different timeframes and different conclusions!
>you hyper focused on my shorthand phrasing, while completely ignoring the rest of the paragraph that directly addressed your full claim.
How ironic coming from the person who literally put words I didn't say into my mouth.

Giga Wolves - MINTING NOW - 0.00 ETH

Shift the question from crypto to blockchain technology and you’ll start to understand why our legacy systems are antiquated, slow, expensive and flawed.
Essentially in a broad sense, the more folks that use a blockchain derives more value to that blockchain’s token. For example, stablecoin usage has exploded in the last couple years and is growing at a wild rate. If the globe adopts stablecoins then trillions of dollars with be exchanged via stablecoins. Etherium has over 50% of the market share of stablecoins transaction on their layer 1 blockchain so thus technically ETH should go up.
There are also apps that can be built on top of blockchains. Same general idea, the more usage and revenue derived off that app = higher valued for that apps respective token.
There are many huge “buts” like tokenomics and stuff but i think this rabbit hole can add a lot of color.

It's going much higher than $100 long term. Literally the only coin in crypto that actually has significant programmed spot buybacks/burns. Not to mention Hyperliquid makes more money every day than Ethereum and numerous other blockchains combined.
It's also the only major coin right now that is making new ATHs against BTC, ETH, and SOL.

Hi, few tips:
1) set slippage to a very low value like 0.02% or 0.01%. A liquid pair like ETH/USDC can handle it.
2) use a RPC with MEV protection. Methods differ depending on your favored wallet.
3) Uniswap is ok but their frontend takes a fee. You can use swap.defillama.com instead, which aggregates aggregators and doesn't take fees. They should always give you better quotes than straight Uniswap (i.e. even when they use Uniswap as the source, you avoid the frontend fees).
What has happened to you is likely Uniswap setting a 2% slippage by default, and a MEV bot exploiting this to sandwich you. You're right, this is way too much and it's basically theft.

ETH can't go lower than $1000, it's an impossibility, like thinking it can go to $5000.
It can dump *hard* though. $1800 is, like, two hour's worth of a good coordinated whale dump.