A rare technical pattern that preceded a 69% rally in Bitcoin (BTC) last year has just made a comeba
A rare technical pattern that preceded a 69% rally in Bitcoin (BTC) last year has just made a comeback - and traders should take notice.
The so-called golden cross, where the 23-day moving average crosses above the 200-day moving average, is about to be officially printed on Bitcoins daily chart. The last time this happened was October 2024. What followed was a surge from below $65,000 to over $108,000 in just a few months.
Now, it is back.
According to the latest observation, BTCs 23-day price curve is striving to cross the 200-day one from below, triggering what many see as a textbook bull rally signal.
It is worth noting, though, that historically, golden crosses do not always guarantee immediate upside - but when they coincide with macro momentum and a breakout-ready chart, the results can be explosive.
This time, the timing could not be more intriguing. Bitcoin is already trading above $96,000 and eyeing the $108,563 resistance level - the same local top it failed to break in March. With this pattern in play, bulls may now have the technical tailwind they have been waiting for.
The last time BTC printed this exact cross, the market was similarly consolidating near key resistance before blasting through on renewed volume and institutional inflows. Add to that today's market environment - where the ETFs are flowing and Strategy buys billions every week - and this technical pattern suddenly looks like more than just coincidence.
But bull-minded traders beware: false breakouts and “cross-fakeouts” have happened before. The coming days will be critical in confirming whether history really is repeating itself.
Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
0.00