TAO price golden cross signals possible 40% drop in weeks
Bittensor (TAO) has surged about 160% in the past month, but Cointelegraph flags exhaustion as TAO forms a golden-cross pattern on the daily chart. TAO’s 20-day EMA crossing above the 200-day EMA has previously preceded steep selloffs.
In three similar TAO setups, the coin fell roughly 38.5%, 32.5%, and 45.5% within 5–6 weeks, averaging close to a 40% drawdown. If the pattern repeats, traders may watch for TAO to retest around $200 by early May. The risk is reinforced by TAO RSI holding above 70 for weeks, suggesting the rally may be “too far, too fast” and could trigger profit-taking.
Market sentiment is mixed. Social volume for TAO is near multi-month highs, but Santiment data shows sentiment remains relatively muted (about 1.5 positive comments per negative). The article notes that even rallies without euphoric retail behavior can still turn into bull traps.
Broader macro conditions may add pressure, with the escalating US–Iran war lifting oil prices, worsening inflation risks, and weakening expectations for near-term Federal Reserve easing. Overall, TAO’s technical “golden-cross fractal” points to downside risk despite recent momentum.
Bearish
The article’s core trading message is that TAO’s bullish-looking golden cross has historically acted as a local-top warning, with an average ~40% drawdown in the following weeks. With TAO RSI staying above the overbought threshold (>70) and social volume rising without strong euphoric retail sentiment, the setup leans toward a sell-the-rally dynamic. That combination often produces short-term volatility and downside continuation once profit-taking starts.
Short-term, traders may use this as a cue to tighten risk management, watch for rejection near recent highs, and consider whether upside follow-through (toward roughly $420+) is likely to fail quickly. Long-term, if the drawdown scenario plays out, it could reset overextended momentum, improving the odds for a healthier base—but until that happens, the near-term path implied by the “fractal” is riskier than the initial trend suggests.