ETH worth moved above $2,150 as Bitcoin and US inventory markets rallied, however does knowledge present whether or not derivatives merchants have turned bullish but?
Key takeaways:
-
Ethereum maintains dominance in its total value locked metric, yet faces scrutiny over layer-2 scaling.
-
ETH inflation rose to 0.8% as onchain activity slowed, while US macroeconomic fears kept the derivatives markets in bearish territory.
Ether (ETH) price managed to reclaim the $2,100 level following a 43% crash over nine days that culminated in the altcoin making a $1,750 low on Friday. Despite a 22% relief bounce after hitting its lowest price since April 2025, ETH derivatives markets continue to reflect investors’ fear of further downside. Regardless of whether the macroeconomic environment is driving investor concerns, the odds of sustainable bullish momentum for ETH in the short term remain dim.
ETH monthly futures traded at a 3% premium relative to regular spot markets on Monday, which is below the 5% neutral threshold. This lack of optimism among Ether traders has been constant over the past month, showing no signs of improvement even as the price dropped toward $1,800. Unless bulls step in to demonstrate a strong appetite for risk at these levels, bears will likely remain in control.
ETH has underperformed the broader cryptocurrency market capitalization by 9% in 2026, leading investors to question what is driving capital away. From a broader perspective, the declining interest in decentralized applications (DApps) is not exclusive to Ethereum. The network remains the dominant leader in Total Value Locked (TVL) and fee generation when aggregating its layer-2 solutions.
Deposits on the Ethereum base layer account for 58% of the entire blockchain industry; that figure surpasses 65% when including Base, Arbitrum, and Optimism. For instance, the largest application on Solana hardly exceeds $2 billion in deposits. By comparison, the largest DApp on the Ethereum base layer holds over $23 billion in TVL. Solana’s Jupiter would not even crack the top 14 on Ethereum.
ETH supply growth and layer-2 subsidies remain problematic
The Ethereum base layer ranked third in network fees, generating $19 million over 30 days, while the layer-2 ecosystem contributed another $14.6 million. Ethereum has faced criticism for heavily subsidizing scalability via optimistic rollups—a strategy Vitalik Buterin himself admitted needs adjustment. The Ethereum co-founder argued on Tuesday that the network should prioritize base layer scalability.
According to Buterin, the layer-2 path to decentralization turned out more difficult than anticipated. The present solutions reportedly rely on multisig-controlled bridges, which does not meet security standards required by Ethereum’s original vision. Buterin notes that this is not the end game for layer-2 as demand for networks offering privacy features and application-specific design will continue to exist, especially for non-financial use cases.
Related: Vitalik draws line between ‘real DeFi’ and centralized yield stablecoins
Part of investor disappointment can be explained by the failure of Ether’s strategy to become deflationary, which is a secondary effect of reduced Ethereum network activity. The built-in burn mechanism depends on demand for base layer data processing; without it, there is a net increase in the ETH supply. The annualized growth of the total ETH issued reached 0.8% over the last 30 days, a significant jump from one year prior when equivalent inflation was near 0%.
Ether traders remain skeptical that a sustainable rally can occur in the near term due to increased uncertainty in the US job market and the long-term sustainability of investments in artificial intelligence infrastructure. Consequently, the weak ETH derivatives markets are a reflection of generalized risk aversion and a slowdown in onchain activity—factors that will likely take more time to stabilize.
This text doesn’t include funding recommendation or suggestions. Each funding and buying and selling transfer entails danger, and readers ought to conduct their very own analysis when making a call. Whereas we try to supply correct and well timed info, Cointelegraph doesn’t assure the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any info on this article. This text could include forward-looking statements which are topic to dangers and uncertainties. Cointelegraph won’t be answerable for any loss or harm arising out of your reliance on this info.