$NUAI | Understanding the technical structure and where we go from here. A few observations, particularly the extraordinary selling pressure we've seen over the past month. But first, there's an important limitation worth acknowledging. Unlike companies such as $GOOGL , $AMZN, or even $IREN , we don't have the benefit of decades of trading history to evaluate NUAI's long-term technical structure. With <2 years of meaningful price history, we have few reference points to work with. It simply means we need to be more measured in the conclusions we draw. BUT from the price history we do have, the market has been communicating something fairly consistently. For much of the past year, $NUAI has traded within a broad range between approximately $3 and $6, repeatedly struggling to sustain advances beyond the 0.786 fib near $5.64. I've highlighted the descending resistance line that has rejected price on multiple occasions. Post-PPA we briefly broke above that resistance, even registering a weekly close above it, but there was no sustained follow-through. Instead, price reversed sharply and ultimately surrendered the entire breakout. This is why confirmation matters. A breakout isn't validated simply because price moves above resistance. You want to see buyers sustain that move, establish acceptance above the previous range, and ideally defend that level on a subsequent retest. We didn't get any of that. And importantly, this happened despite positive fundamental developments at the company. Use this as a useful reminder that a bullish catalyst and bullish price action aren't necessarily the same thing. The market can acknowledge operational progress while simultaneously reducing the valuation it's willing to assign to that progress. So where does that leave us today? Following nearly a month of relentless selling, we're now seeing the first signs of potential stabilization around $3.06, corresponding to the 0.618 fib. This is an important technical area, particularly given the magnitude of the correction and the substantial increase in trading volume accompanying the decline. But I wouldn't suggest the bottom has been confirmed. The broader blue-shaded region between approximately $2 and $3.50 represents an area of historical price activity where buyers have previously demonstrated interest. It's the region for accumulation. Could we still revisit the mid-$2s, or even the 0.5 fib at $1.99? Possible. But I suspect a considerable amount of fear has already been reflected in the stock price. The momentum indicators I track haven't yet demonstrated the kind of bullish divergence or sustained recovery that would give me greater confidence the corrective process is complete. And after a decline of this magnitude, some additional consolidation wouldn't surprise me. I overlaid a fractal from $IREN's 2025 correction to illustrate one possible recovery trajectory. It's not a forecast, nor am I suggesting NUAI must replicate that move. It's simply a useful illustration of how a stock can experience a sharp breakdown, retest a historical demand region, and eventually recover into its former trading range. For now, I'd be watching three areas: - $3.06: Immediate support and the first area where I'd want to see stabilization. - $2–$2.50: A deeper demand region if the corrective process extends. - $5.64: A resistance level that needs to be reclaimed and sustained to improve the broader technical outlook. Until this is convincingly reclaimed, remain open to further consolidation and volatility. Now, here's where I think the longer-term perspective becomes important. NUAI has made meaningful progress building its development platform, including its 207 MW power agreement at TCDC, securing the associated letter of credit, and assembling a team with substantial hyperscale infrastructure experience. But the equity is still being valued against significant commercial, financing, and execution milestones that remain ahead. I believe the opportunity for companies controlling strategically located power and capable of developing AI infrastructure remains substantial. But the market is currently placing a much greater emphasis on how these projects will ultimately be commercialized and financed. A strong LT thesis doesn't eliminate near-term technical risk, just as a deteriorating technical structure doesn't automatically invalidate the underlying business opportunity. For investors approaching the opportunity with a multiyear horizon, you should be increasingly interested in the risk/reward developing at $3. But I'm also comfortable allowing the bottoming process to unfold. There's no requirement that the stock immediately recover simply because it has corrected substantially. The objective isn't to predict a bottoms but to recognize where a potentially attractive opportunity is developing, understand what could invalidate that thesis, and position accordingly.

except that “smart money” as a broad category is an illusion

Meta $META has structurally shown a lot of strength during the market-wide AI correction of the last few weeks, which is a great sign Since 2024, it's formed a series of higher lows within a triangle compression pattern. During its recent selloff it wasn't even able to pullback to the 50 EMA at $506 (notice how in 2019 and 2020 they were buyable pullbacks) To remove any mid-term doubt that it can break the triangle to the downside, price should break past the current resistance, or the 1.414 at $696 Strength indicators are bottoming too. Looks good

The selloff across AI infrastructure has been relentless, and $WGMI offers a particularly interesting perspective on what's unfolding. Its 5 largest holdings $CIFR , $NBIS , $CRWV , $HUT, and $KEEL represent ~40% of the fund. What we've witnessed over the past several weeks has felt like a controlled demolition of sentiment. Aggressive selling, deteriorating technicals, and mounting concerns over financing and capital intensity have pushed investors toward capitulation. But zoom out and look at what price has actually accomplished. Despite the extraordinary volatility, $WGMI has essentially retraced to the neckline of the multi-year accumulation structure from which it broke out in 2025. And look at the corrective structure that has developed. We appear to be forming an expanded flat correction, with the B-wave exceeding the prior high before the C-wave brought price back toward the original breakout region. That has also created a potential bullish megaphone formation, characterized by expanding price swings around an otherwise constructive longer-term structure. $30 is the macro breakout neckline and a level where I'd want to see buyers establish meaningful support. If it fails, I'd be watching ~$24 at the 0.887 fib. Neither outcome would necessarily invalidate the LT investment thesis. I've also overlaid a fractal from the 2022 bottom to illustrate one potential trajectory over the next 1–2 years. It's not a path I'm suggesting will replicate. It's an illustration of how a prolonged accumulation and corrective structure can eventually transition into another powerful advance. Companies throughout this ecosystem are increasingly converting power access into long-duration compute infrastructure contracts. The opportunity is becoming more tangible, but so are the capital requirements, financing risks, and execution challenges. Markets are now repricing those risks aggressively in a higher-yield environment. The question is whether that repricing has already gone far enough to create attractive asymmetry for investors willing to look beyond the next several quarters. Personally, I think we're approaching that territory. It's difficult to look at the fear, liquidation, and deterioration in sentiment without seeing similarities to April 2025, when several stocks lost important technical levels before subsequently staging extraordinary recoveries. If the secular opportunity in AI and digital power infrastructure is as significant as I believe it is, these are precisely the types of corrections investors should be preparing for, not running away from. @cantonmeow @CrypticTrades_ @Freedom_By_40 @chad_ventures @Fibonacci_TA

I don’t need to convince myself that everything is fine. I can acknowledge that financing conditions are difficult, capital is more expensive, execution risks are real, and some companies won’t deliver what they’ve promised. But I also have to ask how much of that am I already being compensated for at today’s valuation? Because if the underlying opportunity remains intact, the business continues making progress, and the market has materially lowered its expectations, an investment can actually become more attractive even as the headlines get worse. Ask yourself are we witnessing a temporary repricing of risk or a permanent impairment of the business. Those are two VERY different things, don’t confuse them

Brent Sea Crude set up technically for massive run to the upside $BNO $BRN1!

My expanded take: I don't touch IPOs at launch. I've seen enough early selloffs to be happy sitting them out. $FIG, $SPCX, $CBRS. And plenty before them. For me, plenty of reasons to wait. Very few reasons to rush in. I don't remember the last time any IPO did well. (Yes, there are few, but generally, they do bad.)