Ethereum is trading near $2,100 at the end of the first quarter of 2026, with the broader outlook largely unchanged compared to recent weeks. The market has lost more than half its value from its late-2025 highs and is struggling to build conviction around a recovery. With ongoing macroeconomic headwinds and continued weakness across altcoins, Ethereum faces a significant challenge heading into the new quarter.

Ethereum price analysis: daily chart

The downward channel that has defined ETH price action since late 2025 remains intact on the daily chart. Both the 100-day moving average (around $2,400) and the 200-day moving average (around $3,000) continue to trend lower and remain well above the current price. Together, they form a strong resistance barrier that has rejected all major recovery attempts since last December.

The supply zone between $2,300 and $2,400 has proven to be a strong resistance area, as the price attempted to enter it in mid-March but was sharply rejected. Meanwhile, the $1,800 support level held firm during the February sell-off and remains the key downside support. A break below this level would expose the next important levels at $1,600 and $1,400.

In addition, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) has rebounded from its February lows near 20 and is now hovering around the mid-40s, indicating some stabilization but no clear directional momentum yet.

ETH/USDT four-hour chart

Following the failed breakout attempt above the $2,300–$2,400 resistance zone about two weeks ago, ETH has been trading within a short-term descending channel on the four-hour chart. The price is currently near $2,100, close to the upper boundary of this channel. However, each recovery attempt continues to face renewed selling pressure.

The RSI on this timeframe has also rebounded from the low 30s to the mid-50s, suggesting that immediate selling pressure may ease temporarily. However, buyers need to break above the channel resistance and sustainably reclaim the recent high near $2,200 to shift the short-term structure. Failure to do so keeps a retest of the key $1,800 support level as a realistic near-term scenario.

Sentiment analysis

The number of active Ethereum addresses rose significantly during the February sell-off and around subsequent lows, far exceeding activity levels seen over the past two years. While this increase may initially appear positive, the context suggests it was more likely a capitulation event — driven by panic selling and rapid liquidations — rather than a wave of new demand.

For ETH to establish a credible bullish case, on-chain activity needs to recover in a sustained manner rather than through temporary spikes during periods of market stress. Until daily active addresses rise consistently alongside price, network data supports a cautious outlook rather than a recovery scenario.

A senior energy security source working closely with the European Union’s energy security framework said that Iran has long been waiting for the United States to deploy ground forces, as it understands that entering any country militarily is relatively easy, but exiting is far more difficult.

The source told OilPrice.com over the weekend: “The longer US forces remain on the ground, the greater the likelihood that Washington will eventually be forced to reach a more favorable peace agreement for Tehran.”

He added that two developments over the weekend (March 28–29) “significantly increased the probability that the United States could fall into this trap.”

Houthis enter the war

The first of these developments was the full entry of the Iran-backed Houthi group into the conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran.

The group is engaged in a proxy war on behalf of Iran in Yemen against its main regional rival, Saudi Arabia.

On Saturday, March 28, the group launched a barrage of missiles toward Israel, marking its first such attack since the outbreak of the war between the United States and Israel on one side and Iran on the other.

The group pledged to continue attacks, noting that closing the vital global shipping route in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait remains “an available option.”

According to the European source, these moves were specifically designed “to provide the spark that could push toward direct US ground intervention,” by challenging President Donald Trump’s pledge to maintain global oil flows amid Iran’s ongoing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

Threat to global energy supplies

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz remains highly fragile, as any disruption to navigation could hinder the flow of up to one-third of global oil supplies and nearly one-fifth of liquefied natural gas trade.

According to the source, Iran aims to drive oil and gas prices sharply higher, causing significant economic damage to energy-importing countries.

At present, the only vessels still able to pass relatively through the strait are those carrying Iranian oil to its largest international supporter, China, which has financed the Iranian system for decades through oil purchases despite international sanctions.

In what the report described as an “unusual” development, this trade — previously considered illegal — has been temporarily legalized for 30 days after being allowed by the United States in an effort to contain oil prices.

This exemption covers around 170 million barrels of Iranian oil currently at sea, with the possibility of extending the waiver.

Russia, Iran’s second-largest international supporter, is also expected to benefit significantly from a similar 30-day US waiver for seaborne oil exports.

With rising prices, Russia’s oil and gas revenues are expected to jump from about $12 billion to $24 billion this month.

Oil could reach $150 and possibly $200

For energy-importing countries — including many US allies — the outlook appears more negative.

Vikas Dwivedi, an energy markets strategist at Macquarie Group, said that closing the Strait of Hormuz alone could trigger a chain reaction pushing oil prices to around $150 per barrel or higher.

He added that the current supply disruption has already surpassed the peaks seen during the oil crises of the 1970s and even the Gulf wars.

He noted that members of the International Energy Agency hold emergency reserves exceeding 1.2 billion barrels of oil, while China also maintains large stockpiles, which could help ease the crisis.

However, if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for an extended period, prices may need to rise significantly to curb global oil demand.

Estimates suggest this could require prices to exceed $200 per barrel for a period of time, which would imply gasoline prices in the United States rising to around $7 per gallon.

Risk of Bab el-Mandeb closure

The situation could worsen further if the other key oil route targeted by Iran — the Bab el-Mandeb Strait — is also closed.

Around 10% to 15% of global seaborne oil trade passes through this 16-mile-wide strait.

The route connects the Gulf of Aden to the Red Sea, and from there to the Suez Canal and the Mediterranean.

In practical terms, the Iran-backed Houthis control the Yemeni side of the strait, while the opposite shore is controlled by Eritrea and Djibouti, both of which are tied to large Chinese loans under the Belt and Road Initiative.

According to the European source, Beijing’s influence in the region is significant through the long-term strategic cooperation agreement between Iran and China.

The source said that “nothing happens in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait or the Strait of Hormuz without implicit approval from China.”

If both straits are closed simultaneously, up to 45% of global oil flows could be disrupted, potentially pushing Brent crude prices to around $200 per barrel or higher.

A potential trap for Trump

The European source believes that such an economic and political shock could push President Trump toward military action, which may represent the trap Iran is seeking to set.

He added that US military movements over the past week were primarily aimed at increasing negotiating pressure on Tehran, but could evolve into an actual deployment.

This could begin with a limited presence, possibly on Kharg Island, a key hub for Iranian oil exports, or at strategic points along the Strait of Hormuz.

However, the problem — according to the source — is that protecting US forces in such a deployment would require establishing a buffer zone against shelling with a range of at least 20 kilometers, and likely much more to counter missile threats.

He added that Iranian forces could simply bombard US positions continuously for months.

A possible political exit

Given these risks, pressure may increase on Trump to declare a form of “political victory” and then withdraw from the conflict.

The source noted that Trump outlined four main objectives at the start of the strikes, and could claim to have largely achieved them, including:

Regime change through the elimination of key leadership figures

Weakening Iran’s nuclear program to prevent near-term weaponization

Destroying most of Iran’s missile stockpile and degrading its production capacity

Reducing the strength of Iran-aligned groups in the region

The source concluded that there is a “politically acceptable narrative” Trump could use to declare success and withdraw once he recognizes the scale of the risks associated with a full-scale invasion of Iran.

Aluminum prices jumped on Monday after Iranian strikes disrupted key production facilities in the Middle East over the weekend, as investors brace for the possibility of further supply and logistics constraints.

Three-month aluminum on the London Metal Exchange rose 3.85% to $3,420.00 per metric ton, trading near its highest level in four years. Earlier in the day, prices climbed to $3,492 per metric ton.

Shares of Alcoa surged 10%, while Century Aluminum shares rose 11% in pre-market trading.

Bitcoin’s recent decline has revived one of the most troubling questions facing the cryptocurrency market this year.

Investors are now seriously asking whether this is just another bad week or the beginning of a deeper losing streak.

What is clear is that pressure has been building over recent weeks.

Bitcoin fell below the $68,000 level late last week and briefly dropped to around $65,112 on March 30, before recovering above $67,000 at the start of Asian trading.

However, this rebound has not eased broader concerns. Market focus is now on whether March will close at a sufficiently weak level to extend an already unusual سلسلة of monthly declines.

A market analysis published in late February had already pointed to five consecutive monthly red candles through February, making the March close a critical turning point in determining the market’s next direction.

Monthly trend outweighs short-term rebound

Bitcoin’s daily movements remain highly volatile, but the stronger signal currently comes from the monthly trend.

The temporary rebound from the March 30 low does not change the fact that the world’s largest cryptocurrency has spent much of recent weeks under selling pressure.

The leading cryptocurrency fell to $65,112 before recovering above $67,000, as renewed weakness late last week coincided with resumed ETF outflows and increasing macroeconomic pressure.

For this reason, talk of a “six-month downturn” should be viewed as a possibility rather than a confirmed outcome.

February was widely described in market commentary as the fifth consecutive month of losses.

March, however, had not yet recorded a final monthly close at the time of the latest sell-off.

Iliya Kalchev of Nexo Dispatch summarized market sentiment, noting that a week that began with cautious optimism ended on a more defensive tone amid renewed ETF outflows and rising macroeconomic pressure.

Sell-off driven by economic concerns

Bitcoin is often promoted as being separate from the traditional financial system.

In reality, it has recently traded more like a high-risk, high-volatility asset.

The same forces pressuring equity markets and weakening investor confidence elsewhere are now directly impacting the cryptocurrency market.

Investors are closely monitoring rising concerns over the war in the Middle East, higher oil prices, a stronger dollar, and a broader retreat from speculative investments.

The escalation of the conflict in the Middle East has driven oil prices sharply higher, strengthened the dollar, and weighed on major equity indices.

The mechanism is straightforward: when war concerns rise and oil prices surge, inflation fears tend to increase.

As inflation concerns rise, investors become less willing to hold highly volatile assets.

In Bitcoin’s case, this caution is amplified by crypto-specific factors such as ETF flow volatility, derivatives positioning, and forced liquidation pressures.

The recent weakness has been linked to renewed ETF outflows, alongside a risk-off economic environment ahead of the expiry of options contracts worth about $14 billion.

Potential for a sixth consecutive monthly decline

The bearish scenario is easy to outline.

Technical analysis published by FXStreet indicated that the short-term tone remains fragile, with immediate support around the mid-$60,000 range, and that a daily close below $65,000 could open the door to a deeper decline toward $60,000.

This places Bitcoin in a critical position, as the price is close enough to support levels to attract dip buyers, yet not far enough from a breakdown point to ease investor concerns.

Reuters quoted Cynthia Murphy of TMX VettaFi as saying that Bitcoin may be approaching a price bottom, even if it remains a “highly volatile journey” for investors.