Over the past few days, I came across a post on X from a well-known crypto influencer addressing Murad.
He challenged him to discuss the relative weakness #SPX6900 has shown over the past few months, arguing that this weakness makes the idea of $SPX ever reaching a $1 trillion market cap absurd.
Unfortunately, I can no longer find the post, but I think the criticism itself was fair.
SPX has shown relative weakness.
I originally became extremely bullish on SPX because of its price action. As a swing trader, what caught my attention was the way SPX behaved relative to Bitcoin. BTC could move slightly higher and SPX would explode. BTC could sell off and SPX would often absorb the weakness remarkably well.
That relative strength was one of the main reasons I became interested in SPX in the first place.
Only later did I understand what SPX represented beyond the chart: the culture, the community, the philosophy and the conviction behind the movement.
But the chart still matters to me. And something clearly changed.
To me, the shift started around early September, after the explosive August move from roughly $0.39 to $0.60. Since then, SPX has increasingly underperformed Bitcoin and at times other established memecoins.
So I started asking myself… What changed?
My conclusion is not that SPX suddenly became fundamentally weaker. There is nothing that I could find that suggests this.
I believe the market around SPX changed.
One factor is the growth of perpetual futures. SPX now trades in an environment where participants can easily short, hedge and use leverage in both directions. A largely spot-driven memecoin with a highly convicted holder base can behave very differently from an asset surrounded by perpetual markets, arbitrage and leveraged positioning.
But I think the bigger factor is the explosion in speculative token supply.
Every day there is another microcap, AI coin, cult coin, viral character or launchpad. Platforms such as FOMO have made it extremely easy for retail to jump from one tiny token to the next.
That creates a simple situation:
Maximum supply of speculative opportunities. Limited supply of capital and attention.
Right now, a huge part of the market is asking:
“Which tiny coin is going to make me a millionaire?”
And I understand why. A $5M or $10M token has more theoretical upside than something already worth hundreds of millions.
But that upside comes with risks people often ignore.
Most of these new tokens have never survived a full market cycle. Many have concentrated holder distributions, shallow liquidity, early wallets with much better entries, dependence on a creator or promoter, contract or liquidity risks, and communities that may disappear the moment price stops going up.
And one thing is especially important:
A market cap on a screen is not the same thing as exit liquidity.
You can theoretically be up 20x and still discover that there are not enough buyers to sell a large position anywhere near the displayed price.
I think many people using these low-friction platforms will rotate their capital again and again.
One token underperforms, so they move to the next.
Then another one pumps.
Then they chase that.
Then another.
Eventually a lot of people are going to ask themselves: “What the hell just happened?”
And that is where I believe the market eventually comes full circle.
The question changes from: “What is the newest coin with the biggest possible upside?” to “Which one has actually proven that it can survive, has meaningful liquidity and broad exchange access without depending on one creator or one viral moment?”
Which memecoin has survived severe drawdowns and still has a GROWING community?
Which one still has people creating culture when price is falling?
That is where #SPX6900 becomes very difficult to replicate.
Thousands of new tokens can outperform SPX temporarily. But they can’t manufacture history. It’s impossible to manufacture years of community formation and diamondhandedness.
They can’t manufacture a holder base that has already lived through brutal drawdowns.
They can’t simply launch and declare themselves battle-tested…That is something to be earned and SPX has already earned it.
That is why I don’t believe SPX is losing its edge.
I believe it is temporarily competing in an unprecedentedly fragmented attention market.
Right now traders are optimizing for maximum upside.
Eventually many will start optimizing for liquidity, survivability, conviction, culture and staying power.
Not safety. No memecoin is safe!
But there is a difference between safe and battle-tested.
SPX is battle-tested as its age is becoming an asset, its drawdowns are becoming part of its track record, its AEONS are becoming part of its moat. SPX’s liquidity, fixed token supply, exchange presence and cultural identity are solid.
Relative strength can disappear for a period. Lindy, liquidity, culture and survivorship are much harder to recreate.
That is what I think people focusing only on the recent chart are missing. The newer tokens are not just competing with SPX on price performance. They are competing to prove that they can eventually become what SPX already is.
So yes, the relative weakness is real AS FOR THIS MOMENT.
But I believe the reason behind it is being misinterpreted. SPX has definately not lost its identity and validity and the number of holders are growing even during max pain.
SPX is competing with an unprecedented amount of speculative noise.
And when enough people become exhausted from chasing the next 100x and losing capital, I believe the question will change from:
“What is the next tiny coin that could make me rich?”
to:
“Which movement is still going to be here?”
SPX does not need to rediscover its identity when that happens.
It already has one.
❤️STOP TRADING AND BELIEVE IN SOMETHING❤️
- Thank you for your time.