I find the support levels in No BS Crypto's altcoin watchlist more useful than the promise of an exact entry price. They give readers something to check against the charts. The analyst expects a correction before a stronger bull phase, but also allows for prices to rise first, with a pullback arriving in Q1 2027.
The watchlist combines chart patterns with changes to token supply, lending services and tokenized assets. I want to keep those arguments separate: a project announcement can matter without proving that its token will rise.
Bitcoin sets the correction scenario
The analyst's market outlook assumes that Bitcoin moving sideways or falling sharply can put pressure on altcoins, the broad term for crypto assets other than Bitcoin. Stellar's XLM provides the comparison: one chart pairs Bitcoin's -4.76% consolidation move with XLM's -22.52%; another pairs Bitcoin's -7.32% fall with XLM's -18.62%.
Those past moves show possible sensitivity, not a formula for the next decline. I would not apply the same multiplier to every asset, and the analyst also acknowledges that altcoins will behave differently.
The first forecast is a possible 9% Bitcoin correction toward the $74K - $75K region, with roughly 20% declines in coins such as XLM. The more severe forecast is a 15% Bitcoin correction toward the 70k or high 60k range, with roughly 30% altcoin declines. Neither scenario sets a maximum loss for an individual token.
How the chart framework works
The chart analysis combines long-running downtrends with moving averages and earlier price turning points. A downtrend line connects lower highs; a break above it can suggest weaker selling pressure, but the breakout can fail or reverse. NEAR's chart has a downtrend stretching back to 2021, followed by a break through the line and a test of it as support.
Support is an area where buying previously slowed a decline, while resistance is where selling slowed a rise. Old resistance can become support after a breakout if buyers continue to defend it. I find that retest more informative than a brief move through a line.
Moving averages smooth price data over a chosen period. The charts use a 200 moving average for several assets, a 200-day moving average for AAVE and a 200 EMA for Chainlink. The EMA gives recent observations more weight, so these references are not interchangeable.
Fibonacci retracements mark portions of a selected rise that a decline might retrace. The main references here are 0.382 and 0.5, with the latter marking a halfway retracement. Changing the selected swing low or swing high changes the levels. The analyst also uses mid-cycle highs, which they place around April, May and June of 2026 for most coins, as possible support or resistance rather than a fixed cycle timetable.
I would check whether overlapping indicators offer independent evidence: a previous high, moving average and retracement still draw heavily on the same price history. Their agreement makes a support area easier to inspect, not certain to hold.
The risk/reward ratios compare a selected upside destination with a selected downside level, often using an earlier all-time high. They do not measure the probability of reaching either. This is a spot-ownership analysis, meaning ownership of the tokens themselves; a downside marker on a chart does not automatically limit a holder's loss.
Altcoin entry prices named in the watchlist
The named price areas are conditional support references:
| Asset | Level or range | Analyst's interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| NEAR Protocol | Around $3.36 | Support near the 0.382 retracement |
| Chainlink | Roughly $11 to around $9, $10 | A pocket of possible support |
| pump.fun | Around 0.0033, give or take | A deeper pullback toward the 0.5 retracement |
| Ondo | 43, 45-cent level; roughly $0.33 deeper | Preferred area and a more severe correction scenario |
| Jupiter | $0.27 to about $0.25 | A narrow correction range |
| Bittensor TAO | Roughly $250 | The 0.5 retracement and an expected moving-average area |
I would preserve those ranges rather than turn them into exact orders. Chainlink has a support pocket; Ondo has a preferred area and a separate deeper scenario. Several forecasts depend on Bitcoin correcting first, and NEAR could fall through its identified level. Reaching support does not prove that buyers will defend it.
Some areas sit below prices that have already rallied strongly; others concern a breakout or retest. A retracement after a rally and a failed attempt to escape a long downtrend call for different readings of the chart. Check the asset, timeframe and current support before relying on an unlabeled price area.
NEAR, AAVE and Morpho: supply and lending arguments
NEAR's supply thesis rests on a proposal to reduce issuance, the creation of new tokens, from 2.5% a year to 1.6% over a two-year period. The analyst expects greater use to bring more burning, which permanently removes tokens from circulation, and potentially make NEAR deflationary.
For supply to shrink, burns must exceed issuance. I also separate scarcity from demand: the analyst expects investors to value lower inflation, but reducing new supply does not establish that buyers will want the token. The chart scenario compares approximately 1:8 toward the all-time high with a possible roughly 35% correction.
AAVE's lending development is the reported arrival of Coinbase tokenized stocks on the platform. Tokenized shares such as Nvidia can be used as collateral in borrowing and lending involving USDC. Tokenization represents an asset through a digital token; pledging it as collateral supports a loan.
The proposed AAVE support area combines the mid-cycle high with the expected moving-average position and the retracements discussed earlier. Its downtrend dates to 2021, and the analyst's comparison is almost 1:9. Their bullish case depends on an eventual breakout and meaningful lending activity from the stock integration.
Morpho's total value locked reportedly increased by over 2x in the bear market. TVL measures the value committed to a protocol. Its Ledger partnership allows borrowing against wrapped Bitcoin, a token representation used outside Bitcoin's native environment, without leaving Ledger.
I would assess that convenience separately from loan safety. Falling collateral can trigger liquidation when required levels are breached, and a familiar interface does not remove the risks in the lending contracts underneath it.
Morpho's chart has an ascending triangle, with rising lows beneath an upper resistance area. The analyst doubts that its apparent strength will allow a fall into the deeper retracement zones. They give a 1:3 comparison back to the all-time high and expect a breakout could clear that high.
Chainlink, Ondo and Quant: tokenization needs a token link
Chainlink is one of the analyst's favoured tokenization exposures. Their forecast is that a strong tokenization bull market could take LINK beyond its $53 all-time high from 2021. The almost 1:19 chart comparison uses a return to that high against a possible 20% decline, with support in the table's price pocket.
Two reported developments support the argument. One-click deposits could move collateral from one chain into a lending service on another, such as Solana collateral into AAVE on Ethereum. Chainlink Fulcrum has also reportedly launched to give institutions access to liquidity and collateral across chains.
The analyst expects broader collateral access to expand lending-platform TVL and argues that routing the activity through Chainlink benefits the network. I still want to know how that use creates demand for LINK. Infrastructure activity and token value need a connection.
Cross-chain services also depend on several networks and contracts, so a transaction can fail at more than one point. Easier liquidity access does not remove transfer or collateral risks.
Ondo's case makes the distinction between activity and token benefits explicit. The analyst acknowledges criticism that its token has no accrual: the cited activity does not currently pass value to holders in the way critics want. Their most optimistic scenario assumes a speculative fee switch that would change how fees flow.
That scenario carries a 1:28 risk/reward comparison. The deeper price area in the table has a roughly 1:10 or 1:11 comparison. I would not treat a possible change to governance or token economics as a benefit holders already receive.
Ondo also reportedly allows permissionless trading of private pre-IPO companies. Permissionless access generally removes the need for individual approval to interact with a system. Access through a token, however, does not establish legal rights, redemption options or exposure to the organisation responsible for the underlying asset.
Quant reportedly rose 6x, a move the analyst attributes to its partnership with The Clearing House in the United States. They expect a similar announcement connected with its European work; that remains a forecast.
I read the proposed roughly 40% Quant pullback against that preceding rally. The analyst sees a retracement toward the 0.5 level as more sustainable and gives an almost 1:2 comparison to the 2021 cycle high. A strong longer-term story can coexist with substantial room for a decline after a large rise.
pump.fun, Aerodrome and Jupiter: activity is the thesis
The pump.fun thesis assumes memecoin activity will return. Rather than choosing one memecoin, the analyst favours exposure through a launch platform with social features, including livestreaming.
Its cup-and-handle chart pattern consists of a rounded recovery followed by a smaller consolidation. The analyst projects upside from the cup's height, producing a roughly 1:9 comparison against a possible 40% fall. I would not rank that ratio directly against ratios based on previous highs: the upside methods differ.
The reported expansion of custom pairs lets a new token pair with another token, potentially PUMP itself. Routing purchases through that paired token could create buying pressure, revenue or burning. The stronger forecast depends on creators choosing the pairs and users trading them.
Memecoin activity can change quickly. Thin liquidity and a sudden loss of attention can make it difficult to exit at the price displayed on a screen. Holding a platform token changes the exposure but leaves it dependent on that market's activity.
Aerodrome Finance's reported upcoming combination with Velodrome under Aero could attract attention. The analyst also warns of a buy-the-rumour, sell-the-news event, where traders anticipate the announcement and reduce exposure after it arrives.
The growth argument connects Aerodrome with Coinbase tokenized assets and Base. Those assets reportedly reached $1 billion in assets under management in 31 days, then 2 billion in another 15 days. The analyst expects that activity to feed into Aerodrome's swapping services.
I would keep those asset totals separate from Aerodrome token economics: growth in a related market does not establish how much reaches the protocol or holders. The chart scenario includes a possible 25% correction, a 1:7 comparison and a potential move toward the 2025 high at roughly $1.50 if the downtrend breaks.
Jupiter combines prediction markets, lending and swaps on Solana. Its lending platform reportedly holds $2.5 billion, with active loans, TVL and fees rising. The analyst considers its price-to-fees ratio of 10x attractive; that ratio relates market value to annualized fees.
Platform fees are not necessarily income distributed to token holders. I would also question whether the recent fee rate is a useful guide to a longer period before relying on an annualized figure.
Jupiter's chart comparison is 1:10. The projected support range in the table could bring together its mid-cycle high, retracement levels and moving average. Continued activity and buyers defending support are separate conditions for the bullish case.
Sui, Stellar and TAO: access, usage and resistance
The analyst calls Sui one of the most undervalued large-cap altcoins and compares it with Solana in 2022. That is a recovery thesis, not evidence that both projects will follow the same path.
A reported Samsung collaboration brings Sui's gasless, USDC-based stablecoin transfers to Samsung Wallet users, with access across 82 million devices. Gas is the fee for processing a blockchain transaction; a gasless experience generally means users do not directly handle it in the usual way.
I distinguish distribution from adoption here. Device access creates a route to users, but does not establish how many will use the service. The investment argument needs usage to follow.
Hashi mainnet is also reportedly launching with $500 million in capital backing lending, borrowing and swaps connected to Bitcoin liquidity. The Sui chart forecast includes a possible 17% drop toward the 0.5 retracement, roughly a 5x move back to the 2025 high and a 1:21 risk/reward comparison.
Stellar's case centres on reported usage: active users rising over the last three years, improving earnings, increasing transactions per second and TVL growth throughout 2026. The analyst also points to real-world-asset TVL growth and expects a DTCC app-chain connection in the first half of 2027.
Their XLM chart comparison is 1:7, and they intend to substantially increase their own buying at the projected worst-case area. I would examine the economic value of the activity as well as its volume; more transactions can support a network thesis without resolving that question.
Bittensor TAO has rebounded from the 0.5 retracement but failed in an attempt to break its two-year downtrend. Its projected support in the table is expected to align with the 200 moving average.
The analyst identifies the mid-cycle high as the next resistance and suggests that clearing it would leave relatively few barriers before price discovery, when prices move beyond previous reference highs. I would keep the failed breakout in view rather than treat the next attempt as already successful.
Judge the assumptions before the ratio
I would put the upside method beside each quoted ratio. A larger figure can come from a more ambitious destination or a closer downside marker, rather than a more dependable opportunity.
For chart checking, follow whether a breakout holds and whether buyers appear on a retest. Recheck the moving average too: an indicator can move while a quoted dollar level stays fixed.
For announcements, distinguish proposals from launches and access from demonstrated use. Then check what changes for the token's demand, supply or holder rights. Ondo's fee switch remains speculative; it is not an existing benefit to holders.
