Deep Dive Analysis
Aave (AAVE)
2026-08-10 09:36 UTC · Tomas Novak · 15,000 Portfolio
PRICE
91.43
91.43
52W HIGH
399.07
399.07
DRAWDOWN
-77.1%
-77.1%
STAGE
Stage 3 (Topping)
Stage 3 (Topping)
🟡 WAIT — No Clear Edge
Trend-Following System · LOW Conviction · 3 Bull / 5 Bear Factors
Bullish factors: price > 50d, 50d rising, rising 1m & 3m
Bearish factors: price < 200d, death cross, MACD-, far below high, distribution (OBV down, vol ratio 0.82)
AAVE Price — 1 Year
1Y Ago: 190.04
Low: 58.05
Now: 91.43
Low: 58.05
Now: 91.43
Technical Snapshot
| RSI (14) | 49.0 | ADX (14) | 13.7 |
| 50d MA | 91.27 | 200d MA | 98.86 |
| Price vs 50d | ▲ Above | Price vs 200d | ▼ Below |
| Support | 87.52 | Resistance | 102.30 |
| ATR Volatility | 4.23%/day | Trend | HOLD |
Crypto Performance Comparison
| Asset | 1 Month | 3 Months | 6 Months | 1 Year |
| AAVE | +1.8% | +44.3% | -6.8% | -51.9% |
| BTC | +0.0% | +3.4% | -4.2% | -28.6% |
| ETH | +1.2% | +14.0% | -9.9% | -35.7% |
| SOL | -1.1% | +15.2% | -5.3% | -44.5% |
Trend-Following Backtest
2-year simulation of 15,000 using 50d/200d MA crossover + RSI filter. Buy when price > 50d MA (rising) + RSI 40-75. Sell on death cross or RSI > 82.
FINAL VALUE
13,524
RETURN
-9.8%
MAX DRAWDOWN
-38.9%
Strategy vs Buy & Hold
| Asset | Strategy | Buy & Hold | Max DD | Trades | Win Rate |
| AAVE | -9.8% | -54.7% | -38.9% | 50 | 36% |
DCA vs Lump Sum (AAVE)
If you had deployed 15,000 using different timing strategies over the past year.
| Strategy | Return | Value Today |
| Lump Sum (1y ago) | -51.9% | 4,666 |
| DCA — 4 buys | -39.3% | 9,099 |
| DCA — 6 buys | -26.6% | 11,005 |
| DCA — 12 buys | -29.0% | 10,655 |
AAVE Deployment Plan — 15,000 Portfolio
Analysis by Tomas Novak (Momentum / Swing Trader). If you’re managing a 15,000 crypto allocation, here’s the plan:
| Position size | 3,750 (25% of portfolio) |
| Stop loss | 83.70 (-8.5%) |
| Target 1 | 101.00 (10.5%) |
| Target 2 | 107.00 (17.0%) |
| Entry quality | Pullback |
| Max concurrent positions | 4 |
Cash reserve: keep 25% buffer. Deploy in 2 tranches. Portfolio style: Momentum / Swing Trader.
Backtest Trade Log
| Date | Action | Price | P&L |
| 2026-07-30 | BUY | 99.44 | |
| 2026-07-31 | SELL | 93.68 | -5.8% |
| 2026-08-01 | BUY | 90.52 | |
| 2026-08-02 | SELL | 92.00 | +1.6% |
| 2026-08-03 | BUY | 92.28 | |
| 2026-08-04 | SELL | 90.41 | -2.0% |
| 2026-08-05 | BUY | 89.74 | |
| 2026-08-06 | SELL | 89.59 | -0.2% |
| 2026-08-08 | BUY | 91.23 | |
| 2026-08-09 | SELL | 90.55 | -0.7% |
| 2026-08-10 | BUY | 91.43 | |
| END | SELL | 91.43 | +0.0% |
Generated by BitcoinsNews.com Coin Analysis Engine · 2026-08-10 09:36 UTC
Trend-following methodology: 50d/200d MA crossover + RSI filter + ADX regime gate
Data via Yahoo Finance / CoinGecko · Not financial advice. For educational purposes only.
Trend-following methodology: 50d/200d MA crossover + RSI filter + ADX regime gate
Data via Yahoo Finance / CoinGecko · Not financial advice. For educational purposes only.
77% drawdown from the high and still calling it a HOLD? the copium is unreal. AAVE had a nice run but lending protocols are dead money until rates cycle
onchain_diet_ 77 percent drawdown and HOLD is copium but trend following at 36 percent win rate is also brutal. both sides of this trade look bad
trend following is supposed to look ugly in a 77 percent drawdown. it lost 9.8 while buy and hold lost 51.9. the win rate column is noise, the divergence column is the entire thesis
risk_off_ron_ the divergence column doing 9.8 vs 51.9 is the whole pitch and people still argue about win rate. trend following was never supposed to feel good
onchain_diet_ lending protocols are rate sensitive by nature. AAVE holds better than most in a bear because actual borrowers use it but the token still trades like everything else
backtest shows -9.8% with 50 trades and 36% win rate. thats a lot of chopping for basically matching the entry price. fees would eat most of that
^ 36% win rate is rough but the strategy still beat buy and hold by 45 points. thats the whole point of trend following, you cut losers fast
50 trades on a liquid perp is maybe 1 to 2 percent all in with sane sizing. the real leak is slippage on breakout entries, everyone chases the same 15m candle. fees are the smallest tax in that backtest
77% drawdown from the highs and they still rate it HOLD? the strategy backtest literally lost money over 2 years. id be scaling out not waiting
^ 36% win rate on 50 trades is rough. your system needs to hit at least 45% to survive slippage long term
Dimitri K. disagree on scaling out. AAVE revenue actually grew QoQ while price dumped. the fundamentals are fine, its just sentiment death
Henrik O. AAVE revenue growing QoQ while the token dumps 77% is the DeFi blue chip paradox. the protocol works perfectly, the token economics do not
the DCA 12 buys column is interesting tho. -26.6% vs lump sum -51.9%. timing still matters even in a bear trend
DCA 12 buys at -26.6% vs lump sum at -51.9% is a 25 point spread. in a 77% drawdown asset that difference is literally whether you survive or not
Malgorzata W. 25 points of spread is also 25 points of patience tax. DCA only wins if you actually have the months to keep buying
patience tax is a good name for it. the DCA column quietly assumes your salary keeps arriving every month, thats the hidden assumption
Stage 3 top formation tag on a protocol with growing quarterly revenue is a strange combo. Either the trend model is right and rates stay painful, or the lending desks come back the first week cuts arrive. Position sized small against a 399 high seems fair.
Gerhard Voss sized it right. small position into a 399 high with revenue still climbing is the only version of this HOLD that makes sense
the rates argument is the whole thing. the first cut headline moves AAVE 30 percent before anyone even rereads the deployment plan
30 pct on a headline also means 30 pct down on a hawkish rewrite. the rates trade cuts both ways and nobody models the downside print
30 pct on one fed headline means the sizing column matters more than the entry column. half a tranche pre cut, half after, sleep fine
revenue up while the token drops 77 percent is exactly why i stopped treating protocol success and token price as the same bet
revenue grew into the valuation two cycles ago. now the token is mostly a leveraged bet on multiple expansion and everyone knows it
multiple expansion bet is generous imo. fee switch chatter has been coming since 2023, at some point the token is just a governance lottery ticket
fee switch rumors alone move this thing more than the rate path. aave is a governance story wearing a macro costume