Week of 23 February 2026: a fifth straight down week for BTC and ETH, both closing mid-range
When an asset falls for a fifth consecutive week but recovers from its low and closes mid-range, what does the week actually show about selling pressure and about the trend that preceded it?
BTC fell 2.76% to 65,776.47 and ETH 0.93% to 1,939.71, the fifth consecutive down week for both. Both touched their weekly lows on Tuesday 24 February and their highs the next day, closing in the middle third of the week range. ETH lost less than BTC, lifting the ETH/BTC ratio 1.89%.
What the data shows. Both assets traded their lows on Tuesday 24 February at 13:00 UTC (BTC 62,510.28, ETH 1,800.00) and their highs the next day on Wednesday 25 February at 21:00 UTC (BTC 69,988.83, ETH 2,148.39), so the low preceded the high. Monday 23 February, the first day of the week, was the worst day for both (BTC -4.42%, ETH -5.19%), and the market reversed on Wednesday (+6.13% BTC, +11.10% ETH, the best day of the week for both). BTC lost 2.76% and ETH 0.93%, so ETH outperformed by 1.83 percentage points and the ETH/BTC ratio rose 1.89%. Hourly moves were very close between the two (correlation 0.92), including the week's largest hourly move, -3.62% for BTC and -4.04% for ETH in the hour starting 06:00 UTC on Saturday 28 February. Both closes sat in the middle third of their weekly ranges. BTC's weekly return ranked at the 26th percentile of the 419 weeks recorded before it, ETH's at the 45th.
What it does not show. Four prior weeks were down for both assets, and this was the fifth, but a run of down weeks is a description of direction, not evidence of a cause. Nothing here identifies who was selling or whether the Tuesday low marked exhaustion. Volume was about equal to BTC's prior twelve-week average (1.02 times) and below ETH's (0.79 times), which is consistent with a decline on ordinary activity rather than capitulation, but volume alone cannot confirm that.
What a careful desk would check. Realised volatility, the size of the swings that actually happened scaled to a yearly figure, was 64.1% for BTC and 82.6% for ETH. BTC closed 47.8% below its 52-week high and ETH 60.69% below, so a 6.13% up day sits deep inside a longer decline. A desk would compare its stop distances with the -3.62% Saturday hour rather than with an average week, and ask whether the mid-range close reflects balance or simply a lack of follow-through in either direction.
Funding. BTC perpetual funding — the periodic payment between long and short holders that keeps contract prices near spot — averaged near zero, with a high of 0.0069% and a low of -0.0093% per eight hours. ETH averaged -0.0026%, touching -0.0365%. Neither asset showed a persistent charge on either side, so no crowding reading can be drawn from funding this week.
What would change this reading
- If a later week closes below this week's low of 62,510.28 for BTC or 1,800.00 for ETH, the mid-week recovery reads as a pause inside the decline rather than a turn.
- If the down-week run ends while volume stays at or below the prior twelve-week average, the change in direction may lack the participation a trend reversal usually needs.
- If ETH keeps losing less than BTC and the ratio rises again after +1.89%, the relative strength becomes a pattern worth testing against its own history.
- If funding turns clearly positive or negative and stays there, the near-neutral reading of this week no longer describes the market.
Terms
- realised volatility
- how much the price actually swung over a period, expressed as a yearly percentage
- percentile
- the share of past weeks with a lower value; the 26th percentile means most past weeks were higher
- perpetual funding
- a regular payment between long and short holders of a perpetual futures contract that keeps its price close to the spot price