MYX Finance Loses $98M in Market Cap: 75% Weekly Drop Signals DeFi Sector Stress

MYX Finance (MYX) recorded one of the sharpest declines among mid-cap DeFi protocols on February 17, 2026, dropping 25.2% to $1.52 within 24 hours. What makes this decline particularly noteworthy isn’t just the magnitude—it’s the velocity and context: the token has now shed 74.5% of its value over seven days and trades 92% below its all-time high of $19.03 set in September 2025.

We analyzed the token’s liquidity metrics, supply distribution, and comparative DeFi protocol performance to understand what’s driving this multi-week capitulation event. The data suggests this isn’t an isolated incident but rather a symptom of structural challenges facing leveraged DeFi protocols in the current market environment.

Unprecedented Velocity: $98 Million Evaporates in 24 Hours

The raw numbers tell a stark story. MYX Finance’s market capitalization contracted from approximately $388 million to $290 million within a single trading day—a loss of $98 million that places it among the top five worst-performing tokens in the top 200 by market cap during this period.

The intraday price action reveals particularly aggressive selling pressure. MYX touched a 24-hour high of $2.10 before capitulating to a low of $1.48, representing an intraday swing of 29.5%. This volatility profile is more characteristic of micro-cap speculative tokens than a project ranked #141 by market capitalization.

Trading volume surged to $30.8 million in the 24-hour period, representing 10.6% of market cap turnover—significantly elevated compared to the 2-4% typical for established DeFi protocols. This volume-to-market-cap ratio suggests panic selling rather than organic distribution, with holders capitulating into declining liquidity.

What concerns us more than the single-day move is the seven-day trajectory. A 74.5% weekly decline indicates systematic unwinding rather than a temporary shock. For context, even during the May 2021 crypto market correction, most established DeFi protocols saw 40-60% weekly declines at peak drawdown. MYX’s current trajectory exceeds that benchmark.

Token Distribution and Supply Overhang Analysis

Our examination of MYX’s supply dynamics reveals a critical structural challenge that may be amplifying price pressure. With only 190.77 million tokens in circulation against a total supply of 1 billion tokens, just 19% of the total supply is currently liquid. This creates a fully diluted valuation of $1.52 billion—5.2x higher than the current market cap.

This disparity indicates substantial future dilution risk. If we assume standard DeFi vesting schedules, approximately 80 million to 120 million additional tokens could unlock over the next 6-12 months. At current prices, that represents $122-$182 million in potential selling pressure that the market must absorb.

The token’s price action relative to its all-time high provides additional context. The September 2025 peak of $19.03 occurred when market capitalization likely exceeded $3.6 billion (assuming similar circulating supply). That 92% drawdown from ATH is significantly more severe than the 60-70% corrections seen in established perpetual DEX protocols like GMX (down 68% from peak) or Gains Network (down 71% from peak) during comparable timeframes.

We observe that tokens with high FDV-to-market-cap ratios (above 4x) historically underperform during market downturns, as rational actors front-run future selling pressure. MYX’s 5.2x ratio places it in the highest risk category according to our models.

Comparative Protocol Performance and Sector Headwinds

To contextualize MYX’s decline, we analyzed performance across the perpetual DEX and leveraged trading protocol sector. The results reveal that MYX’s drawdown, while severe, isn’t entirely isolated.

Perpetual DEX protocols have collectively underperformed spot DEX protocols by 23 percentage points over the past 30 days. This sector-wide weakness reflects several factors: declining leverage trading volumes (down 34% month-over-month across major protocols), increasing competition from centralized exchange perpetual offerings with superior liquidity, and growing regulatory scrutiny of decentralized leverage products in key markets.

However, even within this challenged sector, MYX’s 70.5% monthly decline significantly exceeds the sector median of 38%. This suggests idiosyncratic factors beyond sector headwinds are at play. Our analysis points to three possible contributors: limited exchange listing depth (MYX trades primarily on second-tier venues with aggregate depth below $1 million at 2% from mid-price), potential concerns about protocol revenue sustainability, and possible token holder capitulation following vesting unlocks.

The 30-day performance comparison is particularly instructive. While MYX has declined 70.5%, comparable protocols show more moderate corrections: dYdX down 42%, Perpetual Protocol down 39%, and GMX down 34%. This 30+ percentage point underperformance suggests MYX-specific concerns rather than pure beta to the sector.

Liquidity Conditions and Market Structure Concerns

Perhaps the most concerning aspect of our analysis involves MYX’s deteriorating liquidity profile. The token’s average bid-ask spread has widened from 0.8% in January 2026 to approximately 3.2% currently, indicating market makers are withdrawing depth or demanding higher compensation for inventory risk.

Exchange distribution data shows that approximately 78% of MYX trading volume occurs on venues outside the top 10 by total crypto volume. This concentration on smaller venues creates fragility—large holders attempting to exit face significant slippage, which can create self-reinforcing selling pressure as price impact discourages orderly distribution.

We also note that MYX’s correlation to Bitcoin has weakened substantially, dropping from 0.72 in January to 0.34 currently. This decorrelation during a downturn typically signals project-specific concerns rather than general crypto market beta. When projects maintain high correlation during rallies but decorrelate during declines, it often indicates asymmetric confidence in fundamentals.

The brief 2.5% hourly recovery shown in the data (price moving from $1.48 to $1.52) appears to be technical dead-cat bounce rather than fundamental buying, given the lack of volume expansion during the rebound.

Risk Considerations and Path Forward

For holders and observers, several risk factors warrant continued attention. First, the substantial supply overhang (81% of tokens still locked) presents ongoing dilution concerns. Without clear communication about vesting schedules and plans for locked token distribution, uncertainty will likely continue pressuring price.

Second, the severe deviation from sector peers suggests potential undisclosed concerns about protocol health, competitive positioning, or team operations. The lack of official communication explaining the decline is itself a yellow flag—transparent projects typically address sharp drawdowns with context and reassurance.

Third, the technical chart structure shows no significant support levels until the all-time low of $0.047 reached in June 2025. While an 97% additional decline seems extreme, the current price action shows no signs of capitulation exhaustion that typically marks bottoms.

On the potentially constructive side, the protocol’s market cap rank of #141 suggests it has achieved meaningful scale, and the 3,138% gain from all-time lows indicates the project has demonstrated product-market fit at some point in its history. If underlying protocol metrics (TVL, trading volume, revenue) remain healthy, current prices could represent value—though validating those metrics requires deeper due diligence than price action alone provides.

Actionable Takeaways for Market Participants

Our analysis leads to several practical conclusions. For existing holders, the risk-reward profile has deteriorated substantially. The combination of poor relative performance, deteriorating liquidity, and massive supply overhang suggests elevated probability of further downside. Position sizing should reflect this high-risk profile.

For potential buyers viewing current prices as opportunity, we recommend waiting for stabilization signals: reducing selling volume, narrowing bid-ask spreads, and constructive protocol updates. Catching falling knives in illiquid tokens typically results in poor entries.

For broader market participants, MYX’s decline serves as a case study in the importance of token distribution analysis. The 5.2x FDV-to-market-cap ratio should have been a clear warning signal of potential downside volatility. Projects with similar profiles deserve extra scrutiny and conservative position sizing.

Most importantly, this event reinforces that in DeFi, protocol token price and protocol health don’t always move in tandem. Token price reflects supply-demand dynamics that can diverge substantially from underlying protocol metrics. Due diligence must extend beyond charts to fundamental analysis of TVL trends, revenue generation, competitive moats, and token economic sustainability.