Avalanche is a type of digital money that people can use to buy things or trade with others. Its value went up by more than 4% in one day, which means it became a little bit more valuable compared to other digital monies. This happened because some people think Avalanche will be useful and popular in the future, so they want to have more of it. Read from source...

1. The article does not provide any clear explanation of why the Avalanche price increased by 4% within 24 hours. It only mentions the percentage change without giving any context or analysis of the factors that contributed to it. This is a weak and superficial approach to reporting on cryptocurrency market movements.

2. The article uses vague terms like "positive trend" and "its current price" without specifying the exact figures for both. For example, it says the coin's all-time high is $144.96 but does not mention when this happened or how much the price has fallen since then. This creates confusion and misleads readers who may think that the coin is still close to its all-time high when in fact it is far below it.

3. The article compares the price movement of Avalanche with its all-time high, which is a flawed method of evaluation. The all-time high is an arbitrary point in time and does not reflect the coin's true potential or performance. A more accurate way to compare the price would be to use relative strength index (RSI) or other technical indicators that measure the momentum and volatility of the coin.

4. The article does not mention any significant news, events, or developments related to Avalanche that could have triggered the price increase. This is a crucial piece of information for readers who want to understand the underlying reasons behind the market movements. Without this context, the article seems unprofessional and incomplete.

5. The article has no quotes from experts, analysts, or insiders who can provide insightful and credible opinions on Avalanche's price movement. This lack of expert input weakens the article's authority and objectivity. Readers may question the validity and reliability of the information presented in the article.