This article is reprinted with permission from Biteye, author: @viee7227, copyright belongs to the original author.
From the halving in April 2024 to a new high of $120,000 in October 2025, Bitcoin has gone through nearly 18 months. If we only look at this path, it seems to still be operating according to the cycle. Halving leads to a bottom, a peak within a year, and then a correction.
However, what truly confuses the market is not whether there has been an increase, but that it has not increased in the usual manner.
There has been no series of explosive growth like in 2017, nor the nationwide frenzy seen in 2021. This round of market activity appears slow, dull, and with converging volatility; the progress of ETFs has been inconsistent, altcoin rotations lack strength, and even after reaching a new high, it fell below $90,000 in less than a month. Is this a bull market or the beginning of a bear market?
Therefore, this article will delve into: (1) why many people feel the four-year cycle has failed, (2) which parts of the four-year cycle theory are still valid, and (3) what factors have disrupted the cycle.
Although Bitcoin's price has risen after the halving, this round of market activity has felt quite off from start to finish.
Bitcoin completed its halving in April 2024, and according to historical patterns, the following 12 to 18 months should see a major upward wave and emotional peak in the market. This has been somewhat true, as in October 2025, Bitcoin surged to a new high of $125,000. But the real issue is that this round of market activity lacked that final frenzy and did not see a nationwide emotional handover. Shortly after reaching a new high, the price quickly fell back by 25%, briefly dropping below $90,000. This is not the "bubble tail" that should appear in a typical cycle; it feels more like the market was extinguished before it even heated up.
Additionally, sentiment is clearly low. In past bull market peaks, on-chain capital was active, altcoins surged, and retail investors rushed in. However, in this round, Bitcoin's market dominance remains close to 59%. This indicates that most capital is still concentrated in mainstream coins, with altcoins lagging behind and rotations lacking explosive power. Compared to the tenfold or even hundredfold increases in previous cycles, this round has seen Bitcoin rise only 7 to 8 times from its low at the end of 2022; from the halving point, the increase is less than 2 times.
The mildness of the market is also reflected in the capital structure. After the launch of ETFs, institutions began to buy continuously, becoming the main force in the market. Institutions are more rational and better at controlling volatility, which has led to a decrease in market sentiment fluctuations and a smoother trading rhythm. The price formation mechanism has changed; it is no longer solely determined by "supply and demand," but is more driven by structural trading logic.
In summary, the various anomalies in this round, including the retreat of sentiment, weakening returns, disrupted rhythms, and institutional dominance, have indeed led the market to intuitively feel that the familiar four-year cycle is no longer effective.
Despite the chaotic surface phenomena, a deeper analysis reveals that the logic of the four-year cycle theory has not been completely lost. The fundamental factors such as supply and demand changes triggered by the halving are still at play, but their manifestations are more subdued than in the past.
The following will analyze the parts of the cycle theory that still hold true from three aspects: supply, on-chain indicators, and historical data.
Bitcoin halves every four years, meaning that new supply continues to decrease. This mechanism, in the long run, remains a key logic supporting price increases. In April 2024, Bitcoin completed its fourth halving, reducing the block reward from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC.
Although the total supply of Bitcoin is nearing 94%, the marginal changes brought by a single halving are diminishing, but the market's expectation of scarcity has not disappeared. After previous halvings, the long-term bullish sentiment in the market has remained evident, with many choosing to hold rather than sell.
This round is no different. Despite significant price fluctuations, the impact of tightening supply is still present. As shown in the chart, Bitcoin's unrealized market value and realized market value have significantly increased compared to the end of 2022, indicating that a large amount of capital has continued to flow into Bitcoin in recent years.
The behavior patterns of Bitcoin investors exhibit a cyclical "hoarding-sell-off" cycle, which is still reflected in on-chain data. Typical on-chain indicators include MVRV, SOPR, and RHODL.
MVRV is the ratio of market value to realized value. When the MVRV value rises, it indicates that Bitcoin is in an overvalued state. At the end of 2023, MVRV fell to 0.8, rose to 2.8 during the bullish market in 2024, and fell below 2 during the early 2025 correction, indicating that the valuation is neither overvalued nor undervalued, and the overall cyclical rise and fall rhythm is still present.
SOPR can be simply understood as the price at which an asset is sold divided by the price at which it was bought. According to cyclical rules, SOPR=1 is seen as the dividing line between bull and bear markets; below 1 indicates a loss on sales, while above 1 indicates most are in profit. In this cycle, SOPR remained below 1 during the 2022 bear market, but after 2023, it rose above 1, entering a profit cycle. During the bull market phase from 2024 to 2025, this indicator has mostly remained above 1, consistent with cyclical rules.
RHODL measures the ratio of "realized value" between short-term holders (1 week) and medium to long-term holders (1-2 years), used to identify market top risks. Historically, when this indicator enters a very high zone (red band), it often corresponds to the peaks of bull market bubbles (such as in 2013 and 2017). In 2021-2022, RHODL surged again; although it did not break historical extremes, it indicated that the market structure was entering its later stages. Now, this indicator has also entered a cyclical high point, which in some ways suggests that prices are at a peak.
Overall, the cyclical phenomena reflected by these on-chain indicators still resonate with historical patterns. Although specific values may differ slightly, the on-chain logic of bottoms and tops remains clear.
From another perspective, the gradually decreasing increase at each cycle peak compared to the previous cycle is actually part of the normal evolution of cyclical rules. From 2013 to 2017, the peak rose about 20 times, from 2017 to 2021 the increase shrank to about 3.5 times, while this round saw an increase from $69,000 to $125,000, an increase of about 80%. Although the increase has clearly converged, the trend line is still continuing and has not completely deviated from the cyclical track. This marginal decrease is also a result of the market's expansion and the weakening of marginal pushes from incremental capital, which does not indicate a failure of cyclical logic.
Ultimately, the logic of the "four-year cycle" is still at work at certain times. The halving affects supply and demand, and market behavior still follows the rhythm of "fear-greed," but this time the market activity is not as easily understood as before.
If the cycle is still present, why is this round of market activity so difficult to read? The reason lies in the fact that the previously singular halving rhythm has now been disrupted by multiple forces. Specifically, there are several reasons that make this round of cycles different from the past:
- Structural impact of ETFs and institutional funds
Since the launch of Bitcoin spot ETFs in 2024, the market structure has undergone significant changes.
ETFs are a form of "slow capital," continuously accumulating during price increases and also seeing some buying during declines. However, it is important to note that in the past week, institutional funds have withdrawn on a large scale; for example, in the past two days, the net outflow from the U.S. Bitcoin ETF reached as high as $523 million in a single day, with a monthly total exceeding $2 billion. This indicates that the current time is not the best for "entering and accumulating." Accumulation signals should at least wait until the outflow of funds stops and turns into sustained net inflows, with institutional actions primarily focused on buying.
ETFs not only bring in a large amount of incremental capital but also enhance price stability, with average holding costs around $89,000, forming effective support. This has made the rhythm of the Bitcoin market slower and steadier, but once support or resistance levels are breached, volatility can become more intense. This is a rare characteristic in traditional cycles and has reduced market fluctuations.
- Fragmented narratives and accelerated hot topic rotations
In the previous bull market (2020-2021), DeFi and NFTs created a clear value line, while the current market resembles a collection of fragmented hot topics:
From the end of 2023 to early 2024, Bitcoin ETFs dominated, later entering a craze for inscriptions;
In 2024, the narratives of Solana and Memes rose;
Then Crypto AI and AI Agents became hot topics;
By 2025, InfoFi, Binance Alpha, prediction markets, and x402 took turns in the spotlight…
The rapid rotation of narratives and weak continuity of hot topics have led to high-frequency capital switching, making it difficult to form medium to long-term allocations. Moreover, the previous cycle's pattern of "Bitcoin leading, altcoins following" has become unreliable. The current market resembles a series of small cycles stitched together, with some sectors heating up and cooling down, while Bitcoin fluctuates in between. This layered and interwoven structure has made the halving rhythm no longer solely decisive.
- Reflexivity enhancement
In addition to ETFs, capital, and narratives, we also face another phenomenon: the cycle itself is "self-influencing," which is reflexivity.
Because everyone knows the halving pattern, they tend to preemptively position themselves and cash out early, leading to an overdrawn market. At the same time, ETF holders, institutional market makers, miners, etc., are also making strategic adjustments based on the cycle. Whenever prices approach theoretical peaks, there may be a large amount of profit-taking that preemptively drives prices down, artificially advancing the cycle rhythm.
In summary, breaking down this round of market activity reveals that the so-called cycle confusion is more about the increase in driving forces. The market structure has changed, participants have changed, and the way emotions spread has also changed. This means that the past method of watching the clock to bet on bull and bear markets may be becoming outdated, requiring a deeper understanding of the larger context.
In the face of market uncertainty, different KOLs have provided various judgments, and through these perspectives, we may better understand the current market sentiment.
@BTCdayu
Believes that the four-year cycle no longer exists, and Bitcoin has shifted from being halving-driven to institution-driven, with the weight of retail investors gradually diluted.
Bitwise CEO @HHorsley also tweeted that the traditional "four-year cycle" model is no longer applicable, as the structure of the crypto market has undergone profound changes. He believes the market actually entered a bear market six months ago and is now in its late stages, with the fundamentals of overall crypto assets stronger than ever.
@Wolfy_XBT
Argues that the halving rhythm has never failed, and this round of the bull market ended on October 6, with the current market entering the early stages of a bear market. The four-year cycle rules still hold, and macro narratives and short-term sentiments are merely noise; the cyclical theory born around Bitcoin's halving is the most reliable signal.
@0xSunNFT
States that both the four-year halving cycle and local market conditions still exist. Every round of market activity has a period of silence, and the key is to understand the cyclical rhythm. Whether it's ETH, XPL, or Memes, there are still opportunities for repeated fluctuations within the cycle; the key is not to be swayed by short-term emotions.
@lanhubiji
Shares a view similar to this article, believing that the cycle has not disappeared but has "deformed." The oversupply of Memes and the dysfunction of altcoins have made the market fragmented, requiring new methods for cycle judgment.
From these viewpoints, it is evident that the debate between "the cycle is dead" and "the cycle is still present" is more about different interpretations of changes in market structure. The cycle may not have disappeared; it just requires a more complex perspective to recognize its existence.
So what should we look for in the future?
For ordinary retail investors, the most realistic approach may not be to predict the cycle but to try to build their own market perception, such as learning to use data to assist in judgment, avoiding traps brought by emotional fluctuations, and seeking high-cost performance opportunities rather than chasing every hot topic.
Currently, the cycle is still present, but it is more chaotic and dynamic; we cannot rely on "it should rise when the time comes" to think about the market. Many phenomena indicate that this round of the upward phase has likely ended, so now is the defensive phase, and the most important thing is to preserve capital and not easily go all in. The market may experience a volatile rebound later, but it resembles a fleeing market rather than a new bull market.
The true bottom usually does not arrive all at once but forms slowly after repeated fluctuations. Maintaining caution and restraint while keeping some capital available may allow one to seize the next real opportunity. Surviving is more important than being right.
Related: Analyst: Bitcoin (BTC) volatility surge may signal options-driven price return
Original: “Has Bitcoin's (BTC) Four-Year Cycle Broken?”
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
