In mid-January, Eastern Eight Time, Bitcoin once again gained significant buying support and stabilized around $92,000, with prices fluctuating between the $92,000-$95,000 support zone and the $96,000-$100,000 resistance zone. Meanwhile, the open interest in futures contracts has increased by about 13% since the beginning of the year, reaching approximately $66 billion on January 15, marking a nearly 8-week high, as leveraged funds re-enter the market. In stark contrast, the total network hash rate has fallen below 1 ZH/s, retreating to its lowest level since September 2025, down about 15% from the October 2024 peak, putting continuous pressure on miners' profitability and investment willingness. This article will assess the risks and potential directions of the long-short game surrounding the $92,000 level along three main lines: price, futures leverage, and hash rate divergence.
Price Range Defense and the $92,000 Sentiment Anchor
Since the beginning of the year, Bitcoin's price has repeatedly tested the $92,000 level during multiple fluctuations, with each dip seeing quick buying support that pushes the price back above $96,000, indicating that this range has been repeatedly confirmed by the market as a key defensive level at this stage. Although the extent of the pullbacks and rebounds varies on different trading days, the overall trend shows that the support around $92,000 reflects more of a "proactive absorption in passive defense" rather than a one-time technical stop-loss.
In terms of transaction structure, the $92,000-$95,000 range is evolving into a typical support zone with dense trading activity, where repeated pullbacks and rebounds accelerate the accumulation of chips, with short-term and swing funds frequently trading in this area, gradually concentrating the holding costs towards this range. Conversely, the area above $96,000-$100,000 exhibits characteristics of a resistance zone; once buying pressure pushes the price into this range, selling pressure significantly increases, with previously trapped positions and profit-taking orders overlapping, causing the price to encounter resistance and retreat multiple times as it approaches the six-figure mark. The frequent switching between support and resistance zones makes the current phase more akin to a redistribution of chips in a high-level consolidation rather than a smooth continuation of a one-sided trend.
Market views generally suggest that "the $92,000 support level reflects the market's recognition of the current valuation level," and this price point is gradually being used as an anchor for short-term sentiment and swing trading. For trend traders, stabilization above $92,000 indicates that bulls still hold the dominant position; if it effectively breaks below, it will be seen as a signal that the upward structure has been damaged. For high-frequency and swing funds, repeatedly going long around $92,000-$95,000 and reducing positions or reversing near $100,000 has become a common strategy recently. It is this consensus formed around a single key price level that makes $92,000 not just a technical support but gradually evolves into a watershed for sentiment and position management.
Leverage Position Heating Up and $66 Billion Open Interest Signal
From the derivatives perspective, the open interest in futures contracts has accumulated an increase of about 13% since the beginning of the year, reaching approximately $66 billion on January 15, setting a nearly 8-week high. This scale is relatively high within the range of the past two months, indicating that whether going long or short, funds have accumulated a larger leveraged exposure in the current price range. The renewed influx of leveraged funds is highly synchronized with the stabilization and rebound of spot prices from around $92,000, indicating that market risk appetite is clearly warming up, and the financial attributes of price volatility are being amplified once again.
It is important to distinguish that the increase in positions accompanying price rises is different from the continuous accumulation of positions during price consolidation. In a trending upward phase, open interest increases moderately as prices rise, often reflecting trend-following accumulation and new capital inflow, indicating a relatively healthy market structure; whereas, when approaching the upper range during consolidation, if positions continue to rise at high levels, it is more likely to indicate that both bulls and bears are continuously adding to their positions within a narrow range, preparing for a more directional volatility battle. Currently, Bitcoin is repeatedly facing resistance around $96,000-$100,000, while open interest is nearing a two-month high, indicating a more crowded trading structure, with potential risks of liquidation and squeeze accumulating rather than being released.
Combining the rhythm of the rebound from the $92,000 support level, the expansion of positions and price recovery are occurring simultaneously, indicating that funds still have confidence in short-term upward momentum and are inclined to use leverage to amplify return expectations. If subsequent prices continue to oscillate within the $92,000-$100,000 range, scenarios where bulls passively increase leverage and bears add to their positions at highs may occur; once one side loses a key price level, it could easily trigger a chain liquidation, amplifying severe volatility in a short time. However, due to the current lack of specific data on the scale, direction, and potential intensity of short squeezes, we can only make directional judgments about the possibility of long and short squeezes without precise quantitative projections.
Hash Rate Decline and Economic Logic of Pressure on Miners
In stark contrast to the rising heat in the futures market, the total network hash rate has recently fallen below 1 ZH/s, retreating to its lowest level since September 2025, down about 15% from the October 2024 peak. This decline is not a singular event but rather the result of continuous pressure on miners' profits and the gradual redistribution of power resources over the past few months. From a time series perspective, the hash rate was still near historical highs in the fourth quarter of 2024, but as block rewards shrink post-halving, price volatility intensifies, and operational costs rise rigidly, the exit of marginal miners and the decommissioning of equipment have become more economically rational choices.
In terms of economic drivers, rising electricity and hardware costs are the primary sources of pressure. With global energy price fluctuations and adjustments in local electricity pricing policies, the proportion of electricity costs in miners' cost structures continues to rise, while the threshold for hardware investment due to machine iteration is also increasing. In the context where prices have not sustained significantly above previous highs and block rewards are reduced due to the halving mechanism, the electricity and equipment amortization costs corresponding to a single Bitcoin are rising, while the expected returns per unit of hash rate are declining, directly compressing miners' profit margins. Once profit margins are squeezed to a certain threshold, some high-cost miners choose to reduce load, shut down old equipment, or exit the network, leading to a natural decline in hash rate.
At the same time, a consensus is gradually forming in the market that "the migration of hash rate to the AI field may be a structural trend." Faced with the exponential demand for hash rate from AI and high-performance computing, mining farms and hardware manufacturers are beginning to reassess the best use of their assets. On one hand, data center-level infrastructure, local substations, and cooling systems inherently have the potential to expand into AI/HPC; on the other hand, during certain periods and in specific regions, the unit electricity revenue that AI/HPC tasks can pay has already become competitive with or even more attractive than Bitcoin mining. This economic calculation is driving some of the electricity and hardware resources originally directed towards Bitcoin mining to instead provide hash rate rental services for AI training or inference tasks.
From a network security and technical perspective, a short-term decline in hash rate does not mean that block production will suddenly destabilize or that network security will be immediately compromised on a large scale. The protocol's difficulty adjustment mechanism will buffer hash rate changes, allowing block production intervals to automatically return to target levels within a certain range. Therefore, phase-based fluctuations in hash rate often reflect slight extensions or reductions in block times rather than an immediate outbreak of structural risk. However, if the decline in hash rate persists for an extended period and hovers at low levels, it may marginally reduce network security costs, making malicious attacks theoretically more "economically viable." The current decline of about 15% is closer to a cyclical adjustment rather than a cliff-like collapse, but it reflects a re-pricing of miners' long-term return expectations.
Mismatched Risks of Heating Leverage and Declining Hash Rate
When we overlay the futures positions with the total network hash rate, a stark contrast emerges: on one side, the open interest in futures contracts has surged to a near 8-week high, with funds choosing to "increase leverage"; on the other side, the hash rate has fallen below 1 ZH/s, nearing a low not seen in over a year, with the supply side "reducing capacity." This structural mismatch gives the current price trend a strong financial attribute, while the underlying infrastructure's security redundancy is marginally shrinking.
From the perspectives of risk appetite and safety margin, the firmness of prices above $92,000 is largely supported by the financial re-pricing of funds: leveraged funds are willing to use higher leverage to bet on price increases, while the enthusiasm for new investments on the miners' side has clearly cooled. If the continued price increase primarily relies on leverage from the futures market rather than synchronized expansion of hash rate and long-term miner investments, it indicates that the linkage between price and network security budget has weakened; while prices remain high, the enhancement of underlying safety margins is disproportionate, leading to an invisible accumulation of systemic fragility in the market.
In this structure, the balance between miner selling pressure and network security discount becomes delicate. On one hand, a decline in hash rate often accompanies a reduction in output or exit from some miners, which may alleviate active selling pressure in the short term, helping to ease immediate selling pressure on the supply side; on the other hand, if the market begins to realize that the network security budget is being compressed marginally, it may apply a certain discount to Bitcoin's long-term valuation, especially as institutional investors may raise their risk premium requirements when assessing on-chain security and attack costs. Historically, during rapid price increases, hash rate often lags behind and does not rise synchronously, so short-term divergence between price and hash rate is not absolutely abnormal. However, when the duration of divergence extends and the magnitude increases, it often becomes a warning signal before medium- to long-term adjustments.
It is important to emphasize that in the absence of key data such as ETF inflows and outflows, and options position structures, all interpretations we make regarding this divergence must maintain restraint in assumptions and conclusions. The current confirmed fact is that leveraged funds are clearly increasing their positions on the financial side, while miners are becoming conservative in hash rate investments; whether this will necessarily trigger a cyclical turning point or amplify systemic risks still requires verification with data from multiple dimensions.
Long-term Game of Power and Data Center Migration to AI/HPC
From a longer-term perspective, the redistribution of power resources is reshaping the landscape of the hash rate industry. For traditional mining farms, shifting some electricity and data center infrastructure towards AI/HPC hash rate rental is both a proactive embrace of macro demand changes and a re-optimization of their asset return rates. Once the unit hash rate returns from AI training and inference tasks consistently exceed those from Bitcoin mining, mining farms will have ample motivation to upgrade networks, improve cooling and reliability standards, and convert facilities originally serving PoW mining into data centers for AI/HPC clients, which is more economically rational.
If this trend continues, Bitcoin will inevitably need to make adjustments in either price or on-chain fees to maintain sufficient security budgets in the long term: either prices form a new central point in a higher range, assigning higher fiat value to the same block rewards at higher coin prices to attract hash rate back; or rely on an increased proportion of on-chain transaction fees in total revenue, so that miners no longer primarily depend on block subsidies but maintain investment motivation through higher fee income. Regardless of which path is taken, it ultimately means that the network security budget needs to compete for resources with higher-yield scenarios like AI, and Bitcoin is no longer the only "profit-maximizing" option in the hash rate world.
At the same time, the geographical distribution of hash rate and the concentration of ownership may also change as a result. If more traditional mining farms transform into AI/HPC service providers, while Bitcoin hash rate becomes more concentrated in a few regions that still insist on mining and enjoy low electricity prices and stable policy environments, the weights of hash rate centralization and regulatory risks may be rebalanced. Once hash rate becomes highly concentrated geographically and in terms of capital, single-point regulation or policy changes could have an amplified impact on network security, forcing the market to reassess the relationship between decentralization and attack costs.
For medium- to long-term investors, "the competition for Bitcoin's hash rate has shifted from miners to AI cloud providers," becoming a new variable in the valuation and risk control framework. When assessing Bitcoin's long-term value, it is essential to consider not only macro liquidity and regulatory environments but also the redistribution of hash rate and electricity across various applications. The key question in the future will no longer be simply "Are miners profitable?" but rather "In the presence of higher-yield uses such as AI/HPC, can Bitcoin continue to attract enough quality electricity and hardware resources to remain on-chain?"
Key Observations Under Price Highs and Fundamental Pressure
Considering the three main lines of price support, futures leverage, and hash rate decline, Bitcoin is currently in a "price optimistic, fundamental pressure" divergence phase. On one hand, the $92,000 support has been repeatedly validated, with prices maintaining strong fluctuations within the $92,000-$100,000 range, and the risk appetite on the financial side has clearly warmed up; on the other hand, the total network hash rate has fallen below 1 ZH/s, down about 15% from its peak, and the long-term investment willingness on the miners' side has not kept pace with the optimistic price expectations, leading to stagnation or even slight contraction in the marginal expansion of the network security budget.
In the short-term market, a more probable scenario is that prices will continue to maintain high volatility fluctuations dominated by leveraged funds between $92,000 and $100,000. The support zone around $92,000-$95,000 and the resistance zone around $96,000-$100,000 will continue to be the core battleground for bulls and bears. As long as $92,000 is not effectively broken, trend-following funds will have the motivation to repeatedly attempt to push towards the six-figure mark above the support; however, with open interest already climbing to a near 8-week high, once a key price level is lost or triggers concentrated liquidation, the magnitude and speed of price retracement could also significantly amplify.
From a medium- to long-term perspective, it is necessary to establish a more forward-looking observation indicator checklist. First, pay attention to whether the total network hash rate continues to hover at relatively low levels or shows a clear stabilization and rebound, to assess whether miners' long-term return expectations are being repaired; second, monitor the scale and pace of miners migrating to fields such as AI/HPC, including the transformation of mining farms, equipment upgrades, and the redistribution of electricity contracts; third, observe whether the leverage heat in futures and other derivatives is cooling down, especially whether open interest is oscillating at high levels or declining in an orderly manner, to evaluate the sustainability of financial risk appetite.
In the absence of key data such as ETF fund flows and options structures, any judgments regarding "cyclical turning points" should maintain a higher tolerance for error and position discipline. The current strong prices coexist with pressure on the infrastructure side, indicating that while bulls hold the upper hand, the outcome is not yet settled. For traders and allocation funds, while respecting the $92,000 key anchor point, it is also essential to leave enough safety margin for potential structural changes.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
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。
