When we look at "Adjusted MVRV Ratio" which removes the factors causing distortion in the calculation, traditional valuation framework of MVRV still appears to remain valid. And the Segmented MVRV Ratio (Figure 2) clearly shows why the standard MVRV Ratio has been forced to behave differently from previous cycles. "Adjusted MVRV Ratio" currently stands at around 1.45. Based on the traditional valuation framework, Bitcoin has still not reached the historical undervaluation zone. Let me emphasize this again we should not overlook the fact that the major traditional on-chain indicators failed to provide the same clear warning signals at the peak of the previous bull cycle that they had provided in earlier cycles. This is an extremely important point. This provides important evidence that a structural change has occurred in the behavior of on-chain data compared with previous cycles. These changes in market structure also affected price volatility, which may in turn have influenced technical cycle indicators based on price behavior, such as the Pi Cycle and 200MA. If the traditional framework clearly failed to identify the market top, can we really be confident that the same historical framework will still identify the bottom correctly? I have serious doubts about that. This is why I am approaching the current down cycle with even greater caution. For me, the risk of being unprepared for an unexpected downside shock is still far greater than the regret I would feel if the market moved higher without me.(mignolet)