Written by: Fang Dao

The market is trying to answer a core proposition: Has Bitcoin completed its phase of bottoming out.

However, from a multi-dimensional data perspective, this is not a simple reversal signal, but rather a process closer to a shift in pricing framework. The current market fluctuations essentially arise from the parallel pricing of two sets of logic within the same time window.

The historical reference of the halving cycle still exists, but its explanatory power is declining

The price path post halving in 2024 remains consistent with the historical three-cycle on the time dimension. Past experience shows that the retracement range typically falls between 40% to 80%. The current retracement level of around 43% does not deviate from this statistical range. The problem lies in the change of the external environment for this model.

High interest rate levels and geopolitical risks weaken the single logic of "supply contraction driving prices up."

The $28,000–$35,000 range derived from historical extremes is facing the dual constraints of insufficient samples and macro variables failing to hold.

On-chain data shows "defensive positions" rather than trending signals

On-chain indicators have not formed a consistent direction.

On one hand, the net outflow from centralized exchanges in March 2026 exceeded 47,000 BTC, which is typically seen as funds shifting to long-term holding or self-custody. On the other hand, about 57% of the circulating supply is in profit. This level historically aligns more with the early stage of a bear market rather than a bottom area.

Both sets of signals point to one state: the market lacks a consistent expectation.

Funds have neither formed systemic selling pressure nor exhibited significant new positioning momentum, overall remaining in a "holding and observing" defensive range.

The structure of ETF holdings has changed the path of supply release

The most significant change in this cycle comes from the structure of holdings itself.

As of March 2026, the size of U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs is close to $96 billion. During the period of volatility, approximately 94% of the holdings remained stable.

This characteristic stands in stark contrast to previous rapid in-and-out patterns dominated by retail investors.

The allocation attribute of ETF funds has shifted the supply release from "concentrated selling" to "gradual rebalancing." The result is: price fluctuations still exist, but tail risks are compressed, leading to an extended market adjustment cycle.

The high correlation with risk assets has weakened its safe-haven properties

Bitcoin's macro properties are changing.

By March 2026, its 30-day correlation with the S&P 500 rose to 0.74. This level suggests that Bitcoin is currently closer to being a high-beta risk asset rather than an independent safe-haven tool.

In an environment of tightening liquidity or sustained high interest rates, this correlation will directly affect its price performance. The entry of institutional funds, while enhancing stability, also incorporates it into a broader macro pricing system.

Price divergence reflects a repricing of the valuation framework

The current mainstream institutions predict a price range for 2026 from $65,000 to $250,000.

This span is not merely a disagreement in viewpoints, but reflects that two logics have yet to integrate completely: one is based on historical halving cycles, and the other is based on the logic of allocations by institutions.

The "intermediate state" presented by on-chain data embodies this repricing process.

Short-term direction depends more on capital flow and key price ranges

At this stage, the reference significance of a single price prediction is declining. More explanatory variables include:

Whether ETF net inflows remain stable

The effectiveness of support at the $70,000 range

Whether the defensive structure in the options market continues

Whether regulatory developments introduce new funding channels

These factors will reflect the market direction sooner than any single-point prediction.

The real question for the market is not whether prices have bottomed. But rather: after the holding structure has changed, whether the historical cyclical logic relying on supply contraction still holds.

References

Benzinga, Glassnode, VanEck, Bernstein, CryptoQuant, Standard Chartered

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。