Those who adhere to periodicity pull out old ledgers and begin to calculate how much further it needs to drop this time. The ruler in their hands measures the pullback percentages of the past three times. However, this time, there are other metrics in the blockchain and mines, and the numbers measured are different.

Written by: Cathy

In the winter of 2012, a mining machine buzzed in a garage. Its owner probably did not expect to be pressing the start point of a pattern repeated for twelve years.

That November, Bitcoin halved for the first time. Twelve months later, it surged to a peak of $1217, then slid down to $152.

A drop of 87%.

Since then, this script has repeated approximately every four years: halving, reaching a peak, and then a long and brutal capital strangulation. In the cryptocurrency world, this is called the four-year cycle, and the hardest part is referred to as the final drop.

This term has not strayed far recently. In February 2026, as Bitcoin dropped to $59,900, some insisted there would be a final drop; later, when it rebounded to just over $80,000, the voices faded.

By May 2026, it soared again. Bitcoin had just slipped from a high of $82,000 to $83,000, falling below $77,000 within days, fluctuating violently around $76,800.

Those who adhere to periodicity pull out old ledgers and begin to calculate how much further it needs to drop this time. The ruler in their hands measures the pullback percentages of the past three times. However, this time, there are other metrics in the blockchain and mines, and the numbers measured are different.

01 The Spell Recited for Twelve Years

The four-year cycle is not mysticism; it is the result of three forces twisting together.

The first force is the halving itself. It is written in the code: every 210,000 blocks mined, about every four years, the miner's reward is halved. As long as demand doesn't collapse, supply is abruptly compressed, and prices will be propelled into a bull market peak within the next 12 to 18 months.

The second force is global capital. The rhythm of halving is closely tied to the Federal Reserve's monetary cycles; the true ignition in 2020 was sparked by pandemic liquidity. When the Fed tightens, the crypto market enters a bear phase.

The third force is people. The narrative of scarcity collides with liquidity, greed is amplified, retail investors and leveraged funds flood in, valuations float to unattainable levels based on fundamentals, then the bubble bursts, leading to a panic and a complete turnover of chips.

Four peaks, four faces: in 2013 driven by early speculation, in 2017 by ICO mania, in 2021 by central bank liquidity and institutional entry. The peak in October 2025 surged to $126,200, this time dominated by spot ETFs, yet there was no massive effort from retail investors to chase higher.

The same spell, recited for the fourth time, has a different accent.

02 What the Last Drop in History Looks Like

The last drop can be repeatedly summoned because each of the previous absolute bottoms was accompanied by a prolonged liquidation.

In the first halving cycle, the peak was $1217, and in January 2015 it bottomed at $152, a pullback of 87%. In the second round, the peak was $19,800, in December 2018 it bottomed at $3,127, a pullback of 84%. In the third round, the peak was $69,200, and in November 2022 it bottomed at $15,400, a pullback of 77%.

In three instances, from peak to bottom, the starting price is 77%.

In the fourth instance, halving in April 2024, the script began incorrectly. Prices in the three previous halvings steadily rose, yet this time they oscillated lower. By August 20, it closed at $60,800, nearly a 5% drop from $63,800 on the halving day. For the first time, prices fell for four months after halving instead of rising.

There are two reasons: liquidity was drained during those months; when block rewards were cut, miners were forced to sell off nearly $9.1 billion of existing coins to cover electricity costs.

Nonetheless, the conclusion was not absent. Institutional capital flooded in, and in October 2025 it again climbed to the historical peak of $126,200, reinforcing the inertia that peaks 18 months after halving. Then the correction began, with a drop to $59,900 in February 2026, marking a maximum decline of about 52.48%.

Those fixated on the numbers watched this number: 52% is too shallow compared to historical drops of 77% to 87%. Based on the historical deviation, to achieve similar clearing, prices need to approach $30,000 to $58,000. This is the calculation behind panic returning after falling below $77,000.

The algorithm is not incorrect. The issue is that this ruler measures percentages, and beyond percentages, there are other factors in pricing.

03 Where to Draw the Line for On-Chain Chips

Setting aside percentages, let’s first look at the true cost on-chain.

The cost for short-term holders (those holding coins for less than 155 days) clustered around $78,500 to $78,600 in mid-May 2026; for new whales entering in the last 155 days, the cost is anchored at $80,300. The overall realized price ranges from $54,200 to $62,100, with long-term holders’ cost line around $48,500.

As Bitcoin fell below $77,000, it was genuinely below both the short-term holders and new whales’ cost lines. Below this line, short-term holders are overall in loss, with STH-MVRV less than 1, historically indicating a temporary advantage for bears.

There are troubles upwards too. In the last surge to $125,000, substantial chips were concentrated in the transaction range of $92,100 to $117,400. This batch of trapped positions, once rebounding to $82,000 to $83,000, would seek to break even, and the moment they do, they’ll sell, building up thick resistance above.

With floating loss positions below and trapped positions above, that’s the short-term situation. However, from a macro perspective, the on-chain indicators depict a different picture.

In previous cycles, peaks were always accompanied by two indicators entering the frenzy zone. MVRV: both the 2017 and 2021 peaks surged to 3.5 or even above 4.0; in October 2025, it only reached a maximum of 2.524, and subsequently dropped to 1.56.

NUPL: In the past, peaks needed to remain in the extremely euphoric zone above 0.75 for several months; during the 2025 round, it only touched 0.604, then slid back to the intersection of doubt and optimism between 0.291 and 0.355.

The expected frenzy did not materialize. This can be interpreted in two ways: one is that irrational retail entry did not happen, and the main upward wave isn’t complete; this is a mid-term washout rather than a new bear market; the other is that institutions and ETFs have rewritten price discovery, arbing has leveled out, and extreme punishments for breaking levels have weakened, making the abyss of 80% not reappear.

These two interpretations indicate different numbers.

04 The Shut Down Price for Miners is a Physical Wall

There’s another ruler that is harder than sentiment: the shut-down price for miners.

At the beginning of 2026, hash rates soared, pushing the weighted average production cost to about $87,000. By early February, when prices dipped near $70,000, the market was experiencing extreme losses of nearly 20% below production costs, with profitability sustainability index dropping to 21, a new 14-month low.

Older models couldn’t hold on and began to shut down. The real critical point lies in the primary models: the Antminer S21 series, which has the highest network share, has a shut-down price range of $69,000 to $74,000. Once prices hit this range, network hash rate will plummet dramatically.

Yet there's a brake on clearing. In February, hash rate suddenly dropped by 12% from 1.1 EH/s to 970 EH/s, and on February 8, it saw the largest negative difficulty adjustment since China’s mining ban in 2021, decreasing by 11.16%. Once difficulty decreased, the remaining miners' costs fell immediately, and passive selling halted.

There is another trend: the deviation below the shut-down line is diminishing; in 2018 it was 20%, in 2022 it was 14%, and this time estimates suggest 5% to 10%, getting shallower with each cycle.

A new pool exists outside the mining farms. After the 2024 halving, daily new mining pressure is capped at 450 coins, costing around $40 million at an average price of $90,000; in 2025, on normal days, the net daily purchase from American spot ETFs often exceeds $500 million, peaking above $1 billion.

ETF daily inflows are typically 12 to 25 times the supply reduction from halving. The forces that determine marginal prices have moved from miner production to institutions entering and exiting through ETF channels.

In two years, ETFs have accumulated several hundred billion dollars, with institutional weighted costs concentrated between $80,000 and $83,000. As Bitcoin fell below $77,000, institutional overall losses stood at about 5% to 8%, yet did not trigger a retail-style chain reaction. Conversely, even within a 23% drop in the first quarter, ETFs continued to net purchases of $1.87 billion.

Of course, there are also derivatives connected, with estimated leverage rates stuck at 14.9%, and prices hovering below the cost line, making mid-term resistance tangible.

Several rulers, each reporting different numbers.

05 Summary

If that mining machine from winter 2012 were still operational, it would be in a very awkward position: its electricity cost has long been left far behind the shut-down line of $69,000 to $74,000.

At both ends of the story, there are two sets of numbers.

On one end is the perspective of those seeking a return: from the peak to the bottom in the four-year cycle starts at 77%, and this time has only dropped 52%, the clearout is not complete, and prices must head towards $30,000 to $58,000.

On the other end is the newly developed ruler for this cycle: the S21 shut-down range is $69,000 to $74,000; institutional costs for ETFs are between $80,000 and $83,000, and even during a 23% drop still net bought $1.87 billion; the overall realized price on-chain is between $54,200 and $62,100, with long-term holders’ line at $48,500.

The first set says the abyss lies below. The second set says there are several walls beneath.

Where the price ultimately stops in front of which wall, or which wall might collapse first, is what the ledgers and rulers present us.

What remains is your own judgment.