Author: Viee, a core contributor to Biteye *The full text is approximately 4000 words, and the estimated reading time is 10 minutes. From the halving in April 2024 to reaching a new high of $120,000 in October 2025, Bitcoin's journey took nearly 18 months. Looking at this path alone, it seems to still be operating according to a cyclical pattern: a bottom after the halving, a peak within a year, and then a correction. But what really puzzled the market was not whether it rose or not, but that it didn't rise as usual. There were no consecutive surges like in 2017, nor the nationwide frenzy of 2021. This round of market activity appears slow, sluggish, and with reduced volatility. ETFs have seen repeated upward movements, altcoins have lacked momentum, and some even fell below $90,000 in less than a month after reaching new highs. Is this a bull market or the beginning of a bear market? Therefore, this article will delve into the following: Why do many people feel that the four-year cycle has become invalid? What parts of the four-year cycle theory are still valid? What caused the cycle to be disrupted? Why are more and more people feeling that the four-year cycle is no longer effective? Although the price of Bitcoin rose after the halving, this round of market movement has been suspicious from beginning to end. Bitcoin completed its halving in April 2024. Historically, the following 12 to 18 months should have seen a major upward trend and a surge in market sentiment. This largely materialized, with Bitcoin reaching a new high of $125,000 in October 2025. However, the real problem lies in the lack of a final frenzy and a sustained wave of market enthusiasm. Shortly after reaching its new high, the price quickly fell by 25%, briefly dipping below $90,000. This wasn't the typical "bubble tail" expected in a cycle; it was more like the rally being extinguished before it even truly heated up. Furthermore, market sentiment is noticeably low. In the past, during bull market peaks, on-chain funds were active, altcoins surged, and retail investors rushed in. However, in this round, Bitcoin's market capitalization dominance remains at nearly 59%. This indicates that most funds are still concentrated in mainstream coins, altcoins haven't kept up, and the rotation lacks explosive power. Compared to the tenfold or even dozens of times gains in previous cycles, this round, from the low point at the end of 2022 to the high point, Bitcoin has only increased 7 or 8 times; from the halving point, the increase is less than 2 times. The moderate market sentiment is also reflected in the funding structure. Since the launch of ETFs, institutions have been consistently buying, becoming the main force in the market. Institutions are more rational and better at controlling volatility, which has reduced the magnitude of market sentiment fluctuations and made trading smoother. The price formation mechanism has changed; it is no longer solely determined by supply and demand, but is driven more by structural trading logic. In summary, the various anomalies in this round, including the waning of sentiment, weakening returns, disrupted rhythm, and institutional dominance, have indeed made the market intuitively feel that the familiar four-year cycle is no longer effective. Which parts of the four-year cycle theory are still valid? Despite the apparent chaos, a deeper analysis reveals that the theoretical logic of the four-year cycle has not been completely lost. Fundamental factors such as supply and demand changes triggered by the halving are still at play, albeit in a more moderate manner than before. The following analysis will examine the aspects from three perspectives: supply, on-chain indicators, and historical data, to see why cycle theory still holds true. 2.1 The Long-Term Supply Logic of Halving Bitcoin halves every four years, meaning the new supply is continuously decreasing. This mechanism remains a key driver of price increases in the long run. In April 2024, Bitcoin underwent its fourth halving, reducing the block reward from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC. Although the total supply of Bitcoin is approaching 94%, the marginal change brought about by each halving is diminishing, but the market's expectation of scarcity has not disappeared. After the past few halvings, the long-term bullish sentiment in the market remains evident, with many choosing to continue holding rather than sell. This round is no different. Despite the sharp price fluctuations, the effects of tightening supply persist. As shown in the chart, Bitcoin's unrealized and realized market capitalization in 2025 increased significantly compared to the end of 2022, indicating a substantial and continuous inflow of funds into Bitcoin in recent years. 2.2 Periodicity of on-chain metrics Bitcoin investors exhibit a cyclical pattern of "hoarding - taking profits," which is still reflected in on-chain data. Typical on-chain metrics include MVRV, SOPR, and RHODL. MVRV is the ratio of market value to intrinsic value. When the MVRV value rises, it means that Bitcoin is overvalued. At the end of 2023, MVRV fell to 0.8, rose to 2.8 during the market boom in 2024, and then fell back below 2 during the correction at the beginning of 2025. The valuation was neither overvalued nor undervalued, and the overall cyclical ups and downs continued. SOPR can be simply understood as the selling price divided by the buying price. In terms of cyclical patterns, SOPR=1 is considered a dividing line between bull and bear markets; a value below 1 indicates a loss on selling, while a value above 1 usually indicates a profit. In this cycle, SOPR remained below 1 during the 2022 bear market, then rose above 1 after 2023, entering a profitable cycle. During the bull market of 2024-2025, this indicator was mostly above 1, consistent with cyclical patterns. RHODL is an indicator that measures the ratio of "realized value" between short-term (1 week) and medium- to long-term (1–2 years) holders of cryptocurrency, used to identify market top risks. Historically, when this indicator enters extremely high areas (red band), it often corresponds to the peak of a bull market bubble (such as 2013 and 2017). In 2021-2022, RHODL surged again, although it did not break historical extremes, it indicated that the market structure had entered its later stages. Now, the indicator has also entered a cyclical high, which to some extent also suggests that prices are at a top. Overall, the cyclical phenomena reflected by these on-chain indicators still correspond to historical patterns. Although the specific values differ slightly, the on-chain logic at the bottom and top remains clear. 2.3 A decrease in the rate of increase seems inevitable. From another perspective, the gradual decrease in the rate of increase at the peak of each cycle compared to the previous one is actually part of the normal evolution of cyclical patterns. The peak from 2013 to 2017 saw an increase of approximately 20 times, while the increase from 2017 to 2021 narrowed to approximately 3.5 times. The current cycle, however, has seen an increase of approximately 80%, rising from $69,000 to $125,000. Although the rate of increase has clearly converged, the trend line continues, and the cycle has not completely deviated from its trajectory. This marginal decrease is also a result of the expanding market size and the weakening marginal impetus from incremental funds, and does not indicate that the cyclical logic has failed. Ultimately, the "four-year cycle" logic still applies at times. The halving affects supply and demand, and market behavior still follows the "fear-greed" rhythm; it's just that this time the market is no longer as easily understood as before. The truth behind the chaotic cycle: too many variables and too fragmented narrative. If the cycle is still ongoing, why is this market movement so difficult to interpret? The reason lies in the fact that the previously singular halving rhythm is now disrupted by multiple forces. Specifically, the following factors make this cycle different from previous ones: 1. The 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 type of "slow money," accumulating shares steadily during rallies and seeing additional buying during dips. However, it's important to note the large-scale withdrawal of institutional funds in the past week. For example, the US Bitcoin ETF saw a net outflow of $523 million in a single day a few days ago, with a monthly cumulative outflow exceeding $2 billion. This indicates that now is not the optimal time to "enter and add to positions." A signal to add to positions should at least wait until funds stop flowing out and begin to flow in consistently, indicating that institutional activity shifts towards buying. ETFs not only bring in a large influx of new capital but also enhance price stability, and the average cost of these holdings is around $89,000, providing effective support. This makes the Bitcoin market more stable and gradual, but once support or resistance levels are broken, volatility increases dramatically. This is a rare characteristic in traditional cycles, and it also reduces market volatility. 2. Fragmented narratives and rapid shifts in trending topics. In the last bull market (2020–2021), DeFi and NFTs established a clear value proposition, while the current market is more like a collection of fragmented hot topics. From the end of 2023 to the beginning of 2024, Bitcoin ETFs dominated, followed by an inscription craze. The rise of Solana and Meme narratives in 2024; Next, Crypto AI and AI Agents became hot topics; By 2025, InfoFi, Binance Alpha, prediction markets, and X402 will all be taking center stage... The rapid turnover of narratives and the weak sustainability of hot topics lead to frequent fund switching, making it difficult to form medium- to long-term allocations. Furthermore, the past cyclical correlation of "Bitcoin leading the way, altcoins following" is no longer reliable. The current market is more like a series of smaller cycles pieced together, with some sectors heating up initially and then cooling down, some assets peaking earlier, and Bitcoin fluctuating in between. This layered structure means that the timing of halvings no longer plays a decisive role on its own. 3. Reflexivity reinforcement Besides ETFs, funds, and narratives, we also have to face another phenomenon: the cycle itself is "self-influencing," that is, reflexivity. Because everyone knows the halving pattern, they preemptively position themselves and cash out, causing the market to overextend itself prematurely. Meanwhile, ETF holders, institutional market makers, and miners are also strategically adjusting their strategies based on the cycle. Whenever prices approach their theoretical peak, there may be a large amount of profit-taking leading to a premature sell-off, artificially advancing the cycle's pace. In short, breaking down this market trend reveals that the so-called cyclical disorder is more a reflection of the increased number of driving forces. The market structure has changed, the participants have changed, and the way emotions are spread has changed. This also means that the old approach of focusing on timelines to predict bull or bear markets may be outdated, and it's necessary to understand the broader context. Market Views Summary Faced with market uncertainty, different KOLs have offered different assessments. Through these perspectives, we may be able to better understand the current market sentiment. @BTCdayu believes that the four-year cycle no longer exists, and Bitcoin has shifted from being driven by halvings to being driven by institutions, with the weight of retail investors gradually being diluted. Bitwise CEO @HHorsley also tweeted that the traditional "four-year cycle" model is no longer applicable, and 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 final stages, while the fundamentals of crypto assets as a whole are stronger than ever before. @Wolfy_XBT believes the halving cycle has never failed, and the current bull market ended on October 6th, with the market now entering the early stages of a bear market. The four-year cycle pattern still holds true; macro narratives and short-term sentiment are merely noise, and the cyclical theories surrounding Bitcoin halvings are the most reliable signals. @0xSunNFT stated that the cycle continues, from the four-year halving cycle to localized market movements. Every market cycle has periods of dormancy; the key is to understand the rhythm of the cycle. Whether it's ETH, XPL, or Meme, there are still opportunities for repeated fluctuations within the cycle; the key is not to be swayed by short-term sentiment. @lanhubiji shares a similar viewpoint, believing that cycles haven't disappeared, but have "transformed." Meme oversupply, the failure of counterfeiting, and market fragmentation necessitate new methods for cycle analysis. These viewpoints reveal that the debate between "the cycle is dead" and "the cycle still exists" is largely a matter of different interpretations of changes in market structure. The cycle may not have disappeared; it simply requires a more complex perspective to recognize its existence. Conclusion So what should we look to for the future? For ordinary retail investors like us, the most realistic approach may not be to predict cycles, but to try to develop our own market awareness. For example, we can learn to use data to help us make judgments, avoid the traps brought by emotional fluctuations, and look for high-value opportunities instead of chasing every hot trend. Currently, the cycle is still ongoing, but it's more chaotic and dynamic. We can't rely on the assumption that "the market should rise when the time is right." Many phenomena indicate that this round of upward movement may have largely ended, so now is the defensive phase. The most important thing is to preserve capital and avoid going all in. The market may experience some fluctuations and rebounds later, but these are more like a sell-off than a new bull market. True bottoms usually don't form overnight, but rather gradually through repeated fluctuations. Maintaining caution, restraint, and having reserves is crucial to waiting for the next real opportunity. Survival is more important than guessing correctly.Author: Viee, a core contributor to Biteye *The full text is approximately 4000 words, and the estimated reading time is 10 minutes. From the halving in April 2024 to reaching a new high of $120,000 in October 2025, Bitcoin's journey took nearly 18 months. Looking at this path alone, it seems to still be operating according to a cyclical pattern: a bottom after the halving, a peak within a year, and then a correction. But what really puzzled the market was not whether it rose or not, but that it didn't rise as usual. There were no consecutive surges like in 2017, nor the nationwide frenzy of 2021. This round of market activity appears slow, sluggish, and with reduced volatility. ETFs have seen repeated upward movements, altcoins have lacked momentum, and some even fell below $90,000 in less than a month after reaching new highs. Is this a bull market or the beginning of a bear market? Therefore, this article will delve into the following: Why do many people feel that the four-year cycle has become invalid? What parts of the four-year cycle theory are still valid? What caused the cycle to be disrupted? Why are more and more people feeling that the four-year cycle is no longer effective? Although the price of Bitcoin rose after the halving, this round of market movement has been suspicious from beginning to end. Bitcoin completed its halving in April 2024. Historically, the following 12 to 18 months should have seen a major upward trend and a surge in market sentiment. This largely materialized, with Bitcoin reaching a new high of $125,000 in October 2025. However, the real problem lies in the lack of a final frenzy and a sustained wave of market enthusiasm. Shortly after reaching its new high, the price quickly fell by 25%, briefly dipping below $90,000. This wasn't the typical "bubble tail" expected in a cycle; it was more like the rally being extinguished before it even truly heated up. Furthermore, market sentiment is noticeably low. In the past, during bull market peaks, on-chain funds were active, altcoins surged, and retail investors rushed in. However, in this round, Bitcoin's market capitalization dominance remains at nearly 59%. This indicates that most funds are still concentrated in mainstream coins, altcoins haven't kept up, and the rotation lacks explosive power. Compared to the tenfold or even dozens of times gains in previous cycles, this round, from the low point at the end of 2022 to the high point, Bitcoin has only increased 7 or 8 times; from the halving point, the increase is less than 2 times. The moderate market sentiment is also reflected in the funding structure. Since the launch of ETFs, institutions have been consistently buying, becoming the main force in the market. Institutions are more rational and better at controlling volatility, which has reduced the magnitude of market sentiment fluctuations and made trading smoother. The price formation mechanism has changed; it is no longer solely determined by supply and demand, but is driven more by structural trading logic. In summary, the various anomalies in this round, including the waning of sentiment, weakening returns, disrupted rhythm, and institutional dominance, have indeed made the market intuitively feel that the familiar four-year cycle is no longer effective. Which parts of the four-year cycle theory are still valid? Despite the apparent chaos, a deeper analysis reveals that the theoretical logic of the four-year cycle has not been completely lost. Fundamental factors such as supply and demand changes triggered by the halving are still at play, albeit in a more moderate manner than before. The following analysis will examine the aspects from three perspectives: supply, on-chain indicators, and historical data, to see why cycle theory still holds true. 2.1 The Long-Term Supply Logic of Halving Bitcoin halves every four years, meaning the new supply is continuously decreasing. This mechanism remains a key driver of price increases in the long run. In April 2024, Bitcoin underwent its fourth halving, reducing the block reward from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC. Although the total supply of Bitcoin is approaching 94%, the marginal change brought about by each halving is diminishing, but the market's expectation of scarcity has not disappeared. After the past few halvings, the long-term bullish sentiment in the market remains evident, with many choosing to continue holding rather than sell. This round is no different. Despite the sharp price fluctuations, the effects of tightening supply persist. As shown in the chart, Bitcoin's unrealized and realized market capitalization in 2025 increased significantly compared to the end of 2022, indicating a substantial and continuous inflow of funds into Bitcoin in recent years. 2.2 Periodicity of on-chain metrics Bitcoin investors exhibit a cyclical pattern of "hoarding - taking profits," which is still reflected in on-chain data. Typical on-chain metrics include MVRV, SOPR, and RHODL. MVRV is the ratio of market value to intrinsic value. When the MVRV value rises, it means that Bitcoin is overvalued. At the end of 2023, MVRV fell to 0.8, rose to 2.8 during the market boom in 2024, and then fell back below 2 during the correction at the beginning of 2025. The valuation was neither overvalued nor undervalued, and the overall cyclical ups and downs continued. SOPR can be simply understood as the selling price divided by the buying price. In terms of cyclical patterns, SOPR=1 is considered a dividing line between bull and bear markets; a value below 1 indicates a loss on selling, while a value above 1 usually indicates a profit. In this cycle, SOPR remained below 1 during the 2022 bear market, then rose above 1 after 2023, entering a profitable cycle. During the bull market of 2024-2025, this indicator was mostly above 1, consistent with cyclical patterns. RHODL is an indicator that measures the ratio of "realized value" between short-term (1 week) and medium- to long-term (1–2 years) holders of cryptocurrency, used to identify market top risks. Historically, when this indicator enters extremely high areas (red band), it often corresponds to the peak of a bull market bubble (such as 2013 and 2017). In 2021-2022, RHODL surged again, although it did not break historical extremes, it indicated that the market structure had entered its later stages. Now, the indicator has also entered a cyclical high, which to some extent also suggests that prices are at a top. Overall, the cyclical phenomena reflected by these on-chain indicators still correspond to historical patterns. Although the specific values differ slightly, the on-chain logic at the bottom and top remains clear. 2.3 A decrease in the rate of increase seems inevitable. From another perspective, the gradual decrease in the rate of increase at the peak of each cycle compared to the previous one is actually part of the normal evolution of cyclical patterns. The peak from 2013 to 2017 saw an increase of approximately 20 times, while the increase from 2017 to 2021 narrowed to approximately 3.5 times. The current cycle, however, has seen an increase of approximately 80%, rising from $69,000 to $125,000. Although the rate of increase has clearly converged, the trend line continues, and the cycle has not completely deviated from its trajectory. This marginal decrease is also a result of the expanding market size and the weakening marginal impetus from incremental funds, and does not indicate that the cyclical logic has failed. Ultimately, the "four-year cycle" logic still applies at times. The halving affects supply and demand, and market behavior still follows the "fear-greed" rhythm; it's just that this time the market is no longer as easily understood as before. The truth behind the chaotic cycle: too many variables and too fragmented narrative. If the cycle is still ongoing, why is this market movement so difficult to interpret? The reason lies in the fact that the previously singular halving rhythm is now disrupted by multiple forces. Specifically, the following factors make this cycle different from previous ones: 1. The 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 type of "slow money," accumulating shares steadily during rallies and seeing additional buying during dips. However, it's important to note the large-scale withdrawal of institutional funds in the past week. For example, the US Bitcoin ETF saw a net outflow of $523 million in a single day a few days ago, with a monthly cumulative outflow exceeding $2 billion. This indicates that now is not the optimal time to "enter and add to positions." A signal to add to positions should at least wait until funds stop flowing out and begin to flow in consistently, indicating that institutional activity shifts towards buying. ETFs not only bring in a large influx of new capital but also enhance price stability, and the average cost of these holdings is around $89,000, providing effective support. This makes the Bitcoin market more stable and gradual, but once support or resistance levels are broken, volatility increases dramatically. This is a rare characteristic in traditional cycles, and it also reduces market volatility. 2. Fragmented narratives and rapid shifts in trending topics. In the last bull market (2020–2021), DeFi and NFTs established a clear value proposition, while the current market is more like a collection of fragmented hot topics. From the end of 2023 to the beginning of 2024, Bitcoin ETFs dominated, followed by an inscription craze. The rise of Solana and Meme narratives in 2024; Next, Crypto AI and AI Agents became hot topics; By 2025, InfoFi, Binance Alpha, prediction markets, and X402 will all be taking center stage... The rapid turnover of narratives and the weak sustainability of hot topics lead to frequent fund switching, making it difficult to form medium- to long-term allocations. Furthermore, the past cyclical correlation of "Bitcoin leading the way, altcoins following" is no longer reliable. The current market is more like a series of smaller cycles pieced together, with some sectors heating up initially and then cooling down, some assets peaking earlier, and Bitcoin fluctuating in between. This layered structure means that the timing of halvings no longer plays a decisive role on its own. 3. Reflexivity reinforcement Besides ETFs, funds, and narratives, we also have to face another phenomenon: the cycle itself is "self-influencing," that is, reflexivity. Because everyone knows the halving pattern, they preemptively position themselves and cash out, causing the market to overextend itself prematurely. Meanwhile, ETF holders, institutional market makers, and miners are also strategically adjusting their strategies based on the cycle. Whenever prices approach their theoretical peak, there may be a large amount of profit-taking leading to a premature sell-off, artificially advancing the cycle's pace. In short, breaking down this market trend reveals that the so-called cyclical disorder is more a reflection of the increased number of driving forces. The market structure has changed, the participants have changed, and the way emotions are spread has changed. This also means that the old approach of focusing on timelines to predict bull or bear markets may be outdated, and it's necessary to understand the broader context. Market Views Summary Faced with market uncertainty, different KOLs have offered different assessments. Through these perspectives, we may be able to better understand the current market sentiment. @BTCdayu believes that the four-year cycle no longer exists, and Bitcoin has shifted from being driven by halvings to being driven by institutions, with the weight of retail investors gradually being diluted. Bitwise CEO @HHorsley also tweeted that the traditional "four-year cycle" model is no longer applicable, and 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 final stages, while the fundamentals of crypto assets as a whole are stronger than ever before. @Wolfy_XBT believes the halving cycle has never failed, and the current bull market ended on October 6th, with the market now entering the early stages of a bear market. The four-year cycle pattern still holds true; macro narratives and short-term sentiment are merely noise, and the cyclical theories surrounding Bitcoin halvings are the most reliable signals. @0xSunNFT stated that the cycle continues, from the four-year halving cycle to localized market movements. Every market cycle has periods of dormancy; the key is to understand the rhythm of the cycle. Whether it's ETH, XPL, or Meme, there are still opportunities for repeated fluctuations within the cycle; the key is not to be swayed by short-term sentiment. @lanhubiji shares a similar viewpoint, believing that cycles haven't disappeared, but have "transformed." Meme oversupply, the failure of counterfeiting, and market fragmentation necessitate new methods for cycle analysis. These viewpoints reveal that the debate between "the cycle is dead" and "the cycle still exists" is largely a matter of different interpretations of changes in market structure. The cycle may not have disappeared; it simply requires a more complex perspective to recognize its existence. Conclusion So what should we look to for the future? For ordinary retail investors like us, the most realistic approach may not be to predict cycles, but to try to develop our own market awareness. For example, we can learn to use data to help us make judgments, avoid the traps brought by emotional fluctuations, and look for high-value opportunities instead of chasing every hot trend. Currently, the cycle is still ongoing, but it's more chaotic and dynamic. We can't rely on the assumption that "the market should rise when the time is right." Many phenomena indicate that this round of upward movement may have largely ended, so now is the defensive phase. The most important thing is to preserve capital and avoid going all in. The market may experience some fluctuations and rebounds later, but these are more like a sell-off than a new bull market. True bottoms usually don't form overnight, but rather gradually through repeated fluctuations. Maintaining caution, restraint, and having reserves is crucial to waiting for the next real opportunity. Survival is more important than guessing correctly.