Author: Biteye Core Contributor Viee

From the halving in April 2024 to a new high of $120,000 in October 2025, Bitcoin has gone through nearly 18 months. If we only look at this path, it seems to still be operating according to the cycle theory. Halving leads to a bottom, followed by a peak within a year, and then a correction.

However, what truly confuses the market is not whether there has been an increase, but that it hasn't risen like it usually does.

There hasn't been the series of explosive increases seen in 2017, nor the widespread frenzy of 2021. This round of market activity appears slow, dull, and with converging volatility. The progress of ETFs has been repetitive, altcoins are struggling to rotate, and even after reaching a new high, Bitcoin fell below $90,000 in less than a month. Is this a bull market or the beginning of a bear market?

Therefore, this article will delve into: (1) why many people feel that the four-year cycle has failed (2) which parts of the four-year cycle theory are still effective (3) what causes the disruption of the cycle.

I. Why do more and more people feel that the four-year cycle is ineffective?

Although Bitcoin's price has risen after the halving, this round of market activity has felt quite off from start to finish.

Bitcoin completed its halving in April 2024, and according to historical patterns, the following 12 to 18 months should see a major upward wave and peak in sentiment. This was somewhat the case, as Bitcoin surged to a new high of $125,000 in October 2025. But the real issue lies in the fact that this round of market activity lacked that final frenzy and did not see a widespread emotional handover. Shortly after reaching a new high, the price quickly fell by 25%, dipping below $90,000 at one point. This is not the "bubble tail" that should appear in a typical cycle; it feels more like the market was extinguished before it even heated up.

Additionally, sentiment is clearly low. In past bull market peaks, on-chain capital was active, altcoins surged, and retail investors rushed in. However, in this round, Bitcoin's market cap dominance has remained around 59%. This indicates that most capital is still concentrated in mainstream coins, with altcoins lagging behind and lacking explosive rotation. Compared to the tenfold or even hundredfold increases in previous cycles, this round saw Bitcoin rise only 7 to 8 times from its low at the end of 2022 to its high; from the halving point, the increase is less than 2 times.

The mildness of the market is also reflected in the capital structure. After the launch of ETFs, institutions began to buy continuously, becoming the main force in the market. Institutions are more rational and better at controlling volatility, which has led to a decrease in market sentiment fluctuations and a smoother trading rhythm. The price formation mechanism has changed; it is no longer solely "supply and demand driven," but more driven by structural trading logic.

In summary, the various anomalies in this round, including the retreat of sentiment, weakening returns, disrupted rhythm, and institutional dominance, have indeed led the market to intuitively feel that the familiar four-year cycle is no longer effective.

II. Which parts of the four-year cycle theory are still effective?

Despite the chaotic surface phenomena, a deeper analysis reveals that the logic of the four-year cycle theory has not been completely lost. The fundamental factors such as supply and demand changes triggered by the halving are still at play, albeit in a more subdued manner than before.

The following will analyze the effective parts of the cycle theory from three aspects: supply, on-chain indicators, and historical data.

2.1 Long-term supply logic of halving

Bitcoin halves every four years, meaning that new supply continues to decrease. This mechanism remains a key logic supporting price increases in the long run. In April 2024, Bitcoin completed its fourth halving, reducing the block reward from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC.

Although nearly 94% of Bitcoin's total supply has been reached, the marginal changes brought about by each halving are diminishing, but the market's expectation of scarcity has not disappeared. After previous halvings, the long-term bullish sentiment in the market has remained evident, with many choosing to hold rather than sell.

This round is no different. Despite significant price fluctuations, the impact of tightening supply is still present. As shown in the chart, Bitcoin's unrealized market cap and realized market cap have significantly increased compared to the end of 2022, indicating a substantial inflow of capital into Bitcoin in recent years.

2.2 Cyclicality of on-chain indicators

The behavior patterns of Bitcoin investors exhibit a cyclical "accumulation - profit-taking" cycle, which is still reflected in on-chain data. Typical on-chain indicators include MVRV, SOPR, and RHODL.

• MVRV is the ratio of market value to realized value. When the MVRV value rises, it indicates that Bitcoin is overvalued. At the end of 2023, MVRV fell to 0.8, rose to 2.8 during the bullish phase in 2024, and fell below 2 during the early 2025 correction, indicating that the valuation is neither overvalued nor undervalued, and the overall cyclical rise and fall rhythm is still present.

• SOPR can be simply understood as the price when sold / the price when bought. According to cyclical patterns, SOPR=1 is seen as the dividing line between bull and bear markets. A value below 1 indicates a loss when selling, while a value above 1 indicates most are in profit. In this cycle, SOPR remained below 1 during the 2022 bear market, but rose above 1 in 2023, entering a profit cycle. During the bull market phase from 2024 to 2025, this indicator has mostly remained above 1, consistent with cyclical patterns.

• RHODL measures the ratio of "realized value" between short-term holders (1 week) and medium to long-term holders (1-2 years) to identify market top risks. Historically, when this indicator enters a very high zone (red band), it often corresponds to the peaks of bull market bubbles (such as in 2013 and 2017). In 2021-2022, RHODL surged again, although it did not break historical extremes, it indicated that the market structure was entering its later stages. Currently, this indicator has also reached a cyclical high point, which in some ways suggests that prices are at a peak.

In summary, the cyclical phenomena reflected by these on-chain indicators still resonate with historical patterns. Although specific values may differ slightly, the on-chain logic of bottoms and tops remains clear.

2.3 Diminishing returns seem inevitable

From another perspective, the diminishing returns at each cycle peak compared to the previous cycle are actually part of the normal evolution of cyclical patterns. From 2013 to the 2017 peak, the increase was about 20 times, while from 2017 to 2021, the increase shrank to about 3.5 times. In this round, the rise from $69,000 to $125,000 represents an increase of about 80%. Although the increase has clearly converged, the trend line is still continuing and has not completely deviated from the cyclical track. This marginal decrease is also a result of the market size expanding and the marginal push of incremental capital weakening, which does not indicate a failure of the cyclical logic.

Ultimately, the "four-year cycle" logic is still at work at certain times. The halving affects supply and demand, and market behavior still follows the rhythm of "fear - greed," but this time the market activity is no longer as easily understood as before.

III. The truth behind the cycle chaos: too many variables, fragmented narratives

If the cycle is still present, why is this round of market activity so difficult to read? The reason lies in the previously singular halving rhythm, which is now disrupted by multiple forces. Specifically, there are several reasons that make this round of cycles different from the past:

1. 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 form of "slow capital," continuously accumulating during rises and having some buying during declines. However, it is important to note that in the past week, institutional funds have withdrawn on a large scale. For instance, in the past two days, the net outflow from U.S. Bitcoin ETFs reached as high as $523 million in a single day, with a monthly total exceeding $2 billion. This indicates that the current moment is not the best time for "entry and accumulation." Accumulation signals should at least wait until the outflow of funds stops and turns into sustained net inflows, with institutional actions primarily focused on buying.

ETFs not only bring in a large amount of incremental capital but also enhance price stability, with average holding costs around $89,000, forming effective support. This has made the rhythm of the Bitcoin market slower and steadier, but once support or resistance levels are breached, volatility can become more intense. This is a rare characteristic in traditional cycles and has reduced market fluctuations.

2. Fragmented narratives and accelerated hot topic rotations

In the last bull market (2020-2021), DeFi and NFTs created a clear value line, while the current market resembles a collection of fragmented hot topics:

• From late 2023 to early 2024, Bitcoin ETFs dominated, followed by a surge in inscriptions;
• In 2024, Solana and meme narratives rose;
• Then Crypto AI and AI Agents became hot topics;
• By 2025, InfoFi, Binance alpha, prediction markets, and x402 took turns in the spotlight…

The rapid rotation of narratives and weak continuity of hot topics have led to high-frequency capital switching, making it difficult to form medium to long-term allocations. Moreover, the previous cycle linkage of "Bitcoin leading, altcoins following" has become unreliable. The current market resembles a series of small cycles stitched together, with some sectors heating up and cooling down, and Bitcoin fluctuating in between. This layered and interwoven structure has diminished the decisive role of the halving rhythm.

3. Reflexivity enhancement

In addition to ETFs, capital, and narratives, we also face another phenomenon: the cycle itself is "self-influencing," which is reflexivity.

Because everyone knows the halving pattern, they tend to preemptively position themselves and cash out early, leading to an overspending of the market. At the same time, ETF holders, institutional market makers, miners, and others are also making strategic adjustments based on the cycle. Whenever prices approach theoretical peaks, there may be a large amount of profit-taking that preemptively drives the market down, causing the cycle rhythm to be artificially advanced.

In summary, breaking down this round of market activity reveals that the so-called cycle chaos is more about the increased driving forces. The market structure has changed, participants have changed, and the way emotions spread has also changed. This suggests that the past method of watching the clock to bet on bull and bear markets may be becoming outdated, requiring a deeper understanding of the larger context.

IV. Market viewpoint summary

In the face of market uncertainty, different KOLs have provided various judgments, and through these views, we may better understand the current market sentiment.

@BTCdayu believes that the four-year cycle no longer exists, as Bitcoin has shifted from being halving-driven to institution-driven, with the weight of retail investors gradually diluted.

Bitwise CEO @HHorsley also tweeted that the traditional "four-year cycle" model is no longer applicable, as 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 late stages, with the fundamentals of overall crypto assets stronger than ever.

@Wolfy_XBT argues that the halving rhythm has never failed, stating that this round of the bull market ended on October 6, and the current market is entering the early stages of a bear market. The four-year cycle logic is still effective, and macro narratives and short-term sentiments are merely noise; the cyclical theory born around Bitcoin's halving is the most reliable signal.

@0xSunNFT states that whether on the scale of the four-year halving cycle or in localized market activities, cycles still exist. Every round of market activity has periods of silence, and the key is to understand the cyclical rhythm. Whether it's ETH, XPL, or memes, there are still opportunities for repeated fluctuations within the cycle; the key is not to be swayed by short-term emotions.

@lanhubiji shares a similar view to this article, believing that the cycle has not disappeared but has "deformed." With an oversupply of memes and altcoins failing, the market has become fragmented, necessitating new methods for cycle judgment.

From these viewpoints, it can be seen that the debate between "the cycle is dead" and "the cycle is still present" is more about different interpretations of changes in market structure. The cycle may not have disappeared; it just requires a more complex perspective to recognize its existence.

V. Conclusion

So what should we look for in the future?

For ordinary retail investors, the most realistic approach may not be to predict cycles, but to try to build their own market perception, such as learning to use data to assist in judgment, avoiding traps brought by emotional fluctuations, and seeking high-cost performance opportunities instead of chasing every hot topic.

Currently, the cycle is still present, but it is more chaotic and dynamic, and we cannot rely on "it should rise when the time comes" to think about the market. Many phenomena indicate that this round of the upward phase has likely ended, so now is the defensive phase, and the most important thing is to preserve capital and not easily go all in. The market may experience a volatile rebound, but it resembles a fleeing market rather than a new bull market.

The true bottom usually does not arrive all at once but forms slowly after repeated fluctuations. Maintaining caution and restraint while keeping some capital available is essential to wait for the next real opportunity. Surviving is more important than being right.