According to an analysis by Binance Research, the Bitcoin golden cross that occurred on September 8 can be interpreted as a signal indicating a relatively strong rebound phase compared with past cases, since it formed after concluding an approximately 293-day adjustment period. The underlying asset is Bitcoin (BTC).
Key takeaways
On September 8, the Bitcoin golden cross occurred after a period of 293 days in which the price remained below the 200-day moving average over the preceding one year.
In the past, six golden crosses that appeared after staying below the 200-day line for at least 150 days recorded maximum gains in the following year at roughly the 100% to 600% range.
However, Binance asked for caution in interpretation, noting that the sample size was small, the periods overlapped with each other, and it used “returns based on the maximum high” rather than the “one-year holding return.”
Bitcoin golden cross analysis
Binance Research analyzed golden crosses formed when the 50-day moving average breaks upward above the 200-day moving average, using 12 past instances.
It then classified the events into two groups of “reset periods” based on how long, during the one year leading up to each golden cross, Bitcoin traded below the 200-day line.
Of the six golden crosses that occurred during a period when the price remained below the 200-day moving average for at least 150 days, the six later recorded the highest upside move of roughly 100% to 600% within about one year. Meanwhile, among the six golden crosses that appeared after relatively short pullbacks, four saw a maximum upside of less than 100%. Even so, Binance drew a line, saying that “the longer the correction period, it does not always lead to a bigger rally, and the pattern was not linear.”
A key technical inflection point was also confirmed on the price front. Bitcoin closed at $81,159 on September 20, and for the first time since November 9, 2025, it broke upward through its 50-week moving average on a weekly basis. Binance said, “If weekly closes remain above the 50-week line, the trend-reversal scenario would strengthen, but if price is pushed back below the 50-week line again, the reliability of the technical signals would fall.”
Related article: $1.05 trillion evaporates from gold and silver amid rising dollar and interest rates
Binance Research’s outlook
Technical structure improvements are unfolding alongside a more challenging macro environment. As of September 25, the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield surged to as high as 5.17%, setting a new peak level since 2007.
Binance interpreted this surge in interest rates as stemming from the combination of a resilient real economy, Brent crude prices exceeding $103 per barrel, and lackluster U.S. Treasury auctions—bringing the likelihood of a rate hike by October to nearly 70%. In the end, upward pressure on interest rates returned to the market with renewed strength.
During this process, Bitcoin retreated from the level above $86,000 and traded around the $83,175 mark as of the time BeInCrypto reported. Even so, spot demand remained strong. In the U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, net inflows of $998.95 million were recorded over a single day on September 21, the largest daily inflow since the start of 2026. Binance cited this as evidence that “demand is not simply dependent on futures positioning.”
Binance forecast that the soon-to-be-released inflation and employment data would be an important test of whether Bitcoin can defend above its 50-week moving average. At the same time, it reiterated that “because there are too few historical cases, statistical reliability is insufficient to use golden crosses as an independent predictive indicator.”
The most similar past case cited was October 2015. At the time, after undergoing a correction below the 200-day moving average for about 297 days, Bitcoin formed a golden cross, and then within one year it recorded a maximum upside of about 150%. By contrast, the strongest rally in Binance’s sample unfolded after relatively short resets of just under 150 days, in February and May 2020. In other words, the length of the correction period was not a decisive variable determining performance.
Next article: Bitget resumes Bitcoin withdrawals after a $388.8 million hack