$BTC : Bitcoin’s 4-Year Cycle Isn’t Broken: People Are Ignoring History
The majority are already claiming that the 4-year cycle is broken. Meanwhile, I keep explaining the same thing: the timing is different this time, and we’ve seen a similarly prolonged bear market before, during 2013–2015.
Now imagine Bitcoin makes a new cycle low — even if it’s nothing more than a marginal break below the previous $58K low.
Just imagine the chaos.
People are already questioning the 4-year cycle. If Bitcoin breaks below $58K, many will start screaming even louder that the cycle is officially broken.
But whose mistake would that actually be?
Not the market’s.
Bear markets have never had a fixed duration. We’ve already experienced four completed Bitcoin bear markets, and all four have been different in duration.
Yet people continue to focus almost exclusively on the 2018–2022 cycles, treating a roughly one-year bear market as if it were a mandatory rule that Bitcoin must follow every time.
They ignore more than half of Bitcoin’s historical price action, including the prolonged 2013–2015 bear market, which lasted significantly longer than a year before Bitcoin eventually established a new cycle low.
The market doesn’t owe anyone a bottom on a predetermined schedule.
The real mistake is assuming that because the last two cycles followed a certain timeline, every future cycle must do the same.
A prolonged bear market doesn’t automatically invalidate the 4-year cycle. It may simply mean that this cycle is taking longer to complete.
And that’s exactly what I’ve been arguing from the beginning.
The majority are already claiming that the 4-year cycle is broken. Meanwhile, I keep explaining the same thing: the timing is different this time, and we’ve seen a similarly prolonged bear market before, during 2013–2015.
Now imagine Bitcoin makes a new cycle low — even if it’s nothing more than a marginal break below the previous $58K low.
Just imagine the chaos.
People are already questioning the 4-year cycle. If Bitcoin breaks below $58K, many will start screaming even louder that the cycle is officially broken.
But whose mistake would that actually be?
Not the market’s.
Bear markets have never had a fixed duration. We’ve already experienced four completed Bitcoin bear markets, and all four have been different in duration.
Yet people continue to focus almost exclusively on the 2018–2022 cycles, treating a roughly one-year bear market as if it were a mandatory rule that Bitcoin must follow every time.
They ignore more than half of Bitcoin’s historical price action, including the prolonged 2013–2015 bear market, which lasted significantly longer than a year before Bitcoin eventually established a new cycle low.
The market doesn’t owe anyone a bottom on a predetermined schedule.
The real mistake is assuming that because the last two cycles followed a certain timeline, every future cycle must do the same.
A prolonged bear market doesn’t automatically invalidate the 4-year cycle. It may simply mean that this cycle is taking longer to complete.
And that’s exactly what I’ve been arguing from the beginning.