VERY IMPORTANT A lot of people seem uneasy right now because Bitcoin has dropped below Strategy’s average entry price. That average sits around $76,000. So I’m posting this while rubbing the sleep out of my eyes, hoping it can at least offer a bit of emotional support. What follows is highly logical. First of all, in moments like this, it’s worth thinking through the worst-case scenario. Once you genuinely accept the worst case, nothing worse can really happen. That alone helps neutralize the market’s biggest enemy: Impatience and it keeps panic at bay. So let’s look at a worstcase scenario that hasn’t actually happened yet. A chain reaction of treasury companies going bankrupt. Up to now, these companies have been accumulating Bitcoin under pressure, issuing new shares, often at a discount, to raise capital. Once the average purchase price drops by around 30%, insolvency risk starts to rise meaningfully. At that point, forced selling becomes unavoidable. That said, if a small treasury company fails, the market impact is limited. This is where Strategy matters as an indicator. It’s the world’s largest treasury company by far. Its average Bitcoin purchase price is around $76,000, and it holds roughly 713,500 BTC. A 30% drop from $76,000 puts us at about $53,000. I don’t think it gets anywhere near that level. Why? Because of a historical anomaly that has held throughout Bitcoin’s entire history, something I’ve mentioned many times. The high before a halving has never fallen below the low after the halving. There was only one brief exception, and that exception turned out to be the absolute buying opportunity. That “once-in-a-generation” opportunity is still fresh in everyone’s mind: the second half of 2022, around $10,000. This cycle, that line sits at roughly $69,000. Based on that historical pattern, it’s reasonable to assume that Strategy’s average purchase price will not be meaningfully breached. Of course, if they keep buying, the average price changes, so the numbers always need to be monitored. But at this stage, you can sketch out a scenario in which the world’s largest treasury company survives. If that happens, the probability increases that the global accumulation culture remains deeply intact. To be clear, this is framed purely as a worst-case scenario. And as I often say. Once you’ve accepted the worst case, nothing worse tends to happen and the market’s greatest enemy, impatience, loses its power.
- Biggest day for aggregators since 10/10, implying a ton of retail users came to trade
- Fee volatility remained the lowest across all chains, and median fees were the lowest across all major chains at $0.000487
Basically, Solana reached never before seen usage and yet users paid predictably low fees for execution
During this same period, Base experienced inclusion delays, with many users reporting the chain was unusable, and the median fee users paid to transact was 26x (!!!) that of Solana's
Other notes:
- ATH on tokenized stock volume
- Record USDT availability on Solana, crossing over $3b in supply for the first time
- Excluding 10/10, biggest day for some foreign wrapped tokens including Ethereum, and HYPE on Solana had it's biggest volume day ever
- More wallets made a transaction on Solana than all other chains combined yesterday #sol
It behaves more like a regime-switching, path-dependent, non-linear stochastic system with structural constraints, where small inputs can trigger disproportionately large moves, even though outcomes remain probabilistic.
Bullish doesn’t mean “up only.” It means price formation is not pure noise.
Evidence: Hurst exponent: H ≈ 0.88 (random walk = 0.50) → strong persistence
Variance-ratio tests across horizons reject random-walk behavior (p<0.001)
Autocorrelation/runs tests reject independence
Long-run log-log scaling fit is high (R² ~0.96 in real-history windows)
For a coin-flip/random process, time-based trend fit is expected to be unstable and ~0%
What that implies: Short term: brutal, reflexive, leverage-driven Long term: structured, path-dependent, trend-bearing
So the bullish case is simple: If a process has memory and scales with time, deep drawdowns are not automatically thesis failure.
They are often mean-reversion stress events inside a persistent growth regime.
Rejecting random walk does not guarantee gains. It says price formation has structure and memory. Treating Bitcoin as pure randomness ignores the strongest signal in the data.
Why this Matters: When a process has memory like Bitcoin, patience is not passive.
You never sell your Bitcoin, you never loan against your Bitcoin, you never take your Bitcoin off Self custody. MainStreet over Wall Street, they want to control us, we can't let them.
LATEST: 📉 Vitalik Buterin has sold 6,183 ETH over three days, according to Lookonchain, the week after announcing he would use his personal funds to support Ethereum development. #ETH