Bitcoin’s Four-Year Cycle: A Potential Shift
Bitcoin’s famed “four-year rule” may be on the verge of being upended. Despite noteworthy inflows into spot ETFs and an uptick in corporate bonds, the market is beginning to diverge from its traditional halving cycle.
Factors like liquidity shocks, changes in government asset allocations, and the expansion of derivatives are beginning to play new roles in price determination. This evolution poses significant questions for 2026. Can institutions still depend on the established Cycle Handbook, or is it time to rethink the entire playbook?
Has the Cycle Finally Broken?
With these fresh influences at play, the pressing concern isn’t merely whether the old cycle matters, but if it’s been supplanted altogether. BeInCrypto consulted with James Check, co-founder and on-chain analyst at Checkonchain Analytics, to explore this concept.
For years, Bitcoin aficionados have treated the four-year halving cycle as a fundamental truth. Now, that established rhythm is being put to the test. Back in September 2025, CoinShares reported ETF inflows of $1.9 billion, with nearly half directed toward Bitcoin. Meanwhile, Glassnode highlighted a crucial win/loss zone between $108,000 and $114,000. Interestingly, despite Bitcoin reaching a new all-time high, CryptoQuant noted that foreign exchange inflows plunged to record lows.
ETF Inflows: New Demand or Restructuring?
September’s ETF inflows indicated robust demand, but it’s crucial to discern if this is truly new capital or merely repositioning from existing holders, such as those in GBTC. The distinction is essential for understanding the sustainability of the rally.
“There will definitely be holders who will move from on-chain holdings to ETFs. But that’s not the majority. The demand is incredibly huge; we’re talking tens of billions of serious capital coming in. The downside is that we have a lot of sell-side pressure.”
James observed that ETFs have accumulated around $60 billion in total inflows. Yet, this is dwarfed by monthly profit-taking from long-term holders, estimated between $30 billion and $100 billion. This disparity might explain the slower price rise, even amid ETF demand.
Exchange Flow: Signal or Noise?
CryptoQuant reported that, during Bitcoin’s high price in 2025, exchange inflows reached an all-time low. At first glance, this might imply a structural lack, but James warned against putting too much weight on such metrics.
“I’m not a fan of relying on exchange data because it’s not particularly useful. There are roughly 3.4 million Bitcoins on exchanges, but many data providers lack access to all wallet addresses.”
This points to the notion that the supply from long-term holders, which currently accounts for about 78.5% of circulating BTC, may offer a more reliable measure of scarcity than exchange balances.
Do Miners Still Move the Market?
Mining has often been viewed as a risk factor for downturns. However, with ETFs and Treasury flows becoming more prominent, its impact might now be reduced.
“For Bitcoin, miner movement is minimal compared to what we’ve seen in earlier cycles. The current sell-side appears negligible. The halving? I don’t view it as a significant issue anymore.”
Daily, miners produce around 450 BTC, which pales in comparison to the potential supply from long-term holders, occasionally hitting 10,000-40,000 BTC at peak times. This suggests that miner flows might no longer determine market structure.
From Cycles to Liquidity Regimes
When asked whether Bitcoin adheres to four-year cycles or is transitioning to a liquidity-driven environment, James emphasized a key change in its operational dynamics.
“The Bitcoin landscape has evolved. The shift began with the all-time high in 2017, and by late 2022 or early 2023, Bitcoin emerged as a more mature asset. Now, Bitcoin reacts to external influences rather than vice versa.”
This highlights Bitcoin’s evolving role in global markets, influenced more by liquidity concerns than by its halving cycles.
Realized Price and Potential New Bear Market Floors
Historically, realized prices have provided reliable insights into market cycles. Models indicate a post-halving correction typically happens 12 to 18 months after the event. However, James argues that this information is becoming outdated.
“A bear market generally ends near the realized price, which I believe is roughly $52,000. I’m skeptical that Bitcoin will return to $30,000. Instead, if there’s a downturn, it might bottom around $80,000.”
His analysis suggests that the range between $75,000 and $80,000 could be a new floor for potential bear markets.
MVRV and the Limits of Metrics
Conversely, the MVRV Z-score hasn’t broken down, though its threshold varies based on market dynamics. James promotes a flexible approach.
“All indicators can still be valuable, but they shouldn’t be rigidly interpreted. It’s essential to view them as informational rather than absolute predictors.”
His findings indicate that MVRV tends to stabilize rather than reach historical extremes, which reinforces the need for a contextual understanding of indicators.
Sovereign Flows and Custody Risk
As sovereign wealth funds and pensions consider exposure, concentration risk has become a pressing issue. While James acknowledged Coinbase’s significant holdings, he argued that proof of work mitigates systemic risk.
“Coinbase holds a large portion of Bitcoin for ETFs, but because of proof of work, the location of the coins isn’t as critical. There isn’t a specific risk threshold that could disrupt the system.”
The data reveals that Coinbase acts as the custodian for the majority of U.S. spot ETFs, highlighting both the degree of concentration and its classification as a market risk rather than a security concern.
Options, ETFs, and U.S. Dominance
James noted that derivatives, especially in the options market, play a major role in Bitcoin’s dynamics.
“The crux of the matter is that it’s not the ETF alone driving things; it’s the options market built around it. U.S. ETFs dominate global flows, capturing around 90% of assets.”
After options were rolled out in late 2024, BlackRock’s IBIT quickly seized a prominent share of assets under management, reinforcing U.S. dominance in the marketplace.
Last Thoughts
“People continually search for a perfect metric to predict future trends. There’s no such thing. What you can do is prepare for all scenarios.”
James proposes that having strategies for both downturns and upswings is the most feasible way to navigate the volatility of 2026 and beyond. His insights indicate that the four-year halving cycle may not dictate Bitcoin’s trajectory any longer. While the influx of ETFs and substantial capital from sovereign entities introduces new structural dynamics, the behavior of long-term holders continues to impose limitations. Therefore, a reevaluation of classical indicators like realized price and MVRV is essential, with the $75,000 to $80,000 range likely acting as a new support level in the evolving market landscape. Institutions should focus more on liquidity dynamics, custody issues, and emerging derivatives markets as they approach 2026.
