Bitcoin’s “four-year law” could be experiencing its first break. Despite unprecedented inflows into spot ETFs and increasing corporate treasuries, the market is no longer aligned with the halving cycle.
Instead, liquidity shocks, sovereign wealth fund allocations, and the growth of derivatives are establishing themselves as the new foundations of price discovery. This transition prompts a pivotal question for 2026: can institutions still depend on traditional cycle playbooks, or do they need to completely redefine the rules?
Has the cycle finally snapped?
With these new forces driving the market, the real issue is not the relevance of the old cycle, but whether it has already been supplanted. BeInCrypto interviewed James Check, Co-Founder and on-chain analyst at Checkonchain Analytics and former Lead On-Chain Analyst at Glassnode, to explore this theory.
For years, Bitcoin investors regarded the four-year halving cycle as a fundamental truth. That rhythm is now facing its greatest challenge. In September 2025, CoinShares tracked $1.9 billion in ETF inflows—almost half of which was allocated to Bitcoin—while Glassnode identified $108,000–$114,000 as a crucial zone. At the same time, CryptoQuant noted that exchange inflows plummeted to historic lows, even as Bitcoin surged to new all-time highs.
Sponsored
Sponsored
ETF inflows: fresh demand or reshuffling?
September’s ETF inflows underscored strong demand, but it remains to be seen whether this represents new capital or merely existing holders reallocating from vehicles like GBTC. This distinction influences the structural support for the rally.
“There are definitely holders migrating from on-chain to ETFs. This is occurring, but it isn’t the majority… the demand has been massive—tens of billions of dollars in serious capital are entering. The issue is that there’s a lot of sell-side pressure.”
James noted that ETFs have absorbed about $60 billion in total inflows. Market data reveals this amount is overshadowed by realized profit-taking between $30 billion and $100 billion monthly from long-term holders, explaining why prices haven’t surged as rapidly as ETF demand alone would imply.
Exchange flows: signal or noise?
CryptoQuant indicates that exchange inflows hit all-time lows during Bitcoin’s peak in 2025. On the surface, this might suggest structural scarcity. However, James warned against placing too much faith in these metrics.
“I rarely rely on exchange data because I find it not particularly useful. The exchanges hold about 3.4 million Bitcoin. Many data providers simply don’t have all the wallet addresses, which is an extremely tough task.”
Analysis confirms this drawback, emphasizing that the supply from long-term holders—currently 15.68 million BTC, or about 78.5% of circulating supply, all in profit—is a more dependable measure of scarcity than exchange balances.
Do miners still move the market?
Historically, mining implied downside risk. However, with ETF and treasury flows now taking precedence, their impact might be far less significant than previously thought.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“Regarding the Bitcoin network, the sell-side I mentioned previously appears so small compared to the old hand selling and ETF flows that you really need to zoom in to see it. I’d argue that halving doesn’t matter anymore, and hasn’t for several cycles. That narrative is effectively over.”
Miners currently issue roughly 450 BTC daily, a negligible amount compared to the considerable influx of supply from long-term holders, which can total between 10,000 and 40,000 BTC per day during peak rallies. This disparity explains why miner flows no longer shape the market structure.
From cycles to liquidity regimes
When asked whether Bitcoin still adheres to its four-year cycle or has transitioned to a liquidity-driven regime, James pointed out significant changes in adoption.
“There have been two major turning points in Bitcoin’s journey. The first occurred during the 2017 all-time high… The second was at the end of 2022 or the beginning of 2023, when Bitcoin emerged as a more mature asset. Today, Bitcoin reacts to the world, rather than the other way around.”
Analysis supports this perspective, indicating that volatility compression, along with the emergence of ETFs and derivatives, has positioned Bitcoin in a more index-like function within global markets. It also emphasizes that liquidity conditions, rather than halving cycles, now drive the market dynamics.
Realized Price and new bear-market floors
Traditionally, the realized price has served as a reliable gauge for market cycles. Fidelity’s models indicate that post-halving corrections generally occur 12 to 18 months after the event. However, James contends that this metric is now obsolete—and that investors should focus on where the marginal cost bases congregate instead.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“A bear market typically ends when the price drops to the realized price, which I estimate to be around $52,000. However, I believe that this metric has become outdated due to the inclusion of Satoshi and lost coins… I don’t foresee Bitcoin dropping back to $30,000. If a bear market were to start now, I believe it would settle around $80,000, which is where I anticipate bear market floors to begin forming—around $75,000 to $80,000.”
Data shows a concentration of cost bases around $74,000 to $80,000, encompassing ETFs, corporate treasuries, and actual market averages, indicating that this range is likely to anchor potential bear-market floors.
MVRV and the limits of metrics
Conversely, the MVRV Z-Score has not yet broken, although its thresholds have shifted with market depth and the variation of instruments. James emphasized the need for adaptability.
“Despite MVRV’s reliability, past thresholds are no longer dependable. It is essential to view metrics as sources of information rather than definitive indicators. Spotting a blow-off top is straightforward when metrics point to extremes. The real challenge lies in identifying when the bull market is losing momentum and begins to reverse.”
The data indicates that MVRV is cooling near +1σ and plateauing, rather than reaching historical peaks—supporting James’s assertion that context is more valuable than rigid cut-offs.
Sovereign flows and custody risk
As sovereign wealth funds and pensions weigh their exposure, concentration risk has become a significant issue. James acknowledged that Coinbase holds a large portion of Bitcoin, but contended that the proof-of-work model mitigates systemic risk.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“If there is one significant area of concentration risk, it would be Coinbase, as it is custodian for most ETFs’ Bitcoin. Nevertheless, due to Bitcoin’s proof-of-work, the location of the coins is less critical… There isn’t a concentration risk that can disrupt the system. The market equilibrates itself.”
Data illustrates that Coinbase is the custodian for the majority of US spot ETFs, highlighting the extent of concentration and explaining why James regards it as a market rather than a security risk.
Options, ETFs, and U.S. dominance
James identified derivatives as the decisive component in Vanguard’s potential foray into ETF and tokenized markets.
“The key factor isn’t the ETFs themselves. It’s actually the options market that is developing in conjunction with them… By October 2024, IBIT started to outpace all others, now leading in substantial inflows. The US commands roughly 90% of ETF holdings globally.”
Market analysis reveals that BlackRock’s IBIT has captured a significant AUM share since launching options in late 2024, with US ETFs responsible for nearly 90% of global flows—highlighting derivatives as the real power behind market dynamics. IBIT’s dominance corresponds with reports that US ETFs are driving almost all new inflows, reaffirming the country’s substantial influence.
Closing thoughts
“Everyone is always searching for the perfect metric to predict the future. Such a thing doesn’t exist. The only thing you can control is your decisions. If it drops to $75, have a plan for that. If it rises to $150, ensure you have a plan for that, too.”
James emphasized that devising strategies for both downside and upside scenarios is the most pragmatic approach to managing volatility throughout 2026 and beyond.
His analysis indicates that Bitcoin’s four-year halving cycle may no longer dictate its path. ETF inflows and substantial sovereign capital have introduced new structural drivers, while behavior from long-term holders remains the crucial limiting factor.
Metrics like Realized Price and MVRV need reinterpretation, with $75,000 to $80,000 likely serving as the new baseline in a modern bear market. Institutions should refocus in 2026 on liquidity regimes, custody challenges, and the developing derivatives markets built atop ETFs.
