2026-01-14 04:25:14

Time flies, and 2026 is just around the corner. Reflecting on the debate five years ago—whether Bitcoin was just a tulip bubble—seems a bit laughable now. Even the most rigid traditional financial institutions have started to take it seriously.

Recently, Bitcoin has been consolidating around $92,000. Honestly, the price number itself is not the most important thing anymore. The key lies in its current operational state. After the CPI data was released, market sentiment that was supposed to fluctuate did so, and those that needed to correct were quickly absorbed. The once hyped "four-year halving cycle curse" is gradually losing its effect.

The driving force behind Bitcoin has completely changed. It’s no longer driven by retail investors’ emotional swings, but by institutional funds like ETFs, national strategic reserves, and the ebb and flow of dollar liquidity. So now, the question has shifted—whether it still qualifies as "digital gold" is no longer that important. The real question is, Bitcoin is evolving into a fundamental core asset.

BTC2,89%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

11 Likes

Reward
11
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TokenStorm

· 3h ago

On-chain data shows that institutions are accelerating their accumulation, and the era of retail FOMO has indeed passed. Now it's a matter of who can stay the longest in the eye of the storm. This round of ETF buying is much more reliable than the halving cycle; a quick look at history will tell you. But I still need to add a disclaimer. The tulip bubble theory is a bit awkward to bring up now, but the real risk is actually at the moment of liquidation. 92,000 is just a number; the key is whether institutions will continue to follow when a new high is broken, and how large the arbitrage space is will depend on the subsequent CPI rhythm. I agree with the term "underlying asset," but don't forget that underlying assets can also be dumped; don't be fooled by labels.

View OriginalReply0

SoliditySlayer

· 6h ago

Five years ago, people were still arguing about tulips. Now institutions are accumulating at the bottom. Time truly is the best answer.

View OriginalReply0

orphaned_block

· 6h ago

To be honest, I realized long ago that the halving cycle has become ineffective; institutional entry is the watershed.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-4745f9ce

· 6h ago

Institutional entry has truly changed the entire game, and it's completely different from the way it was five years ago.

View OriginalReply0

BearHugger

· 6h ago

To be honest, five years ago, people still arguing about tulips are now quite embarrassed haha The institutional entry has really changed the whole vibe; it's no longer a game that retail investors can play The price numbers really don't matter much; the key is that BTC has transformed from a gambling tool into a foundational asset, and this shift is incredible I saw early on that the halving cycle curse was invalid; too many people are still clinging to that theory Dollar liquidity is the real driving force, more effective than any technical analysis

View OriginalReply0

TradFiRefugee

· 7h ago

Institutional entry has changed everything, and retail investors' sentiment cycles have really become ineffective. The traditional finance folks are still denying it; they've already quietly started buying in. The price of 92,000 is no longer the key; the important thing is that BTC's resistance has strengthened. From the tulip bubble to national reserves, a five-year turnaround is quite ironic. The breaking of the halving curse is the real signal, indicating that the situation has fundamentally changed. This is the beginning of financial power shifting towards decentralization. Wait, shouldn't we be worried that institutional monopolies might actually kill its essence?

View OriginalReply0