As explained by Glassnode analyst Chris Beamish in an X post, Bitcoin investors have been showing a lot less distribution at the recent price levels. The on-chain indicator of relevance here is the “Accumulation Trend Score,” which tells us about whether BTC holders are buying or selling.
The metric tracks investor behavior using not just the changes happening in their wallet balance, but also accounting for the size of their wallets. This means that larger entities have a higher influence on the score.
When the value of the Accumulation Trend Score is greater than 0.5, it means the investors are displaying a net trend of accumulation. On the other hand, it being under the threshold suggests the dominance of distribution.
Now, here is the chart shared by Beamish that shows how the Accumulation Trend Score has changed for the different Bitcoin investor segments over the last few years:
As displayed in the above graph, the Bitcoin Accumulation Trend Score has reflected a varied behavior for the different investor segments during the last couple of months, but very recently, a uniform picture has started to develop.
The smallest of investors in the market, those holding less than 1 BTC, started participating in aggressive accumulation around the time of BTC’s low in November and have since maintained the indicator nearly at a perfect value of 1. This suggests that retail investors have been buying the dip.
Meanwhile, the 100 to 1,000 BTC traders, popularly called the sharks, have been accumulating throughout the drawdown that has followed since the early October peak, indicating that these investors haven’t lost conviction despite the deep decline.
The story is a bit different for the whale cohorts, however. The 10,000+ BTC holders, corresponding to the largest of hands on the network, were in a phase of distribution between August and November, but they have finally started accumulating since the price low, although the Accumulation Trend Score isn’t as high as the retail investors in their case.
The 1,000 to 10,000 BTC whale group didn’t stop distributing even after the bottom, but very recently, their score has just breached the 0.5 mark. With this, a uniform behavior has begun to appear on the Bitcoin blockchain, with investors as a whole opting to expand their wallet balance.
It now remains to be seen how long this trend of accumulation will continue.
BTC Price
Bitcoin has faced a drop of more than 3% over the last 24 hours that has taken its price to $89,300.
Many in the crypto space have echoed a familiar sentiment over recent months: “The four-year crypto market cycle is dead.” Experts from the Bull Theory assert that while the four-year cycle may have come to an end, the Bitcoin bull run itself is merely delayed and could stretch until 2027.
Why The Four-Year Cycle May Be Ending
In a recent post on social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, the Bull Theory analysts noted that the concept of Bitcoin adhering to a neat four-year cycle is weakening.
They highlighted that significant price movements over the last decade weren’t solely driven by Halving events; rather, they were influenced by shifts in global liquidity.
The analysts pointed to the current landscape of stablecoin liquidity, which remains high despite recent downturns, indicating that larger investors are still engaged in the market, poised to invest when appropriate macroeconomic conditions arise.
In the US, Treasury policies are emerging as pivotal catalysts. The recent buybacks are notable, but the analysts emphasize that the larger narrative lies in the Treasury General Account (TGA) balance, which is currently around $940 billion—almost $90 billion above its normal range.
This surplus cash is likely to flow back into the financial system, enhancing financing conditions and adding liquidity that typically gravitates toward risk assets.
Globally, the trends appear even more promising. China has been injecting liquidity for several months, while Japan recently announced a stimulus package worth approximately $135 billion, alongside efforts to simplify cryptocurrency regulations.
Canada is also moving toward easing its monetary policy, and the US Federal Reserve (Fed) has officially halted its quantitative tightening (QT) measures—a historical precursor to some form of liquidity expansion.
Political And Monetary Factors Align To Create Bullish Condition
The analysts explained that when major economies adopt expansive monetary policies simultaneously, risk assets like Bitcoin tend to respond more rapidly than traditional stocks or broader markets.
Additionally, potential policy tools, such as the Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption—implemented in 2020 to allow banks more flexibility in expanding their balance sheets—could return, resulting in increased credit creation and overall market liquidity.
There is also a political dimension to consider. President Trump has discussed potential tax reforms, including abolishing income tax and distributing $2,000 tariff dividends.
Furthermore, the likelihood of a new Federal Reserve chair who supports liquidity assistance and is constructive toward cryptocurrency could bolster conditions for economic growth.
Extended Bitcoin Uptrend
Historically, whenever the Institute for Supply Management’s Purchasing Managers’ Index (ISM PMI) surpasses 55, it has been followed by periods of altcoin season. The probability of this occurring in 2026 appears high, according to the Bull Theory.
The convergence of rising stablecoin liquidity, the Treasury’s injection of cash back into markets, global quantitative easing, the cessation of QT in the US, potential bank-lending relief, pro-market policy shifts in 2026, and major players entering the crypto sector suggests a very different scenario than the old four-year halving model.
The analysts concluded that if liquidity expands concurrently across the US, Japan, China, Canada, and other significant economies, Bitcoin is unlikely to move counter to that trend.
Therefore, rather than experiencing a sharp rally followed by a prolonged bear market, the current environment indicates a more extended and broader uptrend that could span through 2026 and into 2027.
Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com
Reports have disclosed that central banks around the globe have stepped up purchases of gold this year, with one month standing out. In October 2025, officials bought 53 tons of gold, a level that analysts say is the highest monthly demand seen this year. These moves reflect growing concern about inflation, weaker currencies and rising geopolitical risk.
Central Bank Buying Surges
According to data cited by financial outlets, 2025 is on track to be the fourth-highest year this century for institutional gold accumulation when measured net year-to-date through October. Analysts at Deutsche Bank put gold’s share of central-bank reserves at about 24%, a level not seen since the 1990s. Those figures help explain why governments that once moved away from bullion are returning to it now.
Bitcoin Enters The Conversation
Some banks and market researchers are now asking whether Bitcoin could play a similar role for national treasuries. Based on reports from major financial firms, Deutsche Bank projects that Bitcoin could appear on central-bank balance sheets by 2030 as a complementary reserve asset.
Central banks are ramping up gold purchases:
Global central banks purchased +53 tonnes of gold in October, the most since November 2024.
This marks a +194% jump compared to July, and the 3rd-straight monthly acceleration.
Bitcoin’s market profile has changed: liquidity has risen, and price swings have been less extreme during recent months even though volatility remains higher than older reserve assets. Bitcoin also reached a record above $123,500 in recent trading, a price point that has captured wide attention.
A Few Banks Are Testing The Idea
A small number of central banks are now at least studying the idea more seriously. The Czech National Bank, for example, has discussed the possibility of a “test allocation” to learn how crypto might behave inside a reserve mix. Those conversations tend to focus on custody, accounting rules and how to report gains or losses, rather than immediate buying.
On Gold & Bitcoin: Why Officials Are Cautious
Risk is the main reason most central banks have not moved faster. Bitcoin still shows larger price swings than standard reserve assets, and global rules for how to hold and audit crypto are not uniform. Based on expert commentary, regulators and auditors would need clear guidance before many central banks felt comfortable adding crypto to official reserves.
What This Could Mean For Markets
If even a handful of national banks were to allocate a small share of reserves to Bitcoin, demand could rise sharply and change how markets view the asset. A modest sovereign allocation would not replace gold or the US dollar, but it could give Bitcoin a stronger role as a hedge for countries facing currency weakness or rising inflation. At the same time, such a move would push more work into custody and compliance services, which would have to scale up quickly.
Gold buying by central banks is already significant — 53 tons in one month and about 24% of reserves in gold for some — and that Bitcoin is being discussed as a possible next step for some policymakers. The path from discussion to adoption is uncertain, and many technical and legal questions remain. Still, the debate has moved from theory to test runs and official reports, making this one of the more closely watched trends in global finance this year.
Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView
Bitcoin (BTC) is retesting a crucial support area after its price slid 5% from the recent highs and fell below the $90,000 barrier. Some analysts have suggested that the cryptocurrency’s structure remains intact, but warned that it must bounce quickly or risk retesting the November lows.
Bitcoin Retests $88,000 After Rejection
On Friday, Bitcoin lost the recently reclaimed $90,000 level, falling to a key support area before stabilizing. The flagship crypto has been attempting to recover from the November market correction, which sent its price to a seven-month low of $80,600.
Since reaching its local lows two weeks ago, the cryptocurrency has traded within a macro re-accumulation range, between $82,000 and $93,500, attempting to break out of this zone on Wednesday, when it reached a multi-week high of $94,150.
However, as the first week of December approaches its end, BTC has lost the upper area of its local range again, falling below its monthly open and tapping the $88,000 support.
Amid the drop, Analyst Ted Pillows noted that BTC has been struggling to reclaim the $94,000 resistance, adding that price “wants to go lower here before another breakout attempt.” Therefore, he suggested that a bounce back from the $88,000-$89,000 support zone is likely.
Altcoin Sherpa affirmed that the ongoing retest would confirm whether the recent bounce was “just lower highs and price is going lower or if we actually have any juice to bounce to like 100k or something.”
The analyst outlined two potential outcomes. In the first scenario, the flagship crypto would retrace to the $87,000-$89,000 area and bounce above the $93,000-$94,000 resistance levels.
In the second scenario, Bitcoin would continue to move sideways below the local resistance before eventually sliding to the November lows and potentially lower levels. Per the analysis, the leading cryptocurrency must bottom quickly, or it will risk the second outcome.
BTC Shows Shallowing Pullback Tendency
Analyst Rekt Capital also pointed out that Bitcoin continues to face rejection from the range high resistance. However, he considers that investors should not worry as long as the pullback isn’t as big as the previous ones.
If “the rejection is shallower than the previous two, then this resistance will continue to weaken until eventually breached,” he explained, adding that “as long as this weakening continues, BTC should be able to finally breach this resistance over time & try to challenge the multi-week Downtrend above.”
Earlier this week, the analyst affirmed that BTC’s consolidation structure will remain intact as long as Bitcoin closes the week above the range lows. He also noted that its Macro Downtrend, which “has been dictating resistance throughout this phase of the cycle,” remains the dominant structural barrier and the level to break.
As the price stabilized between the $88,500-$89,350 area, the analyst added that today’s retracement “continues to be a shallower pullback than the previous two,” which keeps the range “‘retrace shallowing’ tendency” intact.
He noted that Bitcoin could technically drop into the ascending two-week support trendline, or tap the $86,000 level and still perform a shallower correction than the recent 10% drop.
As of this writing, Bitcoin is trading at $89,400, a 2.9% decline in the daily timeframe.
Despite the Bitcoin price recovery above the crucial $90,000 threshold—a level that has historically served as a supportive floor for the cryptocurrency—the market is exhibiting signs that a further correction may be imminent.
Bitcoin Price Recovery At Risk?
Market expert Rekt Fencer recently shared insights on social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, suggesting that the Bitcoin price might be forming what he calls a “massive bull trap.”
This term refers to a deceptive bullish signal in which the price briefly surpasses a resistance level, in this case, the $90,000 mark, only to reverse into a decline. Such movements can entrap investors who bought in during the peak, leading to significant losses.
Fencer pointed out a troubling pattern reminiscent of early 2022 when Bitcoin reclaimed its 50-week moving average (MA)—currently positioned above $102,300—before experiencing a severe decline of roughly 60%, plummeting below $20,000 by June of that year.
He indicated that the recent price recovery following major drops to $84,000 should not be interpreted as a signal of near-term success, especially since the Bitcoin price is currently trading under the 50-week MA.
If historical trends repeat, this could mean that Bitcoin might see a significant drop, potentially reaching around $36,200, which could potentially represent the low point of the bearish cycle for the cryptocurrency. On the other hand, there are analysts who retain a bullish outlook.
BTC Bottom In Sight?
Market researcher and analyst Miles Deutscher expressed a confident sentiment, stating he believes there is a 91.5% likelihood that the Bitcoin price has hit its bottom, based on his analysis of key developments.
He noted that recent weeks have been dominated by negative news stories, including concerns surrounding Tether (USDT) and the implications of China’s actions on crypto, which he asserts often mark local price bottoms.
Moreover, Deutscher pointed out a shift in market flows from predominantly bearish to bullish. He explained that the trading environment has recently seen a resurgence in buying momentum, with large investors, or “OG whales,” ceasing their selling. This change has been reflected in the order books, indicating a possible stabilization in market sentiment.
Additionally, the liquidity landscape appears to be shifting, with market conditions tightening in recent months. The potential appointment of a new Federal Reserve chair known for dovish policies, coupled with the official end of quantitative tightening (QT), could further influence market dynamics in favor of buyers.
Deutscher concluded by emphasizing that given the extreme levels of fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) in the market, combined with improvements in trading flows, he believes that the odds favor the notion that the Bitcoin price has indeed reached its bottom.
Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com
Fundstrat’s Tom Lee told attendees at Binance Blockchain Week that he believes the worst leg of the recent crypto slump is likely over and that markets may be ready for a gradual recovery. He pointed to weakening selling pressure and growing underlying activity as reasons for cautious optimism.
Market Sentiment May Be Near A Turning Point
According to Lee, mood on the street turned darker after October, with many investors showing fatigue after steady losses. He said the current selling looks closer to exhaustion than to the start of another major decline. Trading desks have cut back. Volume has thinned. Sentiment is low. Lee argued that often, when pessimism peaks, conditions for a reversal begin to form.
Bitcoin Drawdowns Are Not Uncommon
Based on reports, Bitcoin has fallen about 36% from its all-time high in the recent retreat. That size of drop has happened in prior cycles, including 2017 and 2021, and has been followed by rallies that reached new records.
“Crypto prices likely bottomed. The best years of growth are still ahead: there is 200x adoption to come.” – Tom Lee, Chairman of Bitmine pic.twitter.com/fPWbWdaosO
Lee pointed to long-term returns for bitcoin and ether compared with some traditional assets over the last decade, saying crypto’s gains were larger. He used that history to support the idea that patient holders have been rewarded after past stress.
Tokenization Could Be A Major Story In 2026
Lee also presented tokenization as a key theme for the future. He said large institutions are preparing to move more financial products on-chain and that, if real estate joins the shift, close to a quadrillion dollars in assets could eventually be tokenized.
Stablecoins were cited as an early example of why tokenized instruments can attract demand. He suggested that a broader institutional push could add steady interest to the market over time.
BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF Was Highlighted As A Signal
Reports have disclosed that BlackRock’s bitcoin ETF has become one of the firm’s top fee-earning products, a fact Lee used to show growing involvement from legacy finance. That kind of institutional participation, he argued, points to deeper engagement from big players who were previously on the sidelines.
Adoption Gap Suggests Large Upside
According to Lee, only 4.4 million bitcoin wallets hold more than $10,000 in BTC, while nearly 900 million people globally have more than $10,000 in retirement savings.
He said that gap shows how early the market still is and argued that if just a fraction of those savers put money into bitcoin, adoption could expand by as much as 200 times. The figure is speculative, he acknowledged, but he used it to show the potential scale for future demand.
What This Means For Investors Now
Lee questioned whether the old four-year cycle should be used as a strict guide. He suggested recent moves were driven more by de-leveraging and structural shifts than by the halving rhythm that shaped earlier cycles.
Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView
On 3rd December, official filings and press releases announced Twenty One Capital’s upcoming debut on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), positioning the company as one of the largest Bitcoin treasury firms ever to enter public markets. The listing brings a dedicated Bitcoin balance sheet into Wall Street’s core ecosystem, signaling a structural shift in how institutional investors can gain long-term BTC exposure.
A Bitcoin Treasury Giant Steps Onto The NYSE Stage
Twenty One Capital’s NYSE entry is anchored by its business combination with Cantor Equity Partners (CEP), the SPAC serving as the public-market vehicle for the transaction. CEP shareholders have already approved the merger, and the deal is expected to close around December 8. Once completed, the combined entity will operate as Twenty One Capital, Inc. and begin trading on December 9 under the ticker XXI.
The original announcement, released through official press channels and SEC-related filings, emphasized CEP’s central role in enabling the listing and establishing the company’s public-market structure. CEO Jack Mallers also highlighted the milestone on X, noting the company’s readiness for its debut.
According to this press announcement, Twenty One Capital will debut with an estimated 43,500 BTC, a reserve valued near $4 billion at recent market levels. This immediately places it among the top corporate Bitcoin treasuries globally. Unlike companies that hold Bitcoin as a secondary reserve, Twenty One is specifically engineered around a Bitcoin-native model. The firm intends to report “Bitcoin-per-share,” providing investors a transparent look at how much BTC each equity unit represents. It also pledges full, on-chain proof-of-reserves, positioning itself as a high-transparency asset custodian at launch.
This model effectively transforms Twenty One into a regulated balance-sheet wrapper for Bitcoin. It lowers operational friction for institutional allocators who want direct BTC exposure without the complexities of crypto custody, self-storage, or exchange-based acquisition. By listing on the NYSE rather than relying on ETFs or derivatives, Twenty One creates a regulated public equity vehicle that holds, safeguards, and transparently tracks Bitcoin for institutional and retail investors alike.
Wall Street’s New On-Ramp To Institutional BTC Exposure
The market impact of Twenty One’s listing reflects the accelerating integration of Bitcoin into mainstream financial architecture. The company’s backers—including Tether-linked entities, Bitfinex-aligned interests, SoftBank-connected capital, and Cantor’s public-markets network—provide a cross-sector foundation aimed at bridging crypto-native philosophies with institutional liquidity channels.
Under this structure, Twenty One aims to become a long-term institutional treasury vessel—a regulated balance sheet that accumulates BTC and gives investors an equity-linked way to participate in Bitcoin’s upside without engaging directly with crypto custody or trading infrastructure.
As the NYSE debut approaches, Twenty One Capital embodies a pivot point where BTC’s role in capital markets shifts from speculative asset to institutional treasury instrument. If XXI attracts sustained flow, it could set a new blueprint for how corporate entities engage with Bitcoin—anchoring Wall Street’s next phase of digital-asset adoption.
VTB, Russia’s second-largest bank, has told clients it plans to let them buy and sell real cryptocurrencies through its brokerage service, with a target rollout in 2026 pending regulator approval.
According to the bank, the move would go beyond the derivative products that most Russian banks have offered so far. It is a clear shift toward opening traditional finance to digital assets, at least for now among wealthy clients.
Client Eligibility And Timetable
Reports have disclosed that VTB intends to begin with high-net-worth customers only. The bank set thresholds for its initial offering: clients with assets above $1.3 million or annual income over $649,000 would be eligible at first.
Andrey Yatskov, who heads VTB’s brokerage arm, said there is “sharp demand” from clients for access to actual crypto, not just paper products tied to token prices. The bank has picked 2026 as the planned start year, but it made that clear the launch depends on regulators signing off.
Real Crypto, Not Just Contracts
Based on reports, the service would allow ownership of the underlying coins — not merely derivative contracts or token-linked notes. That is a significant distinction in Russia, where until recently banks were limited to offering exposure through derivative instruments.
Allowing customers to hold coins directly would require legal and compliance work, from custody arrangements to anti-money-laundering controls. Those steps are on the critical path before any retail expansion can happen.
Potential Market Signals
VTB has also given investors a sense of how it views crypto as an asset class. The bank recommended a 7% allocation to crypto for some investor profiles, and its internal forecasts have mentioned medium-term Bitcoin price targets in the $200,000–$250,000 range under favorable conditions.
If VTB moves forward, it could be the first major Russian bank to operate in this way — a signal that some parts of the financial sector see token ownership as something to be offered through mainstream channels.
Regulatory Hurdles And Geopolitics
The plan is not risk free. Russian regulation of crypto is still evolving, and any permit to offer direct trading will require approval from the relevant authorities. Sanctions and other geopolitical pressures could alter timelines or force changes to how the service is structured.
Compliance teams will need to reconcile domestic rules with international restrictions that affect many big banks operating in or dealing with Russia.
For now, the rollout remains conditional. VTB’s timeline, client criteria, and product design all hinge on legal clarifications and regulator consent. Market participants and clients will likely follow announcements from the Bank of Russia and other agencies to judge how soon broader access might come.
Featured image from Pexels, chart from TradingView
The Binance Blockchain Week event in Dubai became the center of a high-stakes showdown between traditional and digital innovation, with Bitcoin and gold going head-to-head. Investors, tech enthusiasts, and financial experts watched closely as Binance founder Changpeng Zhao expertly debated renowned Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff, making a compelling argument for why Bitcoin is better than gold.
Binance Founder Dominates Bitcoin And Gold Debate
During the Binance Blockchain Week in Dubai, Schiff and CZ faced off in a high-profile debate over the value of Bitcoin versus Gold. Schiff defended gold as a safe, stable, and tangible asset while the Binance founder made a compelling case for Bitcoin’s adoption, utility, value, and global reach.
Throughout the debate, which lasted over an hour, CZ consistently demonstrated the practical advantages of Bitcoin, leaving Schiff’s gold argument largely on the defensive. The Binance founder emphasized Bitcoin’s transparent and predictable supply and its role in the modern financial systems. He pointed to hundreds of millions of users who rely on Bitcoin for payments, savings, and transfers.
Schiff argued that Bitcoin lacks inherent value and is mainly driven by hype and faith that its price will rise. He stated that gold remains tangible, centuries old, scarce, and valuable in industry, making it superior to BTC. He further asserted that “nobody needs” Bitcoin and that the cryptocurrency is “backed by nothing.”
Practical demonstrations played a key role in the debate between Schiff and CZ. The Binance founder explained how Bitcoin and crypto payments already improve financial efficiency, especially in emerging markets. Schiff questioned whether these transactions truly count as money, since merchants ultimately receive traditional currency. CZ’s response highlighted the importance of adoption and network effects, noting that people who use BTC directly for payments give it real-world significance.
The debate also considered the preferences of younger generations. CZ asked Schiff whether millennials and Gen Z favoured Bitcoin or gold. The Bitcoin critic responded sharply, suggesting that they would choose gold. He pointed out that, with many young investors losing money on BTC, gold offers a safer, more appealing alternative. The Binance founder countered that younger people understand digital value more intuitively and prefer mobile, borderless, and censorship-resistant assets.
Digital Value And The Future Of Money
The debate between CZ and Schiff also highlighted the changing definition of money. Bitcoin functions as a decentralized network that enables instant settlement and transparent verification. Its adoption has also helped evolve the financial economy, facilitating faster and more seamless cross-border payments. Schiff argued that gold’s scarcity and industrial demand preserve its value and make it a reliable hedge against economic uncertainty.
Tokenization also became a point of agreement during the discussion, with Schiff emphasizing that gold can be digitized and tokenized for easier ownership and distribution without moving the physical metal. CZ contended that Bitcoin offers similar advantages while also enabling global financial inclusion. They also discussed the supply of both assets, with the Binance founder noting that Bitcoin has a visible supply, while gold doesn’t.
They also talked about the performance of both assets over the years. Schiff argued that gold had outperformed BTC over the past four years. CZ contended that Bitcoin has far outpaced gold over the last 8 years, and since its launch in 2009, it has skyrocketed from a few cents to an ATH above $126,000. He concluded his debate, predicting that Bitcoin’s growth will outpace gold over time.
The crypto market is bleeding as leveraged liquidations intensify, sending Bitcoin back below $90,000.
Analysts are warning that if bulls fail to defend the critical $84,000 support level, Bitcoin’s price prediction could tilt into a full-blown bear market.
$200M Wiped Out As Crypto Liquidations Trigger Market-Wide Selloff
The carnage follows today’s massive options expiry event, which traders had been monitoring closely.
A staggering $3.357 billion worth of BTC options with a max pain point at $91,000 expired today, alongside $668 million worth of ETH options with a max pain at $3,050.
Prominent trader TraderThanos is leaning heavily bearish as the 5-day candle closes below $93,000.
“Maybe we get another retest of 93k-93.2k. That would align more perfectly with my current bias. The next leg down takes us to 76k,” he warned.
Thanos highlighted a critical technical breakdown: “This is the first time price is trading under those Moving Averages since June/July of 2023,” referring to the 100 EMA and 100 MA on the 5-day timeframe.
If price stays beneath these moving averages, he expects a drop to the $72,000-$76,000 range.
Adding to the bearish sentiment, the odds of Bitcoin hitting $80,000 by year-end have now surpassed 40% on Polymarket.
Bitcoin Price Prediction: Bulls Must Hold $84K or Face $76K
Bitcoin is trading below all major moving averages on the 4-hour chart, keeping the broader structure tilted bearish.
The 200-MA near $95,000 remains the key resistance that must be reclaimed to restore bullish momentum, but repeated rejections show sellers aggressively defending that zone.
Immediate support sits around $84,000, which stabilized the price during the last flush.
Source: TradingView
However, if Bitcoin fails to bounce strongly from this level, the broader corrective structure could extend toward deeper support near $76,000, where a more meaningful reversal becomes likely.
Bitcoin’s direction remains biased lower as long as it stays capped under $95,000.
A reclaim of that level would signal trend restoration, but until then, indicators point toward continued weakness.
Bitcoin Hyper Presale Surges Past $29M Amid BTC Weakness
As Bitcoin struggles, investors are turning to Bitcoin Hyper ($HYPER), a project working on bringing speed and affordability to Bitcoin’s blockchain for decentralized applications.
Built on Solana-based architecture, Bitcoin Hyper accelerates transaction speeds while slashing network fees.
This enables developers to deploy DeFi platforms, meme coins, and payment solutions that Bitcoin holders can access without abandoning the original blockchain.
The presale has raised over $29 million, with tokens priced at $0.013375 and strong institutional interest driving momentum.
Early investors can benefit from presale pricing at the current $0.013385 price, with some analyses suggesting potential 10-15X ROI by 2026.
To buy $HYPER at its discounted presale price, head to the official Bitcoin Hyper website and link your wallet, such as Best Wallet.
Then connect a wallet (Best Wallet, MetaMask, or Coinbase Wallet) and select payment (ETH, USDT, BNB, SOL, or USDC).You can also use a bank card for instant access.
Crypto analyst Miles Deutscher has issued one of the most forceful bottom calls of this cycle, assigning a 91.5% probability that Bitcoin’s low is already in. In a X thread on December 4, he wrote: “F*ck it. I’m putting my neck on the line here. I’m 91.5% certain that the BTC bottom is in. And if it is, A LOT of people are about to be caught offside.”
Is The Bitcoin Bottom In?
Deutscher bases his conviction on four “pillars”: market reaction to news, the historical behaviour of FUD events, a shift in flows, and an improving global liquidity backdrop. Each pillar is scored in an internal model that culminates in a 91.5/100 bullish reading.
He starts with price behaviour versus headlines. Over recent days, he notes, the market has digested an “influx of bad news” – including renewed Tether FUD, another round of “China banning crypto,” MicroStrategy scrutiny and concerns around a Bank of Japan–driven yen carry trade unwind.
“Despite all this bad news, price rallied,” he writes, calling this “the first time since the major selloff began” that Bitcoin has responded positively to a destructive news cycle. He underscores an old trading adage: “The reaction to news is more important than the news itself. This tells you everything you need to know.”
The second pillar is a systematic look at whether such FUD clusters tend to coincide with local lows. Deutscher says he backtested “every single time Tether, China, BOJ, and Microstrategy FUD entered the market” in a similar way. His conclusion is stark: “Every single time, these FUD events marked a local bottom. Tether FUD = bottom.
China ‘banning’ crypto = bottom. Bank of Japan/carry trade concerns = bottom. Microstrategy FUD = bottom.”
On this basis, his AI model assigns the maximum score of 28/28 to this pillar. He cautions that “in isolation, this factor doesn’t matter much,” but argues that, combined with the first pillar, it “starts to paint a convincing bull case.”
The third pillar is flows, which he calls “the most critical factor (net buy/sell pressure).” For the past weeks, flows were “aggressively negative” with OG whales selling and ETFs dumping. Recently, he argues, this picture has changed. ETF inflows are “starting to stabilise & uptick,” treasury-company holdings remain stable, and “OG whales have stopped relentlessly dumping (this is clear on the orderbooks).” This earns a 22.5/25 score in his model. He adds one key caveat: as long as DATs exist, “there are material risks.”
The fourth pillar is the liquidity and macro environment. Deutscher notes that market liquidity had been tightening for months, but now “things are shifting back toward increased market liquidity,” with global financial conditions “reloosened to near highs.” He highlights “macro tailwinds” and adds that a new, potentially more dovish Fed chair is coming and “QT has now officially ended.” This set of factors receives a 9/10 score in his framework.
Aggregating all four pillars leads to the headline figure: “With all four market pillars taken into account, we arrive at a final score of 91.5/100.”
Deutscher, however, explicitly lists caveats. He points out that US markets “have been on a massive run” and may need to cool off, that DATs “are still seeing some short-term pressure,” and that ETF flows “can flip negative at any time.” His conclusion is probabilistic rather than absolute: “Markets are a game of probabilities, and I think the odds are in favour of the bottom being in – given the extreme FUD we’ve had and the market’s reaction to it.”
Bitcoin is now trading near $89,000 after slipping under $90,000 again, and most large-cap tokens are lower on the day, which keeps the Crypto Fear & Greed Index around 25 and indicates that anxiety has eased only slightly from last week while conviction remains thin and easily shaken by routine headlines.
The seasonal “Santa Claus rally” enters the conversation each December because equity desks track a tendency for late-month strength, yet for digital assets, the calendar effect only matters when liquidity and positioning are prepared to carry bids across sessions rather than fade into the close, which is not the profile this market has shown in recent days.
Bitcoin Price (Source: CoinMarketCap)
Seasonality Needs More Than A Calendar
If a holiday lift is going to matter for crypto, order-book depth on the largest spot pairs needs to rebuild into and after the United States session so that routine headline flurries do not push price through thin ladders, and spreads need to remain tight during moderate selling so execution costs do not sap appetite for adding risk late in the day.
Derivatives should confirm the shift with funding that moderates without relying on squeeze-driven bursts and with a futures basis that settles toward neutral rather than flipping repeatedly, because those signs show that leverage is resetting in a controlled way.
Flows then complete the picture when creations for spot Bitcoin products appear in a steady run instead of one-off prints and when net stablecoin issuance turns higher for more than a session or two, since those patterns show new dollars entering rather than the same capital recycling through a narrower set of venues.
Macro drivers still shape the path into year-end because a firm dollar and higher yields have repeatedly leaned on risk assets, meaning that softer rate expectations would remove a headwind, while any renewed hawkish tone would keep bids cautious and push market makers to carry less inventory through event windows.
Rotation beyond Bitcoin usually follows improved depth in the leader rather than leading it, so a healthier backdrop would show advances broadening from Bitcoin into larger caps only after order books thicken and funding calms.
For desks that watch sentiment, the index near 25 says fear dominates, yet not at the extreme levels seen earlier, which can allow short-lived rebounds on quiet days.
But a durable turn requires evidence that arrives together rather than piecemeal, including deeper books through the U.S. close, steadier funding and basis across multiple sessions, a visible run of ETF creations, and a rise in net stablecoin supply that survives beyond a single headline cycle.
If those pieces align, the case for a December lift improves, and the seasonal story becomes a tailwind rather than a distraction, while in their absence, the market remains one adverse policy remark or liquidity wobble away from another test of support.
The Bitcoin price volatility is once again drawing attention to MicroStrategy, the company whose strategy has become a major market reference point, with billions in accumulated BTC and a track record of aggressive buying during downturns. As traders search for stability in a shaky market, Strategy’s stance is being watched closely for what it might signal about the next phase of BTC’s trend.
Why MicroStrategy’s Next Move Could Redirect Market Momentum
Bitcoin’s recent volatility has put MicroStrategy (MSTR), the largest corporate holder of BTC, in the limelight. Walter Bloomberg has revealed on X that analysts are watching closely to see if the company could influence the cryptocurrency’s price if it sells some of its holdings.
According to JPMorgan, Strategy can avoid forced sales as long as its enterprise value-to-BTC holdings ratio stays above 1.0, which currently stands at 1.13 BTC. However, analysts continue to debunk these claims, accusing JPMorgan of spreading misinformation about market manipulation and the company.
Walter stated that if the ratio remains above this level, BTC markets may stabilize and ease recent market pressure. Due to the market pressure, the firm has slowed its BTC purchases, adding 9,062 BTC last month compared to 134,480 BTC a year ago, reflecting a more cautious accumulation approach amid a broader crypto downturn. Its stock has dropped roughly 42% over the past three months.
Additionally, challenges include the potential exclusion from MSCI indices, which could trigger $8.8 billion in passive fund outflows if index funds are forced to divest. However, MicroStrategy holds a $1.4 billion reserve for dividends and interest, helping it avoid selling its BTC even if the price falls further. In the meantime, there is no proof that MicroStrategy is in danger of liquidation.
How Institutional Behavior Builds A Higher Floor For Bitcoin
In a market speculation, Bitcoin is currently experiencing one of the most significant capital migrations in its history, fueled by institutional adoption. Analyst Matthew noted that the current BTC market cycle from 2022 to 2025 has already absorbed an unprecedented amount of new capital, surpassing all previous BTC cycles. This growth is a reflection of the market’s maturity and the ecosystem’s innovative approach to liquidity through regulated instruments.
Furthermore, the network has incorporated more than $732 billion in fresh capital in the current cycle, surpassing the $388 billion that was injected during the 2018 to 2022 cycle. At that time, the surge helped push BTC market capitalization to an all-time high record of $1.1 trillion, a metric that indicates a much higher aggregate cost base for new institutional investors.
Meanwhile, the total settlement volume in the decentralized BTC protocol was approximately $6.9 trillion in just 90 days. Despite this, the number of active on-chain entities dropped from 240,000 to 170,000 per day, which is a reflection of liquidity migration of capital flows into spot ETFs.
Bitcoin has been struggling to build momentum in recent weeks, and the return of cash into the system is raising questions about whether this could be the moment that changes the tone of the crypto market. That growing sense of anticipation has already started to show up in prices, with the total crypto market cap climbing more than $250 billion from its $3.016 trillion low on December 2.
What Happened: The Liquidity Injection And Why It Matters
After officially bringing its multi-year quantitative tightening (QT) program to an end, the central bank followed up with a $13.5 billion overnight repo operation, funneled through the New York Fed. Banks brought $13.5 billion in Treasuries to the Fed, the Fed accepted all of it, and instantly injected $13.5 billion of fresh reserves into the system.
The move, which is the second-largest liquidity injection since the COVID-19 crisis, effectively puts an end the steady shrinkage of bank reserves that has persisted for years, easing pressure on short-term funding markets and signaling a more accommodative liquidity environment.
The crypto market responded almost instantly. A handful of major assets began turning green within hours of the injection, with Bitcoin leading the charge with an instant break above $92,000.
The influx was visible at a macro level as well: the total crypto market cap climbed from a December 2 low of $3.016 trillion to $3.269 trillion by December 4. A gain of more than $250 billion in under 48 hours
What Investors Should Watch Next
Ending QT leads to better liquidity and often create a bullish environment for equities and other riskier investments like cryptocurrencies. However, although a single liquidity event does not guarantee a sustained multi-month rally, this injection stands out not just for its size but for what it represents.
In a CNBC interview, Fundstrat’s Tom Lee stated that the Fed’s decision to stop QT will be a turning point for the cryptocurrency market. Lee pointed out that the last time the Fed ended QT, the market rose about 17% within three weeks.
The previous time the Fed brought quantitative tightening to a stop was in July 2019, roughly a year after it began reducing its balance sheet. In the three weeks that followed, the S&P 500 climbed about 5%. Bitcoin’s also initially rallied in the same period, but its strongest reaction came months after, towards late 2019 and early 2020.
Fear still hangs over altcoin season, but the sharp edge of panic has softened. The Crypto Fear and Greed Index is now 25, a modest recovery from November’s plunge near 10, yet the mood remains unsettled, and traders continue to move with hesitation rather than conviction.
Altcoins move inside that same heavy climate. Most large names sit in the red today, liquidity stays present, but flows lean toward defense, and new money prefers short-dated trades instead of long commitments.
Against that background, Zcash is one of the few popular tokens in positive territory, while Ethereum, Solana and Hyperliquid track the downtrend, which gives a clean snapshot of where capital still experiments and where it pulls back.
Bitcoin And Sentiment After November’s Shock
Bitcoin continues to dictate the tone. Derivatives screens show a reduction in leverage across both long and short positions, while spot flows lean toward sellers who continue to trim exposure after several weeks of steady declines.
Price action carries the look of a market still searching for stability, not one ready for a quick reversal.
Bitcoin Price (Source: CoinMarketCap)
Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid Track The Pullback
Major altcoins follow that direction. Ethereum is trading near $3,090 after falling by roughly 2.5% in 24 hours, with order book activity showing more supply than demand at current levels. Solana sits near $134 after a 5.5% drop, extending the cooling that began once traders reduced exposure to high beta assets.
Hyperliquid is trading around $31, down by about 8%, and activity on its perpetual pairs has slowed compared with the pace seen in early November. These moves together show how broad the retracement remains, even as volatility cools relative to last week.
Zcash Holds A Bounce After Its November Peak
Zcash breaks from the trend. ZEC is trading near $384, up by about 10% in 24 hours, marking one of the few gains across large liquid names. The token had fallen steadily from its November peak near $700, yet recent market data show more active positioning at current levels and enough liquidity across venues to support a modest rebound.
Zcash@Zcash shared a series of updates covering key developments across the ecosystem. Highlights include:
• @ZcashFoundation released its Q3 2025 report, highlighting engineering progress and the launch of the Shielded Aid Initiative to support privacy-preserving digital aid… pic.twitter.com/Nc06Yo759I
The move does not form a new upward trend on its own, but it demonstrates the way privacy focused tokens can draw interest during quieter, defensive phases when traders search for assets with a historical pattern of occasional outperformance.
What This Phase Means For Altcoin Season
The current market still lacks the conditions for a broad altcoin season. Sentiment has improved from last week’s extreme lows, yet positioning remains conservative, and flows continue to concentrate in larger, more liquid assets.
Until Bitcoin can stabilize over a longer stretch and macro uncertainty eases, rotation is likely to stay narrow and sporadic. For now, the market sits in a phase where isolated tokens can rise on their own dynamics, but the overall environment still leans toward caution rather than a full risk recovery.
Wall Street is preparing to welcome a major player to the New York Stock Exchange as Twenty One Capital moves toward its public debut.
This Bitcoin price prediction examines what the landmark listing could mean for BTC’s trajectory amid ongoing market volatility.
Historic Bitcoin Treasury Firm Goes Public
Bitcoin treasury firm Twenty One Capital, Inc., has received shareholder approval for its business combination with Cantor Equity Partners (CEP).
The transaction is expected to close around December 8, with the merged entity’s Class A common stock anticipated to begin trading on December 9 under the ticker symbol XXI.
“Game on. See you at the NYSE on Tuesday,” Twenty One CEO and co-founder Jack Mallers posted on X.
In July, Twenty One Capital announced it would hold about 43,500 BTC, currently worth approximately $4 billion, when it begins trading, following an addition of 5,800 BTC from stablecoin giant Tether.
This positions the firm as potentially the third-largest corporate Bitcoin holder, trailing only Strategy and Bitcoin miner MARA.
Twenty One, which was first announced in April, is a collaborative venture between Tether, Bitfinex, Cantor Fitzgerald, and SoftBank.
The company’s name refers to Bitcoin’s total possible supply of 21 million coins, with about 19.95 million BTC mined to date.
Bitcoin Price Prediction: BTC Eyes $81K Drop as Sellers Dominate $94K Resistance
Bitcoin is showing signs of weakening after failing to break through the $94,000 rejection block, which has acted as a strong ceiling throughout the past month. The chart clearly shows a sequence of lower highs forming right beneath this level, indicating that sellers are still in control.
Even though price briefly formed a higher high on the most recent bounce, momentum quickly faded, and the market slipped back below the key mid-range structure.
Source: TradingView
The bullish double-bottom that launched the prior rally has now run into resistance strong enough to stall the trend, and the current lower-high structure points toward exhaustion on the buyer side.
If Bitcoin loses strength below $90,000, the next support sits around $87,000. However, the major downside target remains the liquidity pocket between $82,000 and $81,400.
Unless price reclaims $94,000 with conviction, the structure favors a downside sweep toward $81,000 before any meaningful rebound materializes.
New Dogecoin-Themed Meme Coin Raises $4.2 Million in Presale
As Bitcoin consolidates, Maxi Doge ($MAXI) is surging in popularity as an Ethereum-based meme coin fusing gym-bro culture with high-leverage futures trading utility.
Priced at just $0.0002715 in its ongoing presale, the token has raised over $4.2 million, drawing interest from whales amid Dogecoin’s momentum.
Audited by Coinsult and SOLIDProof, $MAXI enters its final presale stages with imminent price hikes before exchange listings.
Bitcoin is holding firmly above the $92,000 level after several days of relief and a stronger-than-expected rebound across the market. Yet despite the positive price action, analysts remain deeply divided. Some interpret this move as a classic relief rally within a broader downtrend, warning that the macro structure still favors a deeper correction.
Others see the recent recovery as the first sign that Bitcoin may be stabilizing and preparing for another bullish phase. The uncertainty reflects the conflicting signals coming from both derivatives and spot markets.
Adding fuel to the discussion, new on-chain data from Arkham shows that Matrixport withdrew 3,805 BTC—worth approximately $352.5 million—from Binance within the last 24 hours. This is a significant development, as Matrixport is one of Asia’s largest crypto financial service platforms, founded by Jihan Wu, the co-founder of Bitmain. The firm provides institutional-grade investment products, lending, trading, and asset management solutions to high-net-worth clients and funds across the region.
Large withdrawals from exchanges by institutions like Matrixport often signal accumulation, reduced selling pressure, or repositioning for custody and long-term holding. Combined with Bitcoin’s stabilization above $92K, this data adds an important layer of complexity to the current market outlook.
Institutional Positioning and a Changing Macro Landscape
Matrixport’s withdrawal of 3,805 BTC from Binance signals a potentially meaningful shift in institutional positioning. Large entities rarely move this size of capital without intention. Such withdrawals typically imply reduced selling pressure and a preference for custody over exchange liquidity, often interpreted as quiet accumulation.
For a firm managing billions in client assets, reallocating Bitcoin off exchanges suggests growing confidence in medium-term price stability or an expectation of improving market conditions.
This move arrives at a pivotal moment in the global macro environment. The Federal Reserve has ended Quantitative Tightening (QT), marking a major transition from liquidity withdrawal to a more accommodative stance. Historically, the end of QT has preceded periods of asset reflation, as systemic liquidity begins to stabilize.
At the same time, Japanese bond yields have surged, signaling stress in one of the world’s most influential funding markets. A spike in Japanese yields often triggers global liquidity adjustments, particularly through the carry trade, which can ultimately redirect capital toward risk assets—including Bitcoin.
Additionally, markets expect the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates soon, further easing financial conditions. Lower rates weaken the dollar, reduce funding costs, and typically stimulate inflows into alternative and high-beta assets.
In this environment of softening monetary policy and rising liquidity, Matrixport’s aggressive Bitcoin accumulation could reflect growing institutional conviction that the worst of the downturn is behind us—and that Bitcoin may be entering a more favorable macro phase.
BTC Price Analysis: Testing Recovery Momentum
Bitcoin’s daily chart shows the market attempting to stabilize after the sharp decline that pushed price toward the mid-$80,000s. The rebound into the $91K–$93K zone marks the first meaningful recovery attempt, but the structure still reflects caution.
BTC remains below the 50-day and 100-day SMAs, which have both started to slope downward, signaling that the broader trend has not yet shifted back in favor of the bulls. Until Bitcoin reclaims these moving averages with strong volume, the market will likely see this move as a relief rally rather than a confirmed reversal.
Price is currently consolidating above the 200-day SMA, a level that often acts as a long-term trend gauge. Holding this region is essential; losing it would risk a deeper drop toward earlier support zones near $82K–$84K. Volume activity during the bounce shows some improvement, yet it remains far below the levels seen during the late-October peak, suggesting that buyers are cautious and large players are not fully engaged.
The chart also shows a clear lower-high structure forming since September, confirming the bearish pressure that has dominated the last several weeks. For sentiment to shift decisively, BTC must break above $95K and rebuild momentum toward the psychological $100K mark. Until then, volatility and hesitation remain the defining features of this recovery.
Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com
Maximum Physical Privacy and Security as a Crypto Whale: OpSec Strategies Against Physical Threats & Scams
In recent years, physical attacks on cryptocurrency holders have surged dramatically. According to data tracked by Bitcoin security expert Jameson Lopp, reported physical attacks on Bitcoin and crypto holders increased by 169% in just six months in 2025, with dozens of violent incidents including kidnappings, home invasions, and armed robberies.
Lopp maintains a comprehensive list of over 200 known physical attacks since 2014, ranging from $5 wrench attacks (where attackers use physical coercion to force transfers) to organized kidnappings involving torture.
As a crypto whale — someone holding significant digital assets — you are a high-value target. Criminals know crypto transfers are irreversible, making you more attractive than traditional wealthy individuals. Beyond digital hacks, threats now include real-world violence and sophisticated scams like pig butchering that can lead to doxxing, luring, or physical meetings.
This article focuses on physical OpSec (operational security) to maximize privacy and safety in everyday life, drawing from best practices recommended by experts like Lopp and security firms.
Adopt a Low-Profile Lifestyle: The Foundation of Physical Privacy
The best defense is not being targeted in the first place.
Never discuss your crypto holdings publicly, at parties, or even with close friends unless absolutely necessary. Loose lips lead to targeting.
Avoid all visible signals of wealth or crypto involvement: No Bitcoin bumper stickers, conference lanyards, luxury watches/cars that stand out, or social media posts showing opulent lifestyles.
Dress modestly, drive common vehicles, and live in unassuming neighborhoods. Blend in completely.
Remove online traces: Scrub old posts, use pseudonyms, avoid linking real identity to wallets or addresses.
Fortify Your Home and Personal Environment
Your residence is the most likely attack vector.
Install layered physical barriers: Reinforced doors with deadbolts, shatter-resistant window film, motion-activated floodlights, visible security cameras, and alarm systems monitored 24/7.
Create natural deterrents: Thorny bushes under windows, fenced property with locked gates, no easy climbing points.
Build a safe room (panic room) with a solid-core door, independent communication (satellite phone or hardline), supplies, and a weapon if legal/trained.
Store seed phrases and hardware wallets in bolted safes or bank safety deposit boxes — never all in one place.
Consider professional security assessments or guarded communities if your holdings justify it.
Design Your Wallet Setup to Defensively Against the $5 Wrench Attack
The classic $5 wrench attack — where an attacker threatens violence until you hand over keys — cannot be fully prevented, but it can be made impractical.
Use multisignature (multisig) wallets requiring multiple keys from geographically separated locations (e.g., different cities or countries). Even under duress, you physically cannot comply quickly, forcing attackers to keep you hostage longer and increasing their risk.
Distribute keys/backups across trusted family, institutions, or secure vaults in multiple jurisdictions.
Avoid “duress PINs” or decoy wallets — attackers may test them or continue violence if they suspect more funds.
Consider collaborative custody services (e.g., Casa, AnchorWatch) that add institutional keys and emergency lockdowns.
Daily Movement and Travel OpSec
Vary routines: Routes to work, gym times, etc. Predictability enables ambushes.
Maintain situational awareness: Head on swivel, avoid phone distraction in public, note tailing vehicles/people.
Travel low-key: Use rideshares or rentals instead of personal luxury vehicles; fly commercial in economy if possible; never post travel plans in real-time.
For high-risk areas (e.g., certain countries with known crypto kidnappings), hire executive protection or avoid altogether.
Carry minimal identifying info; use burner phones for sensitive communications.
OpSec often comes into play in public settings. For example, if members of your team are discussing work-related matters at a nearby lunch spot, during a conference, or over a beer, odds are that someone could overhear. As they say, loose lips can sink ships, so make sure you don’t discuss any sensitive company information while out in public.
A lot of OpSec missteps can be avoided by being more aware of your surroundings and the context in which you are speaking: what you’re saying, where you are, who you’re speaking to, and who might overhear. It’s a good idea to go over the “no-no’s” for your specific company during onboarding and to remind employees of them periodically.
Counter Social Engineering, Phone Scams, and Pig Butchering Schemes
Many physical attacks begin with doxxing via scams.
Phone scams / SIM swapping: Use authentication app 2FA (not SMS), put PINs/passwords on mobile accounts, screen unknown calls ruthlessly, never give out verification codes.
To lock down your SIM, contact your mobile phone carrier. That is a standard that has been tested by telecommunications operators in the US, the UK, Poland, and China — also check out this tweet and this article. You just need to insist on it or visit the head office, and I’m sure that the support manager on the phone mayn’t know about it! Ask them to NEVER make changes to your phone number/SIM unless you physically show up to a specific store with at minimum two forms of identification. This (should) prevent hackers from calling up AT&T or T-Mobile or Vodafone, claiming to be you, and asking them to port your phone number to a new phone.
Get countermeasures in place. The last step of operational security is to create and implement a plan to eliminate threats and mitigate risks. This could include updating your hardware, creating new policies regarding sensitive data, or training employees on sound security practices and company policies. Countermeasures should be straightforward and simple.
Pig Butchering Schemes
These long-con scams build fake romantic or friendship relationships online, then push “lucrative” crypto investments on fake platforms.
Red flags: Unsolicited contact on dating/social apps, rapid affection, steering conversation to crypto, pushing specific (fake) platforms.
Rule: Never invest with or send crypto to anyone you met online. Period. If someone disappears when you refuse to invest, it confirms the scam.
General rule: Any unsolicited investment “opportunity,” recovery scam, or urgency play is fraud.
Additional Physical OpSec Tips for Crypto Whales (Updated for Late 2025 Threats)
We’re talking home invasions with intruders posing as delivery drivers (San Francisco $11M robbery on Nov 22), street kidnappings (Bangkok, Bali, Ukraine), carjackings forcing on-the-spot transfers (Oxford), and straight-up torture/murder when victims can’t or won’t pay (Dubai double murder, multiple Russian cases). The pattern is clear: organized crews are now routinely use delivery disguises, follow targets from public places, grab people off the street, or hit homes with overwhelming force and torture.
The threat model has upgraded from opportunistic thugs to professional kidnapping rings.
Delivery & Package Paranoia
2025’s #1 new vector is criminals posing as FedEx/Uber Eats/Amazon drivers.
Never accept unsolicited deliveries. Route all hardware wallets, seed backup plates, anything valuable to PO Boxes, private mailboxes (e.g., UPS Store), or secure coworking spaces, or lawyer/accountant offices.
Install a package locker or secure drop box outside your perimeter that doesn’t require you to open the door.
Use doorbell cams + intercom. If a delivery person shows up you didn’t order, do not open the door — ever. Tell them to leave it outside the gate or return later.
Bonus: Have mail forwarded through re-mailing services (e.g., Traveling Mailbox or Earth Class Mail) so your real address never appears on anything.
Thief posing as a delivery man steals $11mn in crypto from a man in San Francisco, after tying him up and pulling a gun.
Data Broker Scrubbing + Digital Footprint Eradication
Most victims who got hit hard were doxxed through basic OSINT.
Pay for professional deletion services (DeleteMe, Kanary, OneRep, or 360 Privacy) — do it quarterly. The average whale appears on 70–120 data broker sites with home address, phone, relatives, property records.
Remove your home from Google Street View (request blur) and Zillow, Redfin, etc.
If you’re really paranoid (you should be), buy your next house through an anonymous land trust or Wyoming/LLC structure so your name isn’t on public property records.
Duress Planning That Actually Works
Decoy wallets are good, but pros now expect them and will keep torturing. Real solution:
Have a very believable “main” hot wallet with $50k–$250k (enough to satisfy most crews).
Real stack in geo-distributed multisig that literally cannot be moved without keys in 2–3 different countries and a 7–30 day timelock on large amounts.
Practice your duress story: “That’s everything, I promise — the rest is in a multisig with my ex-wife in Canada and my lawyer in Switzerland. It takes weeks to move.”
Safe room with ballistic blanket/door, satellite phone or VOIP line independent of home power, and a weapon if you’re trained.
Family & Staff OpSec (The Weakest Link 90% of the Time)
Most tortured victims in 2025 were attacked together with spouses/kids/parents because the attackers knew the whole family would be home.
Your spouse and adult children must be fully understand OpSec — no bragging, no crypto stickers, no “my husband is loaded in Bitcoin” comments at school events.
Domestic staff (cleaners, nannies, gardeners) are the #1 leak vector. Vet them like you’re hiring a CIA asset — background checks, NDAs, never let them go if they ever ask about crypto.
Give family pre-agreed code words for phone calls (AI voice cloning + fake kidnapping calls are now common).
Conference & Travel Hardening (You’re Being Watched)
Bitcoin 2025 in Vegas and every major conference now has professional spotters.
Book flights/hotels under alias or corporate name.
Never post that you’re going until you’re already home.
Use cash or privacy.com virtual cards for everything on-site.
Travel with a “burner” phone and laptop that have zero access to real keys.
If you’re a known whale, hire close protection for the duration — it’s $2–4k/day and worth every penny.
The Nuclear Options (For 9-Figure+ Holders)
Relocate to a truly safe jurisdiction (UAE, Singapore, Switzerland, or certain gated compounds in Puerto Rico/Cayman).
Full-time executive protection team + armored vehicle with driver.
Collaborative custody with institutions that have armed response protocols (e.g., AnchorWatch + private security integration).
During and After an Incident
Life > Bitcoin. If attacked, comply as needed but use multisig delays to your advantage (“I need my partner in another country”).
Have emergency lockdown features enabled on wallets/apps.
Report incidents to authorities and communities (e.g., contribute to Lopp’s list) to help others.
Have inheritance/dead-man-switch planning so funds aren’t lost if the worst happens.
Final Thoughts
Bottom line for end of 2025: The game has permanently changed. The crews doing these hits are no longer random junkies — they’re transnational gangs who research targets for months, use fake delivery uniforms bought on Telegram, and are willing to waterboard you while your kids watch if they think you have more. Silence, geographic distribution of keys, and making yourself an annoyingly hard target are now non-negotiable if you want to keep both your bitcoin and your fingernails.
Maximum physical privacy as a crypto whale requires treating yourself like a high-net-worth individual in witness protection — constant vigilance, multiple defense layers, and acceptance that perfect security doesn’t exist, only making attacks too costly or difficult. The combination of strict OpSec, physical fortifications, geographically distributed multisig, and scam paranoia has kept many whales safe despite rising threats.
Implement these gradually, starting with the basics: shut up about your stack, secure your home, and your home, and distribute your keys. Your wealth is freedom — don’t let poor OpSec turn it into a liability. Stay safe!
If you want to support my work, please, consider donating me:
0x1191b7d163bde5f51d4d2c1ac969d514fb4f4c62 or officercia.eth — all supported EVM chains;
17Ydx9m7vrhnx4XjZPuGPMqrhw3sDviNTU or bc1q75zgp5jurtm96nltt9c9kzjnrt33uylr8uvdds — Bitcoin;
If you enjoy my content and want to help keep it ad-free, please consider supporting my work through donations. Your contributions will allow me to dedicate more time to crafting in-depth articles and sharing even more valuable insights.
A combined obituary for TradFi’s (mis)understanding of bitcoin’s underlying value.
This article was written in response to a statement made by European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde in an October 7, 2025, interview, where she claimed that bitcoin has “no intrinsic” or “underlying value.”
When Christine Lagarde says Bitcoin has no “intrinsic” or “underlying value,” she’s (likely) referring to the fact that it — unlike an equity — doesn’t produce a cash flow. The classic critique that follows is that it’s “purely speculative”, meaning it’s only worth what someone else is willing to buy it for in the future.
She further dismisses Bitcoin as a form of “digital gold” and seems to suggest that physical gold is somehow different — presumably because she assigns it value for its use cases beyond its function as money (if I had to guess).
To say that Bitcoin doesn’t have a cash flow is factually correct — but as nonsensical as saying “language” or “mathematics” have no cash flow.
One could, of course, counter Lagarde’s statement by appealing to the subjective value proposition — arguing that there’s no such thing as intrinsic value, since all value is subjective, and that anything can only ever be worth what someone else is willing to pay for it in the future.
But instead of taking that route, I’ll go the roundabout (and more entertaining) way of showing why she’s not only wrong, but also inconsistent by her own logic.
Let’s start with gold and the idea that something supposedly has “intrinsic value” because it has a use case beyond its function as money — to get that out of the way.
Gold
We’ll start with a forum excerpt from Satoshi themselves:
The entire point of money is to be one step removed from bartering — to serve as a neutral medium that communicates the underlying economic reality between supply and demand in an economy, allowing participants to make maximally informed decisions.
For this reason, throughout history, the evolution of money has consistently trended toward what cannot be easily recreated at will. The reason is simple: it’s within everyone’s self-interest, and the economy as a whole (as we will see), that the money being used and accepted cannot be diluted.
If gold were assumed for a moment to be absolutely scarce and used solely as money, the price of an apple becomes a pure function of supply and demand. The price, expressed in gold, could only change if the real supply or demand for apples changed. In this setup, all market participants are maximally informed and economic reality is upheld.
Apple price = f(Apple supply, Apple demand)
If, however, gold all of a sudden gained demand for some other purpose, such as being used for jewellery, the dynamics change. The price of an apple now becomes a function not only of the supply and demand for apples, but also the jewellery demand, as it’s causing a change in the denominator (money) itself. The result is a less-than-ideal form of money, where economic reality is distorted and market participants are presented with compromised information.
Apple price = f(Apple supply, Apple demand, Jewellery demand)
Note that this is materially different from a setup where, as in the real economy, billions of participants want billions of different things while still using the same money.
Money is merely the measuring stick, which means that the demand for bananas isn’t going to affect the price of apples just because both prices are expressed in the same unit of account. What is going to distort prices is if people start demanding the good being used as money for something other than its monetary function.
The irony here, of course, is that gold’s supposed “usefulness” — beyond money — its role in jewellery or industry — which supposedly makes it an exception to the rule of having underlying value, actually makes it less perfect as money. By having a non-monetary use, gold introduces an additional demand parameter into what’s meant to be a neutral measuring stick.
The ideal money, as Satoshi pointed out, would be a kind of “grey metal” — something with no other purpose than being perfect money itself. That “grey metal” is, of course, Bitcoin.
Let’s now move on to cash flows — the main topic of discussion whenever TradFi talks about “underlying” or “intrinsic” value.
After all, many of the same people who point out that Bitcoin doesn’t have any aren’t as internally conflicted as Lagarde, and extend the same judgment to gold (that it doesn’t have intrinsic value)— which, at the very least, is a more consistent position.
Cash flows
Last year, Meta (Facebook), Google, and Amazon reported combined cash flows of roughly $160 billion. If someone asked Lagarde whether these equities had an underlying value, she would of course say yes. Each company sits on billion-dollar assets and billion-dollar expected future cash flows that can be discounted to generate an equity valuation.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, has no comparable cash flows to speak of — no disagreement there.
But before we go further, let’s ask: Where do those cash flows actually come from? In other words, what is the driver of those cash flows fromMeta, Google, and Amazon?
We’ve all used Facebook. It offers a global platform for people to connect, message, and share. Its revenue comes from selling ads on top of user attention. Why do people use Facebook? Because everyone else does. Because it offers the best experience. It’s a social network, meaning every new user adds value to everyone else.
What about Google? Same logic. It’s the world’s leading search engine — the front door of the internet. It also monetises through targeted advertising. Why do you use Google instead of Yahoo or Bing? Because everyone else does. The more data it gathers, the better it gets for everyone. Another network effect (often leading to winner-take-all outcomes).
Amazon? Same principle, different domain. It’s the default marketplace of the world, connecting buyers and sellers on a global scale. Amazon profits from subscriptions and logistics fees. Consumers use it because every supplier is there; suppliers use it because every consumer is there. Every new participant makes the network more useful. It started with books — now it sells everything.
Now, imagine each of these companies woke up one morning after a collective bump to the head, decided profit was overrated, and poured their fortunes into an endowment run entirely by an AI workforce — keeping the networks running exactly as before, just without the monetisation.
Shareholder value would immediately drop to zero.
But what about the network? Would people still use Facebook, Google and Amazon? Of course!
Because the underlying value to the users was never the company itself — it was the network it monetised (which they had no other way of accessing without going through that monetisation). The fact that the network now costs nothing or very little to use wouldn’t make it less valuable for them, now would it?
The equity value and the network value are two different things.
The Bitcoin Company
Now, imagine another startup with a single vision: “We’re going to build the best money in the world.”
Its service is to launch a global network for value transfer and storage, promising a monetary asset with a fixed supply of 21 million units forever — no dilution, no exceptions (pinky promise). The monetisation model: small transaction fees, 10x lower than competitors.
We call it “The Bitcoin Company”.
Imagine it miraculously gained some early traction. Why would people continue or grow interested in using it? Well, because more and more people does. And as they do, both the equity value of those owning the company (as they collect fees) and the network value to the users would grow.
There you’d have your cash flows.
Ironically, this is the same “business model” that underpins the central banking system, only they defaulted on their original promise. By positioning themselves as issuers atop the fiat monetary network, central banks and megabanks monetise it through two layers.
At the base lies the fiat monetary network, consisting of state-backed money. Central banks monetise this layer by issuing the very units the network runs on and indirectly financing government deficits. Above them, megabanks monetise the same network through credit creation, earning profits from interest on loans, and now increasingly from stablecoins (which is like credit on top of credit.).
Lagarde insists stablecoins are “different” because she views them as network expanders that amplify the monetary network she controls. Just as Facebook’s advertising revenue grows with its user base, the spread of stablecoins enlarges the euro monetary network, giving central banks greater room for monetary expansion.
From her perspective, this expansion of units as the network grows functions like “cash flow” in the business model of central banking — and, in her eyes, that’s what constitutes its underlying value.
The fiat monetary network stack. Stablecoins has the potential to expand the fiat monetary network.
Now imagine the same twist: the Bitcoin Company dissolves. No CEO. No board. No office, anymore. The equity value and the cash flows immediately go to zero, but the Bitcoin Network remains —operations henceforth run without rulers (according to some “decentralised consensus protocol” dreamt up one night by some mysterious entity called Satoshi).
Ask yourself: would that make the network more or less valuable?
To be clear — we’ve just removed all counterparty risk. No late-night CEO tweets. No offices to raid. No conflict of interest. No Coldplay scandals.
The network just became (1) even cheaper to use, and (2) even the tiniest worry about that pinky promise was just erased (which, to be fair, you probably should have been pretty worried about).
So yes, from the user’s perspective, the network just became more valuable.
Equity value vs Network value
Christine Lagarde simply hasn’t done the intellectual groundwork needed to understand what she’s critiquing. Like so many others before her, she’s mistaking equity value (which generates cash flows) for the network value — without recognising the path dependency between them: there would be no cash flows without the network in the first place (!)
The wrong question: What is the equity value of the company monetising the network? The right question: What is the network’s value to the users?
In other words:
What is the value of being able to speak with anyone in the world, for free, instantly, across borders and cultures? (Facebook)
What is the value of instantly accessing the world’s knowledge? (Google)
What is the value of finding, comparing, and receiving any product from anywhere on Earth, delivered in a day? (Amazon)
What is the value of moving your money — across borders and across time? Perhaps even more refined, what is the value of undistorted price signals in an economy? (Bitcoin)
The Bitcoin network isn’t valuable despite not being a company — it’s more valuable because it isn’t.
Unlike Meta, Google, or Amazon — whose networks power applications and commerce —the Bitcoin network provides the monetary foundation beneath them all. Its total addressable market is every transaction on Earth.
Now, you could try to build a straw man argument by claiming that the Bitcoin network isn’t truly a monetary network, since it isn’t “widely accepted” by your standards. The problem with that line of reasoning is (1) it implies that nothing new could ever emerge under the sun unless the entire world agreed on it in advance (pretty unreasonable), and (2) it would, by your own logic, require you to dismiss over 90% of the world’s sovereign currencies as money — including the Canadian dollar, the Swedish krona, and the Swiss franc — since Bitcoin’s market capitalisation already surpasses them many times over and would likely be accepted as payment by far more people globally.
The Bitcoin Network ranks 8 out of 108 fiat currencies. Source.
Returning to the initial claim, to say that Bitcoin doesn’t have a cash flow is factually correct — but as nonsensical as saying “language” or “mathematics” have no cash flow. True enough, not in themselves — but they’re indispensable tools for creating everything that does.
In fact, if the money you’re using did offer cash flows (an interest rate yield), that would be a sign you were dealing with defective money.
Let me explain why in the simplest terms:
Suppose the total money supply is $100,000, and ten depositors each place $10,000 into a bank. The bank offers them 4% interest and lends out the full amount to borrowers at 5%. After a year, the borrowers owe $105,000 in total (principal plus interest).
Do you see the problem?
The borrowers owe more money than exists in the entire system. Where does the extra $5000 come from?
No amount of productivity or hard work can solve this mathematical impossibility. The only thing that can is the creation of new money to fill the gap. For the system to keep running, the money supply would have to grow at par with, or faster than, the interest rate being offered to depositors. It’s the only way the math can work out. That means the supposed “cash flow” being offered in the form of an interest rate is being paid for by diluting the very money it’s denominated in, which is the very definition of a Ponzi scheme (!)
The result is a lesser form of money — one that must constantly lose value for the math to work out.
It would now appear we’re at a paradoxical intersection: on one hand, Lagarde and others dismiss Bitcoin’s underlying value on the grounds that it has no cash flow; on the other, we can now see that if it did have a cash flow, it would by definition be flawed money.
It therefore seems that the very trait that makes Bitcoin perfect money — its inability to conjure fake cash flows out of thin air — is precisely what’s being used to dismiss it by those defending a system that only functions by doing exactly that. So how do we work this out?
Here lies the crucial insight that Lagarde, and many others, fail to grasp: something can possess underlying or intrinsic value in a roundabout way.
The roundabout way
Take car insurance (or any other insurance policy, for that matter). Judged in isolation, it has a negative expected value — you pay premiums every month, and it’s structurally priced so that you’ll never get rich buying infinite insurance policies (if that were possible, everyone would).
But when you combine the policy with the car you own and depend on — the picture changes. You’ve now removed the risk of potential ruin. Evaluated together, you now have a situation where the insurance policy explodes in value (generating a positive cash flow) precisely when you need it most — when the car breaks down. Viewed as a whole, you end up with a positive geometric return (that is, underlying value through the omission of ruin) when the accident eventually occurs, which, odds are, it eventually will.
Cash flow/usefulness of an insurance policy.
To illustrate this more practically, consider a scenario where a person depends on their car to get to work. Without insurance, a breakdown might mean they can’t afford the repair, resulting in the loss of both the car and their income. With insurance, however, the repair is covered, allowing them to maintain their income stream. In this way, the insurance policy has value far beyond its direct payoff, as it preserves the ability to keep generating cash flow.
Y axis = Cash flow from income.
This, as we shall now understand, is the entire logic behind money in the first place — and we could just as easily swap the insurance policy for a stack of cash (which is really just a more universal, unspecific form of insurance). You save money not because it generates a cash flow, but because it gives you future optionality and explodes in usefulness when you need it most, allowing you to quickly recover and adapt when the unexpected occurs.
This is not speculative behavior. The reason you hold money is not because you’re engaging in what critics accuse you of — the “greater fool” prediction business, but precisely because you want to avoid it! You hold money not because you’re making a prediction of the future, but because you know you can’t, and therefore want to be ready for whatever it brings. After all, why would you pay for car insurance if you knew you would never need it?
The “greater fool” argument collapses under closer scrutiny because it assumes every individual faces the same circumstances, preferences, and time horizons. It treats the economy as a zero-sum game in which one person’s prudence must come at another’s expense. But reality is the opposite: what’s rational for each participant depends on their unique position in time and space.
Someone sitting on a vast reserve of cash might rationally choose to exchange part of it for a new car with a better A/C that improve their comfort and quality of life. Someone else, with less savings or living in a colder climate, might rationally do the precise opposite — defer a new car purchase and strengthen their savings buffer. Both are acting rationally within their own context. The latter isn’t a “greater fool” for buying the money the former is selling for a car. They’re both winners! Otherwise they wouldn’t agree to the trade in the first place!
Markets exist precisely because we don’t share the same circumstances or needs. The value of money, then, isn’t born from finding a “greater fool”, but from coordinating billions of rational actors, each seeking to balance their own lives in their own way.
We can extend this observation to all the networks and protocols mentioned earlier. Whether it’s a monetary network, a social network, mathematics, or language — each derives its value in a roundabout way that continues to fly over the heads of people like Lagarde, whose job ironically is supposed to be an expert on these things.
Login
