Has the four-year cycle "failed"? Seven seasoned crypto market veterans analyze in depth what this curse is all about.

Halving, supply reduction, bull markets, altcoin seasons—this set of logic passed down since Bitcoin's inception has almost become the belief system supporting the entire crypto market. But the performance in 2024 has broken this spell.

After the April 2024 halving, Bitcoin surged from $60,000 to a new high of $126,000, which looks impressive. But how does it compare historically? The gains in previous cycles were much larger. More painfully, altcoins have shown little sign of life, and market excitement isn't as intense as in previous years.

This has sparked a repeatedly discussed question: Does the four-year cycle really still exist?

We invited seven seasoned industry practitioners to discuss this topic. Their backgrounds vary—some manage $1 billion funds, some are on-chain data analysts, some are veteran miners, and others are early investors. Their perspectives form a three-dimensional picture of the current market state.

What is the “Four-Year Cycle”? Digging Deeper to See Clearly

First, we need to understand what exactly we are talking about.

Traditional theory is simple: Bitcoin halves approximately every four years, reducing new supply, changing miner behavior, and leading to long-term price increases—that's the most straightforward logic.

But listening carefully to these experts, the story becomes more complex.

Some investors believe that the four-year cycle actually reflects the U.S. election cycle and the global central banks' liquidity injection rhythm. Four years ≈ U.S. election cycle, and also ≈ central bank expansion cycles. From this perspective, halving is just a surface phenomenon; the underlying driver is macro liquidity.

This perspective is crucial. Before spot ETF approvals, Bitcoin was mainly driven by retail investors; halving seemed like a “magic number.” But now? With $500 billion of institutional funds already flowing into the market early, Bitcoin has become a macro asset—more akin to gold.

In this sense, the four-year cycle is evolving from “mathematical supply law” to “liquidity narrative.”

The Power of Cycles Is Diminishing, But Diminishing Is a Law

The question arises: Is this cycle truly failing, or is it evolving?

Most people's answer is the latter. But the reasons are interesting:

First is the marginal diminishing effect. The market is growing. When Bitcoin's market cap was only a few billion dollars, new funds could easily push exponential growth; now, with a market cap in the trillions, doubling requires astronomical amounts of capital. The supply effect of halving is shrinking—this is inevitable.

Second is the change in participant structure. In the past, altcoin seasons were crazy because retail FOMO was driving the market. Now, institutional players are the main actors—they look at financial statements, cash flows, regulatory compliance—not “where's the next hot spot.” This makes capital allocation more rational but reduces volatility.

Third is the shift in liquidity dominance. The addition of ETFs and institutions has increased the correlation between crypto markets and traditional finance. Central bank policies, interest rate expectations, dollar trends—these factors' influence is rising rapidly, diminishing the relative importance of halving.

Someone made an analogy: halving has shifted from “main variable” to “reference variable.” It’s still there, but no longer the sole story.

Why Has the Rise This Year Been Less Than Before? It’s Not Just About Cycles

This cycle's performance has indeed been weaker. Bitcoin retraced from its high, and altcoins are even more lackluster. How to explain?

A convincing explanation is that this rally has actually been “stretched out.”

Historically, the pattern was: halving → rapid price surge within months → short-term bubble. But this time, $500 billion ETF funds started flowing in before the halving, effectively front-loading some of the gains and flattening the overall cycle curve.

From the miners' perspective, data is also interesting. In the previous cycle, mining costs were around $20,000; when the price rose to $69,000, profit margins were about 70%. This cycle, after halving, the mining cost soared to $70,000, while the peak price was $126,000, with profit margins just over 40%.

This means that even if the market is “profitable,” the earnings are shrinking—a characteristic of mature markets.

Another factor is capital flow. Last year, hot money poured into AI stocks; the growth of U.S. tech attracted high-risk capital. Although crypto didn't decline, it didn't grab the spotlight either.

What Stage Are We At Now? Experts Show Rare Disagreement

This is the most divisive question.

The pessimists believe we are already in a bear market. Their logic is based on cost-benefit analysis: a sharp decline in miner profit margins is always a precursor to bear markets historically. Coupled with structural issues in the global economy (labor decline, wealth gap, geopolitical risks), the probability of a severe economic crisis in 2026-2027 is high. Once systemic risk triggers, crypto markets won't escape unscathed.

The neutral camp looks at technicals. The weekly MA50 has been broken, which is a technical bear market indicator. But a technical bear market isn't the same as a cycle bear market— the former is a short-term correction, the latter requires macro confirmation (like a recession). Currently, the structure is weak, but macro signals haven't given a final answer. They are waiting.

The optimistic group bets on liquidity. The Fed has no choice but to continue easing to delay debt issues. Global M2 is still growing, and stablecoin supply is increasing—these are liquidity indicators. As long as money keeps flowing, crypto assets, acting as “liquidity sponges,” won't enter a true bear market. They see this as a mid-cycle correction, not a cycle reversal.

This divergence itself is very telling: the market is in a transition period, where the old narrative (the four-year cycle) is failing, but the new narrative hasn't fully taken hold.

Beyond Cycles, What Is the Long-Term Growth Engine?

If the four-year cycle is no longer dominant, what drives the crypto market?

First is institutional adoption. Bitcoin is becoming a national asset, a component of pension funds, like gold. This isn't speculation but normalization of asset allocation. Once it becomes “routine,” prices won't skyrocket wildly but will form a steady upward trend—similar to gold's performance over the past 50 years.

Second is the explosion of stablecoins. The user potential of stablecoins is much larger than Bitcoin's. Cross-border payments, settlement, on-chain financing—stablecoins are becoming the “interface layer” of new financial infrastructure. This isn't a speculative market but an application market with more sustainable growth.

Third is continuous institutional allocation. Every time there's a new policy boost (like ETF approval), institutions increase their holdings. This creates a compound growth structure—not relying on a single explosive moment but on steady, gradual investment.

Overall, the future may not be characterized by “bull→bear” sharp swings, but rather by “long-term consolidation→slow rise→another consolidation” in a golden pattern.

Will Altcoin Seasons Really Never Come Again?

This topic has always been hot in the community. Historically, after Bitcoin's rise, altcoins would follow. But in this cycle, altcoins have been mostly stagnant.

Reasons include:

1. Bitcoin's dominance has increased. Institutions see Bitcoin as a “safe haven” among risk assets, relative to altcoins.
2. Regulations are becoming clearer. Projects with real use cases and compliance can survive long-term; pure concept altcoins are struggling.
3. No new narrative. During DeFi and NFT booms, altcoins surged. But this cycle lacks a similar “big killer.”

A more straightforward view: Traditional altcoin seasons require a certain number of projects within a reasonable range. Now, the total number of altcoins has hit new highs, and even with ample liquidity, dilution prevents a broad rally.

The most likely scenario is a “differentiated rally”—only top projects with real revenue will rise, others may even have zero trading volume. This resembles the US stock “M7” phenomenon: blue chips lead, small and mid-caps occasionally bounce, but most are dead water.

How Are These Veterans Allocating Now?

“Knowing and acting in harmony” best reflects their true thoughts. We asked about their actual holdings.

The results are very interesting: most have significantly reduced or even completely cleared their altcoin holdings.

• Some adopt a defensive stance, replacing USD with gold as cash reserves, mainly holding BTC and ETH.
• Some strictly follow the “cash not less than 50%” rule, with the rest in BTC and ETH.
• Some are optimistic but only hold top coins and stablecoins, avoiding small altcoins.
• The most aggressive have even sold near $110,000, thinking they can buy back below $70,000 in the next two years.

No one is chasing high prices blindly. No one is going all-in on altcoins. This itself indicates that even the most experienced market participants believe the current environment warrants caution.

Can You Still “Buy the Dip” Now?

The answer depends on whom you trust.

The pessimists believe the bottom is still far off. The real bottom is “when no one dares to buy.” If people are still debating, it means we haven't reached it.

The cautious group offers a reference point: a 50% decline is a signal to start DCA, i.e., from $126,000 down to $60,000. Historically, this strategy has worked in every bull market. But they also say that in the short term, this price level might not be seen.

Most advise: don't aggressively buy the dip, but start to deploy gradually. Build positions in 3-5 tranches over the next year at different price points, maintaining a calm mindset.

The only consensus is: avoid leverage. avoid high-frequency trading. Discipline is more important than prediction.

This is what industry veterans have repeated countless times. Now, more than ever, it carries weight.