Interesting. But no mention of a fundamental structural change that caused the reset from loss of confidence.
2026 promises to be interesting.
UGLY
BITCOIN’S CAPITULATION TRANSFER: THE CHART NO ONE IS WATCHING
This is not a breakdown. This is a balance sheet reset.
STH MVRV just printed 0.85. That means every Bitcoin bought in the last 155 days is underwater by 15%. Not “slightly red.” Structurally capitulating.
We have seen this exact configuration twice before:
November 2022 after FTX collapsed: MVRV hit 0.80, STH supply in loss reached 2.8M BTC, price $16K. What followed was a 300% rally over 12 months.
April 2025 local reset: MVRV bottomed at similar levels, launched the move from $60K to $126K all-time high by October.
Now look at the supply side mechanics:
Exchange reserves: 2.39M BTC, down 8% year-over-year. Coins are leaving centralized venues even during a 32% drawdown. That is not distribution. That is absorption.
ETF flows: $3.79B bled in November, then reversed with a $524M single-day inflow. Outflow climaxes look exactly like this at inflection points.
Miner reserves: 1.803M BTC, multi-year lows. Post-halving stress forced ~24K BTC in November sales. They are structurally weaker, not stronger. Issuance keeps falling.
Funding rates: 0.0071%, barely positive. Leverage has been flushed, not added. No euphoria, no excess.
On one side: short-term holders, retail panic, stressed miners, levered traders exiting at losses.
On the other: long-term holders controlling 75% of supply, spot ETFs treating dips as accumulation windows, corporates and sovereigns building strategic reserves, shrinking exchange balances, falling issuance.
This is not what tops look like. This is what finite supply meeting structural demand looks like when weak hands transfer coins to entities that never market-sell.
If you believe STH MVRV below 1.0, record-low exchange reserves, post-halving supply compression, and institutional bid reversion is bearish, you are betting this is the first cycle in Bitcoin’s history where capitulation plus structural accumulation does not resolve higher.
I will take the other side of that bet.
The asymmetry is not in the chart. It is in the ownership transfer happening beneath it.

537
0
本頁面內容由第三方提供。除非另有說明,OKX 不是所引用文章的作者,也不對此類材料主張任何版權。該內容僅供參考,並不代表 OKX 觀點,不作為任何形式的認可,也不應被視為投資建議或購買或出售數字資產的招攬。在使用生成式人工智能提供摘要或其他信息的情況下,此類人工智能生成的內容可能不準確或不一致。請閱讀鏈接文章,瞭解更多詳情和信息。OKX 不對第三方網站上的內容負責。包含穩定幣、NFTs 等在內的數字資產涉及較高程度的風險,其價值可能會產生較大波動。請根據自身財務狀況,仔細考慮交易或持有數字資產是否適合您。


