Grayscale Research says the long-standing belief that Bitcoin strictly follows a repeating four-year price cycle (tied to the halving schedule) is likely incorrect — and that, contrary to the “price must fall next year” interpretation of the cycle, Bitcoin could make new all-time highs in the coming year. The conclusion appears in Grayscale’s recent market commentary and supporting research notes, which argue that market structure and institutional flows have changed the dynamics that previously gave rise to the four-year pattern.
Lede — what Grayscale found
Grayscale’s research team says that while Bitcoin’s supply still follows the four-year halving cadence, valuations no longer must obey a rigid four-year price schedule. The firm highlights two key reasons: the absence of a parabolic, retail-driven blowoff in the latest bull run and a structural shift toward institutional channels (ETPs and corporate treasuries) as sources of new capital. For these reasons, Grayscale states the four-year cycle thesis will “prove to be incorrect” and that Bitcoin has the potential to make new highs next year.
What the research says (short summary)
- Four-year supply vs. price: Bitcoin’s issuance is still halving roughly every four years, but price cycles are emergent outcomes shaped by market participants and capital flows — and these have changed materially.
- No parabolic overshoot: Grayscale notes the most recent bull market lacked the classic parabolic spike that in past cycles preceded large drawdowns; that reduces the “scheduled” probability of a multi-year decline.
- Institutional demand matters: New demand coming mainly through exchange-traded products (ETPs) and corporate/digital asset treasuries (rather than retail exchange flow) alters liquidity and distribution mechanics, potentially muting the historical cycle.
Data & context
Grayscale’s view is presented across multiple market commentaries in 2025 and shared on the firm’s social channels. The firm’s broader research (The State of the Crypto Cycle and quarterly sector notes) shows Bitcoin underperformed several crypto sectors in parts of 2025, illustrating that leadership across the crypto market can shift and isn’t always centered on bitcoin dominance — another reason the classic cycle may not hold as strictly.
Industry reaction
The idea that Bitcoin’s four-year cycle may be “broken” or at least less predictive has surfaced frequently in recent months. Traders, strategists, and commentators have debated whether institutional flows and macro moves have permanently altered cycle dynamics — with some analysts arguing the cycle remains relevant and others saying it’s fading. Coverage and commentary from industry outlets have amplified Grayscale’s framing while also presenting more cautious takes that cycles can reassert themselves under different macro regimes.
Why this matters for investors
- Risk framing: If cycles are less reliable, timing-based strategies that assume an automatic multi-year drawdown after a three-year appreciation may misfire.
- Portfolio construction: Institutional adoption via ETPs and corporate treasuries changes liquidity sourcing and could reduce volatility in certain scenarios — but also concentrates flow risks around products and custodians.
- Signal vs. noise: Grayscale recommends monitoring a broader set of on-chain and market indicators rather than depending on the halving-cycle heuristic alone.
Caveats and limits
Grayscale’s statement is framed as a view, not a guaranteed forecast. Historical cycles remain visible in Bitcoin’s price history and may still influence investor behavior — behavioral and macro feedback loops can re-establish patterns. Grayscale itself notes the outlook is uncertain and that many variables (macro policy, regulatory shifts, liquidity events) could still produce outcomes consistent with a cycle-driven decline.
Key takeaways
- Grayscale believes the classic four-year price cycle is no longer a reliable automatic rule and that Bitcoin could make new all-time highs next year.
- The firm points to structural changes in how capital enters the market (ETPs, treasuries) and the lack of a parabolic spike in the latest run as reasons to doubt the cycle’s predictive power.
- Market participants should treat the four-year thesis as one input among many, not the sole basis for investment timing.
Also Check: Anthropic study: AI agents reproduce $4.6M in simulated smart-contract exploits and find new zero-days
G9HP2ZUU