Is the four-year Bitcoin cycle over, or are market participants in denial?

Bitcoin’s four-year cycle previously followed a straightforward narrative: halving rewards led to scarcity, and scarcity resulted in increased prices.

This trend persisted for more than ten years. Every four years, the network’s reward for miners was halved, tightening the supply, which was followed by a speculative surge that culminated in a new all-time high.

However, as Bitcoin remains just above $100,000 this week, down approximately 20% from its October peak exceeding $126,000, that traditional narrative is losing its relevance.

Wintermute, one of the largest market makers in digital assets, has now openly stated this perspective. “The halving-driven four-year cycle is no longer pertinent,” it asserted in a recent communication. “Current performance is driven by liquidity.” This assertion may seem radical to long-time Bitcoin advocates, but the data supports this conclusion.

The market is now primarily influenced by ETFs, stablecoins, and institutional liquidity flows, with miner issuance appearing negligible.

Liquidity alters the four-year cycle dynamics

Bitcoin’s recent rally and subsequent decline align closely with one key metric: ETF inflows. In the week ending October 4, global crypto ETFs attracted a record $5.95 billion, with U.S. funds comprising the majority. Merely two days later, daily net inflows reached $1.2 billion, the highest recorded.

This influx of capital coincided almost perfectly with Bitcoin’s ascent to its new all-time high near $126,000. When the inflows slowed later in the month, the market followed suit. By early November, with mixed ETF data and slight outflows, Bitcoin had retreated toward the $100,000 mark.

The correlation is notable but not coincidental. For years, the halving represented the clearest model investors had for understanding Bitcoin’s supply and demand dynamics: every 210,000 blocks, the number of new coins awarded to miners is halved.

Since April’s event, that figure stands at 3.125 BTC per block, or approximately 450 new coins daily, equating to around $45 million at current prices. While this may seem like a significant daily supply injection, it pales in comparison to the vast amounts of institutional capital now flowing through ETFs and other financial instruments.

When just a few ETFs can absorb $1.2 billion of Bitcoin in a single day, that inflow is twenty-five times the amount of new supply entering the market each day. Even regular weekly net flows often match or surpass the total weekly issuance of newly minted coins.

The halving has not entirely lost its significance, as it still exerts considerable influence on miner economics. However, regarding market pricing, the calculations have shifted dramatically. The limiting factor is not the quantity of new coins produced, but the volume of capital flowing through regulated channels.

Stablecoins introduce an additional dimension to this new liquidity landscape. The total supply of dollar-pegged tokens currently ranges between $280 billion and $308 billion, depending on the data source, effectively serving as base money for crypto markets.

An expanding stablecoin supply has historically correlated with rising asset prices, providing fresh collateral for leveraged positions and immediate liquidity for traders. While the halving restricts the flow of new Bitcoins, stablecoins facilitate increased demand.

A market driven by flows

Kaiko Research’s October report documented this transformation in real time. Mid-month, a sudden wave of deleveraging wiped out over $500 billion from the total market capitalization of crypto, as order-book depth diminished and open interest reset to lower levels. This episode exhibited all the characteristics of a liquidity shock rather than a supply squeeze.

Bitcoin’s price decline was not due to miners offloading coins or an impending halving cycle. It fell because buyers vanished, derivatives positions unwound, and the thinness of the order books magnified every sell order.

This is the environment Wintermute describes: one governed by capital flows, not block rewards. The introduction of spot ETFs in the U.S. and the broader expansion of institutional access have redefined Bitcoin’s price discovery. Flows from major funds now dictate trading sessions.

Price rallies typically initiate during U.S. trading hours, when ETF activity peaks: a structural pattern that Kaiko has monitored since the products were launched. Liquidity in Europe and Asia remains important, but it now serves as a bridge between American sessions rather than a separate focal point.

This transition also clarifies the change in market volatility. During previous halving periods, rallies often followed prolonged accumulation phases, with retail enthusiasm building on top of diminishing supply.

Now, the price can fluctuate several thousand dollars in a single day, depending on whether ETF inflows or outflows dominate. The liquidity is institutional, yet it is also volatile, transforming what was once a predictable four-year rhythm into a market characterized by brief, intense liquidity cycles.

This volatility is likely to continue. Futures funding and open interest data from CoinGlass indicate that leverage remains a significant factor, amplifying movements in both directions. When funding rates remain elevated for extended periods, it signals that traders are incurring substantial costs to maintain long positions, leaving the market susceptible to a sharp reversal if the flows halt.

The October drawdown, which followed a spike in funding costs and a wave of ETF redemptions, provided a glimpse of how fragile the structure can be when liquidity diminishes.

Yet, even as those flows slowed, structural liquidity in the system continues to expand. Stablecoin issuance remains high. The FCA’s recent decision to permit retail investors in the UK to access crypto exchange-traded notes has ignited a fee competition among issuers, resulting in increased turnover on the London Stock Exchange.

Each of these channels represents another pathway through which capital can reach Bitcoin, thereby tightening its correlation to global liquidity cycles and distancing it further from its self-contained halving cycles.

The Bitcoin market now operates like any other major asset class, where monetary conditions influence performance. The halving calendar once dictated the rhythm of investor sentiment. Today, it is the Federal Reserve, ETF creation desks, and stablecoin issuers who set the pace.

In the coming months, Bitcoin’s trajectory will hinge on liquidity factors. A base scenario anticipates Bitcoin fluctuating between approximately $95,000 and $130,000 as ETF flows remain modestly positive and stablecoin supply continues its gradual expansion.

A more optimistic scenario, featuring another record inflow week for ETFs or a regulatory approval for new listings, could propel prices back toward $140,000 and beyond.

Conversely, a liquidity vacuum characterized by multi-day ETF outflows and declining stablecoin supply could pull Bitcoin back to the $90,000 range as leverage resets once more.

None of these outcomes rely on miner issuance or the timing of the halving. Instead, they depend on the rate at which capital enters or exits through the channels that have supplanted the halving as Bitcoin’s primary throttle.

The implications extend beyond price. Kaiko’s data suggests ETFs have also altered the microstructure of the spot market itself, tightening spreads and enhancing liquidity during U.S. trading hours, while leaving off-hours thinner than before.

This change means the health of Bitcoin’s market can now be assessed as much by ETF creation and redemption activity as by on-chain supply metrics. When miners’ daily output is absorbed by ETFs within minutes, it becomes evident where the balance of power resides.

Bitcoin’s transformation into a liquidity-sensitive asset may disappoint those who once regarded the halving as a significant event, a predetermined countdown to wealth. However, for an asset now held by institutions, benchmarked in ETFs, and traded against stablecoins that act as a private money supply, it signifies maturity.

Thus, perhaps the halving cycle is not entirely obsolete, but rather relegated.

The block reward still halves every four years, and some traders will always reference it as a guide. Yet the true roadmap now lies elsewhere. If the past decade taught investors to monitor the halving clock, the next one will instruct them to observe the flow tape.

The new timeline of Bitcoin is not four years long. It is measured in billions of dollars moving in and out of ETFs, of stablecoins minted or redeemed, of capital seeking liquidity in a market that has evolved beyond its own mythology. The miners still keep time, but the rhythm now belongs to the money.

The post Is Bitcoin’s 4-year cycle dead or are market makers in denial? appeared first on CryptoSlate.