#比特币价格与估值 Seeing Tom Lee's team's series of "contradictory" forecasts, I have to be honest: this is not disagreement, it's viewing the same scene through different lenses.

Sean Farrell suggests Bitcoin could drop to 60-65K, while Tom Lee calls for 200K. It seems like one is bearish and the other bullish. But a closer look at their logic reveals—Farrell targets aggressive investors with over 20% crypto asset allocation, focusing on active rebalancing and short-term market outperformance; Lee serves traditional large institutions, with only 1-5% allocated to BTC and ETH, emphasizing long-term structural trends.

It's like two doctors giving different prescriptions to the same patient—not because one is less skilled, but because one recommends short-term adjustments, while the other plans for long-term recovery.

But there's a detail to be cautious about: Farrell explicitly states, "Current market pricing is almost perfect, but risks still exist." Government shutdowns, Federal Reserve chair changes, miner pressures, holders selling off... these are all sharp knives. Bitcoin is in a "valuation no man's land." Who dares say this price is rational?

Anyone who has experienced several cycles knows that the most dangerous times are often when the market looks the most perfect. Institutional entry, ETF support, overwhelming news coverage—then a black swan event can cause a flash crash. So instead of obsessing over whether it will rise to 200K or fall to 60K, ask yourself: can my principal withstand a 50% drawdown? Do I have disciplined confirmation signals before acting?

Don't be blinded by beautiful long-term narratives; risk management should always come first.