2026-01-06 18:36:51

There's an interesting perspective. A major platform recently released its 2026 crypto market outlook, suggesting that the traditional "four-year cycle" framework may no longer be applicable. Their reasoning is as follows — new sources of demand have emerged, the macro environment is improving, and regulatory efforts remain friendly. These factors combined create a relatively optimistic outlook for the spot market in 2026.

Notably, from a macro perspective, the market is digesting expectations of further easing by the Federal Reserve. BTC, as a risk asset, typically garners more attention in such liquidity environments. On the other hand, if the traditional cycle analysis becomes invalid, it implies that the driving logic of this market may be changing — shifting from purely technical cyclical patterns to being more driven by policy, demand, and other factors. For those planning to position themselves in 2026, it’s time to re-examine their analytical frameworks.

BTC0,23%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

LidoStakeAddict

· 01-09 05:00

Four-year cycle invalid? Then our group that relies on cycles to make a living will have to change careers haha The cycle is broken, policy-driven factors are the real ones. When the Federal Reserve loosens, the crypto market will celebrate That's right, but I still need to see if I can survive until 2026 When liquidity picks up, BTC will soar. This wave is indeed a bit different We need to rethink our spot layout; we can't just focus on K-line charts anymore Macro shifts toward policy-driven factors? Then we must keep a close eye on the Federal Reserve's actions The cycle theory is dead; we need to find a new analytical framework

View OriginalReply0

TokenomicsTinfoilHat

· 01-07 16:58

Four-year cycle invalid? Now this gets interesting, it feels like just finding reasons to justify the direction you're betting on. But to be fair, liquidity easing has indeed changed the game rules. The old cycle theory is now a bit outdated. With regulatory friendliness and policy-driven factors, it sounds more reliable than pure technical analysis. Let's see who can really follow through to the end.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-6bc33122

· 01-06 19:03

Four-year cycle invalidation? I have to put a question mark on that statement. --- Liquidity easing is variable; don't talk about cycles. Policy stance is the real boss. --- The 2026 deployment depends on the Fed's stance. In other words, it's still macro-driven. --- What is the source of new demand? That's the key. Just talking about friendly regulation is a bit superficial. --- I believe in the optimistic outlook for spot markets, but restructuring the analytical framework isn't that easy. --- Instead of waiting for cycles, it's better to keep a close eye on the Federal Reserve's movements. That's the hardcore logic. --- From cycle theory to policy-driven, this shift shows that the market is indeed mutating. --- Friendly regulation? I feel like it's still about reading the Fed's mood. --- Speaking of which, can this easing cycle last until 2026? That's the real question. --- The new demand is RWA, AI, and those new narratives. The tech cycle is already outdated.

View OriginalReply0

MoneyBurnerSociety

· 01-06 18:56

Four-year cycle invalid? That's hilarious. What should we do, the leeks who rely on cycles to fool ourselves? Haha

View OriginalReply0

rugdoc.eth

· 01-06 18:46

Four-year cycle invalidation? It depends on how you define invalidation. It still feels like the same logic, just adding the policy variable. The cycle theory is failing, with policies stepping in to support, which has a bit of a gambling vibe. Basically, it's about trying to back up the optimistic expectations for 2026, and the liquidity story needs to be told again. What is the source of new demand? What exactly is it? It just feels like this term has been appearing too frequently lately. BTC as a risk asset, no problem this time, but can the Federal Reserve really loosen up completely? It feels a bit overly optimistic.

View OriginalReply0