A Bitcoin Reserve Act may end crypto’s 4-year boom-bust cycle

As a seasoned investor with decades of experience under my belt, I find the current state of the crypto market particularly intriguing. The potential for states to become significant buyers of Bitcoin could indeed reshape the entire landscape, much like a mighty oak transforms a barren field.

As speculation grows that President-elect Donald Trump might issue an executive order to create a Bitcoin Reserve on his first day in office or propose legislation during his term, many are asking if such a move could trigger a prolonged period of growth for cryptocurrencies, often referred to as a crypto supercycle.

“Every Bitcoin cycle has a narrative trying to push the idea that ‘this one is different.’ The conditions have never been so ideal. Crypto has never had a pro-crypto US President who controls the Senate and the Congress.”

Under Lummis’ proposed Bitcoin Act of 2024, the U.S. government could acquire Bitcoin (BTC) as a reserve asset by purchasing 200,000 BTC each year for five consecutive years, thereby amassing a total of 1 million Bitcoins. These digital coins would then be held in the government’s reserves for at least two decades.

Jack Mallers, head of Strike, posits that Donald Trump might utilize an immediate executive order to acquire Bitcoin, albeit emphasizing it wouldn’t translate into a purchase of one million Bitcoins.

To date, Trump’s team hasn’t explicitly verified the assertions regarding an Executive Order. However, when asked during a CNBC interview whether the U.S. might establish a Bitcoin Reserve like its oil reserve (implying potential legislation), Trump responded affirmatively, saying “I believe so.

An Executive Order however would lack stability, as subsequent presidents often reverse such orders. The only way to ensure the long term future of a strategic Bitcoin reserve would be with legislation with majority support.

As an analyst, I find myself in a position where advocates for Bitcoin within Trump’s team can confidently advocate for Lummis’ bill, given the Republican majority in Congress and the narrow margin they hold in the Senate. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that a small number of Republican dissenters, influenced by progressive outrage towards perceived government wealth transfer to Bitcoin users, could potentially disrupt this legislative process.

‘Stop comparing this cycle to prior cycles’

In the recent past, I, as an analyst, have found myself in agreement with Alex Krüger, an economist and proprietor of Asgard Markets, a digital assets advisory firm. His perspective on the election results has led me to believe that we are highly probable to be witnessing a Bitcoin supercycle.

As a researcher, I posit an intriguing parallel between Bitcoin’s current status and the surge of gold in the early 1970s. Much like the abandonment of the gold standard by former U.S. President Richard Nixon and the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 that propelled gold prices from $35 per ounce to a staggering $850 in 1981, Bitcoin’s unique circumstances could potentially mirror this dramatic rise in value over an extended period.

Krüger indicated that Bitcoin might experience a downturn similar to previous market cycles, much like before. Yet, he advised crypto investors to refrain from equating this cycle with past ones because it could turn out to be unique in its own way.

So far, Trump’s actions indicate that his administration may lean in a positive direction moving forward. He has put forth Paul Atkins, who is supportive of cryptocurrency and deregulation, as a candidate for the position of SEC Chair, following the departure of Gary Gensler.

Additionally, he has put forth Scott Bessent, a supporter of digital currencies, as a candidate for the position of Treasury Secretary. Meanwhile, he appointed David Sacks, the former chief operating officer of PayPal, as an authority on AI and cryptocurrencies. This role will involve creating a comprehensive legal structure for the crypto sector.

Supercycle theory has never had super results

In my analysis, the idea that “this time is different” has cropped up consistently during previous Bitcoin bull markets. These instances were often supported by narratives centered around growing mainstream and institutional adoption.

As a researcher examining the period between 2013 and 2014, I observed the surge in Bitcoin’s price (the bull run) and found myself aligning with the supercycle theory. This belief was reinforced by the notion that as global interest in Bitcoin grew, it would emerge as a compelling alternative to traditional fiat currencies on an international scale.

During the 2017-2018 period, the swift increase in Bitcoin’s value was perceived as an indicator of its impending entry into mainstream finance and widespread acceptance among institutions, marking a time when institutional interest would flourish. (As a researcher studying this phenomenon, I find it fascinating to observe how these fluctuations reflect the evolving perception of Bitcoin within the financial world.)

During the 2020-2021 period, when businesses like MicroStrategy, Square, and Tesla ventured into the Bitcoin market, they anticipated that numerous other technology-focused companies would join them in this trend.

Despite the recurring cycles suggesting a supercycle, it didn’t materialize as expected in each instance. Instead, the market experienced a steep price crash, followed by an extended period of bearish trends that diminished many supporters, who had anticipated the supercycle to culminate in Bitcoin reaching $5M. This was the stance taken by Su Zhu, co-founder of Three Arrows Capital, who championed the Supercycle Thesis from 2021.

3AC (Three Arrows Capital) seemed to assume the validity of the supercycle thesis and consequently borrowed funds. When it was eventually liquidated, the cryptocurrency market cap plummeted by nearly half due to the news, and this decline resulted in bankruptcies and financial struggles for companies such as Voyager Digital, Genesis Trading, and BlockFi.

For Chris Brunsike, partner at Placeholder and ex-blockchain leader at ARK Invest, the concept of a Bitcoin supercycle is merely a speculative theory that one should not base their life savings on.

“Supercycle is without fail a collective delusion.”

Despite the uncertainties surrounding the recent US elections, the election outcomes appear to have significantly favored Bitcoin, creating exceptionally optimistic market conditions. This favoritism stems primarily from the apparent support of a U.S. President who appears committed to honoring his pro-cryptocurrency pledges, including his intention to refrain from selling Bitcoin from the U.S. government’s Bitcoin reserves.

The potential global domino effect

If the Bitcoin Reserve Act gets approved, it could spark a worldwide competition among countries to accumulate Bitcoins, as they strive to keep pace and not fall behind in this digital asset trend.

George S. Georgiades, who was previously an attorney specializing in counseling Wall Street firms on fundraising, shifted gears in 2016 to work with the cryptocurrency sector, explained to CryptoMoon that implementing the Bitcoin Reserve Act could signify a significant milestone for global Bitcoin acceptance. He further suggested that this action might spur other nations and financial institutions to emulate this move, thereby accelerating broader adoption and improving market liquidity.

According to Basel Ismail, CEO of the cryptocurrency investment analysis platform Blockcircle, the approval [of a particular event or decision] will likely be one of the most encouraging developments in the history of crypto, sparking a fierce competition among investors to amass as much Bitcoin as they can.

“Those other nations won’t have a voice, their hand will be forced. Pivot and compete, or die.”

He thinks that the majority of the G20 nations, being the most influential and economically robust countries globally, will likely establish their own currency reserves.

Experienced cryptocurrency investor and Bitcoin instructor, Chris Dunn, told CryptoMoon that a fierce buying competition driven by fear of missing out (FOMO) among nations might entirely reshape the existing pattern in the crypto market.

“If the US or another major economic power started accumulating, Bitcoin could trigger an FOMO, which could create a market cycle and supply-demand dynamics unlike anything we’ve seen so far.”

As a seasoned crypto investor, I’m keenly aware that while we focus on the cryptocurrency landscape here, other nations might be quietly preparing to join the competitive fray.

“Game theory is likely already quietly in play.”

According to Ismail, most Bitcoin transactions will be conducted through over-the-counter brokers and settled as block trades, meaning the price of BTC might not see an immediate change, but rather a prolonged increase in demand that could eventually drive up the price of Bitcoin in the long run.

The new wave of crypto investors may alter crypto market dynamics

If nations were to start buying Bitcoin, it’s expected that the Bitcoin market would undergo a significant transformation. This could trigger a massive influx of new investors, particularly from major financial hubs worldwide, into the cryptocurrency markets. Such an influx would alter the market behaviors, perceptions, and responses to specific events.

According to analyst Kalchev from Nexo, while it’s uncertain if the proposed law would affect Bitcoin’s recognized four-year halving patterns, there could be some changes that occur.

Bitcoin represents a distinctive market segment, predominantly influenced by individual transactions (buying and selling) up until now. Its value tends to fluctuate significantly in response to the collective mood or sentiment within the market. However, as new categories of investors enter this space, there’s potential for market dynamics to evolve, possibly disrupting traditional patterns and cycles.

Ismail posits that investors in the stock market typically exhibit distinct behaviors compared to highly responsive individual investors, primarily due to their substantial resources and sophisticated risk management techniques. These institutional players tend to handle Bitcoin transactions in a manner contrasting with individual investors.

“Over time, Wall Street’s participation could contribute to a more stable, less reactive market environment.”

In simpler terms, when we say “stabilization,” we are essentially referring to something that’s less prone to sudden or extreme changes, or in other words, more resistant to volatility. This implies that during bear markets, the downward trends might not be as intense compared to past cycles.

Georgiades is confident that “price fluctuations will continue,” however, he suggests that “consistent demand from major purchasers such as the U.S. might help smooth out these price changes and lessen the extreme ups and downs observed during previous cycles.

In the meantime, Ismail noted that the Bitcoin market is displaying unique patterns unlike the previous four-year cycles. Contrary to expectations, the price of Bitcoin during this cycle dropped below its all-time high (ATH), a development many found improbable, and then it set a new ATH before the halving event officially occurred.

“The four-year cycle has already been debunked and broken multiple times now.”

In the past, Bitcoin has undergone just four halving events, but there are almost thirty more to come in the future. Kalchev points out that it’s challenging to assume these halvings will follow a consistent four-year pattern due to the increasing impact of broader economic and political factors like central bank policies and regulatory changes on Bitcoin’s market trends.

Kalchev posits that the fluctuations in Bitcoin’s value may increasingly be driven by external elements rather than internal mechanisms such as the Halving. These external factors might include increased institutional investment and global political occurrences.

Read More

2024-12-20 01:04