Bitcoin slashes to $70,000: Is this the fulfillment of the four-year cycle curse, or the complete end of the bull market?

March 11, 2026, Bitcoin (BTC) price hovers around the $70,000 mark. Just five months ago, the market was celebrating a new all-time high of $126,000. Now, nearly a 45% decline casts a shadow over the narratives of “super-cycle” and “institutional bull.” This sharp correction is not just a numerical retracement but a systemic stress test on the crypto market’s most steadfast belief: the four-year cycle.

What triggered this deep correction of over 45%?

Since the October 2025 peak at $126,000, Bitcoin has undergone a typical yet intense structural shift. On the surface, geopolitical conflicts (such as tensions in Iran) sparked short-term panic selling, but these are insufficient to explain the multi-month downturn. The core trigger lies in the market’s “leverage fragility.” In the late bull phase, digital asset treasury companies like MicroStrategy (now renamed Strategy) accumulated massive Bitcoin holdings and built complex leverage structures through convertible bonds and other instruments. When prices broke key psychological levels, the marginal repayment pressures on these leverages emerged, fueling fears that they might be forced to sell Bitcoin, creating ongoing selling pressure. This systemic concern, driven by a single entity’s leverage, replaced the previous profit-taking narrative and became the initial accelerant of the decline.

Is the four-year cycle pattern really a rule or just a trap?

The crypto community has long believed in the four-year cycle centered around “halving”: roughly 16-18 months after halving, prices top out, followed by a year-long deep bear market. This cycle seemed to hit precisely—halving in April 2024, peak in October 2025. However, behind this self-fulfilling prophecy lies a paradox. On one hand, many long-term holders (LTHs), trusting this pattern, sold heavily in the fourth quarter before the top, exerting significant supply pressure. On the other hand, when everyone acts based on the same “map,” markets often deviate unexpectedly. Attempts to break the cycle are often crushed by its inertia during the bottoming process. Thus, rather than being an iron law, the four-year cycle is better understood as a behavioral finance model rooted in retail traders’ herd psychology—especially when institutional participation is only about 10% of the market, this psychology still dominates the bull-bear shifts.

What structural costs does the end of the leverage bull market entail?

The heaviest cost of this correction is the partial collapse of the “leverage bull” model. Previously, Bitcoin’s rise heavily depended on continuous issuance and buying by listed companies like MicroStrategy, forming a positive feedback loop: “stock price rises—funding—buy BTC—BTC rises—stock price rises.” During the downturn, this mechanism reversed. When these companies’ market-to-net asset value (mNAV) fell below certain thresholds, the cost of maintaining leverage skyrocketed, turning them from “largest buyers” into potential “largest sellers.” This structural shift means the market temporarily loses a key buying engine and faces a looming threat of forced liquidation. Additionally, this correction shatters the myth of Bitcoin as “digital gold” serving as a safe haven during macro risks, revealing its current high-risk asset characteristics and increasing correlation with Nasdaq and AI-related stocks.

What does the reshaping of market structure mean for the crypto industry?

This correction accelerates the shift from “retail sentiment-driven” to “macro asset-linked” market dynamics. First, although Bitcoin spot ETFs attracted significant inflows after launch, they did not provide a floor during the downturn—in fact, their liquidity and ease of entry/exit may make them channels for traditional capital to exit crypto. Second, the narrative power has shifted. Without the “perpetual motion” buying of entities like MicroStrategy, Bitcoin’s fate is more tightly linked to Federal Reserve monetary policy and broader liquidity conditions. This means crypto is no longer an isolated market but integrated into the global macro financial landscape. For the Web3 sector, Bitcoin’s stagnation has also prompted capital and attention to shift toward Ethereum and other layer-1 chains with real ecosystem applications and stablecoin dominance.

How might the market evolve over the next year?

Based on current structures and risks, two main scenarios are possible over the next 12-18 months. Scenario one (inertia-driven decline): if the Fed maintains a hawkish stance or rate cuts fall short, combined with forced liquidations of leveraged entities like Strategy, Bitcoin could test support levels around $50,000 or even $40,000. This aligns with historical bear market retracements of over 57% from the highs. Scenario two (bottoming and recovery): Bitcoin has shown resilience near $70,000; if this level is viewed as a retest of the resistance at the 2021 bull top, and macro liquidity expectations improve, the market could establish a long-term bottom here, potentially brewing a new cycle by late 2026 or early 2027. In either case, a “V-shaped” reversal is highly unlikely; the market needs time to digest leverage and rebuild confidence.

What unpriced risks remain in the current market?

Despite the sharp decline, several risks may still be underappreciated. First, the chain reaction from Strategy: although the company holds cash to cover short-term debts, persistent weakness in its stock price could render its model of issuing equity to buy Bitcoin unsustainable, risking liquidation of hundreds of billions in holdings. Second, the “quantum threat” is moving from fringe to mainstream: breakthroughs in quantum computing could, within years, threaten Bitcoin’s cryptographic security, undermining its fundamental value proposition—this concern is gaining traction among professional investors. Lastly, macro liquidity traps: if inflation remains sticky, forcing major economies to maintain high interest rates, the valuation of risk assets will shift downward permanently, making Bitcoin less immune.

Summary

Bitcoin’s fall from $126,000 to $70,000 marks a thorough clearing of the past two years’ leverage-driven bull market and a stress test of the four-year cycle faith. The market is currently in a chaotic phase of old narratives collapsing and new order yet to emerge. Bitcoin is no longer purely a sentiment asset; its future will increasingly reflect global liquidity tides and institutional leverage cycles. For investors, understanding this paradigm shift from “faith-driven” to “macro-driven” is more meaningful than simply guessing bottoms.

FAQ

What is the main reason for Bitcoin’s recent decline?

Answer: Key factors include: herd psychology based on the four-year cycle, potential forced liquidations of leveraged entities like Strategy, geopolitical risk-driven safe-haven flows, and macro liquidity tightening increasing correlation with high-risk tech stocks.

Is the “four-year cycle” still valid?

Answer: The “four-year cycle” refers to the pattern of price rises and falls around halving events—roughly three years up, one year down. While recent price movements align with this pattern, many see it as a self-fulfilling prophecy driven by collective behavior. With increased institutional participation, its effectiveness is increasingly challenged.

Is $70,000 the bottom? Will it go lower?

Answer: It’s impossible to predict the exact bottom. Several institutions and analysts suggest potential support levels around $50,000 to $40,000 based on historical retracements and macro conditions. Most agree that a prolonged bottoming process is necessary before a true bull restart.

What should retail investors watch out for in a bear market?

Answer: Be cautious of “bottom-fishing” mentality, avoid blindly buying during the aftershocks of leverage-driven crashes, and pay attention to macro policy shifts and movements of large holders like Strategy. These factors will influence market direction. Historically, extreme fear at lows often presents opportunities for patient, risk-aware investors.

What is the biggest potential threat to Bitcoin’s future?

Answer: Beyond macro policies, notable risks include: the potential for quantum computing to break Bitcoin’s cryptography, and the chain reaction of forced liquidations from leveraged entities like Strategy during extreme market moves.