2025-12-29 09:25:18

Regarding the future trend of Bitcoin, there are different opinions in the industry. Some investment institution executives believe that in the long term, Bitcoin may steadily rise, but achieving significant jumps between years is quite difficult—this era of aggressive growth may have passed. They also mentioned that 2026 is expected to see a relatively positive performance.

However, another investment officer remains cautious. Regarding the popular four-year cycle theory of Bitcoin in recent years, they feel it is still uncertain whether the cycle has truly ended. Some market participants believe in this cycle, while others think it is unreliable. Interestingly, the high price point in October might suggest that there could be a decline in 2026—this is quite intriguing, as there is a significant difference in market participants' expectations.

Overall, opinions are divided on whether Bitcoin's future will be steady growth or if there are risks of a correction.

BTC-0,23%

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.

17 Likes

Reward
17
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

OnchainUndercover

· 10h ago

Here we go again talking about the four-year cycle. This explanation has been proven wrong so many times already.

View OriginalReply0

MagicBean

· 10h ago

Steady upward movement? Ha, I've heard that phrase too many times. Every time they say it will be stable, but what actually happens... --- The four-year cycle is back again. Who believes this rhetoric is foolish; the market isn't something that can be calculated with a formula. --- Will 2026 be active or decline? Anyway, I've already prepared my wallet. --- A bunch of investment officials each say different things. To put it plainly, they're all just gambling. --- Predicting a drop after October's high? That logic is a bit extreme, but it's normal for the market to have many differing expectations. --- Long-term steady growth sounds comfortable, but the end of the era of aggressive growth really hits home. --- The cycle isn't really over; let's see how this year unfolds before bragging.

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunter

· 10h ago

The four-year cycle theory has long been clear to me from the mempool; on-chain data is not reliable at all. Honestly, these two experts are both gambling; no one truly knows what will happen in 2026.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeTherapist

· 10h ago

Alright, since everyone is just talking past each other, no one can be sure.

View OriginalReply0

SerNgmi

· 10h ago

Steady upward trend? Bro, stop joking. It's been rising for so long this round, where's the aggressive growth? Believing in a four-year cycle is just asking to get trapped; it's purely luck. A decline in 2026? That's even more interesting. By then, it'll probably be another set of explanations.

View OriginalReply0

EyeOfTheTokenStorm

· 10h ago

Regarding the four-year cycle theory, I see that major institutions are also unsure, to be honest, they are still gambling.

View OriginalReply0

GweiWatcher

· 10h ago

What are you talking about with the four-year cycle again? To put it nicely, it's just a theory; to put it bluntly, it's probably just gamblers' self-comfort. --- 2026? We'll only know if we make it to next year. Anyway, current predictions are about as reliable as flipping a coin. --- Is the era of aggressive growth over? Then why are some still going all in? Either there's a huge information gap or it's just gambler mentality. --- These institutions always have the same spiel: this year will be steady upward, next year will decline, and then they switch again—no matter what they say, it's always right. --- They are right about the big expectation gap; market participants are not thinking about the same thing at all. --- Instead of listening to them hype about 2026, it's better to focus on how to bottom fish now.

View OriginalReply0