VideoBenjamin CowenBenjamin Cowen

Bitcoin: Bull Case Vs. Bear Case

The bullish case rests on Bitcoin’s stronger 2026 performance relative to prior midterm bear-market years, supportive RSI and holder-accumulation readings, and a stablecoin oscillator that has risen rather than collapsed into a low. The bearish case points to incomplete valuation resets, weak whale activity, missing volume capitulation, unresolved technical resistance, and possible macro pressure from tighter policy, a stronger dollar, or shifting investor attention toward artificial intelligence. Cowen’s cycle and price comparisons leave room for another decline, with scenarios ranging from roughly $52,000–$53,000 to theoretical dislocations as low as $45,000, while emphasizing that these are possibilities rather than forecasts.

BitcoinCrypto MarketsTechnical AnalysisMonetary PolicyCurrenciesArtificial Intelligence

Preview · 17 more points in the app

Read the Full Summary

Key Takeaways

Bitcoin's cycle evidence remains divided: its PE multiple has not yet fallen below the roughly 0.4 level seen in several prior four-year-cycle lows, while historical cycle metrics have already crossed in a way that preceded the July low. However, repeated summer crossovers in 2022 and the absence of a current Pi Cycle Bottom signal leave room for another decline.

The price-based historical comparison remains more bearish than the time-based comparison. Cowen argues that Bitcoin holding near $60,000 could resemble the 2018–2019 decline from $6,000 to $3,000–$4,000, while the low-to-low cycle comparison allows for a late-October or early-November bottom and a potentially intact four-year cycle.

Several technical indicators support a possible bottom but do not confirm one: weekly RSI is near 26, the monthly RSI resembles prior bear markets, and a recent golden cross favors the bulls. Bitcoin's failure to decisively reclaim the 50-week moving average remains bearish, and historical golden crosses and moves above the 200-day average were sometimes followed by new lows.

On-chain reset data is incomplete, with the MVRV Z-score still above zero and Bitcoin above realized price, which bears view as evidence that the cycle may not have fully reset. Bulls counter that 2019 did not require the lowest historical readings, and that rising long-term-holder accumulation and low short-term-holder levels resemble prior major lows.

Several weaker on-chain signals leave the timing of a definitive bottom unresolved. Transaction fees are near 2022-low levels and the 90-day coin-days-destroyed measure is rising, but both could weaken, while whale activity near the July low was only about 0.25 versus roughly 0.76–0.89 at earlier cycle bottoms.

Stablecoin and risk indicators provide a bullish counterweight to the missing-capitulation evidence. The stablecoin supply ratio oscillator has risen since November, but current composite risk readings remain above earlier bottom levels and Bitcoin has not produced the major volume spike that accompanied prior cycle lows.

CYCLE-TIMING

PE Cycle History — Bitcoin’s PE multiple has historically fallen below 0.4 roughly every four years, including in 2011, 2014–2015, 2018, and 2022. Because it has not reached that level in the current cycle, the pattern is potentially bearish, although 2019 may be the more relevant comparison.

“So if you look at the PE multiple what you'll notice is that approximately every four years the PE multiple goes below 04. You see that?…”—

Metric Crossover — Historical Bitcoin cycle metrics favor the bulls because prior lows generally occurred after the metrics crossed, and the current crossover preceded the July low. However, similar summer crossovers occurred repeatedly in 2022 before further declines, so the signal does not rule out another downturn.

“It clearly shows you the cycles and the argument is every time these cross the low is in after it…”—

2018 Price Analogy — A price-based comparison with 2018 and 2019 remains bearish: Bitcoin holding around $60,000 could precede a decline resembling the move from $6,000 to $3,000–$4,000. Cowen distinguishes this bearish price analogy from the more bullish time-based comparison.

“It only goes to the bears when you make the pricebased comparison where you know in 2018 and 2019 we held support at 6K and then eventually it fell to…”—

MACRO-MARKETS

Seasonal Stock Downside — Historical midterm-year seasonality points to possible 10%–20% S&P 500 declines in the second half of the year. Cowen argues that a single 25-basis-point rate hike producing roughly a 10% stock-market decline may not force Bitcoin to make a new low, while multiple hikes and a decline closer to 20% would strengthen the bearish case.

“You can pretty clearly see it in starting in September 2014, starting in September of 2018, and then also starting in August of 2022, the S&P had either 10 to…”—

AI Attention Shift — An upcoming Anthropic IPO could redirect investor attention toward artificial intelligence and away from Bitcoin. Cowen presents that shift as a potential bearish pressure on the market.

“We now have the anthropic IPO coming up probably in a month or two…”—

2019 Comparison — Cowen maintains that the 2019 Bitcoin comparison is relevant because that period featured Bitcoin dominance, little altcoin rotation, and a Bitcoin top roughly two months after quantitative tightening ended.

“What's really fascinating that I saw this year is that for years and years and years, people people ridiculed the comparison I made to 2019, like the Bitcoin dominance bull…”—

MARKET-SIGNALS

Volume Capitulation — Bitcoin’s prior market-cycle bottoms formed alongside major volume spikes after volume declined during the bear market. Because the current decline has not produced a comparable spike, Cowen treats the missing capitulation as a point for the bears.

“So every prior market cycle bottom for Bitcoin occurred on a volume spike…”—

Social Interest — Bitcoin’s social interest has declined since 2021 and could either recover with looser monetary policy or undergo another shakeout toward $60,000 and a higher low. Coinbase app rankings provide a bullish counterpoint, while Google Trends and Wikipedia views remain weak.

“What if right like I think there's this general thinking that social interest is going to come back and I hope it does right like I mean I really hope…”—

ETF Analogy — Cowen compares Bitcoin’s ETF launch near $48,000 with QQQ’s launch near 48 late in the Nasdaq bull market. QQQ then rallied toward 120 before falling toward 60, while Bitcoin later underperformed the S&P after its ETF launch, supporting the bearish analogy.

“But when the QQQ launched in like March of 99, you can see that propelled the final leg of the bull market…”—

ON-CHAIN

Incomplete Reset — Several valuation and reset measures remain above levels historically associated with Bitcoin cycle lows. The MVRV Z-score has not fallen below zero, and Bitcoin has not broken below realized price; these readings favor the bears, although prior cycles such as 2019 show that a complete reset is not always required.

“Now, objectively, every prior low in the market occurred after Bitcoin's MBRV Z-score went below zero. 2011, 2015, 2018, 2022.”—

Transaction Fees — Bitcoin transaction fees are near the level seen when the 2022 low occurred, providing a modest bullish signal. Cowen considers the evidence weak because fees could still decline.

“And so that's all we really have to go off of…”—

Holder Accumulation — Long-term holder accumulation has risen and plateaued in a pattern Cowen associates with major bear-market lows, including in 2018 and 2022. Short-term holder levels are also low, which has historically aligned with major lows and supports the bullish case.

“And so what normally happens is long-term accumulation, long-term holder accumulation moves higher and then it kind of just plateaus for a while and that's where the low occurs…”—

TECHNICALS

RSI Signal — Bitcoin’s weekly RSI near 26 and monthly RSI at levels seen in prior bear markets support the bullish case. However, both indicators could move lower while preserving historical patterns, so they do not confirm that the bottom is already in.

“Okay, if you look at the RSI, the relative strength index. Now, let's clean this up a little bit so it looks a little bit easier to read…”—

50-Week Average — Cowen views Bitcoin’s failure to decisively break above the 50-week moving average as bearish; the cited index closed 41 cents below it. Stronger bullish confirmation would require a weekly close roughly 20% above the average.

“If you have a weekly close above it where it significantly gets above it, not like 2022, but where you have like a 20% move above it, the low has…”—

200-Day Average — The 200-day moving average carries less weight than the 50-week average because Bitcoin moved above it in 2014 and 2015 before falling again. Although it worked during the prior cycle, those exceptions weaken its reliability as a standalone confirmation signal.

“But there are times where Bitcoin has gotten above the 200 day moving average and the low was not in…”—

INTRO bull case vs bear case

Setting up the indicator tally

On-chain indicators and market reset signals

Puell Multiple favors the bears

Weekly and monthly RSI favor bulls

MVRV Z-Score and realized price

ThermoCap, cycle cross, and holder accumulation

Time-based cycle comparisons

Comparing the drawdown with 2019

Low-to-low cycle timing

Post-halving timing and volume spikes

Social interest and the thematic ETF bear case

Coinbase rankings versus declining search interest

Bitcoin ETF parallels with QQQ

Gold and long-term social-interest risks

Thematic ETFs underperforming the market

Market-cap, risk, and macro indicators

Stablecoin supply and total market-cap signals

Risk metric and quantile regression levels

S&P 500 midterm-year correction risk

CME gaps and one-year ROI

Bitcoin buying strategy and moving-average signals

DCA strategy below 0.3 risk

50-week moving average confirmation

200-day average and Pi Cycle Bottom

Golden Cross and dollar headwinds

Related Episodes

Important Disclaimers

Not Investment Advice: For education only — not financial, tax or legal advice.

AI-Generated: Made by AI from source transcripts and may contain errors.

No Guarantees: Past performance does not predict future results; investing carries risk.

Our Commentary · Request Removal