Geopolitical risk added another layer of caution. Iranian officials warned they could halt regional oil exports, invoking the Strait of Hormuz, with the message that no one ships oil if Iran can’t. Crude prices jumped on the threat, and Bitcoin softened as traders priced in the risk of a wider disruption. The logic is familiar: a supply shock in energy feeds inflation expectations, which complicates the case for rate cuts, which in turn weighs on risk assets.
Against this backdrop, the debate over whether Bitcoin has found its bottom has grown louder. Samson Mow argued that the bottom is already in, pointing to an accelerated halving cycle and growing institutional demand following the launch of US spot Bitcoin ETFs. On the other side, analysts like Markus Thielen and Arthur Hayes see more downside, with forecasts of $55,000 or even $40,000 based on technical indicators such as the 200-week moving average and bear crosses in long-term moving averages. The divide is not just about price levels; it reflects fundamentally different views on whether institutional adoption has permanently altered Bitcoin’s market dynamics or whether historical patterns still hold sway.