比特币投资大局观:与黄金和纳指长期相关,流动性仍是关键驱动力

coinvoicePublished on 2024-07-26Last updated on 2024-08-02

作者:ECOINOMETRICS

编译:深潮TechFlow

如果你从日常主要资产类别的波动中抽离出来,你会发现一个大的趋势。

这个趋势将比特币、黄金和在股票市场中占据重要地位的领先公司联系在一起,并且它正在影响所有下游的事物。

这是我们应该关注的大局。

要点
本周我们不看短期相关性,而是放眼长远。当我们看大局时,我们学到了什么:

比特币的价格趋势在长期内与黄金和纳斯达克密切相关,这主要受全球流动性条件的驱动。

许多加密资产、矿工和相关股票都跟随比特币的走势。投资这些资产实际上是在押注比特币的方向。

美国的金融状况正在放松,为比特币和相关资产创造了有利的环境。

当前的流动性支持比特币,但潜在的美国经济衰退仍然是一个需要关注的关键风险。

理解这些长期趋势和宏观相关性对于有效导航加密市场至关重要。

放眼宏观相关性
自从我们开始这个相关性报告以来,我通常专注于较短的时间框架。对我们来说,“短”意味着月度规模,所以我们通常研究1个月滚动窗口内的相关性变化。

这种方法有助于识别潜在的转折点,但也带来相对较大的噪声(因此分析中需要一些猜测)。

有时候,值得放眼长远,以更好地理解长期趋势。

大约15年前,当我刚进入量化业务时,在短时间框架内仍然可以找到信息优势。但随着时间的推移,这些优势变得越来越难以捕捉,我认为对长期交易的大局有一个深刻的理解才是真正的优势所在。

所以今天,我决定调整一些参数,研究比特币与几个“宏观”资产在1年滚动窗口内的趋势相似性得分的变化。

这种方法有助于确保我们不会见树不见林,并为我们提供一个更清晰的整体图景。

这是结果。提醒一下,接近1的趋势相似性得分意味着两种资产的趋势方向相同,而接近-1的得分表明它们的趋势方向相反。

 

比特币是否受到美元强弱波动(DXY)的巨大影响?并没有。趋势相似性得分仅在正值和负值之间波动。

比特币与利率变动有关吗?同样影响不大。我们看到的趋势相关性与DXY的模式相似。

然而,当你观察黄金和纳斯达克时,你会发现更一致的关系。尤其是自从我们度过了最近的熊市,比特币、黄金和纳斯达克之间的联系非常紧密。

这并非巧合。有一个共同的因素将这三者联系在一起:全球流动性。

全球流动性通过影响风险偏好和投资流动来驱动这些资产。宽松的货币政策不仅提升了比特币和以科技为主的纳斯达克股票等风险资产,同时也提升了作为对抗潜在通胀对冲的黄金。随着流动性的波动,这些资产往往会同步移动,反映出更广泛的经济状况和投资者情绪。

这会产生下游影响。

比特币的下游效应
这里我们讨论的是相关性,而不是潜在的因果关系。

然而,可以公正地说,我们可以将世界分为领导者和追随者。

例如,全球流动性是领导者,比特币是追随者。或者比特币是领导者,MicroStrategy是追随者。

当谈到比特币的追随者时,我们可以识别出几个自然类别:

加密资产(如以太坊)

从比特币中获取价值的资产(如矿工、MicroStrategy)

间接从比特币价值增长中获利的资产(如 Coinbase)

通过观察这些资产在1年期内的趋势相似性得分,我们可以看到一些典型的行为模式。让我们来看几个例子:

 

这个规则基本上是这样的:在足够长的时间范围内(比如一年),比特币与所有直接或间接相关资产之间的趋势相关性非常高。

实际上,“非常高” 这个词还不够准确。我应该说这些趋势相关性非常强。

押注这些资产中的任何一个,基本上就等同于对比特币进行方向性押注。是的,其中一些资产的增长速度会比其他资产更快。但它们都会一起繁荣或衰退。

好消息是,目前的条件似乎有利于这些资产的繁荣。

流动性顺风
几个月前,我们讨论了美国的金融状况正处于关键时刻。

有两种可能的情况:

如果通胀形势恶化,我们将面临“高利率维持更久”以及更多次加息的风险。即使只是这种威胁,也会导致金融环境收紧,金融资产的流动性减少。

如果通胀形势改善,美联储可能会开始降息。这将可能导致比当时更宽松的金融环境。 最终,宽松的情景占据了上风。从国家金融状况指数的趋势中已经可以明显看出这一点。

 

与流动性对抗是非常危险的。在2008年金融危机后,流动性成为一切的驱动力。

随着金融环境因预期降息而变得宽松,比特币(及其相关资产)将迎来顺风。

唯一可能打破这种局面的因素是美国陷入经济衰退。因此,我密切关注就业市场的变化速度。


声明:本内容为作者独立观点,不代表 CoinVoice 立场,且不构成投资建议,请谨慎对待,如需报道或加入交流群,请联系微信:VOICE-V。

来源:深潮TechFlow

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

According to an analysis published by ZeroDrift on June 22, 2026, attackers have stolen approximately $16.9 million over 40 days from five deprecated but still operational smart contracts across various blockchains. The primary issue is not a specific vulnerability but the incomplete decommissioning of legacy contracts. These "zombie contracts" often retain economic value, operational permissions, and callable functions, making them prime targets long after teams cease active development. The most significant loss occurred at DxSale, where an old locker contract lost about $7.3 million due to a forgotten control path becoming accessible again. Other affected projects include TrustedVolumes (~$5.87M), Raydium's legacy AMM pool (~$1.34M), Aztec Connect (~$2.28M), and Huma Finance V1 pool (~$101k). These incidents involved diverse systems—RFQ settlement, credit pools, liquidity lockers, AMMs—demonstrating the widespread nature of the risk. The analysis highlights that automated tools are lowering the cost for attackers to systematically scan for these long-tail targets, which have public code and weaker monitoring. In contrast, defensive practices for contract retirement remain underdeveloped. While the DeFi industry has mature audit processes for new deployments, it lacks strict protocols for securely sunsetting old contracts, which only become truly "retired" after all funds, permissions, authorizations, and trust assumptions are removed.

marsbit8m ago

Hackers Steal Nearly $17 Million in 40 Days as 'Zombie Contracts' Become Their ATMs

marsbit8m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

"The Old Titans' Valuation Collapse: The Death of an Era's Valuation Framework" Between Alibaba's 2014 NYSE debut at $93.89 and its 2026 price of ~$95, twelve years have passed with zero price appreciation. This stagnation symbolizes a wholesale valuation reset for an entire generation of Chinese internet assets. Companies like Tencent, Pinduoduo, Meituan, Bilibili, and Kuaishou have seen catastrophic declines of 80-98% from their peaks. The core question arises: what framework now prices these companies, or has the framework itself expired? The valuation logic for Chinese internet stocks followed a clear "anchor-setting and anchor-removing" process. From 2014-2017, the dominant narrative was "US comparable discounting" – applying a growth premium and governance discount to US peers' multiples. This anchor loosened with the 2018 US-China trade war and the VIE structure risk, then was violently uprooted by the 2020-2021 regulatory crackdowns (Ant Group, Didi, anti-monopoly fines). The 2022 delisting panic and subsequent 2025-2026 geopolitical shocks (US military lists, AI espionage accusations) completed the demolition. The old "US对标打折" model is dead. However, this is not solely a China story. A structural mirror exists in US "old titan" stocks ("老登股"). In 2026, even Microsoft – with robust fundamentals – saw its PE compress from a 34x median to 22x, its worst performer status among the "Magnificent Seven" driven by a $190 billion annual AI capex crushing free cash flow. The core dilemma is universal: legacy platform giants, whether Alibaba or Microsoft, are spending colossal sums to chase an AI paradigm that may颠覆 their own high-margin, user/subscription-based business models. They have shifted from "companies defining the future" to "companies needing to prove they won't be淘汰ed by the future." This phenomenon of a dying valuation坐标系 has a historical precedent: post-1989 Japan. After its bubble burst, the "Japan premium" narrative ("most efficient manufacturing + perpetual growth") collapsed. A 25-year valuation vacuum ensued until Warren Buffett provided a new language in the 2010s: "low valuation + high dividend + governance reform." China's internet sector is now in a similar vacuum six years into its reset. While different from Japan's deflationary context, the parallel is clear: the old macro assumption of "deep integration with global capital" is falsified, but a new pricing framework is absent. Potential "new languages" for Chinese internet valuations are contradictory. AI transformation requires gutting profitable core businesses (e.g., Alibaba's ad-driven e-commerce) for an unproven consumption-based model, risking a Microsoft-like cash flow crunch. Alternatively, shareholder returns (buybacks/dividends) could build a floor, following Buffett's Japanese playbook, but current scales are insufficient to form a standalone anchor. The current state mirrors mid-1990s Japan: the old framework is dead, the new one unborn. The market waits in a vacuum for a重新定义ing force – a person, event, or proven business model shift – to answer "why buy." This may only be the middle phase of a prolonged re-rating.

marsbit16m ago

Valuation Rout of Old Titans: The Demise of a Generation's Asset Valuation Framework

marsbit16m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Title: STRC Deeply Discounted, mNAV Falls Below Break-even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Redefined The recent volatility in MSTR and STRC highlights the need to reassess the core business model of Bitcoin reserve companies. These entities function more like leveraged, single-asset banks rather than software/tech firms. Consequently, they should be valued using banking metrics, not based on their total Bitcoin holdings. The key valuation metric is mNAV (market net asset value), akin to a price-to-book ratio. It compares the company's market capitalization to the equity value of its Bitcoin holdings after deducting all senior debt and preferred equity (like STRC). As of June 24, Strategy's mNAV was 1.10x. The focus should be on "net Bitcoin per share" (the Bitcoin claim per share after senior claims) and its growth rate, equivalent to a bank's book value and return on assets. Given STRC's 19% discount to its $100 par value (yielding 14.2%), issuing new MSTR equity at the current price to buy more Bitcoin is inefficient. It slightly dilutes the widely watched "total Bitcoin per share" metric while providing minimal improvement to the more critical "net Bitcoin per share." The article analyzes four potential uses for $1 billion in new equity: 1. **Buy Bitcoin:** Least effective. Improves net Bitcoin per share only marginally while diluting total Bitcoin per share. 2. **Repurchase STRC:** Most effective for balance sheet repair. The discount creates immediate value, increasing net Bitcoin per share by 1.0%, reducing debt burden, and lowering future dividend obligations. 3. **Boost Cash Reserves:** Dramatically improves the "cash coverage ratio" for STRC dividends from 9.8 months to 16.8 months, a crucial liquidity metric in a tightening funding environment. 4. **50/50 Split (STRC buyback & cash):** A balanced approach improving all key metrics. Strategy's own Q1 report indicates its internal break-even mNAV for profitable equity issuance to buy Bitcoin is 1.22x. With the current mNAV at 1.10x, such a move would be value-destructive. The core assumptions of its previous expansion model—issuing STRC at par and maintaining ample dividend coverage—have broken down. The recommended path is to use new capital to optimize core financial health: repurchasing discounted STRC and/or bolstering cash reserves. This would repair the balance sheet, signal liquidity strength, support STRC's price, lower its yield, and potentially reopen the par-value issuance channel. The current STRC discount represents a low-cost capital opportunity to restart this positive cycle. Bitcoin reserve companies must be evaluated as banks, focusing on book value, leverage, and liquidity resilience.

Foresight News17m ago

STRC Trading at Significant Discount, mNAV Falls Below Break-Even, Strategy's Valuation Logic Has Been Rewritten

Foresight News17m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

463 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片