全球流动性周期重塑：为什么 2025 的加密市场如此艰难？

coinvoicePublicado a 2025-11-13Actualizado a 2025-11-14

撰文：ODIG Invest

2025 年年中以来，加密市场整体呈现出高波动性和下行压力，主要资产价格持续回调、交易量萎缩，并伴随投资者信心不足。截至昨日，全球加密总市值约 3.33 万亿美元，较年初高峰缩水约 20-30%，BTC 主导率稳定在 55% 左右，波动率高达 40%，远超 2024 年。市场情绪偏向谨慎。

CryptoQuant 的链上数据显示，交易所 BTC 储备从 8 月初以来下降约 8%，储备 USD 价值从约 3000 亿降至 11 月的 2500 亿。这显示出投资者从交易所撤资（转向自托管或避险资产），强化了抛售信号。

主流 Token 价格在 2025 年上半年短暂反弹后，从 10 月起进入调整期，11 月进一步下探，Top 50 的 Token 价格几乎回落至 2022 年 FTX 崩盘后时期的水平。

总结一下 2025 年的加密市场现状，这包括：

主流 Token 如 SOL、ETH、BTC 都回到了 2024 年 12 月的价格；四年周期理论失效，行业参与者需要调整和磨合。

Token 数量爆炸：过去四年中，大多数代币的发行模式都是低流通、高 FDV 模型。Meme 潮之后，数量更是快速增加；目前，每天都有新的项目上线，市场上供应量庞大，资金愈发谨慎，除非新买家不断涌入，否则已不足以抵消项目的大规模解锁潮。

市场进入概念复用期：创新性不足；存在大量非必需技术；

项目落地困难：经济模型激励与调节效果不佳；众多项目未找到产品市场契合点（PMF）；

空投疲软：空投 Token 被用户立即兑换为稳定币；

交易难度大幅提升：凡是值得交易且流动性充足的标的，竞争都会异常激烈。

资金链紧张：VC 投资萎缩，总融资仅占 2024 年约一半，项目方资金链紧张。

行业内生问题频发：10.11 「黑天鹅」事件；黑客攻击频发（上半年损失超 20 亿美元）；Layer1 链拥堵事件等等。

DeFi 收益率降低：相较于 2024 年，DeFi 收益率降至 5% 以下。

这更像是一场结构性调整，类似于 2018 年，但规模更大。这几乎让每个市场参与者都面临困难，无论是用户，交易员，Meme 小将，创业者，VC，量化机构，等等。

尤其在 10.11 黑色星期五之后，很多加密交易员及量化机构有所折损，机构暴雷的隐忧仍在，这次事件意味着 投机者 / 专业交易员 / 零售投资者 都面临着资金损失。

而传统金融机构的参与集中在 BTC 及支付，RWA，DAT 策略等方向，与 Altcoin 市场相对割裂。比特币现货 ETF 在 10 月份整体表现强劲，净流入 34 亿美元，创下历史纪录，但在 11 月初出现了大规模资金外流，一定程度上反映了市场在价格高位时的获利了结行为。

目前，随着政府停摆结束的市场预期，官方流动性预计将重归。在 2025 年最后两个月，加密市场将会有怎样的表现？

越来越明确的方向仍然是：BTC 与稳定币。

（1）BTC：宏观流动性周期取代减半叙事

随着市场共识逐渐转向，分析师们认为全球流动性周期，而非单纯的比特币减半事件，是驱动牛熊转换的核心动力。

依据 Arthur Hayes 近期的核心「四年周期已死，流动性周期永生」。他认为，过去三轮牛熊都与美元 / 人民币大规模扩表、低利率的信用宽松时期高度吻合。 当前，美国国债堆积呈指数级增长，为稀释债务，常设回购工具（SRF）将成为政府的主要手段；SRF 余额增长意味着全球法币数量同步扩张。在「隐形量化宽松」下，BTC 的上涨趋势就不会改变。

认为常设回购工具（Standing Repo Facility, SRF）将成为政府的主要手段，当前货币市场状况持续、国债堆积呈指数级增长，SRF 余额将作为最后贷款人不断上升。SRF 余额增长意味着全球法币数量同步扩张，这将重新点燃比特币牛市。

Raoul Pal 的周期理论同样指出每个加密周期的终结源于货币紧缩政策。从数据上看，全球债务总量已达约 300 万亿美元，其中约 10 万亿美元（主要是美国国债和企业债）即将到期。为避免收益率飙升，需要大规模流动性注入。据其模型估算，每增加 1 万亿美元流动性，可能与风险资产（股票、加密货币）5-10% 的收益相关。10 万亿美元的再融资规模，可能为风险资产注入 2-3 万亿美元的新资金，从而强力推动 BTC 上涨。

以上思路都在全球央行流动性周期主宰下，为 BTC 等稀缺资产提供长期上涨的宏观环境。

（2）稳定币：走向到金融基础设施

2025 年的另一条主线是稳定币，其价值非「投机叙事」，而是「真实采用」。

最新的政策利好已经发布：美国国会正推动赋予 CFTC（美国商品期货交易委员会）对加密货币现货市场更大的管辖权。CFTC 预计在明年初出台一项政策，可能允许稳定币作为衍生品市场的代币化抵押品。这首先将在美国清算所进行试点，并伴随更严格的监管，为稳定币进入传统金融核心领域打开大门。

稳定币规模正迅猛扩张，远超市场预期。美国各大机构已抢先布局，致力于构建以稳定币为核心的全新支付网络。

面对真实应用场景的爆发，稳定币的价值是在跨境转账、汇率风险控制、企业结算调拨等场景中「稳定发挥」。

过去一年，它在速度、成本和合规性之间取得了平衡，初步形成了一个合规、低成本、可追溯的全球资金通道，正逐步成为现实世界可用的金融结算层。稳定币作为基础设施，其地位正通过监管和实际应用被夯实，为整个加密经济提供稳定的血液。

这对对创业者亦有启示：创业团队需要考虑将业务流程「稳定币原生化」，目标市场应瞄准「稳定币适用人群」，并在此基础上找到真正契合的产品 - 市场匹配（PMF）。

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：ODIG Invest

Lecturas Relacionadas

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

The Ethena (ENA) price has risen 14.11% from its July 8 low, recovering the $0.08 resistance zone to trade at $0.082. Despite this recent gain, the overall trend remains bearish, with the token down 94% from its all-time high. Positive developments include the launch of the Robinhood Earn feature, where ENA represented over 70% of user asset allocations, significantly boosting the Robinhood Chain's TVL. However, a large transfer of 1.231 billion ENA ($94 million) between unknown wallets created mixed signals. Technical analysis shows long-term bearish dominance, with price action below key former support. The ongoing bounce from $0.08 requires sustained buying pressure to continue. Key resistance is seen at the $0.105-$0.125 zone. Analysts suggest a potential bounce to that zone could present a selling opportunity, while current price levels offer unclear risk-reward for swing traders. The $0.08 level is crucial for keeping the recovery alive.

ambcryptoHace 16 min(s)

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

ambcryptoHace 16 min(s)

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

When users complained that Claude was "getting dumber," the root cause wasn't the AI model itself. In an official blog post, Anthropic clarified the critical difference between two key settings in Claude Code: Model and Effort. Model refers to the core "brain"—the fixed, trained weights of a specific AI (like Sonnet, Opus, or Fable). Changing the Model addresses *capability* ("can it do this?"), but its knowledge is static post-training. Effort, however, controls the AI's *approach and thoroughness* for a specific task. A higher Effort level instructs Claude to read more files, run tests, perform verification, and complete multi-step reasoning before responding, significantly increasing its "work output" for that job. Conversely, low Effort leads to quicker, less thorough replies. This distinction explains the March 2024 uproar where users experienced a sudden drop in Claude's performance. The cause was not a model change but Anthropic quietly lowering the *default* Effort setting from "high" to "medium" to reduce latency, which was later reverted. The key insight is that a smaller, capable model (like Sonnet) on high Effort can often outperform a larger, more powerful model (like Opus) on low Effort for many tasks. The article provides a practical troubleshooting framework: if Claude makes an error, first check the context and instructions. If it seems to skip necessary steps or validations, increase Effort. If it diligently attempts the task but fails conceptually or makes consistent factual errors despite good context, then consider switching to a more capable Model. The takeaway is a shift in focus: effective AI programming is less about always choosing the "strongest" model and more about intelligently *orchestrating* models and effort levels—acting like a project manager to assign the right "brain" with the right level of diligence for each job, optimizing both results and cost.

marsbitHace 22 min(s)

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

marsbitHace 22 min(s)

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) is undergoing significant internal turmoil and functional erosion. Following its largest-ever layoff of 54 staff (20% of its workforce) and a major organizational restructuring announced in June, its Protocol Support Team has been officially dissolved. This comes alongside the high-profile resignation of key figures like co-executive director Xiaowei Wang, bringing senior departures this year to at least eight. Criticism of EF's rigid structure, opaque decision-making, and perceived lack of a clear value narrative for ETH has intensified within the community. The layoffs have catalyzed the emergence of independent, non-profit organizations like Ethlabs and Ethereum Institutional, founded by former EF researchers and members. These entities are now taking on core functions such as protocol research/development and institutional adoption, effectively fragmenting the EF's traditional leadership role. Concurrently, EF's security team is adapting to technological change, deploying specialized AI agents to audit Ethereum's codebase, which successfully discovered a critical vulnerability (CVE-2026-34219). While EF states AI complements rather than replaces researchers, it signals a potential future shift in its operational model. Faced with these challenges—internal restructuring, talent drain, the rise of competing organizations, and AI integration—the Ethereum Foundation appears to be stepping back from a central commanding role. Analysts and community observers speculate it may increasingly transition towards a symbolic "ecosystem mascot" function, while decentralized initiatives drive Ethereum's future growth and institutional adoption.

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

Lighter (LIT) has experienced significant volatility, rallying 18% over the past week but facing potential overbought conditions. After a warning of a correction toward $2, the price dipped to $2.3 before recovering to $2.60. A major catalyst was the recent burn of over 15.6 million LIT tokens (worth ~$42 million), representing 6.3% of the circulating supply, which may have spurred short-term bullish momentum toward $3. Technical analysis on the 1-day chart shows a bearish divergence with the RSI, signaling a potential pullback despite strong demand. The key Fibonacci retracement level to watch is $2.30. On the 4-hour chart, LIT is forming a range between $2.31 and $2.68. The suggested strategy is to wait for a breakout above $2.70 to target $3.06-$3.21, or a breakdown below $2.31 for a likely deeper retracement below $2. In summary, while bullish momentum persists, traders should monitor the range boundaries for the next directional move.

ambcryptoHace 3 hora(s)

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

ambcryptoHace 3 hora(s)

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

The domestic embodied AI data industry has attracted nearly 100 players, with 70 focused on data collection and 27 on data infrastructure. In the past year, 15 independent embodied data service providers raised approximately 4.47 billion yuan. Despite this growth, the sector remains early-stage, fragmented, and faces significant challenges. Data collection methods are diverse, categorized into four main routes: teleoperation of real robots, human demonstration without a robot (using motion capture, exoskeletons, etc.), simulation synthesis, and distillation from internet videos. Most companies (43%) adopt hybrid approaches, combining multiple routes, as no single method can meet all training needs. Teleoperation alone is pursued by 31% of players, often by state-owned platforms and robot companies, while newer firms favor asset-light, no-hardware human demonstration. Independent data service providers now form the largest player group (40%), indicating the emergence of a distinct industry segment rather than just a subsidiary function for robot makers. Two-thirds of all players are "embodied-native" startups, while one-third are companies that pivoted from fields like AI data annotation, which are more prevalent in the data infrastructure layer. Current annual industry capacity is estimated at 1.6-1.8 million hours plus 70-80 million data points, with a short-term goal to increase this 15-20 fold within 1-3 years. Data collection factories are spread across 20 provinces in China, concentrated in the Yangtze River Delta, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and Pearl River Delta regions. Financially, the 4.47 billion yuan raised in the past year pales compared to the 43.8 billion yuan raised by the broader embodied intelligence sector in just the first half of 2026, highlighting that data remains a less "sexy" bet for investors. The 15 funded independent providers show clear stratification: a top tier led by a unicorn (Lightwheel Intelligence, 3.1 billion yuan), a middle tier of 11 firms raising tens to hundreds of millions, and an early-stage tier of 3 companies. Sixty-nine investment institutions have participated, but none have made concentrated bets, reflecting uncertainty about viable business models. Over half of these funded companies are less than a year old, most are at pre-A or A rounds, and profitability remains largely unproven. In summary, the embodied data industry has become an independent track creating jobs and local economic activity. However, it is still nascent, with unformed consensus, unsolved problems, and unproven business models. The coming 1-2 years will be a critical validation window to see if companies can build sustainable, profitable businesses purely by "selling data."

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片