Analyst’s Bitcoin Price Crash Prediction From May 2025 Resurfaces And It Says The Bottom Is Not In

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-02-09Actualizado a 2026-02-09

Resumen

A previously published Bitcoin price crash projection from analyst KillaXBT, dating back to May 13, 2025, has regained attention for accurately predicting the current market downturn. The model uses rotational market mathematics to identify cycle stages—accumulation, distribution, and breakdown—and signaled that Bitcoin had not yet reached a macro bottom. The analysis highlighted key levels, including accumulation phases that fueled the rally and distribution zones near $115,000–$120,000 where exhaustion signals emerged. The chart correctly anticipated rejections at highs, fading momentum, and eventual breakdowns, with Bitcoin transitioning into mid-range consolidation around $100,000 before falling further. Currently, Bitcoin is trading in a lower distribution band near $70,000, with the model suggesting extended bearish consolidation. Relief rallies lack strength, and volatility remains high on declines. The projection indicates a potential capitulation toward $50,000 to complete the distribution phase, concluding that the true market bottom has not yet been established.

A previously published Bitcoin price crash projection from May 13, 2025, has re-entered market discourse after several prominent crypto traders on X recirculated the chart and commended the foresight behind the analysis from KillaXBT. The model mapped Bitcoin’s full cycle structure — from accumulation to distribution and breakdown — long before the current correction unfolded. Now, the same framework is signaling that Bitcoin has yet to establish a macro bottom.

Chart Signals That Nailed The Bitcoin Price Crash

KillaXBT’s framework is built on rotational market mathematics, measuring how many times price cycles are within a range before exhaustion. The analyst segmented Bitcoin’s structure into consolidation blocks and assigned swing counts to identify when liquidity had been fully absorbed.

In the early phase, accumulation rotations labeled “(2×2)+1 = 5” and “(5×2)+1 = 11” defined the base that ultimately fueled Bitcoin’s impulsive rally. These counts indicated that internal liquidity cycling was complete, clearing the path for expansion. Once that move matured, the price transitioned into a high-range consolidation beneath the cycle peak.

Inside the 115,000–120,000 distribution zone, the chart identified overlapping exhaustion clusters marked “(2×5)+1 = 9” and “(3×2)+1 = 7.” For traders, stacked counts at highs typically signal supply absorption. Although Bitcoin printed marginal higher highs, momentum was fading — a textbook late-stage distribution signal.

Source: Chart from KillaXBT on X

Market behavior followed that roadmap. Bitcoin formed repeated rejection wicks near the highs, upside momentum slowed, and breakout attempts failed to secure acceptance above resistance. Volume compression reinforced the distribution thesis. Instead of continuation, the price rolled over.

The model then mapped a transition into mid-range consolidation around the 100,000 psychological level, with BTCUSDT referenced near 102,603. Annotated “(2×2)+1 = 5, then subtract 2 = 3,” the structure signaled weakening bounce capacity. Price action mirrored the setup: multiple support tests, lower highs, and eventual breakdown — completing the crash phase outlined in the May 2025 forecast.

Bitcoin Price Could Drop Further Before Hitting Bottom

The resurfaced chart’s larger significance lies in its forward projection. After the six-figure range failed, the model guided Bitcoin into a lower distribution band around 70,000. This zone carried heavier rotational counts — “4×2 = 8” and “(5×5)+1 = 26” — implying extended consolidation within a bearish continuation framework.

Current market behavior continues to align with that structure. Bitcoin has already rotated into lower support territory following the 100K breakdown, while volatility has expanded on selloffs rather than recoveries. Relief rallies remain corrective, lacking the impulsive follow-through required to confirm bottom formation.

The chart’s final stage shows a potential capitulation toward the $50,000 area, marked by a sharp move below the lower range. Structurally, this is an unfinished downside that completes the current distribution phase.

The sequence is straightforward: accumulation pushed prices higher, the rise led to distribution, and now distribution is causing further breakdowns. Because no consolidation has shown the expansion profile typical of a macro base, the model maintains that the true bottom is not yet in.

BTC trading at $69,162 on the 1D chart | Source: BTCUSDT on Tradingview.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main prediction of the resurfaced Bitcoin price analysis from May 2025?

AThe analysis predicts that the Bitcoin price crash is not over yet and that the true macro bottom has not been established, with a potential further drop toward the $50,000 area.

QWho created the Bitcoin price projection model that is being discussed?

AThe model was created by an analyst known as KillaXBT.

QWhat key mathematical concept does KillaXBT's framework use to analyze Bitcoin's price action?

AThe framework is built on rotational market mathematics, measuring how many times price cycles are within a range before exhaustion, using formulas like (2x2)+1=5 to identify liquidity absorption and exhaustion clusters.

QAccording to the model, what was the significance of the distribution zone between $115,000 and $120,000?

AThis zone was identified as a high-range distribution area with overlapping exhaustion clusters, signaling supply absorption and marking a late-stage distribution phase before the price rolled over.

QWhat is the model's final projected stage for the current Bitcoin price cycle?

AThe model's final projected stage is a potential capitulation event, involving a sharp move below the lower consolidation range toward the $50,000 area to complete the current distribution phase.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

In the race to dominate the AI era's entry point, China's tech giants—Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba—are aggressively deploying AI Agents to control the future of traffic distribution. Alibaba is pursuing a dual-track "closed loop + openness" strategy. Its Qianwen app is evolving into a super-Agent integrated across its ecosystem (Taobao, Alipay, etc.) to handle complex tasks like travel planning. Concurrently, it is opening its platform to external brands (Luckin Coffee, KFC) and has launched a B2B Agent platform, "Wukong," targeting enterprise automation. Its other flagship, Quark, aims to be an "AI super search box" for information and tasks. ByteDance is executing an omnipresent "sprawl strategy." Its Doubao app boasts over 300 million monthly active users and is evolving into a default AI entry point for daily life, with plans for paid versions and e-commerce integration. Its core weapon is the Kouzi platform, a visual "AI assembly factory" for developers to build custom Agents. ByteDance is also pushing hardware integration, collaborating on AI phones and developing smart glasses to embed Doubao everywhere. Tencent is playing its long-held "ultimate card" by quietly embedding an AI Agent directly into WeChat. This Agent, accessible via a swipe, can understand user commands and automatically execute tasks by calling upon WeChat's millions of mini-programs (e.g., finding and ordering coffee). This leverages WeChat's unparalleled 1.4-billion-user ecosystem to position the app as an AI-powered "service operating system," a move that could dramatically reshape the competitive landscape. The core battleground is shifting from competing for "user screen time" to competing to be the "default execution layer" for user intent. The business model is evolving from an "attention economy" to an "intent economy," where the Agent that can most efficiently fulfill a user's need gains control over service access and token flow. This represents a fundamental change in how users connect with digital services, making the fight for the Agent入口 (entry point) a pivotal moment for redefining industry leadership in the AI age.

marsbitHace 58 min(s)

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

marsbitHace 58 min(s)

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

The article explores the sudden shift in WeChat's strategy towards AI assistants from mobile phone manufacturers, transitioning from strict opposition to active collaboration. For over a year, WeChat fiercely resisted attempts by phone AI assistants (like ByteDance's Doubao in late 2025) to control its features via GUI automation ("simulated clicking"), citing security and data control concerns. This stance created a significant barrier for system-level AI integration. Now, Tencent has initiated A2A (Agent-to-Agent) partnerships with major phone brands like Honor, Xiaomi, OPPO, and vivo. This model allows a phone's system AI (e.g., Honor's YOYO) to parse a user's voice command and send a structured request directly to WeChat's own internal AI agent via secure APIs. WeChat then executes the action (e.g., sending a message) and returns the result. The article attributes Tencent's "change of face" to strategic pressure. While leading in social app usage, Tencent trails rivals like ByteDance and Alibaba in standalone AI app popularity. WeChat, with its vast mini-program ecosystem, is Tencent's key asset for an AI comeback. The upcoming WeChat AI agent aims to handle tasks like booking and payments within the app. However, phone system assistants remain the primary AI entry point for most users. The A2A collaboration allows Tencent to extend WeChat's AI reach to this crucial system layer while maintaining control over its core functions and data. For phone manufacturers, embracing A2A is a pragmatic move. The GUI route proved unviable due to WeChat's blocks. A2A offers a compliant path to integrate a vital service, enhancing their AI assistants' usefulness. It allows them to focus on developing their own AI ecosystems for other services while cooperating on WeChat access. The collaboration is framed as a mutual, strategic necessity: Tencent gains a distribution channel, and manufacturers gain a key functionality. The partnership relies on a "dual authorization" mechanism for security, requiring both user and app consent for each action. While questions about long-term data privacy practices remain, experts note A2A is more secure and compliant than GUI automation. Ultimately, this cooperation is seen as a tentative, calculated truce. Tencent's long-term goal is to make WeChat an AI-powered "service OS." Phone manufacturers aim to make their system AI the central user interface. Their paths may converge or clash in the future, but for now, the A2A deal represents the opening chapter in the battle for the AI-era user入口, driven by necessity and strategic calculus on both sides.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片