BIT Research: If It Followed Nasdaq, Bitcoin Should Be Close to $140,000

marsbitPubblicato 2026-05-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-15

Introduzione

BIT Research: Bitcoin Price Analysis Under Inflation Re-pricing The market is currently undergoing a macro adjustment phase dominated by inflation re-pricing. Analysis suggests that if Bitcoin had continued to follow Nasdaq's trajectory, its theoretical price would be near $140,000. However, a significant divergence between the two assets has emerged since October 2025. The core reason is the resurgence of US inflation, which has led to a reversal in market expectations for the Federal Reserve's rate-cut path. Recent data shows US CPI rising to 3.8% and PPI to 6.0%, prompting markets to scale back expectations for 2026 rate cuts. For Bitcoin, the previous supportive narrative of anticipated loose liquidity is weakening. Concurrently, escalating tensions involving Iran have driven oil prices up approximately 40% since late February 2026, heightening inflation concerns through rising energy costs. While the market currently views this inflation surge as a temporary pressure point, the interplay between energy, interest rates, and risk appetite is prompting a reassessment of the potential for a prolonged high-rate environment. In this context, Bitcoin has begun to underperform tech stocks, which can benefit from nominal inflation. The divergence stems from a key distinction: Bitcoin's past rallies were driven by loose liquidity and rate-cut expectations, not inflation itself. As a long-duration asset, Bitcoin is highly sensitive to interest rate paths. When expectations for ...

The market is currently in a macro adjustment stage dominated by inflation repricing. If Bitcoin had continued to follow the Nasdaq's trajectory, its current theoretical price should be close to $140,000. However, since October 2025, the divergence between the two has begun to widen significantly. The core reason behind this lies in the resurgence of US inflation, prompting a reversal in market expectations regarding the path of interest rate cuts.

Latest data shows that US CPI has risen from the previous 2.4% to 3.8%, while PPI has increased from 2.9% to 6.0%. Simultaneously, the interest rate market is gradually withdrawing some of its pricing for rate cuts in 2026. For Bitcoin, the expectation of loose liquidity that previously supported its rally is beginning to weaken. Meanwhile, escalating tensions in Iran have driven oil prices up by approximately 40% since late February 2026, with rising energy costs further intensifying market concerns about inflation.

Based on current pricing, the market still tends to view this round of inflation as a temporary pressure disturbance. However, as the interplay between energy, interest rates, and risk appetite strengthens, the market is also beginning to reassess the risk of a prolonged high-interest-rate environment. During this process, Bitcoin's performance has started to noticeably underperform that of tech stocks, which can benefit from nominal inflation.

Inflation Repricing: Why Bitcoin Struggles to Benefit from a High-Inflation Environment

Most investors often equate "monetary expansion" with "inflation," but they actually correspond to entirely different market phases. Over the past few years, a key driver for Bitcoin's rise has essentially been loose liquidity and expectations of rate cuts, rather than inflation itself. In December 2022, the BIT model already pointed to a significant easing of price pressures and signaled that central bank policies might subsequently turn toward releasing rate cut signals. This also became a crucial starting point for the rally in tech stocks and Bitcoin from 2023 to 2025.

The problem, however, is that when inflation genuinely begins to resurface, market logic changes. Even before actual rate hikes materialize, mere expectations that "interest rates will remain higher for longer" are enough to trigger a repricing of Bitcoin. As a typical long-duration asset, Bitcoin is highly sensitive to the interest rate path; once rate cut expectations are withdrawn, its valuation tends to come under pressure.

At the same time, Bitcoin is not like stocks, which can gain structural benefits in a certain inflationary environment. Stocks may benefit not only from rising nominal corporate revenues but also potentially from a reduction in the real burden of debt. Bitcoin, on the other hand, has neither debt that can be diluted by inflation nor cash flows that can expand with inflation, making it difficult to benefit directly from this round of rising inflation. This also explains the recent pronounced divergence between the Nasdaq and Bitcoin.

From Energy Shock to Rate Constraints: The Market Begins Reassessing the Liquidity Path

The issue the market is truly concerned about now is not just "whether inflation is rising," but whether high inflation will force the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates elevated for an extended period. The BIT model forecasts that US CPI could potentially rise further to 6.0%. If this scenario materializes, Bitcoin may experience periodic pullbacks around the release of each CPI and PPI data point.

Meanwhile, while the crude oil futures curve indicates that oil prices will gradually decline in the future, they are unlikely to return to the pre-conflict level of around $63 in the short term. The market has already priced in a long-term premium of approximately 15% in oil prices, reflecting genuine supply bottlenecks. Starting from the current price of around $101 per barrel, the market expects oil prices to fall to $89 by September 2026, to $80 by January 2027, and further to $73 by January 2028.

Beyond geopolitical and energy factors, the expansion of AI infrastructure may also be altering the inflation path the market had previously grown accustomed to. Data center construction, power demand, and infrastructure capital expenditures are continuously pushing up energy pressures. This suggests that inflation may remain above target levels for longer than previously anticipated by the market. In such an environment, tech stocks can benefit from order growth and improved earnings expectations, while Bitcoin is more susceptible to pressure from high-interest-rate conditions.

Overall, the core of this market shift is not a breakdown of Bitcoin's long-term logic but rather a reassessment of the interest rate and liquidity path as inflation resurfaces. In the short term, the high-inflation environment may continue to suppress Bitcoin's performance, causing it to underperform the Nasdaq periodically. However, this does not signal a market shift towards bearishness; more accurately, it merely slows Bitcoin's upward momentum. As the market begins to price in expectations of renewed liquidity easing in the future, Bitcoin may still regain support.

Some of the above viewpoints are from BIT on Target. Contact us to obtain the full BIT on Target report.

Disclaimer: Markets involve risks, and investments require caution. This article does not constitute investment advice. Trading digital assets can be extremely risky and volatile. Investment decisions should be made after careful consideration of personal circumstances and consultation with financial professionals. BIT is not responsible for any investment decisions based on the information provided in this content.

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to the article, what would Bitcoin's price theoretically be if it had continued to follow the Nasdaq's performance?

AIf Bitcoin had continued to follow the Nasdaq's performance, its price should theoretically be close to $140,000.

QWhat are the two main economic data points cited as indicators of rising inflation in the US?

AThe two main economic data points cited are the US CPI rising from 2.4% to 3.8% and the PPI rising from 2.9% to 6.0%.

QWhy does the article argue that Bitcoin has difficulty benefiting from a high inflation environment compared to stocks?

ABitcoin has difficulty benefiting because it is a long-duration asset highly sensitive to interest rate expectations, and it lacks corporate earnings or debt that can be nominally inflated, unlike stocks which can benefit from rising nominal revenues and reduced real debt burdens.

QWhat future CPI level does the BIT model predict, and what is the potential impact on Bitcoin according to the article?

AThe BIT model predicts that US CPI may further rise to 6.0%. If this happens, Bitcoin could experience periodic pullbacks around the release of each new CPI and PPI data.

QBesides geopolitical tensions, what other factor is mentioned as potentially prolonging inflation above target levels?

AThe expansion of AI infrastructure, including data center construction, power demand, and related capital expenditures, is mentioned as a factor that may sustain energy pressures and keep inflation above target levels longer than previously expected.

Letture associate

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

**Title:** The AI PC Battle: Don't Bet on Sides, Bet on the Tollbooth **Summary:** The AI PC competition is moving beyond simple "x86 vs. Arm" narratives. The core investment thesis should focus on identifying which players can sustain margins, cash flow, and pricing power throughout the upgrade cycle, rather than backing a particular architecture. The opportunity is analyzed in three layers: 1. **The Advanced Foundry Tollbooth:** TSMC is positioned to collect "tolls" regardless of which chip designer wins, due to its dominant ~70% share in advanced semiconductor manufacturing, which is essential for high-end AI PC chips. 2. **Compute & Platform Spillover:** AMD represents an offensive in the x86 CPU+GPU space, while NVIDIA leverages its GPU and CUDA software stack dominance. Both benefit from the demand for increased local AI compute. 3. **Architecture Diffusion & Turnaround Plays:** ARM and Intel offer potential for significant upside (elasticity), but investments here require stricter discipline due to higher execution risks and competitive challenges. The industry is transitioning from concept to shipment validation. While short-term forecasts for AI PC adoption have been revised down slightly due to tariffs and procurement delays, the long-term trend towards AI becoming a standard PC feature remains intact. The key driver for upgrade cycles will be whether compelling enterprise applications (e.g., privacy-sensitive computing, low-latency inference) emerge beyond consumer-focused features like meeting summarization. Investment strategy should prioritize companies with platform-level advantages and recurring revenue streams. TSMC offers high certainty as the foundational tollbooth. AMD presents a strong offensive play within the established ecosystem. ARM and Intel are higher-risk, higher-potential-reward turnaround bets. The report cautions against chasing short-term hype and emphasizes a disciplined, long-term approach focused on buying ecosystem strength and cash-flow certainty after market enthusiasm subsides. **Key Risks:** Underwhelming AI PC applications slowing upgrade cycles; slow improvement in Windows on Arm compatibility; macro/tariff impacts on PC demand; potential advanced node supply-demand mismatches affecting TSMC; high overall AI sector valuations making stocks vulnerable to a risk-off shift in markets.

marsbit14 min fa

AI PC Battle: Bet on the Toll Booth, Not the Camp

marsbit14 min fa

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

Marvell Technology's stock price surged from under $10 in 2016 to a record $290 in June 2026, fueled not by making GPUs, but by dominating AI infrastructure connectivity. This analysis argues the market misvalues MRVL as merely a smaller Broadcom in custom AI chips, overlooking its true, unique position. Marvell's core strength lies in enabling high-speed data flow for AI clusters through three interconnected businesses. First, it holds a commanding ~70% market share in high-speed optical DSPs (essential for data center light modules), a deep-moat business with accelerating growth. Second, its custom AI chip design business serves hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, with a significant revenue pipeline despite lower margins. Third, stable cash flows come from Ethernet switch chips and enterprise storage controllers. Together, they form a full-stack "AI data movement" platform. CEO Matt Murphy's transformative leadership since 2016, involving strategic divestments, key acquisitions (like Inphi for optical DSPs), and securing long-term agreements with major cloud providers, repositioned the company. A pivotal $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA in 2026 underscored Marvell's critical role in the AI ecosystem, particularly through collaborations like NVLink Fusion. While Marvell faces risks—including client concentration (losing the Amazon Trainium3 design), lower-margin business mix, competitive threats, insider selling, and complex supply chains—its fundamentals remain strong. The optical interconnect moat is widening with the acquisition of Celestial AI (photonics fabric), and financial metrics show accelerating revenue growth and operating leverage. With a PEG ratio suggesting undervaluation relative to its growth, the thesis is that the market undervalues Marvell's monopolistic position in AI "plumbing" while overemphasizing its competitive custom chip segment. The story transcends investing, symbolizing how in any complex system—from the internet to AI—the value of "connection" ultimately surpasses that of individual "nodes."

marsbit44 min fa

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

marsbit44 min fa

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

A discussion on Zhihu about "AI relay stations" shifted the niche developer topic of "cheap tokens" into broader user awareness. Users moved beyond simply questioning the legitimacy of these services to focus on practical concerns: Where do cheap tokens truly come from? Is the model being accessed the real one? Can relay stations see prompts, code, and API keys? For occasional users, are the risks worth it? The core debate centered less on price and more on trust. A primary worry is model authenticity—the risk of "model swapping," where users paying for a premium model might be routed to a cheaper one, creating an information asymmetry. Others argued that cost comparisons matter; while cheaper than official pay-as-you-go APIs, relay stations may not be the lowest-cost option versus subscriptions, domestic models, or free tiers, making user needs assessment crucial. Speculation about token sources ranged from legitimate bulk discounts to gray-area methods like account sharing or exploiting regional pricing. This opacity makes risk assessment difficult for users. Data security emerged as a critical concern, especially for enterprise use. When processing sensitive information like code, contracts, or client data, the inability to verify a relay station's data handling, retention, or access policies poses significant compliance and confidentiality risks. The evolving consensus suggests relay stations can be used cautiously for low-sensitivity, disposable tasks (e.g., summarizing public info, simple translation). However, they should not be the default for sensitive, professional, or production workflows involving proprietary data, Agents, or automated systems. Recommendations include avoiding large prepayments, not relying on a single service, using test prompts to monitor quality, anonymizing data where possible, and keeping official channels as backups. Ultimately, the discussion framed tokens not just as a billing unit but as a measure of real cost encompassing price, model integrity, data security, and service stability. The popularity of relay stations highlights user demand for affordable access, but the debate underscores a key trade-off: the savings from cheap tokens may come at the price of trust, transparency, and control over one's data and AI experience.

marsbit1 h fa

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

marsbit1 h fa

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

In 2026, the crypto industry is undergoing a profound infrastructure-level transformation—TradFi assets are migrating on-chain at an unprecedented pace. According to CoinGecko's Q1 2026 report, the total value locked (TVL) of tokenized real-world assets (RWA) has surpassed $31 billion, a nearly 4x increase from $7.8 billion at the beginning of 2025, with the sector’s aggregate market capitalization reaching $19.3 billion. Among these, the market cap of tokenized stocks surged from $2 million to $486 million, with Q1 spot trading volume reaching $15.1 billion—a single quarter already surpassing the entire second half of 2025. RWA perpetual contract Q1 trading volume reached a staggering $524.8 billion, far exceeding the $313 billion for all of 2025. Meanwhile, BlackRock's BUIDL fund has reached $2.3 billion in scale and has filed for two new tokenized funds, signaling that the world's largest asset manager's tokenization strategy is evolving from pilot to product suite expansion. HTX, as a core participant in the crypto exchange sector, officially launched TradFi perpetual futures products including NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, META, and SPY in 2026, enabling crypto users to gain 24/7 trading access to core U.S. equities. Boston Consulting Group predicts that global tokenized asset scale could reach $16 trillion by 2030, while McKinsey offers a conservative estimate of approximately $2 trillion. The on-chain migration of TradFi assets is no longer a "future narrative" but a structural transformation unfolding in real time, as crypto exchanges evolve from single crypto asset trading platforms toward "multi-asset-class trading infrastructure."

HTX Learn1 h fa

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

HTX Learn1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片