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

marsbitPublished on 2026-05-15Last updated on 2026-05-15

Abstract

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.

Related Questions

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.

Related Reads

Breaking: OpenAI Undergoes Major Reorganization, President Brockman Assumes Command

OpenAI has announced a major internal reorganization just months before its anticipated IPO. The company is merging its three flagship product lines—ChatGPT, Codex, and the API platform—into a single, unified product organization. The most significant leadership change involves co-founder and President Greg Brockman moving from a background technical role to take full, permanent control over all product strategy. This follows the indefinite medical leave of AGI Deployment CEO Fidji Simo. Additionally, ChatGPT's longtime lead, Nick Turley, has been reassigned to enterprise products, with former Instagram executive Ashley Alexander taking over consumer offerings. The consolidation, internally framed as a strategic move towards an "Agentic Future," aims to break down internal silos and create a cohesive "Super App." This planned desktop application would integrate ChatGPT's conversational abilities, Codex's coding power, and a rumored internal web browser named "Atlas" to autonomously perform complex user tasks. The reorganization occurs amid significant internal and external pressures. OpenAI has recently seen a wave of high-profile departures, including Sora co-lead Bill Peebles and other senior technical leaders, leading to concerns about a thinning executive bench. Externally, rival Anthropic recently secured funding at a staggering $900 billion valuation, surpassing OpenAI's own. Google's upcoming I/O developer conference also poses a competitive threat. Analysts suggest the dramatic restructure is a pre-IPO move to present a clearer, more focused narrative to Wall Street—streamlining operations and demonstrating decisive leadership under Brockman to counter internal turbulence and intense market competition.

marsbit2h ago

Breaking: OpenAI Undergoes Major Reorganization, President Brockman Assumes Command

marsbit2h ago

Two Survival Structures of Market Makers and Arbitrageurs

Market makers and arbitrageurs represent two distinct survival structures in high-frequency trading. Market makers primarily use limit orders (makers) to profit from the bid-ask spread, enjoying high capital efficiency (nominally 100%) but bearing inventory risk. This "inventory risk" arises from passive, fragmented, and discontinuous order fills in the limit order book (LOB). This risk, while a potential cost, can also contribute to excess profit if managed within control boundaries, allowing for mean reversion. Market makers essentially sell "time" (uncertainty over execution timing) to the market for price control and low fees. In contrast, cross-exchange arbitrageurs typically use market orders (takers) to exploit price differences or funding rates, resulting in lower nominal capital efficiency (requiring capital on both exchanges) and higher transaction costs. Their risk exposure stems from asymmetries in exchange rules (e.g., minimum order sizes), execution latency, and infrastructure risks (e.g., ADL, oracle drift). These exposures are active, exogenous gaps that primarily erode profits rather than contribute to them. Arbitrageurs essentially sell "space" (capital sunk across venues) for localized, immediate certainty. Both strategies engage in a trade-off between execution friction and residual risk. Optimal systems allow for temporary, controlled risk exposure rather than enforcing zero exposure at all costs. Their evolution converges towards hybrid models: arbitrageurs may use maker orders to reduce costs, while market makers may use taker orders or hedges for risk management. Ultimately, both use different forms of risk exposure—market makers exposing inventory, arbitrageurs immobilizing capital—to extract marginal, hard-won certainty from the market.

链捕手2h ago

Two Survival Structures of Market Makers and Arbitrageurs

链捕手2h ago

Who Will Define the Rules of the AI Era? Anthropic Discusses the 2028 US-China AI Landscape

This article, based on Anthropic's analysis, outlines the intensifying systemic competition between the U.S./allies and China for AI leadership by 2028. It argues that access to advanced computing power ("compute") is the critical bottleneck, where the U.S. currently holds a significant advantage through chip export controls and allied innovation. However, China's AI labs remain competitive by exploiting policy loopholes—via chip smuggling, overseas data center access, and "model distillation" attacks to copy U.S. model capabilities—keeping them close to the frontier. The piece presents two contrasting scenarios for 2028. In the first, decisive U.S. action to tighten compute controls and curb distillation locks in a 12-24 month AI capability lead, cementing democratic influence over global AI norms, security, and economic infrastructure. In the second, policy inaction allows China to achieve near-parity through continued access to U.S. technology, enabling Beijing to promote its AI stack globally and integrate advanced AI into its military and governance systems, altering the strategic balance. Anthropic contends that maintaining a decisive U.S. lead is essential for shaping safe AI development and governance. The core recommendation is for U.S. policymakers to urgently close compute and model access loopholes while promoting global adoption of the U.S. AI technology stack to secure a lasting strategic advantage.

marsbit4h ago

Who Will Define the Rules of the AI Era? Anthropic Discusses the 2028 US-China AI Landscape

marsbit4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片