Bitcoin Price Bottom Could Be Around $40,000, On-Chain Data Shows

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-02-22Última atualização em 2026-02-22

Resumo

Based on on-chain data analysis by Ali Martinez, the Bitcoin price bottom in the current bear market could be around $40,000. This projection hinges on the cost basis of long-term holders (LTH), investors who have held their coins for over 155 days. Historically, this level acts as a strong support during downturns, as these investors are less likely to sell and often increase their buying when the price approaches their average acquisition cost, which is currently approximately $40,363. If selling pressure does not overwhelm this renewed buying activity, this cost basis could mark the market bottom. Currently, Bitcoin is trading near $68,330, down over 45% from its all-time high.

The biggest question so far in the bear phase has been when and where the Bitcoin price will bounce back. According to the latest on-chain data, there might be a fresh answer as to where the price bottom will be in the current bear market.

Here’s Why $40,000 Could Be Pivotal To The Bear Market

In a recent post on the X platform, crypto analyst Ali Martinez identified the $40,000 level as a potential bottom for the Bitcoin price in the current market phase. This projection is based on the cost basis of an old investor cohort known as the long-term holders (LTH)

For context, the cost basis of long-term holders refers to the average price at which Bitcoin investors (who have held their coins for 155 days or more) acquired their coins. This price level is often relevant because long-term investors are often referred to as diamond hands, who are less likely to sell during periods of downside volatility.

Moreover, the LTH cost basis tends to act as the ultimate support level during bear markets, as most long-term investors are usually still in profit even in the thick of the bear market. Hence, when the Bitcoin price falls to this support, the long-term holders double down on their positions.

Source: @ali_charts on X

This renewed buying activity by the long-term holders would prop up the price of the premier cryptocurrency above their cost basis, as observed in the chart above. According to the highlighted data, the LTH cost basis is currently around $40,363, about 40% from the current price point.

If the Bitcoin price were to face further downside pressure and approach this cost basis, there is a likelihood it would receive support from the long-term investors’ increased reaccumulation. Hence, this cost basis could become the bottom for the current bear market.

On the flip side, the Bitcoin market could face an even deeper correction if the selling pressure overwhelms the long-term holders’ reaccumulation spree.

Bitcoin Price Overview

As of this writing, the price of BTC stands at around $68,330, reflecting a nearly 1% increase in the past 24 hours. However, this mild single-day action does little to correct the over 2% price decline witnessed by the premier cryptocurrency over the past week. According to data from CoinGecko, the Bitcoin price is currently down from its all-time high by more than 45%.

The price of BTC on the daily timeframe | Source: BTCUSDT chart on TradingView

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the on-chain data suggesting about the potential price bottom for Bitcoin in the current bear market?

AThe on-chain data suggests that the price bottom for Bitcoin could be around $40,000, based on the cost basis of long-term holders.

QWho are the 'long-term holders' (LTH) mentioned in the analysis, and why is their cost basis significant?

ALong-term holders are investors who have held their Bitcoin for 155 days or more. Their cost basis is significant because it often acts as a strong support level during bear markets, as these investors are less likely to sell and may even buy more when the price approaches their average purchase price.

QWhat is the specific cost basis for long-term holders that is cited as a potential support level?

AThe specific cost basis for long-term holders is currently around $40,363.

QWhat could happen if the selling pressure in the market overpowers the buying activity of long-term holders?

AIf the selling pressure overwhelms the long-term holders' reaccumulation, the Bitcoin market could experience an even deeper correction beyond the $40,000 support level.

QWhat was the price of Bitcoin and its performance at the time of writing, according to the article?

AAt the time of writing, the price of Bitcoin was around $68,330, reflecting a nearly 1% increase in the past 24 hours, but it was still down over 2% for the week and more than 45% from its all-time high.

Leituras Relacionadas

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbitHá 1h

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbitHá 1h

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbitHá 2h

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbitHá 2h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片