US Stocks and Gold Rise Together, Bitcoin Rebound Absent, Have Bottom Signals Appeared?

marsbitPublicado em 2026-08-12Última atualização em 2026-08-12

Resumo

While traditional assets like U.S. stocks and gold have rebounded strongly, Bitcoin continues to consolidate without following the uptrend. Since hitting an all-time high near $126,000 in October last year, Bitcoin has remained in a corrective phase, trading between $62,000 and $66,000 over the past month. Although U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen renewed net inflows recently—with the past week marking the best performance since mid-April—this buying pressure has been insufficient to counter persistent selling from miners and crypto companies. For instance, miner-linked wallets have seen their BTC balance drop by about 72% since late 2021. Some long-term indicators are showing early signs of a potential bottom. Metrics such as Reserve Risk, BTC price relative to its 2-year moving average, and the AHR999 index have entered historically oversold territory, suggesting improved long-term value. However, key indicators like MVRV Ratio, NUPL, and the Fear & Greed Index have not yet reached the extreme levels typically seen at major cycle lows. Furthermore, over 53% of Bitcoin supply remains in profit, and stablecoin liquidity is still contracting, indicating the market may need more time for a full capitulation phase. In summary, while select bottom signals are emerging, Bitcoin lacks the broad-based confirmation needed to declare a definitive cycle low. A sustained recovery will likely depend on continued ETF inflows, a reduction in structural selling pressure, and further deter...

Author: Nancy, PANews

Since hitting its all-time high of approximately $126,000 in October last year, Bitcoin has been stuck in a correction, failing to regain its upward momentum. Recently, traditional assets like US stocks and gold have led the recovery, with market risk appetite gradually warming up. However, Bitcoin has continued its sideways movement, missing out on a synchronous rebound.

Now, with ETF funds flowing back in and some long-term indicators hitting historical lows, why hasn't Bitcoin started its recovery? Is the current adjustment nearing the bottom of the cycle?

US Stocks and Gold Rise Together, Why is Bitcoin Falling Behind?

After the severe volatility and sharp correction in the US stock market in late July, capital has returned to risk assets, and US stocks have quickly embarked on a rebound. Both the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average have substantially recovered their previous losses, reaching new all-time highs this week. Tech stocks have been the core driver of this rebound, with semiconductor and AI-related sectors surging, significantly boosting market sentiment.

Meanwhile, the precious metals sector has regained favor. Spot gold has risen for several consecutive days, once breaking through the $4,400 per ounce mark to hit a near two-month high; silver prices have also climbed, with spot silver once reaching the $66 per ounce range, setting a new seven-week high.

However, Bitcoin has not enjoyed a synchronous recovery. During the recent period of pressure on risk assets, Bitcoin also performed weakly. And now, with US stocks and gold strengthening again, Bitcoin continues to move independently in a sideways pattern.

According to CoinGecko data, Bitcoin's price has been range-bound over the past 30 days, fluctuating repeatedly between $62,000 and $66,000.

Glassnode points out that over the past 90 days, the S&P 500 has risen about 5%, while Bitcoin has fallen 20%, showing diverging trends even in the past week. Until Bitcoin reestablishes its relative strength against US stocks, the market will remain dominated by US stock movements.

Although on-chain transaction volume has surged recently, and spot ETF fund flows have noticeably improved, the capital inflows have not yet effectively fueled price increases.

Looking at on-chain activity, Santiment Intelligence data shows that over the past week, new BTC wallet creations reached 2.27 million, the highest level in nearly a year; active wallet numbers hit 751,000, a 10-month record. However, a significant catalyst for this on-chain activity growth was security concerns triggered by the Coldcard wallet incident. This event prompted some users to transfer funds, create new wallets, adjust custody solutions, and reassess asset security risks, thereby driving a notable increase in wallet creation and on-chain interactions.

Regarding ETF inflows, SoSoValue data shows that last trading week, US Bitcoin spot ETFs recorded net inflows for five consecutive trading days, with a cumulative net inflow of $854 million, marking the best weekly performance since April 17th. So far in August, the cumulative net inflow for Bitcoin spot ETFs has already exceeded four times the total for the entire month of July. This change has reversed the previous sustained outflow pressure. From May to July, US Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a cumulative net outflow of over $6.59 billion, enduring eight consecutive weeks of capital withdrawal. However, the scale of the recent ETF fund recovery remains insufficient to drive a Bitcoin price rebound. Market analysis suggests recent inflows are mainly driven by changes in custody demand and weaker employment data improving expectations for rate cuts. The current buying scale is difficult to fully offset the ongoing market selling pressure.

Currently, the Bitcoin market faces persistent selling pressure from miners and crypto asset management companies. As profit margins shrink, operational costs rise, and the demand for AI data center transformation grows, some mining companies have begun selling Bitcoin assets to cover cash flow needs, repay debt, or adjust business direction. CryptoQuant data shows that since November 2021, the BTC balance held in miner-related OTC addresses has dropped from about 500,000 BTC to 139,700 BTC, a decline of nearly 72%.

Meanwhile, crypto asset management companies are also adjusting their Bitcoin holdings, selling portions of their assets to supplement liquidity, repurchase shares, or pay shareholder returns, with some even liquidating to survive. For example, since late June, MicroStrategy has sold a cumulative 6,948 BTC, cashing out approximately $432 million.

Furthermore, buying power in the US spot market remains weak. Coinglass data shows that the Coinbase Bitcoin Premium Index has remained negative for 80 consecutive days (since May 19th), with the latest figure at -0.0868%, marking the longest negative premium cycle in history—twice the previous 40-day record. Historical data indicates that a sustained negative premium on Coinbase typically signals weak buying demand from US investors or persistent strong selling pressure in the market.

Bottom-Fishing Signals Appear Locally, Cycle Bottom Still Awaiting Confirmation

Historically, after reaching a cycle top, Bitcoin typically takes about 12 to 13 months to reach its final bottom. If this cycle follows the historical rhythm, the market cycle low might not occur until the fourth quarter of 2026. Currently, have any bottom-fishing signals appeared for Bitcoin?

The bottom-fishing indicator list tracked by PANews's crypto market data and cycle indicator platform, PAData, shows that only some bottoming signals have appeared for Bitcoin so far.

This indicator list covers multiple data sources including CryptoQuant, CoinGlass, Alternative.me, DefiLlama, Dune, and growthepie. Among them, the "Distance to Hit Line" measures the gap between the current indicator value and the historical bottom-fishing threshold; the closer the value is to 0, the closer it is to triggering a historical bottom-fishing signal.

Among the 12 core bottom-fishing indicators, four have currently entered the "hit zone": Reserve Risk (Long-Term Holders), BTC Price / 2-Year Moving Average, AHR999 (Long-Term DCA), and EVM Sample Chain Active Diffusion Breadth.

Specifically, Reserve Risk has dropped to 0.00108, the BTC Price / 2-Year MA indicator has fallen to 0.73x, AHR999 has reached 0.345, and the EVM Sample Chain Active Diffusion Breadth has dropped to 0. These indicators primarily reflect long-term holder confidence, price cycle position, and on-chain ecosystem activity levels. They have now entered historical stress zones, indicating that Bitcoin's current price shows a significant discount compared to its long-term trend, and its long-term allocation value is increasing.

However, an indicator entering a stress zone does not equate to the market having bottomed. Historical cycles show that Bitcoin bottoms are usually not triggered by a single indicator but emerge when multiple dimensions reach extreme levels simultaneously.

Currently, judging by indicators related to valuation, market sentiment, capital liquidity, and on-chain profit status, the market still has some distance from historical extreme bottoms.

In terms of valuation, the MVRV Ratio (on-chain valuation) is currently 1.212, having not yet broken below the historical undervaluation line of 1. MVRV compares the relationship between Bitcoin's market value and realized value to gauge the overall profit state of the market. Historical data shows that when this indicator falls below 1, it typically signifies the market has entered a deep correction phase, often corresponding to accumulation zones in the late stages of a bear market.

Regarding on-chain profit status, NUPL is currently 0.175, still not negative. This indicator measures the net value of unrealized profits and losses in the market. When NUPL falls below 0, it means the entire network's holders are in an overall loss state. Meanwhile, the miner revenue indicator Puell Multiple is currently 0.755, still some distance from the historical stress region below 0.5. Historical data shows that significant macro bottoms have occurred when Puell Multiple was below 0.5.

In terms of market sentiment, the Fear & Greed Index is currently at 29, indicating the market is in a state of fear, but still some distance from extreme fear levels. This suggests investor risk appetite is declining but hasn't yet reached the level of large-scale panic selling often seen at cycle bottoms.

In terms of supply structure, the percentage of supply in profit remains at 53.12%, meaning over half of the Bitcoin supply is still profitable. In historical bottom phases, this indicator typically falls below 5%, indicating the market often needs more thorough loss realization and筹码 transfer.

In terms of liquidity, the Stablecoin Liquidity Pulse is currently -0.74%, indicating a contraction in stablecoin funding conditions. Historical observation shows that when this indicator falls below -2%, it usually corresponds to a significant reduction in the supply of fiat-backed stablecoins within 30 days, indicating intensified market liquidity pressure. Currently, this indicator still has some distance from the extreme contraction zone.

Additionally, some on-chain ecosystem indicators have not shown comprehensive bottom signals. Currently, the DeFi Fundamental Diffusion Breadth is 38.55%, still some distance from the deep contraction zone (0-25%). This indicator measures the diffusion degree of DeFi operational activities; entering low levels typically signifies widespread contraction in industry activity. The Cross-Chain MEME Risk Appetite Index is 32.66, above the "cooling zone" (0-20) hit boundary, indicating that although market risk appetite has clearly declined, capital has not yet fully entered an extremely quiet state.

In summary, Bitcoin is currently showing some market bottom signals, but the market still lacks sufficient confirmation for a cycle reversal. Whether Bitcoin can initiate a recovery going forward still depends on the sustainability of capital inflows, the release of selling pressure, and further changes in key on-chain indicators.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhy has Bitcoin not joined the recent recovery rally seen in traditional assets like US stocks and gold?

ABitcoin has not participated in the recent recovery because it is facing persistent selling pressure from miners and crypto DAT companies, weak US investor buying demand (evidenced by a prolonged Coinbase premium discount), and ETF inflows, while positive, are insufficient to overcome this selling pressure. The market remains dominated by US stock trends.

QWhat are some of the specific indicators that have entered historical 'buy signal' zones according to the article's analysis?

AAccording to the analysis, four indicators have entered the historical pressure/buy zones: Reserve Risk (for long-term holders), BTC Price/2-Year Moving Average, AHR999 (long-term DCA indicator), and EVM Sample Chain Active Diffusion Breadth.

QWhat key indicators suggest that Bitcoin might NOT have reached its cycle bottom yet?

ASeveral indicators suggest the cycle bottom is not yet confirmed: MVRV Ratio is above 1 (not in undervalued zone), NUPL is positive (network not in overall loss), Fear & Greed Index is at 29 (not extreme fear), Percentage of Supply in Profit is 53.12% (far from historical lows below 5%), and Stablecoin Liquidity Pulse is at -0.74% (not in extreme contraction below -2%).

QWhat two main sources of ongoing selling pressure are highlighted in the article as suppressing Bitcoin's price?

AThe two main sources of ongoing selling pressure are: 1) Bitcoin miners selling assets due to squeezed profits, high costs, and AI data center transition needs, and 2) Crypto DAT companies selling BTC to raise liquidity, buy back shares, or survive, with examples like Strategy selling nearly 7,000 BTC.

QBased on historical patterns mentioned, when might the potential cycle low for Bitcoin occur in this cycle?

AHistorically, Bitcoin takes about 12-13 months after a cycle top to find its final bottom. If this pattern holds, the potential cycle low might occur in Q4 2026.

Leituras Relacionadas

"Ontology Faction" vs. "Supplier Faction": In-depth Observation of Dexterous Hand Track Financing in 2026

The article analyzes the robotics "dexterous hand" sector in 2026, revealing intense investment activity. Key insights include: The sector is divided into two camps: "Body Manufacturers" (15 companies like Zhuji Power, Xingdong Era, Xingchen Intelligence) that integrate self-developed dexterous hands into their humanoid robots, and "Third-Party Suppliers" (32 companies) that independently sell complete dexterous hands or core components like tactile sensors and micro-motors. Body Manufacturers secured significantly larger average funding rounds (over ¥8B vs. under ¥2B for suppliers), reflecting bets on the broader humanoid robot market. While body makers now view in-house hand R&D as essential for differentiation, they still heavily rely on external suppliers for key underlying components like sensors and actuators. The supplier landscape is further segmented. "Complete Hand" suppliers (e.g., Critical Point AGILINK, Lingxin Qiaoshou, Xynova) face fierce consolidation as scale becomes critical. "Tactile Perception" specialists (e.g., Paxini, Daimeng, Qianjue) possess high technical barriers and early-mover advantages. "Core Component" makers (e.g., Wuji Tech, Zhijian Zhiqing, Nuoshi Robotics) are "hidden champions" with deep expertise in motors and drive systems, benefiting from import substitution. The analysis concludes the industry is structurally diverging. A hybrid model of body-maker integration plus specialist outsourcing will likely dominate. Suppliers will undergo significant consolidation, particularly among complete hand makers, while component specialists with deep technical moats are poised for sustained growth.

marsbitHá 9m

"Ontology Faction" vs. "Supplier Faction": In-depth Observation of Dexterous Hand Track Financing in 2026

marsbitHá 9m

Is 'Light In, Memory Out' Becoming the New Trading Narrative in the U.S. Stock Market?

Is "Light in, Memory out" Becoming the New Narrative in U.S. Stock Trading? Following the growing market consensus that AI chip valuations may have peaked, capital is seeking the next AI-related theme. In this context, the "Light in, Memory out" narrative is emerging – signaling a shift where optical communication stocks are taking the baton from memory. Optical communication, utilizing light signals (primarily via fiber optics) for data transmission, is critical for AI. AI model training and inference rely on massive GPU clusters that require frequent exchange of vast data, generating immense east-west traffic. Traditional copper interconnects face physical limits at high speeds (short distances, high power, interference). Optical interconnects solve this with higher bandwidth density, longer reach, and better energy efficiency, becoming crucial for scaling AI clusters. The narrative is validated by diverging stock performance. While memory stocks (like Micron, SK Hynix) have corrected amid crowded positioning and growth concerns, optical communication stocks (AAOI, COHR, LITE) have surged roughly 40-50% since August, driven by strong earnings and accelerating demand from AI cluster expansion and the transition to 800G/1.6T technology. LITE’s recent earnings solidified the story, beating estimates with impressive margins (gross margin above 50%, operating margin 36.4%). Its guidance projected an operating margin near 40% next quarter, faster than expected. Management noted laser capacity remains insufficient to meet strong demand and confirmed its key CPO (Co-Packaged Optics) client is accelerating plans. COHR's upcoming earnings are highly anticipated for further confirmation. However, risks are evident after the sector's sharp rally. The current dilemma is believing the narrative while avoiding buying at a peak. In a thematic rotation market, survival is key – prepare your tools before deciding how to position. Disclaimer: This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

marsbitHá 9m

Is 'Light In, Memory Out' Becoming the New Trading Narrative in the U.S. Stock Market?

marsbitHá 9m

OpenClaw Founder Peter Steinberg's Latest Speech: The Life and Death Revelation of an Open Source Project, How OpenClaw Emerged from the Eye of the Storm

Peter Steinberg, founder of the wildly popular open-source AI agent project OpenClaw, reflects on its turbulent journey from creation to near-collapse and resurgence. It began in late 2024 from his personal frustration with sending prompts from phone to computer. He built a WhatsApp relay that felt "magical," but initial excitement was limited to friends. After adding Discord support and launching a public server, the project exploded virally overnight, attracting massive attention, rebranding requests (from "Claudis" to OpenClaw), and even praise from NVIDIA's CEO. The intense scrutiny and pressure nearly broke Steinberg. The biggest technical crisis came from over-optimizing for a specific AI model provider, which suddenly canceled subscriptions, forcing a rushed shift to open-weight models. OpenClaw's weekly downloads plummeted before surging to a record high after being "declared dead." Steinberg realized he had stopped enjoying the build process and using his own product, making it a duty rather than a passion. His key lesson: "Fun is speed." Recovery came by refocusing on building for himself, forming a non-profit, and receiving crucial support (e.g., from NVIDIA for security). The team is now using OpenClaw to build OpenClaw itself, emphasizing its core value: a private, open alternative where "your agent, your machine, your life." He shares insights: the first user should be yourself; balance bug fixes with new features to maintain interest; the current bottleneck is reliable toolchains, especially for Mac testing. His story underscores that creation thrives on personal need, endures through storms when the joy of building returns, and persists by "living in the future and building what's missing."

marsbitHá 49m

OpenClaw Founder Peter Steinberg's Latest Speech: The Life and Death Revelation of an Open Source Project, How OpenClaw Emerged from the Eye of the Storm

marsbitHá 49m

Trading

Spot
活动图片