LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

Odaily星球日报Опубліковано о 2024-01-23Востаннє оновлено о 2024-01-23

Анотація

本文将主要围绕下图回顾在不同阶段BTC价格的走势。

原文作者：Lisa，LD Capital

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

几乎所有的资产价格都要受到美联储货币和财政政策的影响，BTC 自然也不例外，身处 crypto 市场需要时刻关心美国经济的各项数据、联储官员讲话的态度、货币政策走向等。随着 BTC 现货 ETF 的通过，美元潮汐对 crypto 市场的影响将愈加显现。本文将主要围绕下图回顾在不同阶段 BTC 价格的走势。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

美联储最后一次加息至开始降息

时间： 2018/12 至 2019/7 

BTC 价格表现：先横后涨，约 3500 上涨至 12000 美元

主升开始时间： 2019/4 （与缩表减缓 2019/5 时间相近），可以认为市场提前 3 个月交易降息预期。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

该历史时期对应了当前市场所处阶段，目前距离美联储最后一次加息时间（2023/7）已经过去约 6 个月，与过去类似的，BTC 价格也在 2023 年 10 月份（加息停止后的 3 个月）迎来了一段主升行情。近半年 BTC 价格较大程度收到了 ETF 预期的影响，但从时间和形态上依旧巧合地符合了过去一次周期的规律。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

美联储开始降息至疫情扰动前

时间： 2019/7 至 2020/3 

BTC 价格表现：先跌后涨

开始降息后价格下行，约从 10000 跌至 12 月的 7000 ，跌幅 30% （期间 2019/9 结束缩表并未产生明显正面影响 ）， 2019 年 12 月至 2020 年 2 月反弹至 10000 。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

该阶段是市场 24 年将会进入的阶段，历史上一次降息落地和缩表结束后 BTC 的表现整体为先跌后涨。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

以上两个阶段的配合 NUPL 的角度可以很好地判断阶段性的高低位置。

疫情影响下的宽松阶段

后 2020 年 3 月份，受 covid 疫情影响，美联储迅速降息并开启大规模 QE，叠加 2020/5 的减半，市场短暂下挫后迎来主升浪，BTC 大致从 5000 上涨到 65000 。

BTC 市场的顶出现在 2021/11 ，距离宽松结束的时间（2022/3 首次加息） 4 个月，可以认为市场提前 4 个月交易加息预期，与此前提前交易降息的时间差较为接近。

在没有黑天鹅事件的情况下，本轮牛市恐难再现这样激进的货币政策和上涨速率或幅度，但方向依旧。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

重新开始紧缩，美联储开始加息至最后一次加息

时间： 2022/3 开始加息至 2023/7 最后一次加息；2022/6 开始缩表至目前

BTC 价格表现：约从 46000 最低下跌至 16000 ，下跌约 9 个月后在 2023 年初开始反弹

2023 年初开始 BTC 和纳斯达克指数同步上涨的这段行情可能与市场预期美债利率阶段性见顶和联储加息幅度放缓有关。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

整体看起来降息对 BTC 市场的影响相对缩表更大，那么今年何时开始降息？

美联储主席鲍威尔在 12 月 FOMC 会议后发出“鸽派”信号，导致美联储降息预期升温。而美国最新的数据较为强劲，美国 12 月 CPI 同比增长 3.4% （前值 3.1% ），核心 CPI 同比增长 3.9% （前值 4.0% ），均高于预期，同时劳动力市场仍然紧俏，目前市场预计 3 月不降息概率为 52.88% 。

LD Capital：从美联储货币政策周期看BTC价格变化

对于 24 年的预计降息不是在 3 月份就是在 5 月份，刻舟求剑地看，市场可能届时有一波回调。当然现货 ETF 是对市场较大的扰动，利好落地和 GBTC 的抛压是近期影响 BTC 价格的主导因素。同时 BTC 减半的时间也比前一次周期提前不少（前一次的减半发生在开始降息 10 个月后），本次减半恰好夹在市场预期的两个降息起始点中间。虽然减半利好后的上涨通常滞后于其实际发生的日期，但从时间上看仍然能够部分熨平降息后可能的下跌。

Пов'язані матеріали

Behind the AI Scorecards Lies a Chinese 'Question Setter'

Behind the AI scorecards that dominate industry discussions—benchmarks like MMLU-Pro, MMMU, and MMMU-Pro—stands a Chinese-Canadian researcher: Wenhu Chen. As an assistant professor at the University of Waterloo and founder of the TIGER Lab, Chen has become a key "exam-setter" for evaluating large language and multimodal models. Chen first gained broader recognition with MMLU-Pro, a more challenging and stable update to the popular MMLU benchmark. As top models like OpenAI’s o3 began achieving near-perfect scores on the original MMLU, it became difficult to distinguish their true capabilities. MMLU-Pro introduced more complex reasoning questions, expanded answer choices, and filtered out ambiguous or simple items, effectively reintroducing differentiation among state-of-the-art models. His work on MMMU addressed the evaluation of multimodal models, requiring them to integrate visual information (like charts, diagrams, or tables) with textual knowledge across diverse academic subjects. Even the strongest models initially scored only around 56-59%, highlighting significant room for improvement in genuine multimodal reasoning. MMMU-Pro further refined this by preventing models from bypassing visual cues. Chen’s research focus has long been on complex information understanding and reasoning. His background—including a PhD at UC Santa Barbara, research at Google/DeepMind on Gemini, and now a role in Meta’s superintelligence lab—provides deep insight into model development and their potential weaknesses. His TIGER Lab also builds models (e.g., for video understanding and generation), ensuring his evaluation benchmarks are grounded in practical challenges. While AI headlines often spotlight company leaders and product launches, Chen’s work exemplifies the critical, behind-the-scenes contributions of researchers crafting the rigorous standards that define and drive progress in AI capabilities.

marsbit29 хв тому

Behind the AI Scorecards Lies a Chinese 'Question Setter'

marsbit29 хв тому

STRC Unpegged by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Turning?

STRC, the perpetual preferred stock of MicroStrategy, is experiencing a persistent de-pegging from its target par value of $100, with the discount recently widening to over 11%. This de-anchoring challenges the core design of STRC, which was intended as a stable, income-oriented security operating near $100. As a crucial funding engine for MicroStrategy's Bitcoin acquisition strategy, STRC's price reflects market confidence in the company's entire capital model. The company's "capital flywheel" relies on issuing STRC at or above $100 via an At-the-Market (ATM) program to raise cash for buying Bitcoin, thereby boosting company equity and theoretically supporting STRC's value. A monthly adjustable dividend mechanism was designed to maintain this peg. Despite raising the dividend to 11.5% and increasing payment frequency, the de-pegging persists. Market concerns extend beyond technical factors like leveraged arbitrage unwinding. Analysts point to MicroStrategy's limited cash reserves relative to its ~$1.7 billion annual dividend obligation for preferred shares. While the company counters that its vast Bitcoin holdings could cover decades of payments, this argument hinges on the potential need to sell Bitcoin—a shift from its longstanding "hodl" narrative. The company's recent sale of a small amount of BTC, framed as a test, amplified these liquidity and strategy concerns. If STRC remains discounted, impairing MicroStrategy's ability to raise cheap capital, fears may grow that the company could sell more Bitcoin to meet obligations. This scenario could transform MicroStrategy from a major market buyer into a potential seller, posing significant downside risk for Bitcoin. The re-pegging of STRC is thus a key indicator for the health of MicroStrategy's capital structure and its market impact.

Odaily星球日报42 хв тому

STRC Unpegged by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Turning?

Odaily星球日报42 хв тому

Silicon Valley's Most Sought-After New Role Has Emerged

Silicon Valley's New Most Wanted Job: The Rise of the Forward Deployment Engineer The AI industry is witnessing a significant shift. The focus has moved from developing cutting-edge models to deploying them effectively within enterprises. This has made the "Forward Deployment Engineer" (FDE) a critical and highly sought-after role at major firms like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. For the past three years, the industry prioritized model scientists. However, companies are now facing a harsh reality: purchasing powerful AI tools does not guarantee productivity gains or organizational change. The biggest hurdle is not the technology itself, but integrating it into complex legacy systems, workflows, and corporate cultures. This includes challenges like data silos, compliance requirements, and internal resistance. The FDE role, pioneered by Palantir Technologies, addresses this "last-mile" problem. FDEs are deployed on-site with clients for extended periods. Their job is to deeply understand the client's specific organizational structure, processes, and pain points, then tailor and implement the AI solution accordingly. They combine skills in technology, project management, and organizational change. A clear signal of this trend emerged in May 2026 when three AI giants made major moves. Anthropic launched a $1.5B joint venture for enterprise deployment. OpenAI formed an independent deployment subsidiary, DeployCo, with over $4B in commitments and acquired a deployment consultancy. Google Cloud's CEO publicly announced a large-scale recruitment drive for FDEs. This shift represents a fundamental change in the software business model: from selling tools to selling guaranteed outcomes. FDEs are the agents of this change, responsible for delivering a working system within the production environment, not just a demo. Real-world cases, such as challenges at Goldman Sachs (compliance barriers) and Target (internal cultural resistance), illustrate that the primary obstacles to AI adoption are organizational, not technical. An FDE's value lies in navigating these human and procedural complexities to facilitate a successful "AI migration." In essence, as core AI technology becomes more accessible and affordable, the true premium is shifting to the human expertise required to understand organizations and drive change—making the FDE role pivotal for the next phase of the AI revolution.

marsbit43 хв тому

Silicon Valley's Most Sought-After New Role Has Emerged

marsbit43 хв тому

When the World Cup Collides with Agents: From Web2 to Web3, How Are Wallets Evolving into Agentic Wallets?

World Cup as a Catalyst for Agentic Wallets: From Web2 to Web3 This article explores how the World Cup provides a real-world scenario for observing the evolution of digital wallets from simple asset managers towards "Agentic Wallets"—intelligent, AI-powered interfaces. Using the example of prediction markets like Polymarket, it illustrates how AI Agents can lower the barrier to Web3 interaction. Instead of navigating complex DApps, users can express intent in natural language (e.g., "I think Portugal will win") within platforms like Discord or web pages. The Agent then interprets this intent, finds the relevant market, and seamlessly guides the user through the on-chain transaction via their wallet. The core shift is from wallets as mere "function menus" for signing transactions to "intent interpreters" that understand user goals. The article highlights parallel developments in traditional finance, such as Mastercard's "Agent Pay" and WeChat Pay's AI tests, which focus on granting AI controlled, authorized, and auditable payment capabilities. This underscores a broader trend of AI entering the financial layer. However, the article emphasizes that the primary challenge for Agentic Wallets in Web3 is not automation but establishing clear security boundaries. Unlike traditional systems with chargebacks, on-chain transactions are often irreversible. Therefore, future wallets must ensure users retain ultimate control and comprehension. They need to transparently communicate an Agent's permissions, spending limits, authorized durations, and provide easy ways to pause or revoke access. The World Cup experiments represent early steps toward wallets that are not just applications but ubiquitous, intelligent interfaces that simplify Web3 while keeping users securely in control.

marsbit2 год тому

When the World Cup Collides with Agents: From Web2 to Web3, How Are Wallets Evolving into Agentic Wallets?

marsbit2 год тому

Options Don't Work in DeFi? Vitalik Might Not Agree

For years, the prevailing view has been that options struggle to gain traction in DeFi due to complexity, fragmented liquidity, and lack of natural demand compared to products like perpetual futures. However, a recent algorithmic stablecoin design proposed by Vitalik Buterin presents a different perspective, using options not as a standalone trading product, but as foundational infrastructure for other financial instruments. In this design, one unit of ETH is split into two components: a "stable" side (P) that retains value up to a specified strike price, and an "upside" side (N) that captures all appreciation above that strike. Combined, they always equal one ETH, eliminating debt, margin, and liquidation risks inherent in typical collateralized debt position (CDP) stablecoins. The stable component essentially mimics the payoff of a covered call option. To function as a stablecoin, this structure requires continuously rolling deep in-the-money calls, which introduces challenges like rollover slippage, predictable transaction flow vulnerable to front-running, and persistent liquidity needs. A core hurdle is finding consistent buyers for the leveraged ETH upside exposure (N). While it offers leverage without funding rates or liquidation, it must compete with simpler alternatives like direct call options or perpetuals. The system's scalability depends on a sustained demand for this specific form of leverage. The author draws parallels to their experience with Rysk, where earlier versions of DeFi options protocols struggled. The breakthrough came with Rysk V12, which aligns incentives: asset holders generate yield by selling covered calls against their holdings, while market makers efficiently acquire the desired option exposure. This demonstrates that options can find product-market fit when embedded as a risk distribution and pricing engine within structured products, stablecoins, or yield-generating assets, rather than marketed as a complex direct trading instrument. Vitalik's proposal reinforces this architectural approach—using fully collateralized, non-custodial, and physically settled options as a fundamental building block. The real opportunity for options in DeFi may lie not in becoming the next perpetual swap, but in powering the next generation of on-chain financial products.

marsbit2 год тому

Options Don't Work in DeFi? Vitalik Might Not Agree

marsbit2 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片