📉 BTC’s weekly EMA warning. A 3-Cycle macro pattern is repeating
Across the last three major Bitcoin cycles from 2018, 2021–2022, and now 2024–2025. The same structural signal has appeared before each deep bear market phase:
The Sequence:
Price closes multiple weeks below the 50-week EMA
BTC attempts a reclaim and fails
The 100-week EMA acts as temporary support
Once that support gives way → macro capitulation unfolds
This behaviour is visible:
In 2018 before the 6k floor broke
In 2022 before the 36k floor broke
And it’s forming again right now in 2025
Bitcoin doesn’t always repeat, but it often rhymes.
When the market structure at the weekly level aligns across three cycles, it becomes a signal worth respecting.
The coming retest of the 50-week EMA will determine the macro direction for the next 6–12 months.
A clean reclaim of the 50-week EMA would technically break the pattern, but based on current structure, liquidity behavior, and weekly momentum, the probability of such a reclaim looks extremely low.
Until the market proves otherwise, the burden of proof is on the bulls, not the bears.
A failure reinforces it.
Across the last three major Bitcoin cycles from 2018, 2021–2022, and now 2024–2025. The same structural signal has appeared before each deep bear market phase:
The Sequence:
Price closes multiple weeks below the 50-week EMA
BTC attempts a reclaim and fails
The 100-week EMA acts as temporary support
Once that support gives way → macro capitulation unfolds
This behaviour is visible:
In 2018 before the 6k floor broke
In 2022 before the 36k floor broke
And it’s forming again right now in 2025
Bitcoin doesn’t always repeat, but it often rhymes.
When the market structure at the weekly level aligns across three cycles, it becomes a signal worth respecting.
The coming retest of the 50-week EMA will determine the macro direction for the next 6–12 months.
A clean reclaim of the 50-week EMA would technically break the pattern, but based on current structure, liquidity behavior, and weekly momentum, the probability of such a reclaim looks extremely low.
Until the market proves otherwise, the burden of proof is on the bulls, not the bears.
A failure reinforces it.
❤12👍10
📉 Bear flag structure developing – strategic short zone
Price is currently forming a textbook bear flag, characterized by:
- A strong impulsive move down (flagpole)
- A controlled, low volume corrective grind upward (flag)
- Gradually weakening momentum as we approach resistance
The grey zone on the chart is my preferred area to scale into shorts. As long as price remains within this rising wedge and fails to reclaim the upper boundary with conviction, the structural bias continues to favor downside.
Base scenario:
- A breakdown from the flag triggers continuation
- Liquidity is targeted in the 80k–82k region, which aligns with prior demand and untested inefficiency
- From that zone, I expect a healthier foundation for the next higher timeframe impulse
Until the structure is invalidated, every slow push upward is treated as a corrective move rather than a trend reversal.
My outlook remains unchanged: a controlled retest of the 80k region before any meaningful upside expansion.
Price is currently forming a textbook bear flag, characterized by:
- A strong impulsive move down (flagpole)
- A controlled, low volume corrective grind upward (flag)
- Gradually weakening momentum as we approach resistance
The grey zone on the chart is my preferred area to scale into shorts. As long as price remains within this rising wedge and fails to reclaim the upper boundary with conviction, the structural bias continues to favor downside.
Base scenario:
- A breakdown from the flag triggers continuation
- Liquidity is targeted in the 80k–82k region, which aligns with prior demand and untested inefficiency
- From that zone, I expect a healthier foundation for the next higher timeframe impulse
Until the structure is invalidated, every slow push upward is treated as a corrective move rather than a trend reversal.
My outlook remains unchanged: a controlled retest of the 80k region before any meaningful upside expansion.
❤10👍8
$BTC Spot Taker CVD (90-Day)
This chart illustrates 90-day Spot Taker Cumulative Volume Delta, highlighting shifts in aggressive spot market participation.
The recent transition from buyer-dominant to seller-dominant flow while price remains near elevated levels signals absorption rather than strength. Despite continued buy interest, spot demand is increasingly being met by passive supply, preventing meaningful upside continuation.
Historically, when aggressive buying fails to translate into higher prices, it reflects distribution by larger participants and a deterioration in spot market momentum.
This is not a panic signal, but it is a structural warning:
- Spot buyers are no longer in full control
- Demand exists, but it is being absorbed
- Price is supported, yet lacks expansion
For BTC to sustain upside, buyer dominance must return and remain unabsorbed. Until that happens, the spot market is vulnerable to range expansion, liquidity sweeps lower, or a corrective phase before any healthy continuation.
This chart illustrates 90-day Spot Taker Cumulative Volume Delta, highlighting shifts in aggressive spot market participation.
The recent transition from buyer-dominant to seller-dominant flow while price remains near elevated levels signals absorption rather than strength. Despite continued buy interest, spot demand is increasingly being met by passive supply, preventing meaningful upside continuation.
Historically, when aggressive buying fails to translate into higher prices, it reflects distribution by larger participants and a deterioration in spot market momentum.
This is not a panic signal, but it is a structural warning:
- Spot buyers are no longer in full control
- Demand exists, but it is being absorbed
- Price is supported, yet lacks expansion
For BTC to sustain upside, buyer dominance must return and remain unabsorbed. Until that happens, the spot market is vulnerable to range expansion, liquidity sweeps lower, or a corrective phase before any healthy continuation.
❤6
📉 IBIT: Historical EMA Alignment Signals Downside Risk
Historically, when Bitcoin’s 50-day EMA moves below the 50-week EMA, price action has tended to resolve lower, particularly within bearish or late cycle environments. This alignment has consistently marked a loss of short-term momentum, with rallies turning corrective and weekly averages acting as resistance.
IBIT is now exhibiting the same structural setup. The 50-day EMA is rolling below the 50-week EMA, indicating weakening demand against the higher-timeframe trend.
Unless weekly structure is decisively reclaimed, downside continuation remains the higher probability outcome, consistent with past BTC behavior.
Momentum shifts first. Price follows.
Historically, when Bitcoin’s 50-day EMA moves below the 50-week EMA, price action has tended to resolve lower, particularly within bearish or late cycle environments. This alignment has consistently marked a loss of short-term momentum, with rallies turning corrective and weekly averages acting as resistance.
IBIT is now exhibiting the same structural setup. The 50-day EMA is rolling below the 50-week EMA, indicating weakening demand against the higher-timeframe trend.
Unless weekly structure is decisively reclaimed, downside continuation remains the higher probability outcome, consistent with past BTC behavior.
Momentum shifts first. Price follows.
❤7
Institutional driven cycle: A structural break from prior $BTC Bull Markets
In previous Bitcoin cycles, the sequence was consistent:
price appreciation accelerated first, retail participation followed, and on chain congestion peaked near the cycle top as late entrants competed for block space. Elevated transaction fees were a symptom of excess, not a driver.
This cycle breaks that pattern.
The most significant expansion in mempool congestion and fee pressure occurred at the very beginning of the cycle, coinciding with the launch of BlackRock’s IBIT spot Bitcoin ETF. Importantly, this on chain activity did not reflect retail euphoria. Instead, it marked the initial institutional allocation phase, where large capital entered the asset class through regulated ETF rails rather than direct on chain spot purchases.
This shift matters.
Institutional investors do not chase momentum at cycle extremes. They front load exposure during periods of narrative uncertainty, liquidity transition, and structural access improvements. The IBIT launch was not a speculative event, it was a liquidity gateway, enabling pension funds, asset managers, and advisors to allocate before traditional bull market dynamics emerged.
As a result:
Institutional demand led the cycle, rather than confirming it
On chain congestion peaked early, not late, reflecting structural positioning instead of retail FOMO
Subsequent price expansion occurred with less on chain retail saturation than in prior cycles
This explains why price advanced without the classical signs of terminal excess typically observed near cycle tops. Retail participation, historically the defining feature of Bitcoin market peaks, remained comparatively subdued while institutions accumulated via ETFs.
In effect, this cycle was pulled forward by institutional capital.
The ETF era did not end the cycle, it started it.
Retail driven excess has historically marked Bitcoin tops.
Institutional driven access marks Bitcoin’s maturation phase and this cycle’s divergence from prior peaks.
This is not a retail bubble forming late.
It is institutional positioning forming early.
In previous Bitcoin cycles, the sequence was consistent:
price appreciation accelerated first, retail participation followed, and on chain congestion peaked near the cycle top as late entrants competed for block space. Elevated transaction fees were a symptom of excess, not a driver.
This cycle breaks that pattern.
The most significant expansion in mempool congestion and fee pressure occurred at the very beginning of the cycle, coinciding with the launch of BlackRock’s IBIT spot Bitcoin ETF. Importantly, this on chain activity did not reflect retail euphoria. Instead, it marked the initial institutional allocation phase, where large capital entered the asset class through regulated ETF rails rather than direct on chain spot purchases.
This shift matters.
Institutional investors do not chase momentum at cycle extremes. They front load exposure during periods of narrative uncertainty, liquidity transition, and structural access improvements. The IBIT launch was not a speculative event, it was a liquidity gateway, enabling pension funds, asset managers, and advisors to allocate before traditional bull market dynamics emerged.
As a result:
Institutional demand led the cycle, rather than confirming it
On chain congestion peaked early, not late, reflecting structural positioning instead of retail FOMO
Subsequent price expansion occurred with less on chain retail saturation than in prior cycles
This explains why price advanced without the classical signs of terminal excess typically observed near cycle tops. Retail participation, historically the defining feature of Bitcoin market peaks, remained comparatively subdued while institutions accumulated via ETFs.
In effect, this cycle was pulled forward by institutional capital.
The ETF era did not end the cycle, it started it.
Retail driven excess has historically marked Bitcoin tops.
Institutional driven access marks Bitcoin’s maturation phase and this cycle’s divergence from prior peaks.
This is not a retail bubble forming late.
It is institutional positioning forming early.
❤12👍1
Trader Bamp 🏟
Photo
50% profits taken.
A clean ~5.5% unleveraged move captured. Remaining position stays open to benefit from further downside as long as structure remains intact. Risk reduced, discipline applied patience now does the heavy lifting.
A clean ~5.5% unleveraged move captured. Remaining position stays open to benefit from further downside as long as structure remains intact. Risk reduced, discipline applied patience now does the heavy lifting.
❤5
📉 BTC Macro Outlook
BTC is expected to consolidate into late January / February, followed by a rejection at the 50-week EMA and continuation into a full bear-market leg.
Based on historical structure and macro conditions, the cycle bottom is projected for September–October, with price targeting $48k–$55k.
Unless BTC reclaims and holds above the 50W EMA, upside remains corrective and risk stays skewed to the downside.
BTC is expected to consolidate into late January / February, followed by a rejection at the 50-week EMA and continuation into a full bear-market leg.
Based on historical structure and macro conditions, the cycle bottom is projected for September–October, with price targeting $48k–$55k.
Unless BTC reclaims and holds above the 50W EMA, upside remains corrective and risk stays skewed to the downside.
❤13👍2
Trader Bamp 🏟
📉 Structural imbalance forming in long positions Whale positioning is rotating lower while retail participation is increasingly concentrated on the long side. This divergence historically precedes periods where marginal buyers are exhausted and liquidity…
Closed short position with full TP here.
❤4
Trader Bamp 🏟
Long opened here. Expecting a potential short-term bounce from this level, with room for a brief upside move. Monitoring price reaction closely and managing risk accordingly.
50% profits secured after a clean ~4,5% expansion.
SL moved slightly above entry.
Remaining position left to run.
SL moved slightly above entry.
Remaining position left to run.
❤7
Liquidity is concentrated below price in the 83k–85k region, while leverage remains skewed long around 88k, leaving the market vulnerable to a downside liquidity sweep. Weekend price action lacks conviction. I remain on the sidelines and will reassess once the weekly close is in and volume returns with the new trading week, providing clearer directional confirmation.
❤11