Will Bitcoin rise or fall next year? Institutions and traders are in a heated debate.

Author: Jaleel Jia Liu, BlockBeats

After experiencing the rapid decline on “10.11” and facing the consecutive blow of the U.S. government shutdown in November, the crypto market has become somewhat jittery.

What is even more concerning is that traders and institutions have developed a serious divergence regarding the direction of the market. Galaxy Digital has just lowered its year-end target price from $185,000 to $120,000, while JPMorgan insists that Bitcoin could reach $170,000 in the next 6-12 months.

Ultimately, the biggest factor influencing the rise and fall of the crypto market is liquidity. When liquidity in USD is abundant, funds flow into risk assets, and Bitcoin rises; when liquidity tightens, funds flow back into government bonds and cash, and Bitcoin falls. This time, the U.S. government shutdown set a historical record, leading to the Treasury's total account balance approaching 1 trillion USD, completely locking up liquidity and affecting almost all financial markets globally. Bitcoin is certainly no exception. This also shows that, in fact, the factors affecting liquidity are largely political.

The local elections on November 4 saw a significant victory for the Democratic Party. What do the midterm elections in 2026 indicate? Will the Federal Reserve cut interest rates in December? Every recent move from the White House deserves thorough analysis. Every event is altering the expectations of liquidity.

So how will Bitcoin perform in the soon-to-end 2025 and the upcoming 2026? Who is right and who is wrong in the bullish and bearish arguments? Rhythm BlockBeats has summarized the arguments from both sides.

What do the bears say?

Before analyzing the possibility of an upward trend, let's first hear what the bears have to say.

Democrats Strike Back, Trump is Anxious

“The recent victories of the Democratic Party in several state elections are the reasons for the decline of the crypto market in the past few weeks; the Democratic Party is very unfavorable to cryptocurrencies and capitalism,” analyst borovik.eth's viewpoint is not unfounded.

After the presidential election and before the congressional midterm elections, there are several important local gubernatorial elections in the United States. These local elections can be seen as a referendum on the public's satisfaction with the Republican Party, as well as a precursor to the midterm elections.

Recently, the Republican Party suffered three consecutive defeats in state-level elections, with the Democratic Party winning comprehensively:

1. Virginia gubernatorial election: Democratic candidate Abigail Spanberger was elected with a significant margin of 15 percentage points, becoming the state's first female governor. The Democratic Party not only secured the governorship but also reclaimed the positions of lieutenant governor and attorney general, while the House of Delegates flipped at least 13 seats.

2. New Jersey Governor Election: Democratic candidate Mikie Sherrill also became the first female governor of the state. New Jersey is a moderate voter stronghold, but this time the Democrats won by 13.8 percentage points, marking the largest victory since 2005.

3. California passes redistricting of election voting: potentially adding 5 House seats for the Democrats and redrawing 3 districts. Next, California Governor Newsom and others will become Trump's and the Republican Party's fiercest opponents.

Newsom has consistently maintained the top position for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028 on Polymarket.

4. New York City Mayoral Election: 34-year-old Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani won easily, receiving over 1.03 million votes with a vote share of 52-55%. He became the first mayor of New York City born in the 1990s, the first Muslim mayor, and the first Indian-American mayor.

More importantly, the symbolic significance of New York is quite extraordinary. Many of the votes supporting Mamdani come from young people who once supported Trump, and he is also nicknamed “leftist Trump.” This means that in the largest city in America and Trump’s hometown, nearly 90% of young people have switched their allegiance to the Democratic Party.

The timing of gubernatorial and mayoral elections in the United States is staggered to avoid the “down-ballot effect” of federal elections, allowing local voters to focus more on local issues. Governors generally serve a four-year term, but election years vary from state to state; mayoral terms range from two to four years, with election timings being even more flexible. Ironically, because of this staggering, these local elections have become an important barometer for federal elections, often predicting national political trends. These governors and mayors are also significant sources of future federal candidates.

The recent comprehensive victory of the Democratic Party in state elections provides strong momentum for the midterm elections in 2026. Many foreign media and analysts believe this is a precursor to a “blue wave” similar to that of 2017. This also serves as a political warning for Trump; if he doesn’t take action soon, he may repeat the situation of losing the local elections in 2017 during his first term and ultimately losing control of the House of Representatives.

In American politics, the first year in office is often a honeymoon period, the second year is the hate period, and the next two years are considered lame duck years. But Trump probably didn’t expect that his honeymoon period would be so short and that his defeat would come so quickly.

Even though he still controls both houses now, Trump cannot act completely at his own will. This recent U.S. government shutdown is a good example.

The core contradiction of the recent U.S. government shutdown can be simply stated: the Senate needs 60 votes to move forward with reopening the government, which is a hard rule. The Republicans want the Democrats to vote, while the Democrats' condition is to extend an expiring health insurance subsidy, but Trump does not agree.

Under the leadership of minority leader Chuck Schumer, the Democrats voted against 14 times, united like a family.

In contrast, the Republican Party is filled with infighting and divisions. Trump has repeatedly called for breaking the rules to eliminate the 60-vote threshold, but has been rejected by the Senate Republican leaders, who are concerned that abolishing the filibuster rules could backfire if the Democrats regain power. It is said that Trump was very angry about this and scolded these Republican leaders.

The final result is that the Republican Party compromised, and Trump was forced to accept a package deal that included Democratic priorities in exchange for the reopening of the U.S. government. This also clearly shows that the united Democratic Party has the ability to block the Republican agenda, and Trump's control over the “dictatorship” of both houses is being weakened.

This shutdown has created the longest record in American history, with a large number of civil servants unable to take paid leave and many poor people unable to receive subsidies, resulting in economic losses that severely weakened the image of the Republican Party.

The dissatisfaction of the Americans has reached a critical point. Livelihood is always the biggest politics.

Dissatisfaction with the standard of living is actually declining, dissatisfaction is making everyone feel insecure as illegal immigrants are being targeted everywhere, and dissatisfaction with various divisions is causing people a lot of anxiety. Millions of people from the upper middle class are realizing that they are experiencing a downward social class shift, and they feel panic about it.

Millions of people from the middle and upper classes realize that they are experiencing a downward social mobility, and they feel panic about it.

Food inflation is also key; something that used to cost 100 dollars now costs 250 dollars, and the quality has actually worsened. The egg price surge has just calmed down, but America's favorite beef is facing new inflation.

The latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) released on October 24 shows that the prices of roasted beef and steaks have increased by 18.4% and 16.6% year-on-year, respectively. According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the retail price of ground beef has soared to $6.1 per pound, setting a new historical high. Compared to three years ago, beef prices have risen by more than 50%.

Additionally, coffee prices rose by 18.9%, natural gas prices increased by 11.7%, electricity costs went up by 5.1%, and car repair expenses rose by 11.5%. Many young Americans who are burdened with debt from attending college are facing even greater pressure due to the rising cost of living.

The 2026 U.S. midterm elections are scheduled for November 3, and the recent victory of the Democratic Party in the 2025 gubernatorial elections has provided strong momentum for regaining control of the House of Representatives. If the midterm elections next year result in both the Senate and the House being controlled by the Democratic Party, Trump will undoubtedly be hamstrung in the next two years, effectively becoming a lame duck.

For the crypto market, tightening regulation may mean that funds betting on Trump-friendly policies need to reconsider their direction, and a downward trend may not even have to wait for the midterm elections.

A December Rate Cut is Not a Done Deal

The probability of a rate cut at the Federal Reserve meeting on December 10, which originally had a 90% chance, has now dropped to 65% on Polymarket (51% at the time of writing).

“Fed mouthpiece” Nick Timiraos stated that currently four voting regional Fed presidents (Boston Fed's Collins, St. Louis Fed's Bullard, Chicago Fed's Goolsbee, and Kansas Fed's Schmidt, who voted against the rate cut decision in October) are not actively pushing for another rate cut in December.

Federal Reserve officials are increasingly divided over a rate cut in December, as hawkish figures who had previously focused on inflation issues began to advocate for a pause in actions after last month's rate cut. Officials have disagreements on three evaluative questions:

First, is the rise in costs due to tariffs really only a one-time effect? Hawks are concerned that after absorbing the initial tariff costs, companies will pass more costs onto consumers next year, continuously pushing up prices. Doves, on the other hand, believe that companies have been unwilling to pass more tariff costs onto consumers so far, indicating weak demand that is insufficient to support inflation.

Secondly, the slowdown in monthly non-farm payroll growth is due to weak demand for labor from businesses, or is it due to a decrease in immigration leading to insufficient labor supply? If it is the former, maintaining high interest rates will lead to an economic recession; if it is the latter, cutting interest rates may overly stimulate demand.

Third, do interest rates still have a limiting effect on the economy? Hawks believe that after a 0.5 percentage point cut this year, interest rates are at or near neutral levels, which neither stimulate nor suppress economic growth, thus posing a significant risk of further cuts. Doves, on the other hand, argue that interest rates still have a limiting effect, and that cuts can support the recovery of the labor market without reigniting inflation.

In August, Powell attempted to quell the debate during his speech in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, arguing that the impact of tariffs was merely temporary, and that the weakness in the labor market reflected weak demand, thus siding with the doves in support of interest rate cuts. The data released a few weeks later confirmed his view: the economic slowdown had indeed halted the creation of new jobs.

However, at the meeting on October 29, hawkish voices rose again.

Jeff Schmid, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, opposed the interest rate cut this month. Several non-voting Federal Reserve Bank Presidents, including Beth Hammack, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, and Lorie Logan, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, also publicly expressed opposition to the rate cut.

At the press conference after the meeting, Powell stated bluntly that a rate cut in December is not a certainty. Therefore, whether the Federal Reserve will cut rates again at the meeting on December 9 to 10 is currently difficult to predict.

More importantly, the term of Federal Reserve Chairman Powell is also coming to an end, as his term will conclude on May 15, 2026. Most analysts believe that Powell will not risk appearing flustered, and maintaining the status quo is the safest choice.

The dual uncertainty of politics and monetary policy has also subjected the cryptocurrency market to a stress test.

Renowned analyst Willy Woo has put forward a profound point: the two major cyclical forces that have driven Bitcoin's rise in the past are gradually fading, and what will truly determine the market in the future will not be halving, nor liquidity, but the macro economy itself.

In the past decade, the history of Bitcoin has almost entirely been built on the “overlapping effect of two four-year cycles”: one is Bitcoin's own halving cycle, and the other is the global liquidity (M2) cycle. Whenever the narrative of supply contraction brought about by halving meets the liquidity expansion driven by central bank injections, a strong resonance is formed—this has been the underlying driving force of the past two bull markets. However, now, with the misalignment of cycles, this resonance has disappeared, leaving only liquidity to function independently.

“The last two real economic recessions, the bursting of the internet bubble in 2001 and the financial crisis in 2008, occurred before the birth of Bitcoin. In other words, we have never seen how Bitcoin would perform during a full economic recession.”

Therefore, Willy Woo suggests that the past bull market era driven by dual-cycle resonance has ended. Bitcoin has lost its previous “natural accelerators,” and the driving force for its rise may be weaker and more reliant on external factors. The current trend of Bitcoin may already be telling us that “the peak has been reached.”

Galaxy Digital has also recently lowered its Bitcoin price target. They recently reduced their year-end target from $185,000 to $120,000, citing large investors' massive sell-offs, funds rotating into assets like gold and AI, as well as leverage liquidations. Galaxy's head of research, Alex Thorn, described this period as a “mature era,” where lower volatility and institutional absorption dominate the market.

What do the bulls say?

Of course, not everyone is pessimistic.

The U.S. Government Opens the Floodgates

Real Vision CEO Raoul Pal is optimistic that the crypto market will soon recover from the ongoing turbulence.

“The road to Valhalla is very close now,” Pal said. Simply put, Pal believes that the crypto industry will soon start an upward trend after experiencing a series of market collapses.

The logic of Pal is as follows: the U.S. government shutdown has indeed led to liquidity tightening. Tax revenue is still flowing in, but spending is at zero. The balance of the Treasury General Account (TGA) is nearing $1 trillion, which is the main reason for the liquidity squeeze and why Bitcoin is underperforming compared to government bonds.

But this is exactly the signal of a turning point.

In response, the Federal Reserve has been forced to restart temporary repurchase operations (Overnight Repo), planning to inject nearly $30 billion in liquidity into the market.

More importantly, the next phase: once the government shutdown ends, the Treasury will begin spending between 250 billion to 350 billion dollars in the coming months.

When this situation occurs, quantitative tightening ends, and the balance sheet technically expands. This means that the crypto market will gain free liquidity.

Historical trends also support this judgment. When the Treasury supplements reserves and liquidity becomes extremely tight, it often foreshadows an impending reversal. In other words, the current pain is just the darkness before the dawn.

Raoul Pal also made an important point: “The four-year cycle has now become a five-year cycle… Bitcoin should peak in 2026. Possibly in the second quarter.”

This judgment directly addresses the concerns of the bears regarding the “periodic resonance disappearance.”

Pal's view is that the cycle hasn't disappeared, but has instead been extended. If the peak is in the second quarter of 2026, then the current position is actually a good time to get on board.

Moreover, even if liquidity acts independently, it is enough to drive Bitcoin up—provided that liquidity is indeed expanding. The large-scale spending after the government reopens is precisely the beginning of liquidity expansion.

Arthur Hayes, co-founder of BitMEX, echoed similar sentiments. He linked the decline of Bitcoin to an 8% decrease in dollar liquidity since July, believing that once the Treasury balance declines after the shutdown, dollar liquidity will rebound, driving BTC higher.

Hayes provided a deeper analysis in his latest Substack piece “Hallelujah”: The U.S. will issue about $2 trillion in new debt each year for the next few years, in addition to rolling over old debt. As the purchasing power of the private sector and foreign central banks declines, RV funds will increasingly rely on SRF financing. This will force the Federal Reserve to continue expanding its balance sheet, resulting in the effect of “invisible QE.” Ultimately, the supply of dollars will continue to expand, which is the fuel for the rise in Bitcoin prices.

Therefore, Arthur believes that the current weakness in the cryptocurrency market is merely due to liquidity being temporarily locked by the Treasury—during the government shutdown, the Treasury absorbed dollar liquidity through bond issuance, but has not yet released spending. When the government reopens, this capital will flow back into the market, and liquidity will loosen again. Meanwhile, the market may mistakenly perceive this as a peak and sell off Bitcoin, but that would be a “major misjudgment.” The real bull market will reignite from the moment “invisible QE” begins.

JPMorgan analysts remain optimistic about Bitcoin, predicting that in the next 6 to 12 months, as the leverage in the futures market resets, the price could rise to $170,000. This prediction is based on technical corrections.

The decline over the past few weeks has largely been due to leveraged liquidations. Once the leverage reset is complete, without the burden of excessive leverage, Bitcoin may actually find it easier to rise.

The CLARITY Act on Fast-Tracking

The second important reason for the bulls is that the regulatory environment is improving. The core of this improvement is the “CLARITY Act.”

Real Vision CEO Raoul Pal repeatedly emphasizes that establishing favorable cryptocurrency regulations will provide strong support for the market. His logic is simple: once the CLARITY Act is passed, banks and brokers will receive the regulatory green light to custody and trade spot crypto ETFs on a large scale.

The “CLARITY Act” was passed in the House of Representatives on July 17, with bipartisan support—78 Democratic members voted in favor. This number is crucial, indicating that the bill is not just a unilateral desire of the Republican Party, but has a bipartisan foundation.

Two days ago, on November 10th, the Senate Agriculture Committee released a bipartisan discussion draft. This timing is quite delicate—it marks the first significant legislative progress after the end of the government shutdown.

The publisher is the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, led by Chairman John Boozman (Republican from Arkansas) and senior member Cory Booker (Democrat from New Jersey). Note that this is another example of bipartisan cooperation.

Market observers expect the bill to be passed by the end of the fourth quarter of 2025. The White House's goal is clearer: to complete the legislation by the end of 2025.

Currently, in the Polymarket market “What bills will be enacted in 2025?”, the probability of the CLARITY Act (H.R.3633) passing is 41%

From July to November, it only took 4 months to advance from the House of Representatives to the Senate discussion stage. This speed is not common in the history of U.S. legislation.

What exactly does this bill change? The most critical point: it transfers the primary regulatory authority over the spot digital commodities market to the CFTC, significantly reducing the SEC's powers.

Specifically, the CFTC has obtained exclusive jurisdiction over the spot digital commodity market, including mainstream assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. This means that the CFTC can regulate digital commodity exchanges, brokers, dealers, and custodians, establishing anti-manipulation standards, system safeguards, and risk management requirements. Correspondingly, the SEC has lost its regulatory authority over only securities-type digital assets. The previous uncertain state of “regulating through enforcement” will come to an end.

The bill handles stablecoins more cleverly. It creates a special status for “licensed payment stablecoins”: the CFTC's regulatory scope will only apply to the execution, solicitation, and acceptance of stablecoin transactions on registered platforms. There is no regulatory authority over the operations, reserves, or issuance processes of stablecoin issuers. This complements the GENIUS Act (which focuses on issuer licensing and reserves) to avoid regulatory conflicts.

This design is very clever. It separates the trading and issuance aspects of stablecoins for regulatory purposes, avoiding the awkward situation of one asset being monitored by two institutions simultaneously. The impact on market structure is direct; platforms must register with the CFTC to engage in stablecoin spot trading, while issuers maintain autonomy to avoid overregulation.

This is a significant benefit for major stablecoins, such as Ripple's RLUSD stablecoin, Circle's USDC, Tether's USDT, and so on.

Powell's Countdown

Powell, who does not listen to Trump, is entering the countdown of his term, which ends on May 15, 2026, with six months left.

In the coming months, the choice of the Federal Reserve Chair will become the focus of the market. The government has currently narrowed down the list of candidates, but has not yet announced a specific nominee.

Currently, the candidate with the highest probability on Polymarket is Kevin Hassett, who is the Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers and has a close relationship with President Trump. Due to his position, he analyzes economic data for Trump almost daily and is even referred to by Trump as his “economic professor.” Their policy ideas align, and he is a complete dove, advocating for interest rate cuts to stimulate economic growth.

During Trump's first term, Hasit publicly criticized Powell's interest rate hike policy multiple times, believing that the Federal Reserve's overly aggressive tightening of monetary policy would harm the economic recovery.

This year, the Federal Reserve has faced unprecedented political pressure from the Trump administration due to its failure to implement more aggressive interest rate cuts. This political pressure is changing the balance of power within the Federal Reserve, and there is a recent good example of this.

On November 13, according to “Fed Whisperer” Nick Timiraos, Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic suddenly announced that he will retire when his current five-year term ends at the end of February next year. This announcement is somewhat subtle given the potential interest rate cut in December.

After all, Bostic is one of the most hawkish figures within the Federal Reserve, and his departure will weaken the hawkish voices within the Fed during this politically sensitive period.

Futures market pricing indicates that by the end of 2026, the Federal Reserve will have cut interest rates at least 4 times, each by 25 basis points. If Haskett indeed becomes the chairman of the Federal Reserve, coupled with the diminishing hawkish voices within the Fed, there is no doubt that the pace and magnitude of rate cuts will exceed market expectations. Liquidity will be significantly released, and risk assets will experience a strong rally.

This is very positive for the crypto market.

Another key political event is that Trump is repairing ties with former allies. The signal was on November 4, when Trump announced the re-nomination of Musk's friend Isaacman as the head of NASA.

After the news was released, Isaacman's friend, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, quickly retweeted the news

Trump first nominated Isaacman as NASA Administrator in December last year, but withdrew the nomination in May this year after a heated argument with Musk over the “Beautiful Law Act,” appointing Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy as acting NASA Administrator, which was seen as a warning to Musk. The two then exchanged insults, staging a “century breakup.”

A turning point emerged in August this year. According to The Wall Street Journal, during the consideration of launching the “American Party,” part of Musk's focus was on maintaining his relationship with Vice President Vance. Sources say that Musk has been in contact with Vance in recent weeks. He admitted to his aides that if he continued to push forward with the plan to form a political party, it would damage his relationship with Vance. The report states that Musk and his aides have informed close associates that if Vance decides to run for president in 2028, Musk would consider using his immense financial resources to support him, which indeed is the optimal solution under Musk's return to rational thinking.

In September, media captured Trump and Musk appearing together at Charlie Kirk's memorial service, shaking hands and communicating, indicating a warming relationship between the two. This is indeed the case, as multiple U.S. media outlets reported that with Musk's relationship with the Republican Party improving, Isaacman seems to be gradually re-entering discussions for the NASA administrator nomination.

Trump and Musk had a long talk at Kirk's memorial service

The re-nomination on November 4th is another signal of reconciliation, and this timing is quite subtle, coinciding perfectly with the Democratic Party's local election victory.

The bears see Trump's approval rating declining, Republican compromises, and a bleak outlook for 2026. The bulls see the Republicans consolidating power, repairing relationships with allies, preparing to push key legislation before the end of the year, and continuing to impact the midterm elections in 2026.

Uncertainty itself is the greatest certainty.

How much will Bitcoin actually rise to? Traders and analysts have given different answers ranging from $120,000 to $170,000.

After sorting out all the arguments from both the long and short sides, three viewpoints can be summarized.

First, look at liquidity in the short term, regulation in the medium term, and cycles in the long term.

If we only look at the next few weeks, the recent end of the government shutdown, tight liquidity, and increasing political uncertainty do put pressure on us. Galaxy's target of $120,000 by the end of the year may be a relatively conservative but realistic expectation.

However, looking at the next six to twelve months, the combination of large-scale government spending + the implementation of the CLARITY Act + liquidity release may push prices closer to 170,000 dollars. JPMorgan's assessment is reasonable.

As for Raoul Pal's statement about reaching a peak in the second quarter of 2026, that reflects a longer-term cycle judgment. A five-year cycle replaces the four-year cycle, and if this assumption holds, now is actually a good time to position oneself.

The key is to clearly understand which time frame you are trading in. Short-term traders should focus on liquidity data and government spending progress, mid-term holders should keep an eye on the CLARITY Act and the Federal Reserve's changes, while long-term investors should consider the business cycle and the fundamental positioning of Bitcoin.

Secondly, political risks are overestimated, but they cannot be completely ignored.

The victory of the Democratic Party in local elections does pose a threat to the midterm elections in 2026. However, there is still a whole year left from now until the midterm elections.

A lot can happen politically in a year. Trump reconciles with Musk, the Republican Party may push more favorable legislation before the end of the year, and improved economic data may also change public opinion.

More importantly, even if the Democratic Party takes back Congress in 2026, the crucial crypto regulatory framework, if established in 2025, is unlikely to be overturned in the short term. The “CLARITY Act” received support from 78 Democratic representatives in the House, indicating it has bipartisan backing.

The characteristic of American politics is that “a large ship is hard to turn around.” Once the regulatory framework is established, even if the political parties change, it is difficult to completely reverse it in the short term.

Therefore, the logic that “betting on the Democratic Party's victory leads to the end of cryptocurrency” is overly simplistic. Political risks do exist, but they are not as fatal as the market imagines.

What is truly alarming is the political uncertainty itself. If the market does not know who will win for a long time, the funds will choose to wait and see. This wait-and-see sentiment may harm the market more than the victory of any side.

Thirdly, the biggest risk is not political, but economic recession.

The concerns about the “business cycle” raised by the bears are, on the contrary, the risks that deserve the most attention.

If the U.S. economy really enters a recession, will Bitcoin plummet like tech stocks or become a safe-haven asset like gold?

This question has no historical answer because Bitcoin has never experienced a complete economic recession cycle. The Internet bubble of 2001 and the financial crisis of 2008 both occurred before the birth of Bitcoin.

From the current data, there are indeed signs of an economic slowdown: weak job growth, declining consumer spending, cautious business investment, and food inflation putting pressure on the middle class.

If these trends continue, there might really be a risk of recession in 2026. At that time, liquidity release, regulatory friendliness, and the reconciliation between Trump and Musk may all become ineffective. Bitcoin will face a real stress test.

This is also why JPMorgan, despite setting a target of $170,000, emphasized that “a leverage reset is needed”; and why Raoul Pal, while optimistic about 2026, also acknowledged that “the market will be volatile until invisible QE begins.” They are all waiting for a confirmation signal: Can the economy achieve a soft landing?

When will the government open? When will the CLARITY Act be passed? Will the Federal Reserve lower interest rates in December? What will the results of the 2026 midterm elections be? The answers to these questions will determine the short-term direction of Bitcoin.

But the longer-term question is: how will Bitcoin perform in the next economic recession? The answer to that may not be revealed until 2026. Until then, traders will continue to argue endlessly, and the market will remain volatile. The only certainty is that uncertainty itself remains the greatest certainty.

Source: BlockBeats