{"id":23635,"date":"2025-05-03T13:23:55","date_gmt":"2025-05-03T10:23:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forklog.com\/en\/a-year-after-bitcoins-halving-why-is-this-time-different\/"},"modified":"2025-05-03T13:23:55","modified_gmt":"2025-05-03T10:23:55","slug":"a-year-after-bitcoins-halving-why-is-this-time-different","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forklog.com\/en\/a-year-after-bitcoins-halving-why-is-this-time-different\/","title":{"rendered":"A year after Bitcoin\u2019s halving: why is this time different?"},"content":{"rendered":"

It has been more than a year since the fourth halving<\/a>, yet Bitcoin is still treading water\u2014trading roughly 12% below the ATH<\/span> set<\/a> at the time of Donald Trump\u2019s inauguration. Judging by historical patterns, this is the most lacklustre performance of any market cycle.<\/p>\n

After previous halvings, the first cryptocurrency typically delivered chunky multiples within 12 months. The 2024\u20132025 stretch, however, has broken the mould\u2014the market seems stuck in wait-and-see mode.<\/p>\n

ForkLog examines why this cycle is different.<\/p>\n

Historical patterns versus the current cycle<\/h2>\n

According to researchers at Kaiko<\/a>, in the 12 months after the 2012 halving Bitcoin\u2019s price soared 7,000%, while the 2016 and 2020 cycles saw gains of 291% and 541%, respectively.<\/p>\n

Clearly, this cycle is nowhere close. After the block reward fell from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC, digital gold rose just 46% (calculations as of 29 April).<\/p>\n

\"1_btc_price_perf_1_year_after_halving_events\"
Bitcoin price performance across market cycles. Source: Kaiko.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

\n\u201cThe characteristic price surge that typically appears nine months after the halving is simply absent this time,\u201d the analysts stated.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Price action remains sluggish<\/a> amid mounting macroeconomic uncertainty. In the first quarter of 2025, global tensions intensified after the introduction of \u201cliberation\u201d tariffs<\/a>, damping risk appetite.<\/p>\n

In the six months after the fourth halving, the average Economic Policy Uncertainty Index<\/span> (per FRED<\/a>) stood at 317. For comparison, in comparable post\u2011halving windows it was 107 in 2012, 109 in 2016 and 186 in 2020.<\/p>\n

The EPU gauges uncertainty in economic policy based on media analysis, tax\u2011spending forecasts and expert disagreement. High readings correlate with greater equity volatility, weaker investment and stronger \u201csafe\u2011haven\u201d assets such as gold.<\/p>\n

In 2020\u20132022, rising EPU coincided with capital flowing into Bitcoin, which many view<\/a> as a hedge against inflation and political risk. Research shows<\/a> that when the index exceeds 150, interest in digital gold increases.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cHowever, in the United States, regulatory questions around digital assets are beginning to clear up<\/a>, which could reduce uncertainty and restore investor confidence in crypto markets over the coming months,\u201d the experts said.
<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A maturing market<\/h2>\n

Kaiko notes that Bitcoin\u2019s 60\u2011day price volatility has fallen markedly\u2014from over 200% in 2012 to barely 50% now.<\/p>\n

\"2-bitcoin_volatility_1_year_after_halving_events\"
Bitcoin volatility in the year after each halving. Source: Kaiko.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

\n\u201cAs Bitcoin matures, it will likely deliver steadier, albeit more moderate, returns than in previous cycles,\u201d the experts opined.
<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

On\u2011chain analyst Tiago Amaral noted<\/a> that MVRV, a metric geared towards long\u2011term investors, points to a sharp decline in unrealised profits. In his view, that signals market maturation and lower prospective returns.<\/p>\n

\"3-glassnode-studio_btc-long-term-holder-mvrv.png\"
MVRV dynamics for long\u2011term investors. Source: Glassnode.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

\n\u201cBitcoin may be entering a new era\u2014with less pronounced parabolic peaks and more gradual, institution\u2011driven growth,\u201d Amaral explained.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In the 2016\u20132020 cycle the indicator peaked at 35.8, signalling sizeable paper gains and a clear market top. In 2020\u20132024 the maximum fell sharply\u2014to 12.2\u2014despite a new ATH<\/span>.<\/p>\n

In the current cycle, the long\u2011term\u2011holder MVRV peaked at just 4.35\u2014well below previous periods. The drop suggests long\u2011term holders are no longer booking outsized profits.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cThe trend is obvious: with every new cycle, the multiples are more modest,\u201d the analyst noted. \u201cRising market capitalisation means it takes exponentially more capital to move the price materially.\u201d
<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He also cautioned it is too early to declare a final top for this cycle. Historically, before setting new highs the market often drifted sideways or saw moderate pullbacks.<\/p>\n

\"4-Bitcoin-Cycles-Comparison\"
Bitcoin performance from each halving across cycles. Data: Bitcoin Cycles Comparison<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Given the growing role of institutions, the current accumulation phase may well last longer than in past cycles.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cAlthough the current stretch feels sluggish and dull, it may in fact be a healthy reset before the next upward impulse,\u201d Amaral suggested.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Cycles and miners<\/h2>\n

The crypto market\u2019s structure is evolving, and the familiar four\u2011year cycles appear to be losing relevance.<\/p>\n

Mitchell Askew of Bitcoin Magazine Pro and Blockware Solutions believes<\/a> that with institutional capital, Bitcoin\u2019s \u201cparabolic growth model\u201d followed by deep drawdowns is changing. Meanwhile, mining is becoming more efficient and stable, affecting supply and pricing trends.<\/p>\n

Halvings used to coincide with rapid rallies, often followed by 70%\u2011plus corrections. That driver now looks less potent; instead, more institutions are involved. They make the market steadier but more sensitive to macroeconomics.<\/p>\n

According to Askew, spot ETFs and corporate investments<\/a> help stabilise demand for Bitcoin, reducing the odds of sharp swings. Unlike retail traders\u2014who tend to buy in euphoria and panic\u2011sell on dips\u2014institutions are likelier to take profits into strength and accumulate during declines.<\/p>\n

Like others, Askew also sees longer consolidation phases before advances resume. In his view, Bitcoin increasingly behaves like a traditional financial asset, shedding the hallmarks of a highly volatile speculative instrument.<\/p>\n

He added that mining\u2011hardware efficiency has plateaued, which could materially affect production and supply. New ASIC models are only about 10% more efficient than their predecessors, leaving them profitable for four to eight years.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cThis reduces the pressure on miners to constantly invest in new equipment,\u201d the expert observed.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Reward cuts are not the only factor shaping mining profitability.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cAlthough miners\u2019 revenues remain roughly in line with the five\u2011year average, mining difficulty is now five times higher than in April 2021 and 40% above pre\u2011halving levels,\u201d noted<\/a> Blockworks journalists.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In short, mining is tougher and costlier than ever. But what is the cost to produce one bitcoin? There is no single answer, as the key variable\u2014electricity\u2014varies<\/a> by region.<\/p>\n

Researchers at the CCAF<\/span> estimate<\/a> the average cost of mining 1 BTC at $49 887<\/span> (as of 30 April).<\/p>\n

\"6-historical_cost_to_mine_btc\"
Historical cost to mine one bitcoin. Source: CCAF.
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

A correction of over 40%\u2014from around $94,000 to the breakeven ~$50,000\u2014looks unlikely. That, in turn, makes a near\u2011term miner capitulation improbable.<\/p>\n

The dust from the \u201cliberation\u201d tariffs has settled, and most on\u2011chain metrics are nowhere near overheating. The market remains relatively stable, but one question keeps surfacing: \u201cWhen does the rally resume?\u201d<\/p>\n

Should we expect a moonshot this year?<\/h2>\n

In March, CryptoQuant head Ki Young Ju concluded<\/a> the bull trend had ended\u2014predicting a correction or prolonged range over the next 6\u201312 months.<\/p>\n

After a rise to $94,000<\/a>, he conceded the price was 10% above the level at which he had called the bull trend over.<\/p>\n

Ki Young Ju added he would watch the data for a few more weeks for signs of a reversal. Until the price clears $100,000, his view is unchanged: it is too early to declare the uptrend back.<\/p>\n

Some on\u2011chain analysts are more upbeat. A CryptoQuant author known as IT Tech noted<\/a> that after several weeks of persistently negative readings, the Apparent Demand<\/span> indicator has turned higher, signalling a clear recovery in demand.<\/p>\n

\"7-Apparent-Demand\"
Bitcoin\u2019s Apparent Demand indicator. Source: CryptoQuant.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The metric reflects the net change in the volume of coins unmoved for a year, adjusted for daily block rewards. It serves as a proxy for demand strength.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cA vigorous rebound from extremely negative readings (below -200,000 BTC) indicates previously idle capital is re\u2011entering the market,\u201d the expert explained. <\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

By his account, this is the first significant move since February and comes alongside stronger inflows to spot Bitcoin ETFs and continued long\u2011term accumulation.<\/p>\n

\n\u201cHistorically, such Apparent Demand reversals preceded either large\u2011scale rallies or the formation of durable support levels,\u201d IT Tech said.<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Capriole Investments founder Charles Edwards, using the Bitcoin Energy Value (BEV) model, concluded that Bitcoin trades at a 40% discount to its fair value\u2014$130,000.<\/p>\n

\n

Bitcoin Energy Value is at $130K. We are one year post Halving and Bitcoin is trading at a whopping 40% discount to its intrinsic value. pic.twitter.com\/kbqTgTPp5d<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Charles Edwards (@caprioleio) April 25, 2025<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n