I wonder if anyone has noticed a strange phenomenon: Recently, there have been continuous geopolitical conflicts, and logically speaking, BTC, as 'digital gold,' should be rising, but the fact is that BTC has not only failed to rise but has also broken through the critical support level of 88000 USDT. This has led many to question whether the 'digital gold' narrative of BTC has already failed. In today's article, I will delve into this issue with you, helping you see the true asset attributes of BTC at present; many viewpoints may overturn your understanding, so be prepared!
First, let's review the origin of the narrative of 'digital gold.' During the 2024 halving cycle, BTC was attributed with the properties of 'digital gold' by the market due to its limited supply and decentralization, becoming a safe-haven asset in the eyes of many. At that time, whenever there was a global geopolitical conflict or economic crisis, the price of BTC would rise. However, the current situation is completely different; recently, the maritime confrontation between the US and Venezuela and the tense situation in Gaza have increased geopolitical uncertainty, yet BTC continues to be under pressure, while the US dollar index is continuously strengthening. This indicates that the market's positioning of BTC has changed, and the narrative of 'digital gold' is being weakened.
So what is the current property of BTC? Personally, I believe that BTC is more like a 'global liquidity thermometer' now. Why do I say this? Because with the deep penetration of spot ETFs, BTC has become an important option for institutions to allocate risk assets, and its price fluctuations are increasingly influenced by global liquidity. When the Federal Reserve releases liquidity and US Treasury yields fall, a large amount of capital flows into risk assets, causing BTC prices to rise; when the Federal Reserve tightens liquidity and US Treasury yields rise, funds flow back to risk-free assets, causing BTC prices to drop. The recent drop of BTC below 88000 USDT is due to the market's significant cooling of expectations for a rate cut by the Federal Reserve in early 2026, with US Treasury yields strengthening, leading to capital flowing out of the crypto market.
To validate my point, I made a data comparison: In 2024, the correlation coefficient between BTC and gold is 0.6, while the correlation coefficient with the Nasdaq 100 index is 0.4; by the end of 2025, the correlation coefficient between BTC and gold dropped to 0.2, while the correlation coefficient with the Nasdaq 100 index rose to 0.8. This change in data is very telling; it indicates that BTC has gradually shifted from a 'safe-haven asset' to a 'risk asset,' and its price fluctuations are increasingly correlated with tech stocks. This change has a significant impact on our investment strategy. In the future, when analyzing BTC prices, we can no longer only look at geopolitical conflicts; we must also pay attention to macroeconomic data and the Federal Reserve's monetary policy.
Next is the practical part: how to adapt to the changes in BTC asset properties? I will give you three suggestions. The first suggestion: change the analytical framework. In the past, we primarily looked at supply and demand relationships and market sentiment for BTC analysis, but now we need to incorporate macroeconomic analysis. For example, monthly non-farm payroll data, inflation data, and the Federal Reserve's meeting minutes, all of which will have a significant impact on BTC prices. I suggest spending 10 minutes each day to check macroeconomic news to cultivate your macro thinking. The second suggestion: adjust asset allocation. Since BTC has become a risk asset, we should appropriately reduce its proportion in the asset portfolio and increase the allocation of some traditional safe-haven assets, such as gold and government bonds, to diversify risk. The third suggestion: focus on long-term value. Regardless of how the asset properties change, BTC's long-term value still exists, such as its decentralization characteristics and the continuous development of its technical ecosystem. We should not deny its long-term value due to short-term price fluctuations; we need to look at the long term.
Some may ask me, 'Does the failure of the 'digital gold' narrative mean that BTC has no investment value?' Of course not. The change in asset properties is just the market's re-recognition of BTC, and it does not mean its value has disappeared. On the contrary, as institutional funds continue to flow in, BTC's market size will grow larger, and liquidity will improve, and its investment value still exists. What we need to do is adapt to market changes, adjust our investment strategies, rather than cling to past understandings.
Finally, I would like to conduct a survey: do you think BTC can become 'digital gold' again in the future? Or will it always exist as a risk asset? Feel free to share your views in the comments section. Follow me, and I will continue to research the changes in BTC's asset properties, bringing you cutting-edge analysis and practical investment advice. If you currently feel helpless, confused about trading, and want to learn more about cryptocurrency and access the latest information, follow me@Square-Creator-aa01419647e18 .
