温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.bee.com/zh/66237.html
点击访问原文链接

BTC’s “Narrative Crisis”: Bloomberg Is Right, But Only Half Right | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
BTC’s “Narrative Crisis”: Bloomberg Is Right, But Only Half Right | Bee Network Login 熱門新聞 Meme Launchpad AI 代理商 DeSci 熱門鏈瀏覽器 新人必讀 衝百倍幣 蜜蜂遊戲 必備網站 必備APP 必關大神 DePIN 新人必備 教我避坑 基本工具 深度網站 交易所 NFT 工具 你好， 登出 Web3宇宙 遊戲 DApp 蜂巢 增長平台 生態 搜尋 英語 Coins儲值 登入 下載 Web3大學 遊戲 DApp 蜂巢 生態 家•分析•正文 BTC’s “Narrative Crisis”: Bloomberg Is Right, But Only Half Right分析3天前更新懷亞特 2,798 21

No crash, no black swan event, no exchange or project running away with funds. It’s just that feeling of being slowly bled dry.

A little drop each day, another little drop the next. Over a trillion dollars in market cap has evaporated, yet there hasn’t even been a decent news story about it.

Right at this moment, on February 21st, Bloomberg published an article titled “Bitcoin’s Trillion-Dollar Identity Crisis Is Coming From All Sides.” Its core argument can be summarized in three sentences: Gold is stealing the macro hedge narrative, stablecoins are stealing the payment narrative, and prediction markets are stealing the speculation narrative.

In my view, Bloomberg got two-thirds of it right, but they missed the most crucial third.

Some Data You Can’t Argue With

Content creators often fall into a trap: when they see a top-tier media outlet criticizing an asset they hold, their first reaction is “they don’t get it,” and they immediately start looking for angles to refute it.

However, there are some hard data points in this Bloomberg article.

Over the past three months, US-listed gold and gold-themed ETFs have seen over $16 billion in net inflows. During the same period, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw $3.3 billion in outflows. This contrast is particularly stark at the beginning of this year. Geopolitical tensions, a weak dollar, fluctuating tariffs—all are macro environments where “digital gold” should shine. Yet, safe-haven capital flowed into physical gold bars.

More specific data: On a day in January 2026 when the Fed signaled a hawkish stance, gold rose 3.5%, while Bitcoin fell 15%. Their correlation turned to -0.27. If “digital gold” means “rising alongside real gold during crises,” Bitcoin failed this test.

The shift of former Bitcoin advocate and Twitter founder Jack Dorsey towards stablecoins is also not a minor event. His stature in the 加密貨幣 space needs no explanation—the man who embedded Bitcoin payments into Cash App’s DNA announced support for stablecoins last November.

Polymarket’s explosive growth over the past year is also a fact. Betting on elections, tariffs, the Fed—it’s even more compliant than a casino. For those entering the crypto market seeking “thrills,” it’s a faster, more straightforward alternative.

Bloomberg is correct about all of the above.

But…

There’s an implicit logic running through the entire Bloomberg article: Bitcoin’s value comes from the narrative functions it performs. These functions are being taken away by other things, so Bitcoin’s value is eroding.

This logic itself rests on an unspoken presupposition: it assumes Bitcoin must “win” a specific function to justify its existence.

Even gold can’t win under this logic. Gold isn’t the best payment tool, nor the best speculative instrument. In some inflation-hedging scenarios, TIPS (Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities) are more effective.

But gold is gold. Over millennia, no one has demanded it “prove its function.” Its very existence is its value. Humanity’s obsession with “scarcity, durability, and unforgeability” is more stubborn than any functional argument.

Bitcoin is doing the same thing; it just has only sixteen years of history and hasn’t yet reached the point of being taken for granted.

One line in the Bloomberg article is particularly sharp: “Bitcoin’s biggest threat isn’t competition, but diversion—when no single narrative can sustain it, attention, capital, and conviction slowly bleed away.”

In the short term, this makes sense. But it treats “diversion” and “sedimentation” as opposing forces.

When Bitcoin is no longer the protagonist of a hot narrative, those who remain holding it are precisely the ones who don’t need a narrative. Their reasons for holding are network effects, liquidity depth, regulatory certainty, and the growing list of sovereign-level institutions buying in.

The Overlooked Major Development

There’s one sentence in the article that carries more weight than all the rest, but it slipped by easily:

“Bitcoin spot ETFs have made Bitcoin a permanent fixture in investment portfolios.”

This has completely changed the holder structure.

Before ETFs, Bitcoin’s main holders were retail investors, exchanges, miners, plus a few high-risk-tolerant institutions. These groups are characterized by highly emotional behavior—chasing rallies, fleeing dips. That’s why the bear market saw an 84% drop in 2018 and a 77% drop in 2022.

After ETFs, a new type of money entered: pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, family offices, insurance capital. The sole motivation for this money is asset allocation—buying according to portfolio weightings, then holding without moving. When the market falls, they engage in passive rebalancing, buying more on the dip.

Currently, Bitcoin has fallen over 40% from its peak this cycle. To some extent, ETF capital is forming a new support structure at the bottom. Chips are still being exchanged; a large amount of Bitcoin is flowing from early miners, early HODLers, and industry insiders into institutions. This process inevitably comes with growing pains.

Bloomberg observed this phenomenon but didn’t follow the logic further. They only saw narratives bleeding away, not that simultaneously, the holder structure is shifting from “casino regulars” to “asset allocators.”

Where’s the Bottom?

No one knows where Bitcoin’s bottom is this cycle; we can only guess.

But there are a few things more worth observing than the price itself.

The sustainability of ETF fund flows. The current net outflows are short-term data. If they become sustained outflows on a quarterly basis, it would mean institutional allocation demand is shrinking—a real problem. If they stabilize, that’s the true signal.

The Bitcoin-to-gold ratio. It’s currently in a historically low range. The last time it was this low was during the March 2020 pandemic crash. This ratio itself doesn’t predict a rebound, but it describes the degree of relative undervaluation.

The progress of Kevin Warsh’s nomination. One catalyst for this round of decline was the expectation of a stronger dollar following his nomination. How this macro variable plays out directly affects Bitcoin’s pricing as a risk asset.

And something Bloomberg didn’t mention at all: Discussions at the US federal level regarding a Bitcoin strategic reserve are still advancing. If this materializes, the list of sovereign Bitcoin holders would expand from El Salvador to the world’s largest economy.

Bloomberg’s article is well-written, but its problem lies in perspective. It’s the perspective of a market researcher, not an allocator.

A researcher sees narrative failure and calls it a crisis.

An allocator sees narrative failure and calls it valuation normalization.

Both perspectives are incomplete.

It’s too early to draw conclusions now. But one thing is probably right: Bitcoin isn’t dying; it’s molting.

Molting is really painful.

本文源自網路： BTC’s “Narrative Crisis”: Bloomberg Is Right, But Only Half Right

Related: The New Ticket to the AI Agent Era: Pushing ERC-8004, What is Ethereum Betting On? This open-source agent, known as OpenClaw (originally Clawdbot, later renamed MoltBot), has rapidly spread across global tech communities and crypto circles in the past period, showcasing a new trend in the accelerated formation of AI Agents: leveraging open-source models, automation tools, and on-chain infrastructure, individuals now have the first opportunity to own a sustainable, productive unit that doesn’t rely on large platforms. Yet, precisely behind this optimistic outlook, a more fundamental and thornier issue is emerging: when AI Agents truly start collaborating and “hiring” each other, how can we trust them? Against this backdrop, on January 30th, Davide Crapis, the AI Lead at the Ethereum Foundation, tweeted that ERC-8004 is now live on the Ethereum mainnet, and the team will deploy the singleton to all major L2s within the next…

#分析#比特幣# 加密#交換#市場#工具© 版權聲明文章版权归作者所有，未经允许请勿转载。 上一篇 Fan culture is becoming a differentiating variable in prediction markets 下一篇 Why Do 85% of Token Launches Ultimately Become Expensive "Funerals"? 相關文章 Weekly Editors Picks (0118-0124) 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 36,460 After the tide recedes, let’s talk about the differences between Meme and Build 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 17,983 2 “Black Tuesday” for US retail investors: Speculative stocks and cryptocurrencies plummet under the combined pressure of earnings reports and short selling. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 16,036 1 美國 SEC 的最新聲明：RWA 監管面臨重大轉折點；Project Crypto 發放重大訊號。. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 16,340 1 以太坊協議技術升級前景分析（一）：合併 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 37,167 3 From Geopolitical Tensions to Liquidity Tightening, BTC Dragged into Uncontrolled Market Conditions 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 6,859 暫無評論 您必須先登入才能發表評論！ 立即登入 暫無評論... Bee.com 全球最大的 Web3 入口網站 合作夥伴 CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko 幣活 盔甲 下載Bee Network APP開啟您的Web3之旅 白皮書 角色 常問問題 © 2021-2026.版權所有。. 隱私政策 | 服務條款 下載蜜蜂網路APP 並開始 web3 之旅 全球最大的Web3入口網站 合作夥伴 CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors 白皮書 角色 常問問題 © 2021-2026.版權所有。. 隱私政策 | 服務條款 搜尋 搜尋站內鏈上社群媒體新聞 熱門推薦： 擼毛打金 數據分析 必關大神 教我避坑 繁體中文 English 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt العربية 한국어 Bahasa Indonesia हिन्दी اردو Русский 繁體中文

智能索引记录