#比特币价格波动 Seeing the words from the Bitwise advisor, I was reminded of the 2017 market rally. At that time, Bitcoin surged from 3,000 to 20,000, with each phase accompanied by a sharp increase in volatility—that was true bullishness. Nowadays, the price hovers around $90,000 with repeated tug-of-war, yet volatility has fallen to historic lows. This essentially reflects the same issue: a lack of market participation enthusiasm and risk premium compensation.
I remember during the 2018 bear market, I saw countless projects fall from heaven to hell. Back then, volatility was also very low, but that was because everyone was cutting losses and fleeing. The current low volatility is even more bizarre—it suggests not a solid consensus, but a waning participation. The voices in the Chinese community worried about the $90,000 resistance level are actually talking about this problem: in times of liquidity exhaustion, long squeezes in futures can easily turn into a stampede.
History has shown me that volatility and price appreciation are always twin relationships. Without volatility, no participants are willing to take risks and enter. The current situation is very similar to mid-2015, appearing "stable," but that stability often precedes a storm. The key now is whether new incremental funds or market catalysts will break this deadlock. Otherwise, that $90,000 might really be just a ceiling.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
#比特币价格波动 Seeing the words from the Bitwise advisor, I was reminded of the 2017 market rally. At that time, Bitcoin surged from 3,000 to 20,000, with each phase accompanied by a sharp increase in volatility—that was true bullishness. Nowadays, the price hovers around $90,000 with repeated tug-of-war, yet volatility has fallen to historic lows. This essentially reflects the same issue: a lack of market participation enthusiasm and risk premium compensation.
I remember during the 2018 bear market, I saw countless projects fall from heaven to hell. Back then, volatility was also very low, but that was because everyone was cutting losses and fleeing. The current low volatility is even more bizarre—it suggests not a solid consensus, but a waning participation. The voices in the Chinese community worried about the $90,000 resistance level are actually talking about this problem: in times of liquidity exhaustion, long squeezes in futures can easily turn into a stampede.
History has shown me that volatility and price appreciation are always twin relationships. Without volatility, no participants are willing to take risks and enter. The current situation is very similar to mid-2015, appearing "stable," but that stability often precedes a storm. The key now is whether new incremental funds or market catalysts will break this deadlock. Otherwise, that $90,000 might really be just a ceiling.