Recently, there have been policy signals regarding Bitcoin strategic reserves, and some observations are worth clarifying.

On the surface, it appears that a major country is simply accumulating Bitcoin, but in reality, it points to deeper strategic adjustments. The policy document explicitly mentions a plan to hold 1 million BTC. How significant is this number? It accounts for approximately 5% of the total global supply. More importantly, the bill states that the holdings are to be maintained for 20 years, effectively locking up a large portion of the circulating supply.

From a funding perspective, this scheme is quite interesting. It does not rely on fiscal allocations but is financed through the Federal Reserve's net earnings, the price difference gains from gold reserves, plus 200,000 Bitcoin previously confiscated, serving as a foundational cushion. This effectively creates a national-level strategic reserve at zero cost. The market's biggest concern—"fiscal pressure might derail this"—has been directly alleviated.

Policy-wise, there is also a push in this direction. The head of the anti-cryptocurrency regulatory agency has been replaced by a pro-cryptocurrency decision-making team, giving the entire industry a green light from top to bottom. Such support has not been seen in history.

However, there are hidden contradictions that need to be understood. On one hand, this "Bitcoin reserve + stablecoin" combination seems to aim at building a new Bretton Woods system, integrating crypto assets into the US dollar framework. From a long-term valuation perspective, this is indeed a major positive—equivalent to giving Bitcoin's asset status official national backing.

On the other hand, in reality, Bitcoin has already fallen nearly 30% from its peak of $120,000. Institutional analysts have even cut their target prices for the next few years in half. What does this indicate? Short-term liquidity is indeed tight, and the market has not fully digested these positive signals. Retail selling pressure and institutional holding uncertainties still exist.

In other words, there is a transition period between policy benefits and market reality. Even with clearer signals, the redistribution of funds and chips will take time.