Recently, I’ve been looking into Bitcoin’s history and found a pretty interesting phenomenon. There’s a website called “Bitcoin Is Dead,” which specifically records the statements of famous people who predicted Bitcoin’s collapse. Just among economists, Peter Schiff has claimed Bitcoin has died 18 times, Nobel laureate Krugman and JPMorgan CEO Dimon are also on the list. But none of these predictions have come true.

Last year, Bitcoin hit a new high, then adjusted to its current price, but the key question is: what supports it to keep rising from the “death predictions” time and again? This involves the core logic of Bitcoin’s halving cycle.

Over the past decade, halving events have almost become the rhythm of the market. Every four years, Bitcoin’s supply halves, and historically, each halving has been accompanied by a price explosion. Data from Glassnode confirms that Bitcoin’s current trend still reflects past patterns. Based on this logic, many analysts predict that the bull market peak will occur around 550 days after the 2024 halving.

But now, the question arises. I’ve noticed some signs indicating the market is cooling down. Long-term investors are taking profits at high levels, and spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen nearly $1 billion in net outflows. This has sparked the biggest debate in the community: Is the Bitcoin halving cycle still valid?

Opponents argue that the four-year cycle is outdated. They point out that traditional financial institutions entering via ETFs have changed the game. Now, ordinary investors can easily buy Bitcoin through brokerage accounts, and this large influx of capital might overshadow the impact of halving events. Additionally, corporate holdings are increasing; it’s said that the top 100 companies worldwide hold nearly 1 million BTC, worth over $112 billion. This is no longer purely retail speculation.

Bitwise’s investment director even bluntly said, “Bitcoin’s cycle is dead.” He believes that as Bitcoin becomes integrated into the global financial system, it will be more influenced by macro factors, such as Federal Reserve interest rate policies, rather than solely relying on the halving mechanism.

But my view is that Bitcoin’s halving cycle may not have truly died, just evolved. The supply and demand principles created by halving still exist, but they are no longer the sole drivers. ETF and corporate participation bring in capital like pouring water into a lake—water levels will rise, but the waves won’t be as fierce as before.

What does this mean for investors? The old rules no longer apply mechanically. Now, it’s necessary to pay attention to the halving cycle, ETF capital flows, changes in corporate holdings, and central bank policies all at once. Bitcoin has survived 477 death predictions, but it faces a bigger challenge: maturity. Maturity means abandoning simple rules and entering a more complex game.

If the four-year cycle truly comes to an end, it’s not the end but the beginning of a new era for Bitcoin.