Why has Bitcoin once again returned to the 200-week moving average this time?

Author: Fang Dao

Over the past month, Bitcoin has fallen by more than 25%. The price has returned to around $60,000 and is once again pressing up against the 200-week moving average that the entire crypto market is closely watching.

For many veteran players, this line is nothing new.

During the Terra collapse in 2022, the liquidation of Three Arrows Capital, and the FTX blowup, Bitcoin also fell below this level. Back then, what the market worried about was a credit crisis—whether exchanges would collapse, and whose balance sheet would fail first.

But this time, things are somewhat different.

Over the past four weeks, the total assets under management of U.S. Bitcoin spot ETFs have fallen from $109 billion to $80.4 billion.

On the surface, the asset size has shrunk by $28.6 billion. But when broken down, the true net outflow of funds is about $5.2 billion, while the remaining amount—more than $23 billion—mainly comes from asset impairments driven by the decline in Bitcoin’s price.

In other words, the percentage drop in price is far greater than the pace at which capital is withdrawing. At the same time, stablecoins have not broken their peg, major exchanges have not experienced runs, and the on-chain system is still operating normally. This means this round of decline has not been accompanied by the kind of systemic credit risk seen in 2022.

If it wasn’t a systemic crisis, then why did the price fall to this point anyway? The cause likely isn’t inside the crypto market itself, but in the reshuffling of capital across the broader capital markets.

After spot ETFs were approved, the biggest change for Bitcoin is that it has officially entered the portfolios of pension funds, family offices, and macro funds.

Entering the mainstream asset allocation framework also means it must accept the most realistic set of evaluation standards used in traditional finance—opportunity cost.

In the most recent settlement cycle, gold has continued to strengthen. Data from the World Gold Council shows that central banks in multiple countries have been increasing their gold reserves for several consecutive quarters, helping keep gold prices near historical highs.

Meanwhile, AI-related companies represented by Microsoft, Nvidia, and Oracle have continued to realize real profit growth and expand cash flow.

For institutional investors, every dollar of capital faces the same question: if I hold Bitcoin, what am I giving up?

When gold continues to play its role as a safe-haven asset, and AI companies keep delivering results that exceed expectations, digital assets that lack cash flow and interest income naturally see their relative attractiveness reassessed. This change is especially evident in the derivatives market.

Currently, Deribit data shows that around the $60,000 strike price, more than $1.2 billion worth of put options open interest has clustered.

For many institutional investors, $60,000 is not only an integer threshold—it is also the concentrated area where a large amount of ETF capital and institutional positions built up over the past year.

As the price approaches this level, some market makers selling put options need to hedge their risk by selling spot or futures. This hedging activity itself also increases selling pressure on the market.

Therefore, around $60,000, what you are seeing is not only a battle of sentiment, but also a set of real risk-management mechanisms. This is why this round of decline looks similar to 2022, but the underlying logic is different.

What was validated in 2022 was credit. The market was asking: will this system collapse? And what is validated in 2026 is value. The market is asking:

With gold, U.S. Treasuries, and AI profit-making machines all in place, what exactly is the basis for Bitcoin to continue receiving long-term allocations of global capital?

After spot ETFs have been approved, for the first time Bitcoin has entered a stage where pricing is dominated by traditional institutions.

As more and more pension funds, family offices, and macro funds become holders, Bitcoin no longer faces only comparisons within the crypto market—it faces comparisons across the entire capital market.

This article is for observing the capital market industry and conducting research in technological economics only, and does not constitute any form of investment advice. Digital asset prices are subject to significant fluctuations—please make prudent decisions based on your own risk tolerance.