对话Glassnode前首席分析师：比特币牛市已重启，但需熬过漫长盘整

Original source: 《What Bitcoin Did》

Transcribed by: Felix, PANews

Checkmate, former Lead Analyst at Glassnode, appeared on the *What Bitcoin Did* podcast. During the show, Checkmate explained why the crash to $60,000 looks like a genuine capitulation event, stating that the probability of a bottom being in is 80%, and that we are in a bull market phase but requiring a long consolidation period. He also discussed rising bond yields, a collapsing fiscal system, the end of trust in government debt, and ETF flows. Finally, he explored proposed capital gains tax reforms in Australia. PANews has compiled the podcast highlights.

Host: Are we currently in a bull or bear market? Because it seems to me that the worst day of a bear market is often the start of a bull market. But is it too early to say we're in a bull market now? Or do you think we are already in one?

Checkmate: That's the right framework for thinking about this. The worst day of a bear market is often the beginning of a bull market. As I've always described, you often don't know exactly when the bottom is until months or more later. We spoke back in February when Bitcoin hit $60,000, which I termed the "price pain capitulation" phase. It's a point where almost everyone sensitive to price simultaneously despairs and gives up. You could see massive losses, token transfers, and market panic at the time; my inbox was flooded. It felt just like the crash in June 2022.

Looking back at past bear markets, after the bottoms in 2015 and 2018, prices began a slow, multi-month grind upwards. During the FTX collapse in 2022, that was the only time we broke below the previous "pain capitulation" low. Many people, due to recency bias, think we must make new lows, but that's not necessarily true. We might retrace to $65,000 and bounce, or form a higher low at $75,000. So from my perspective, I think the probability of a bottom being in is about 80%. That means we are in a bull market. But the consolidation will take a long time, just like in 2016 and 2023, when it took a whole year to break through $30,000. A whole year of boring grinding, where everyone feared every selloff would push prices lower. You need to build confidence. Unless Bitcoin goes to zero, we have to affirm that at some point, we will return to a bull market.

Host: If you're 80% sure, which specific indicators give you that confidence? Are those institutional investors really looking at these technical indicators?

Checkmate: First, look at the technicals. I'm not a technical analyst, but I know what institutional traders using Bloomberg terminals look at. Bitcoin's weekly RSI hit 26, an all-time low. Historically, whenever this indicator dips below 30, that's the bottom. Many institutional traders simply look at Bitcoin's position relative to the 200-day moving average; when the indicator turns from red to green, they pay attention, completely ignoring daily noise and volatility. I have my own mean reversion model, combining 9 models including on-chain, technical, and trend factors. The drop to $60,000 was a "Q10 event," meaning historically only 10% of days have prices lower than this relative level. I see many bears saying it could drop to $45,000, but in my model, that only happened when Bitcoin was $2 in 2011, so I don't use that as a baseline prediction.

Host: You often mention "Realized Price." Why is it one of the most important indicators right now?

Checkmate: "Realized Cap" values each coin based on its price when it last moved, not the current spot price. It's used to measure holder cost basis. For example, Satoshi's coins are large in quantity but have zero USD value in the Realized Cap calculation. To more accurately reflect human investor behavior, Dave Puell and I developed the "True Market Mean Price" framework. If you exclude lost coins and dormant coins, looking only at active investors, their average cost is currently around $78,000. Meanwhile, the average entry cost for entities like Strategy and ETFs, as well as miners' production costs, all fall between $75,000 and $82,000. $85,000 is a major supply density midpoint. After breaking through, market sentiment flips, and people start 'buying the dip.' Before that, $78,000 is the first resistance line on the way up (Short-Term Cost Basis, True Market Mean), $85,000 is the second (200-day MA, large cost cluster), and the third resistance line is $95,000 (near the 50-week MA).

Host: How long do you think it will take to break through $85,000 and $95,000? Who is driving market prices right now?

Checkmate: My Mean Reversion Index is currently at 33, still in the bottom tertile, indicating good prices, but people are no longer in a state of blind, aggressive buying. We've hit a ceiling around $80,000 and need to experience a pullback. The market needs to transition to a full "buy the dip" mode.

What drives prices higher is essentially sustained incremental capital inflow, whether from people buying more as their income grows with age, or from companies growing larger. Institutionally, I did research (though it's outdated now) showing institutions make up 20-25% of ETF holders, many of which are small institutions or Bitcoin hedge funds. Large institutional allocations are still very low. Even moving from 0.001% to 0.002% represents hundreds of millions of dollars. Once we break $100,000, institutions too scared to enter now will step in. Regarding capital flow, buying from ETFs and Strategy is currently roughly equal. They are very strong buyers relative to the selling pressure. On-chain realized profits and losses are both very low, a classic characteristic of the late bear / early bull market phase – the market is in a state of "extreme apathy."

Host: Speaking of Strategy, if Saylor custodies some Bitcoin on Coinbase, doesn't that add risk? Shouldn't he be self-custodying? What if Coinbase gets hacked?

Checkmate: There is definitely tail risk there. Any bet involving this strategy is essentially a leveraged long on Bitcoin. If something happens to Coinbase, it would be devastating for the entire industry, and everyone would be affected. But regarding Strategy, there's another serious risk often overlooked: when Bitcoin's price falls, if you subtract its debt and preferred stock, its stock's net asset value could go to zero much sooner. The liquidation price threshold for this asset value going to zero is actually much higher than Saylor himself claims (maybe in the $50,000 range). Although the probability is very low, it's one of the most apparent Bitcoin-specific risks.

Host: Let's talk about the macroeconomy. Government bonds seem to be the signal cornerstone for all assets. Now, 30-year bond yields in the US, UK, and Australia are all above 5%, with the UK nearing 6%. Are rising yields and falling collateral values (the bedrock of the system) the market saying something is wrong with the system? Or are they worried about runaway inflation and deficits?

Checkmate: All of the above. The market is basically declaring they no longer trust the government. Interestingly, many assets aren't trading as people expect. For example, oil prices are surprisingly stable despite geopolitical conflicts. Gold, a geopolitical safe haven, has been lackluster recently, although that's because it was severely overbought before. Similarly, the US Dollar Index (DXY), which should have been boosted by safe-haven flows above the 100 mark, is instead floating between 98 and 99.

Host: Does this mean a crisis is coming where the government will have to print money massively? How would Bitcoin perform in that environment?

Checkmate: The current trend points to higher inflation and interest rates. This process will be very painful. When you realize the debt obligations of the fiat system exceed its assets, you'll want to move your assets outside the system, seeking assets that cannot be devalued, like gold and Bitcoin. We are in an era of monumental change in the monetary system. The world will look fundamentally different after this transformation. The world is effectively separating the "Global Reserve Currency" from the "Global Reserve Asset." The US Dollar will continue as a medium of exchange (like stablecoins), while Bitcoin and Gold serve as stores of value. When a system's debts and obligations become too large, people want to own hard assets that exist outside the system and cannot be debased.

Host: I've never quite understood your rationale for holding gold. If you think Bitcoin has higher upside, why not just hold Bitcoin?

Checkmate: It's mainly about asset duration. Gold is less volatile in the short term. If you plan to save for a house down payment within the next one to three years, gold is a suitable tool. Bitcoin, however, offers longer-term growth dividends, suitable for expenses far in the future, like my son's tuition or paying off a 30-year mortgage. Having both allows you to find your balance while navigating volatility across different timeframes. After all, we need to live our lives, not just pursue investment returns.

Host: Recently, Iran started using Bitcoin for payments to circumvent sanctions. Do you think this could be a peak moment of historical shift?

Checkmate: That's not the real peak moment. The real turning point was in 2022 when the US froze Russia's foreign exchange reserves. Everything shifted towards the pursuit of hard assets after that. Bitcoin perfectly solves the problems of transporting physical gold and cross-border settlement difficulties. Digital Bitcoin is highly liquid and can be protected with multi-signature setups, far superior to hoarding tons of hard-to-move metal.

Host: Let's talk about Australia's policies. You seemed very frustrated when you came in today. Can you explain to the listeners what exactly is happening?

Checkmate: The last two weeks have been terrible. Since 1999, Australia had a Capital Gains Tax (CGT) rule: assets held for over a year get a 50% tax discount. This accounted for inflation over the holding period and helped ordinary people build wealth. Recently, the Labor government proposed a reform in the budget: under the guise of "helping young people save for a house," they are actually abolishing this 50% CGT discount for all assets, including ETFs, stocks, Bitcoin, etc.

They are replacing it with an "indexation method." This means your cost base only rises by approximately 3% CPI inflation. Australia currently has an extremely severe real estate bubble. The median house price is AUD 1 million (approx. USD 720,000), while the median annual salary is only AUD 74,000. An ordinary person would need to save for 40 years in a bank account to accumulate a down payment. To catch up with this bubble, young people must invest in high-growth assets like Bitcoin or startups.

Host: What does this specifically mean?

Checkmate: It's essentially a scam, a disguised debasement of national savings. They let your asset cost base rise by 3% CPI, but the remaining large gains are directly added to your income and taxed at your highest marginal tax rate. Crucially, they do not index the tax brackets simultaneously. The result is that your effective tax rate, which might have been around 25%, could skyrocket to 40% or even 47%. Imagine you found a startup and sold it successfully. Since your initial cost base is zero, you get zero benefit from indexation. The government would simply take 47% of your profit, bearing no risk themselves while becoming your biggest shareholder.

Host: Do they think people are saving for a house by just putting money in the bank, rather than investing in assets? These politicians are so out of touch.

Checkmate: Absolutely correct. Australia has the most ridiculous real estate bubble in the world, with a median house price of AUD 1 million and a median wage of AUD 74,000. A young person saving at 5% bank interest would need 40 years for a down payment. To buy a house, they must invest in assets that outpace inflation. The government claims this policy helps young people buy homes, but in reality, it severely penalizes those saving through high-growth asset investments like Bitcoin. I used a Large Language Model to calculate the impact: this tax reform wouldn't just delay a person's home-buying goal by 2 to 5 years; it would also directly wipe out 1-2 years of savings for a child's private school tuition. This is not about helping young people.

Host: That's absurd. If you hold Bitcoin now, do your previous gains still fall under the old policy? What should people who don't want to leave Australia do now?

Checkmate: They are using something called "Partial Grandfathering," which is also a rogue tactic. Before July 1, 2027, your unrealized gains can use the old 50% discount. But any asset growth after that date will be fully subject to the new, high-rate indexation policy. For those who don't want to leave Australia, first, find a good accountant. Tax systems are interconnected, and knowledgeable people often find new tax avoidance opportunities within system changes. Second, go to the websites of Australian Bitcoin industry bodies, download their protest letter templates, and write to your local member of parliament. Just because you don't want to move overseas doesn't mean you have to accept this lying down.

Host: Does this mean the government is trying to steer the economy towards some kind of austerity?

Checkmate: Yes, that's why I call it a "trial balloon" thrown to the world (PANews note: meaning an action to test public reaction). True austerity shouldn't look like this. The current approach is a form of egalitarianism that makes everyone poorer, a pure scam on ordinary people's wealth. They want to test Australians' tolerance for this kind of predatory policy. If we don't push back hard, this policy will spread globally. Young people must understand that to climb the housing ladder, you must first climb the asset accumulation ladder. The government has just doubled your asset tax. This is simply unacceptable.