Bitcoin's repeated fluctuations around the $93,000 mark have once again sparked intense discussions about the future trend. Bulls are optimistic about the start of a bull market, while bears bet on breaking below $80,000. But if we still rely on the "four-year halving cycle" to guide trading decisions, it's probably time to reevaluate this theory.

From the perspective of participant structure changes, the once-reliable cycle theory has become invalid. Why? It's simple—market dominance has shifted. The era of retail-driven, emotion-led markets is over. Now, listed companies like Strategy and Metaplanet have incorporated Bitcoin into their asset allocations, with institutional holdings continuously rising. These players won't trade frequently based on short-term fluctuations; their participation directly weakens the impact of traditional cycles.

You can feel this change by looking at the current contradictions. The Fear and Greed Index is still in the "Extreme Fear" zone at 20 points, yet Bitcoin's price is rising, creating a divergence. What does this indicate? Retail investors are still worried, but institutional funds are quietly positioning themselves. The data is in front of us, yet it tells two completely different stories.

The real factor that can determine the direction is actually the Federal Reserve's actions. Currently, the market's expectation of a rate cut in March has risen to 45%. Once the rate cut is implemented, liquidity will tilt toward risk assets, and breaking through the $100,000 psychological barrier for Bitcoin will become highly probable. Conversely, if inflation data unexpectedly rebounds and the rate cut is delayed, the market will need to retest the $80,000 support line.

Macro monetary policy is the truly hidden variable. Applying the cycle theory to today's market is like using yesterday's map to navigate today's journey—completely the wrong direction. Institutionalization and liquidity expectations are the core factors to watch closely.