Crypto’s downturn is rippling through treasuries, ETFs and mining infrastructure, exposing how digital asset volatility reshapes balance sheets and operations.

Proponents of AI agents say the new technology will simplify crypto trading and other financial activities for the average user.

Market resilience and retail interest could reshape the future of Bitcoin and crypto investments.

The post Joshua Lim: Bitcoin’s divergence from gold is causing market instability, retail interest will drive price movements, and quantum computing poses risks for institutional investors | Unchained appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Coinbase adopts Sui token standard, expanding access for institutions and retail as SUI rebounds 14% from recent lows.

The post Sui Network partners with Coinbase as exchange adopts Sui token standard appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent put a spotlight on the growing rift between regulators and parts of the crypto industry this week, telling lawmakers that those who resist clear rules “should move to El Salvador.”

The line landed hard during a Senate Banking Committee hearing and was repeated across multiple news outlets as a sign the administration is pushing for firm oversight rather than tolerance for gray areas in markets.

Bessent’s Warning To Industry

Based on reports, Bessent called out what he described as a “nihilist” wing of crypto that would rather scuttle compromise than accept a legal framework.

His remarks came as senators debated the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, a bill meant to spell out how digital assets fit into existing banking and securities rules.

The episode followed recent moves by major players — including a high-profile platform stepping back from support for the bill — which lawmakers say complicates chances for a quick fix.

Lawmakers And Lobbyists Take Sides

The hearing did not stay polite for long. Voices rose. Accusations flew. Some senators warned that unchecked stablecoin products could pull deposits out of banks, while crypto advocates argued that heavy-handed rules would stifle innovation.

Bessent suggested that if firms prefer places with looser oversight they can seek them out, naming El Salvador as an example. That rhetorical nudge is more than a talking point — it’s a signal about market access: do business under US guardrails, or accept limits on participation.

Reports note that El Salvador’s crypto stance has shifted since it became the first country to make bitcoin legal tender. Lawmakers there approved changes to make Bitcoin acceptance voluntary as part of an IMF-backed deal last year.

The move reduced the mandatory use of Bitcoin while the government said it would still hold and, on occasion, add to its reserves. Those choices mean El Salvador is not a simple “no rules” refuge, even if it appears friendlier to some crypto actors than the US.

Traders watch words like these. Markets respond to certainty, and clarity tends to calm them. When policymakers argue publicly, volatility can spike.

At the same time, a clear path for regulation would let banks plan products and let crypto firms design services that can be sold widely, not just in select jurisdictions.

Some industry executives are lobbying for carve-outs; others want full regulatory recognition. The tension is real and it will shape who stays and who sails elsewhere.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Bitcoin (BTC) has staged a modest rebound after suffering a sharp sell‑off over recent days, but market analysts warn that the underlying pressures driving the decline remain firmly in place. 

The world’s largest cryptocurrency plummeted momentarily to around  $60,000 on Thursday, its lowest level in around 17 months, before rising modestly to current trade values of $70,667 as of Friday afternoon.

Crypto Winter Fears Grow

In comments shared with Fortune, Jefferies analyst Andrew Moss, the downturn is being fueled largely by selling from major holders. In a note to clients, Moss said that large Bitcoin investors, commonly referred to as whales, have been offloading their positions into market weakness. 

He noted that these holders shifted to net sellers over the weekend after steadily accumulating Bitcoin since early January, suggesting a significant change in market behavior at the top end of ownership.

Selling pressure has also emerged from retail investors who gained exposure to Bitcoin through spot exchange‑traded funds (ETFs). Moss pointed out that net outflows from spot Bitcoin ETFs during the weeks of January 19 and January 26 ranked as the second‑ and third‑largest since those products were launched. 

Those withdrawals were followed by another wave of substantial outflows on February 4, adding to downward pressure on prices, which coupled with ETF outflows, has reignited familiar concerns across the crypto market. 

Moss said renewed talk of a “Crypto Winter” is spreading, warning that there are few convincing signs that Bitcoin is nearing a bottom. He added that the lack of buying activity from small‑ and medium‑sized holders suggests that dip‑buying sentiment remains weak, a factor that often signals further downside risk.

Analysts Divided On Bitcoin’s Next Move

Other analysts echoed the cautious outlook. Deutsche Bank strategist Henry Allen noted that Bitcoin’s recent drop marked its worst single‑day decline since November 2022. 

That period coincided with the collapse of Sam Bankman‑Fried’s FTX exchange, an event that wiped out billions of dollars in customer funds and sent shockwaves through the digital asset industry.

Chevy Cassar, author of the Milk Road newsletter, described the current environment in stark terms, acknowledging that the downturn is painful and warning that conditions could deteriorate further. 

Based on historical patterns, Cassar said crypto markets often take anywhere from one month to nearly a year to reach a true bottom after major declines.

Still, not all observers see the current moment as purely negative. Fabian Dori, chief investment officer at Sygnum Bank, said the market may be approaching a point of exhaustion. 

Dori said sentiment appears to be entering what he described as “peak fear territory,” a phase that has historically preceded stabilization or recovery in past cycles.

At the time of writing, BTC has recovered to its current trading price of $70,667 and has seen a 10% surge within the last 24 hours. 

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com 

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and other prominent “whales” have offloaded millions of dollars in ETH since the beginning of February, adding narrative fuel to a market rout that saw the world's second-largest cryptocurrency tumble below $2,000.

While the high-profile sales by Buterin served as a psychological trigger for retail panic, a closer examination of market data suggests that the primary pressure came from a systemic unwind of leverage and record-breaking selling activity across the network.

Nonetheless, these disposals, combined with significant selling by other industry insiders, have prompted investors to question whether project leaders are losing confidence or simply managing operational runways amid extreme volatility.

Why is Buterin selling his Ethereum holdings?

In the past 3 days, Buterin sold 6,183 ETH ($13.24M) at an average price of $2,140, according to blockchain analysis platform Lookonchain.

However, the specifics of Buterin’s transactions reveal a calculated, rather than panic-driven, strategy.

Notably, Buterin publicly disclosed that he had set aside 16,384 ETH, valued at approximately $43- $45 million at the time, to be deployed over the coming years.

He stated the funds are earmarked for open-source security, privacy technology, and broader public-good infrastructure as the Ethereum Foundation enters what he described as a period of “mild austerity.”

In this light, the most defensible explanation for “why he sold” is mundane. It appears to be the conversion of a pre-allocated ETH budget into spendable runway (stablecoins) for a multi-year funding plan rather than a sudden attempt to time the market top.

However, the channel through which these sales affect the market is more narrative-driven than liquidity-based. When investors see founder wallets active on the sell side during a downturn, it tilts sentiment and deepens the bearish resolve of an already shaky market.

Still, Buterin remains an ETH whale, holding over 224,105 ETH, which is equivalent to approximately $430 million.

Did Buterin's ETH sales precipitate a market crash?

The central question for investors is whether Buterin’s selling mechanically pushed ETH below $2,000.

From a structural perspective, it is difficult to argue that Buterin's $13.24 million sell program, by itself, breaks a major market level, given ETH's multi-billion-dollar daily trading volume.

So, a sell order of this magnitude is small relative to typical turnover and lacks the volume required to consume order book depth and drive prices down significantly on its own.

However, Buterin was not selling in a vacuum. He was part of a broader exodus of large holders that collectively weighed on the market.

On-chain trackers flagged significant activity from Stani Kulechov, the founder of the DeFi protocol Aave. Kulechov sold 4,503 Ethereum (valued at about $8.36 million) at a price of around $1,857 just hours before ETH's slide accelerated.

This activity is symptomatic of a broader trend. Data from CryptoQuant shows that the network has faced record selling activity this month.

The analytics firm noted that the network had seen an increase in large whale order sizes during the downturn, suggesting that high-net-worth individuals and entities were actively de-risking into the liquidity provided by the drop.

While a single whale cannot crash the market, a synchronized exit by industry leaders can create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

When liquidity is thin and leverage is stretched, these “headline flows” signal to the broader market that “smart money” is de-risking, prompting smaller traders to follow suit in a bid to preserve capital.

The real drivers behind ETH's crash

While the narrative focused on founder wallets, the bulk of the crash was driven by three distinct market forces: leverage unwinding, ETF outflows, and macroeconomic headwinds.

Data from Coinglass indicated hundreds of millions of dollars in ETH liquidations over 24 hours during the worst of the move, with long liquidations dominating.

This created classic cascading conditions in which price declines trigger forced sales from overleveraged positions, which in turn trigger further declines and additional forced selling.

Simultaneously, institutional support evaporated. US spot ETH ETFs have recorded about $2.5 billion of net outflows over the past four months, according to SoSo Value data.

This occurred alongside much larger outflows from Bitcoin ETFs. This represents the kind of institutional de-risking that matters more than any one wallet when the market is already sliding.

Compounding these crypto-specific issues is the macroeconomic backdrop.

Reuters tied the broader crypto drawdown to a cross-asset selloff and tighter liquidity fears. The crypto market has shed about $2 trillion from its peak in October 2025, with roughly $800 billion wiped out in the last month alone, as investors reduced risk and leveraged positions unwound.

Indicators to watch

As the market attempts to find a floor, three indicators will matter more than any whale alert.

First is liquidation intensity. If forced liquidations remain elevated, ETH can continue to “gap” lower even without additional discretionary selling.

A decline in liquidation totals alongside stabilization is often the first sign the cascade has burned out, according to Phemex analysts.

Second is the ETF flows regime. One day of outflows is noise, but a multi-week streak changes the marginal buyer. ETH's near-term path depends heavily on whether institutional flows stabilize or continue to bleed into broader risk-off behavior.

Finally, investors should watch exchange inflows and large-holder behavior.

Founder wallets are visible, but the more telling indicator is whether large holders increase deposits at exchanges (distribution) or whether coins move into cold storage and staking (accumulation). When those signals flip, the market usually follows.

The bottom line remains that Vitalik Buterin’s sales are best understood as the execution of a pre-announced funding plan tied to public goods and open-source spending, not as a sudden loss of faith.

But in a collapse driven by leverage liquidations, ETF outflows, and macro risk-off, even “small” founder sales can have disproportionate effects.

They do so not by supplying enough ETH to break $2,000, but by adding narrative fuel to a market already searching for a reason to sell first and ask questions later.

The post Ethereum collapses below $2,000 after Vitalik Buterin and insiders moved millions to exchanges into thin liquidity appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Big Tech companies' planned $500 billion war chest to dominate artificial intelligence could offer a lifeline to a Bitcoin mining industry teetering on the edge of capitulation.

The headline numbers are eye-watering. Alphabet, Google’s parent, alone plans to spend as much as $185 billion this year.

However, the capital surge will involve more than buying chips and servers, as Microsoft and Meta are also increasing AI budgets.

This means that the real race is now being fought over physical infrastructure, including pipelines, grid interconnections, and the scramble to secure large blocks of power capacity.

Thus, the projected spending will reshape power markets and put a premium on the one asset distressed Bitcoin miners still control: “ready-to-run” energy infrastructure.

For Bitcoin miners seeking to reinvent themselves as data center landlords, this spending surge presents a massive growth opportunity precisely when their core business is under siege.

A mining industry under severe financial stress

The timing of these firms' planned spending surge matters because miners are operating under some of the weakest economic conditions in Bitcoin’s history.

Data from CryptoQuant indicate that the recent market correction has pushed miners into what the firm describes as a phase of “miner capitulation,” a period marked by acute financial stress that has historically coincided with local market bottoms.

The pressure is visible across multiple indicators. CryptoQuant’s Miner Profit/Loss Sustainability metric has fallen to -30, indicating that miners’ daily revenue in US dollar terms is approximately 30% lower than it was 30 days earlier.

The indicator has entered the  “extremely underpaid” zone, a level that indicates widespread unprofitability among operators.

At the same time, the Puell Multiple, another measure of miner revenue relative to historical norms, has dropped to 0.69, reinforcing the view that mining economics have deteriorated sharply.

At these levels, inefficient miners are typically forced to shut down machines, sell assets, or liquidate Bitcoin holdings to survive.

Notably, some of these miners have already been offloading their BTC holdings in the current bear market.

CryptoQuant’s Miner Position Index (MPI) and Exchange-Miner Mean Inflow metrics have both spiked in recent weeks, signaling that large mining entities are moving Bitcoin to exchanges at an accelerated pace.

In January alone, miners transferred approximately 175,000 Bitcoin to Binance, an unusually high figure relative to stable periods.

According to CryptoQuant data, the activity was punctuated by sharp bursts of outflows, with single-day transfers reaching nearly 10,000 Bitcoin.

Such spikes point to deliberate liquidity decisions rather than routine treasury management. While transferring Bitcoin to exchanges does not guarantee immediate selling, it increases available supply on order books.

In a weak-demand environment, that supply can translate into short-term price pressure, reinforcing the feedback loop and squeezing miners’ margins.

Historically, periods when miners are “extremely underpaid” and selling pressure peaks have preceded cyclical bottoms. But the clearing process can be brutal, and not every operator survives it.

Why these AI spending changes the equation

This is the backdrop against which a big tech firm's $500 billion capital expenditure plan becomes relevant for miners.

The AI boom has created a bottleneck that GPUs alone cannot solve. Compute deployment is increasingly constrained by access to electricity, cooling capacity, grid interconnections, and permitting. Those constraints align closely with the assets miners already control.

Over the past decade, large miners have assembled power-heavy campuses designed to run dense compute loads around the clock. They have negotiated long-term power agreements, built transmission links, and learned to operate energy-intensive infrastructure at scale.

While Bitcoin mining hardware is not interchangeable with AI servers, the underlying sites are scarce and increasingly valuable.

Big tech firm's decision to press ahead with AI investment signals that demand for compute remains strong enough to justify building through those constraints rather than waiting for them to ease.

That demand directly supports the economics of converting or co-developing mining sites into high-performance computing facilities at a time when Bitcoin-derived revenue is collapsing.

For context, Alphabet-owned Google has provided at least $5 billion of disclosed credit support behind a handful of BTC miners' AI projects.

Those backstops lower counterparty risk and make projects financeable on terms that would be difficult for miners to secure on their own, especially during a downturn.

These structures matter because they transform a miner’s profile. Instead of relying entirely on volatile Bitcoin rewards, operators gain long-duration, contracted cash flows that can be financed like infrastructure.

For an industry currently forced to sell Bitcoin to stay afloat, that stability is powerful and could provide a durable lifeline.

What the $500 billion really represents

In practical terms, the big tech firm's planned $500 billion in AI capex is positive for Bitcoin miners for three reasons.

First, it reinforces demand for AI data center capacity at a time when mining revenue metrics show miners are extremely underpaid and under pressure to capitulate.

Second, it elevates the value of miners’ core asset, power-ready campuses, precisely when on-chain data shows miners are being forced to sell Bitcoin to cover costs.

Third, through backstops and structured financing, firms like Google are effectively underwriting the transition, turning distressed crypto operators into viable infrastructure partners.

That combination explains why, in the middle of one of the harshest periods for mining profitability on record, the big tech firm's AI spending boom is being viewed by miners not as competition for power, but as a potential lifeline.

A paradox for Bitcoin’s security model

There is, however, an uncomfortable flip side to this lifeline.

The current miner capitulation is coinciding with a structural shift in how infrastructure is utilized.

When miners temporarily shut down due to price declines, Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment can eventually restore balance. But when sites are permanently repurposed for AI under 15-year leases, that power capacity is removed from the network’s security budget indefinitely.

Market observers note that the conversion of mining infrastructure to AI could have long-term implications for Bitcoin’s hashrate, even if the absolute security level remains high today.

A sustained reduction in marginal mining capacity increases centralization risks and lowers the cost of attacking the network at the margin.

From a market perspective, the tension reflects the stakes: Big Tech’s spending can help mining companies survive and stabilize their balance sheets, but it accelerates a reallocation of resources away from Bitcoin toward higher-paying AI workloads.

The post Bitcoin miners have the one thing AI still needs and Big Tech has $500 billion to buy it appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Global markets staged a broad rebound on February 6 after a sharp sell-off the previous day pushed stocks, crypto, and commodities into deeply oversold territory. Bitcoin recovered to around $70,000, while US equities, gold, and silver also advanced, driven by technical buying and easing near-term macro fears.

The recovery followed a violent deleveraging phase rather than a shift in fundamentals.

Technical Levels Sparked The Initial Bounce

The rebound began after key technical levels held across asset classes. The S&P 500 touched its 100-day moving average, a level closely watched by systematic and discretionary traders.

That triggered mechanical buying from funds rebalancing risk exposure after several sessions of heavy selling.

Bitcoin followed a similar pattern. After briefly falling to $60,000, the asset rebounded sharply as forced liquidations slowed and funding rates stabilized. 

The absence of fresh liquidation pressure allowed spot buyers to step in, supporting a short-term recovery.

Positioning Reset Reduced Selling Pressure

The previous sell-off had flushed leverage across markets. 

In crypto, derivatives positioning had become heavily skewed toward longs, amplifying downside once prices broke support. By February 6, much of that excess leverage had already been cleared.

As a result, marginal selling pressure eased. With fewer margin calls and reduced forced selling, prices were able to rebound even without new bullish catalysts.

The chart shows leverage building through January before being sharply flushed as price broke support in early February. 

After that reset, forced selling pressure eased, allowing price to rebound despite the absence of new bullish catalysts.

Macro Signals Eased Near-Term Stress

US macro data also helped stabilize sentiment. Consumer sentiment data released on February 6 came in stronger than expected, marking a six-month high. 

While not signaling strong growth, the data reduced immediate fears of a sudden economic deterioration.

Bond markets reacted by pricing a slightly higher probability of a near-term rate cut from the Federal Reserve, pushing short-term yields lower before stabilizing. That shift eased financial conditions at the margin, supporting risk assets.

Gold and silver also recovered sharply, reinforcing the view that the prior session’s decline reflected liquidity stress rather than a fundamental rejection of safe-haven assets. 

A softer US dollar and bargain-hunting contributed to the move.

Relief Rally, Not A Trend Reversal

The February 6 rebound reflects a technical relief rally driven by oversold conditions, positioning resets, and short-term macro relief. It does not yet confirm a durable trend reversal.

Markets remain sensitive to liquidity conditions, interest-rate expectations, and capital flows. Volatility is likely to persist as investors reassess risk in a tighter financial environment.

The post US Consumer Data Sparks Relief Rally in Bitcoin, Gold, and Stocks appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Ethereum has suffered a sharp correction, with price falling nearly 29% over the past week and slipping below the $2,000 mark. ETH is now trading at levels last seen nine months ago, reflecting severe weakness across the market. 

Diminishing buyer support has worsened conditions, with on-chain data confirming growing stress among Ethereum holders.

Ethereum Holders Move Back To Selling

Ethereum holders have increasingly resorted to panic selling as broader market conditions deteriorated. On-chain data from the Realized Profit/Loss indicator shows investors selling despite being underwater. Realized losses surged past $1.2 billion within 24 hours, highlighting widespread capitulation as holders prioritize risk reduction over recovery.

Such elevated realized losses often extend declines by reinforcing negative momentum. As more ETH is sold at a loss, the price faces additional downward pressure. This behavior suggests confidence remains fragile, limiting the ability of Ethereum to stabilize until selling activity meaningfully subsides across the network.

Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.

ETH Long-Term Investors Change Stance

Long-term holder behavior reflects similar stress. The HODLer Net Position Change has declined, with bars flipping red, signaling net outflows from long-term wallets. This shift is notable because long-term holders are typically considered the backbone of Ethereum’s market structure and price stability.

When long-term holders distribute rather than accumulate, it often signals deep concern. Their decision to sell amid mounting losses indicates rising panic even among conviction-driven investors. This development adds macro-level pressure and increases the risk that Ethereum’s decline could deepen before a meaningful recovery begins.

ETH Price Could Note A Reversal

Ethereum price is trading near $1,920 at the time of writing after a 29% drop in one week. The move below $2,000 has reinforced bearish structure across multiple timeframes. Given the prevailing on-chain and sentiment indicators, ETH remains vulnerable to additional downside in the near term.

ETH is currently holding above the $1,796 support level. If this level fails, price could slide toward $1,671 or lower. Ethereum is already at a nine-month low, last seen in May 2025, increasing the risk of further liquidation-driven selling if support breaks.

A recovery scenario remains possible if selling pressure eases. Ethereum could reclaim $2,000, supported by oversold conditions. The Money Flow Index sits well below the 20.0 threshold, indicating selling pressure has likely saturated. Historically, such readings have preceded short-term relief rallies.

A similar rebound could unfold if investors refrain from further selling. Holding supply off exchanges may allow ETH to regain momentum. Under this scenario, Ethereum could push beyond $2,000 and advance toward $2,500. Securing that move would invalidate the bearish thesis and restore market confidence.

The post Ethereum Crashes 29% in a Week, but Reversal Signals Start to Appear appeared first on BeInCrypto.

On-chain data shows the Bitcoin Realized Loss has spiked to its highest level since November 2022 as investors have capitulated after the price crash.

Bitcoin Realized Loss Has Hit A Value Of $889 Million

In a new post on X, on-chain analytics firm Glassnode has talked about the latest trend in the Bitcoin Realized Loss. This indicator measures, as its name suggests, the total amount of loss that investors on the network are ‘realizing’ with their transactions.

This metric works by going through the transaction history of each coin being sold to see at what price it changed hands before this. If the previous selling price was greater than the latest spot price for any token, then its sale is considered to be resulting in some loss realization. The exact degree of loss involved in the transaction is equal to the difference between the two prices.

The Realized Loss sums up this value for all loss transfers to find the total for the network. A counterpart indicator called the Realized Profit deals with the transactions of the opposite type (that is, those with a cost basis lower than the latest selling value).

Now, here is the chart shared by Glassnode that shows the trend in the 7-day moving average (MA) of the Bitcoin Realized Loss over the last few years:

As displayed in the above graph, the Bitcoin Realized Loss has witnessed a sharp spike recently, implying investors have participated in a notable amount of loss-taking.

Something to note is that the version of the metric used by the analytics firm here is the “entity-adjusted” one, meaning that it only tracks transactions occurring between two different entities, rather than just two addresses. Glassnode defines an “entity” to be a cluster of addresses that it has determined to belong to the same owner.

In the context of the Realized Loss, the entity-adjusted indicator filters out transactions occurring between the wallets of the same investor. These naturally never involve a true realization of loss (or profit), so removing them from the data provides a more accurate representation of the market.

Applying for this filtration, the 7-day MA Realized Loss hit a peak value of $889 million on Wednesday. This is the highest single-day spike in the metric since November 2022, when the market crashed to the bear market bottom following the collapse of cryptocurrency exchange FTX.

The latest investor capitulation has arrived as Bitcoin has been in freefall, with its price now breaking below the $70,000 level. It now remains to be seen whether the loss-taking will sustain or if investor panic will subside in the coming days.

BTC Price

Bitcoin has taken a blow of more than 21% over the past week that has taken its price to the $66,700 level.

Crypto’s latest drawdown hit the majors in size: bitcoin fell about 8.1% over the past 24 hours and is down roughly 29.5% over the past 30 days, while Ether dropped about 9.4% on the day and about 41.4% over the past month; XRP was off about 10.3% in 24 hours and roughly 42.7% over 30 days, and Solana slid about 12.3% on the day and around 42.8% over the month.

While many point to the nomination of Kevin Warsh as next US Federal Reserve chair, renowned macro analyst Alex Krüger argued on X on Friday that it is the cumulative effect of narrative fatigue, weakening marginal demand, and a macro regime wake-up call that hit after the market had already started to roll over.

What Went Wrong For Crypto?

Krüger framed the move as a momentum break that turned into a seller’s market. In his telling, the “10/10 slaughter” — a nod to the sharpness of the unwind, with a pointed aside about whether he’d “get sued” for mentioning Binance — was less a mystery than a pileup of factors that steadily drained risk appetite and then yanked away the last hope of a liquidity tailwind.

He pointed first to the hangover from Digital Asset Treasuries (DATs), and then to a reversal in flows tied to criminal networks. Krüger said “major flows reversed after the DoJ indictment of the Cambodian Prince Group last October,” describing it as a material shift in demand that the market may have been underappreciating while price was still holding up.

What went wrong with crypto

1. 10/10 slaughter (will I get sued if I mention Binance?).

2. Digital Asset Treasuries (DATs) hangover.

3. Reversed flows from crime syndicates: major flows reversed after the DoJ indictment of the Cambodian Prince Group last October.

4. Quantum…

— Alex Krüger (@krugermacro) February 6, 2026

Two other themes in his post leaned explicitly on fear and opportunity cost. Krüger flagged “quantum fears (real)” as a psychological overhang, and then argued that the AI boom has become a direct competitor for both capital and talent. He said the pivot isn’t subtle: “capital pivoting to AI,” “talent pivoting to AI,” and even “miners pivoting to AI,” all of which tighten the loop around crypto’s ability to reaccelerate.

In parallel, he suggested the market’s global bid has narrowed. Krüger cited a “perception of Bitcoin as American,” adding that there are “few Chinese buyers,” a contrast with the participation he said had been “behind the metals uptrend in large numbers.”

He also described a structural shift in who “owns” the trade. “The Swamp & Institutions taking over,” he wrote, arguing the market has moved from “Cypherpunk/Rebel tech to ETF tech.” In his framing, crypto used to be “for misfits & geniuses,” but now “it’s a line item in a 401k” — a change that, in his view, crowds out the volatility-driven momentum that historically pulled in OGs and retail.

Other pressure points were more familiar: political risk around Trump association (“what happens once Democrats are back?”), “minimal innovation (since Hyperliquid),” and the brutal reflexivity of the Solana memecoin cycle — “Solana casino massacre (thank Pump Fun & the Memecoin Supercycle).”

He paired that with a supply critique: “There are 29.91 million cryptocurrencies tracked by CoinMarketCap,” he wrote, warning that “almost every coin in the top 200 is grossly overvalued” alongside “never ending” launches that “pump then dump to oblivion where only insiders profit.” He even declared the “dead digital gold narrative” as another drag on marginal buyers.

The mechanical result, Krüger said, was straightforward: “sellers dumping more aggressively than usual on every pump,” while “buyers not showing up to buy the dips as much any longer.”

Then came what he framed as the macro trigger that hardened the selloff. “And then came the Warsh nomination (beating Hassett and Rieder), and the market suddenly became deeply aware that Warsh is a strong advocate of a small balance sheet: goodbye Quantitative Easing (QE) and Yield Curve Control (YCC) dreams, hello Quantitative Tightening (QT) fears. That is what happened.”

Krüger stressed he was describing the past, not forecasting the next move, arguing the damage has already been done. Still, he noted that “volume, liquidations, implied volatility and options skew indicate that a local bottom is likely in.”

In replies, the conversation turned toward what crypto might still be for in an AI-led cycle. A user said the rotation “makes sense,” but argued the bigger upside is in “agent stacks” that could eventually “manage crypto liquidity,” positioning crypto rails as infrastructure for machine-to-machine value transfer.

Krüger largely agreed on the asymmetry. “I don’t know. I was hoping momentum. Momentum can do magic,” he wrote. “I’m very concerned about points #3 and #4. Saylor just started a new initiative on #4, maybe that helps. Reality is crypto can’t compete with AI. It’s impossible. But it could be used by AI. That’s high quality hopium right there. Agent-to-Agent payments would be better served on crypto rails.”

At press time, BTC traded at $66,029.