Willy Woo challenges the notion that Bitcoin’s established four-year cycle has concluded, asserting that price trends continue to align with this traditional pattern at least through 2026. He compares misunderstandings on social media to mistaking a changing heartbeat for its disappearance.
The Heartbeat Metaphor
Onchain analyst Willy Woo disputes the increasing skepticism about Bitcoin’s four-year cycle, rejecting claims that this recurring pattern has ended. According to him, current data does not validate the idea of the cycle’s demise—at least not yet. Woo maintains that until Bitcoin’s price movements clearly deviate from cyclical behavior beyond 2026, relying on this time-tested rhythm remains the most reliable approach for interpreting market dynamics.
To clarify his argument, Woo employs a medical analogy: if your heart rate drops slightly during sleep from 70 beats per minute, it doesn’t mean your heartbeat ceases just because its tempo shifts temporarily. Similarly, while external influences may cause minor fluctuations in timing or intensity, the fundamental pulse of Bitcoin’s four-year cycle—rooted in supply and demand forces—remains robust and intact.
Woo’s perspective contrasts sharply with several prominent figures in crypto who argue that between 2024 and 2026 we are witnessing a permanent transformation in Bitcoin’s macroeconomic framework. Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan and researcher Ryan Rasmussen contend that key drivers behind previous cycles like halvings and leverage-induced crashes have diminished significantly over time.
These experts believe institutional capital inflows via spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are fostering an extended bull market characterized by fewer dramatic downturns compared to past cycles’ severe corrections exceeding 80%, effectively rendering prior cyclical models obsolete.
Outlook for an Evolving Market
Similarly, industry specialists interviewed by Bitcoin.com News emphasize how institutional investments and ETF demand now play dominant roles in shaping Bitcoin’s path rather than miner reward halvings alone. This shift results in more gradual upward trends instead of sharp boom-and-bust episodes typical of earlier years. Overall consensus among these professionals is that Bitcoin has matured beyond its halving-driven origins.
The market today is influenced more heavily by widespread institutional adoption alongside broader macroeconomic conditions — factors which diminish the predictive power of historical four-year cycles. Instead, they foresee Bitcoin evolving into an asset behaving more like traditional financial instruments: exhibiting less volatile surges but offering greater long-term stability.
In response to criticism questioning his track record—including allegations regarding a hedge fund collapse attributed incorrectly to him—Woo clarified: “That was Murad’s fund; my first fund was Crest launched in 2018 which remains active today delivering consistent returns.” He added they currently manage three institutional funds including SyzCrest partnered with Syz Banking Group.
When asked what underpins confidence in ongoing cyclicality beyond historical patterns, Woo highlighted two main factors: internal supply shocks caused by halvings plus a global liquidity cycle spanning roughly four years influencing risk appetite across markets. “Two impacts: internal halving supply shock & global liquidity cycles determining risk-on/off,” he explained further noting how historically BTC led broader markets into risk-off phases three times before—with debate ongoing whether we’re experiencing a fourth such event covering all known BTC history so far.”
Additionally supporters argue recent massive federal stimulus injections will eventually affect investor risk tolerance curves fueling continued cyclical expansions as predicted by Woo’s model.
FAQ ❓
- Is bitcoin’s four‑year cycle truly finished?
On-chain expert Willy Woo insists data still supports maintaining this rhythmic pattern for now. - Why do some analysts claim it’s dead?
They point toward stronger influences from institutional ETF flows combined with overarching macroeconomic forces overshadowing halving effects. - What evidence does Woo provide?
He cites both halving-induced supply shocks along with synchronized global liquidity pulses occurring every four years as proof points sustaining cyclicality. - This debate’s impact on investors worldwide?
Market behavior might transition away from wild boom-and-bust swings toward steadier growth aligned closely with larger economic trends over time.