• Bitcoin’s cycle shifts from halvings to external factors like U.S. elections and central bank policies.

• Market peaks in 2013, 2017, and 2021 occurred in Q4, tying to political uncertainty more than supply events.

• Institutional caution and slowing capital inflows limit upside, with liquidity key to future rallies; data shows reduced inflows compared to prior years.

Discover how Bitcoin’s four-year cycle evolves with politics and liquidity driving trends. Stay informed on crypto market shifts and prepare for election impacts—explore key insights today.

What Is Driving Bitcoin’s Four-Year Cycle in 2025?

Bitcoin’s four-year cycle continues to shape market dynamics, but its primary drivers have evolved beyond the traditional halving events to include political developments, liquidity conditions, and election cycles. According to Markus Thielen, head of research at 10x Research, this cycle remains relevant as historical bull market peaks—such as those in 2013, 2017, and 2021—consistently aligned with fourth-quarter timelines influenced by U.S. presidential elections and global monetary policies. Investors should focus on these macroeconomic factors to anticipate future movements, as they now hold more sway than Bitcoin’s supply mechanics.

How Do Politics and Liquidity Influence Bitcoin’s Market Peaks?

The interplay of politics and liquidity has redefined Bitcoin’s trajectory. Thielen, speaking on The Wolf Of All Streets Podcast, emphasized that the cycle’s “death” is a misconception; instead, it adapts to broader forces. For instance, U.S. election years introduce uncertainty, often leading to volatility as investors react to potential policy shifts, such as changes in fiscal or regulatory agendas. Historical data supports this: Bitcoin’s price surges in 2013 followed post-election optimism, while 2017’s rally coincided with debates over monetary easing.

Liquidity plays a pivotal role, as central bank actions—particularly Federal Reserve rate decisions—affect capital flows into risk assets like Bitcoin. Recent Federal Reserve rate cuts, intended to support economic growth, have not yet spurred a Bitcoin breakout due to institutional investors’ heightened caution. On-chain metrics from analytics firms indicate that Bitcoin inflows via exchange-traded funds have slowed by approximately 20% compared to the previous year, tightening liquidity and promoting a consolidation phase. Thielen notes that without a surge in global liquidity, such as from quantitative easing or stimulus, parabolic rallies become less probable.

Expert analysis from 10x Research highlights that presidential election cycles amplify these effects. In years divisible by four, like 2024 leading into 2025, the sitting president’s party often faces seat losses in Congress, stalling agendas and injecting market uncertainty. Thielen stated, “There’s this uncertainty that the sitting president’s party is going to lose a lot of seats. I think that’s also the odds now that Trump would lose or Republicans would lose a lot of seats in the House, and therefore, maybe he’s not going to push a lot of his agenda through anymore.” This political gridlock can deter risk-taking, keeping Bitcoin range-bound until clearer signals emerge.

Markus Thielen says four-year cycle is not dead. Source: The Wolf Of All Streets

Furthermore, the Federal Reserve’s mixed signals exacerbate this caution. While rate cuts historically bolster assets, the current environment features persistent inflation concerns and tightening global conditions, leading institutions to prioritize stability over speculation. Bitcoin’s price, hovering in a $90,000 to $110,000 range post-2024 halving, reflects this restraint, with trading volumes down 15% year-over-year per exchange data.

Thielen advises shifting focus from halving dates—which vary in calendar impact—to these exogenous variables. Fiscal policy debates, such as debt ceiling negotiations or trade tariffs, can act as catalysts, drawing parallels to how 2021’s peak synced with election aftermath liquidity boosts rather than the halving itself.

Frequently Asked Questions

What Evidence Supports Bitcoin’s Four-Year Cycle Being Driven by Politics?

Historical peaks in 2013, 2017, and 2021 all fell in the fourth quarter, aligning with U.S. election uncertainties and policy shifts rather than halving timings. Markus Thielen from 10x Research cites on-chain data showing election-year volatility spikes, with institutional flows responding to congressional outcomes and regulatory promises.

Will Liquidity Conditions Trigger the Next Bitcoin Rally?

Liquidity is crucial for Bitcoin’s next rally, as global monetary easing can funnel capital into crypto. With Federal Reserve cuts in play but inflows slowing, a pickup in institutional demand—potentially from ETF approvals or economic stimulus—could spark upward momentum, echoing past cycles driven by loose policy.

Key Takeaways

• Bitcoin’s four-year cycle endures: It adapts to politics and liquidity over halvings, with election timelines key to peaks.
• Institutional caution dominates: Slowing inflows and Fed mixed signals keep markets consolidating, per 10x Research data.
• Watch macroeconomic triggers: Monitor U.S. elections and central bank moves for rally cues—adjust portfolios accordingly.

Conclusion

Bitcoin’s four-year cycle, as analyzed by experts like Markus Thielen of 10x Research, remains a vital framework but now hinges on politics, liquidity, and elections more than halvings. With historical patterns tying peaks to electoral and monetary shifts, and current consolidation underscoring institutional prudence, the market’s future likely depends on resolving U.S. policy uncertainties. Investors poised for these dynamics stand to benefit; stay vigilant for liquidity surges that could reignite bullish trends in the evolving crypto landscape.

Contrasting Views on the Cycle’s Evolution

While Thielen maintains the cycle’s relevance, other voices in the industry offer nuanced perspectives. Arthur Hayes, co-founder of BitMEX, declared in October that the four-year crypto cycle is effectively over, attributing this not to institutional fade but to outdated reliance on historical models. Hayes argues from his platform that Bitcoin’s movements stem from global liquidity trends, particularly U.S. dollar strength and Chinese yuan dynamics, rather than rigid timelines. He points out that past bull ends correlated with monetary tightening, rendering halvings coincidental rather than causal.

This view aligns with broader analytics: Glassnode’s on-chain reports suggest the cycle may persist subtly through liquidity lenses, countering narratives of its demise. Hayes warns that traders clinging to four-year predictions risk mis-timing markets, as 2026 could mark an “up year” driven by pragmatic factors like privacy tech advancements in projects such as Canton and Zcash. Despite these debates, the consensus leans toward adapting traditional models to incorporate real-time economic indicators for more accurate forecasting.

Institutional adoption further complicates the narrative. With over $100 billion in Bitcoin ETFs since 2024, per financial disclosures, large players now prioritize macroeconomic stability over cycle lore. Thielen’s emphasis on election-driven uncertainty resonates here, as 2025’s post-election environment could either unlock pent-up capital or prolong sideways action if policy stalls.