For more than a decade, Bitcoin’s four-year halving cycle has shaped market expectations. After the 2012 halving, Bitcoin rallied strongly and finished the following year at a new all-time high. The same pattern repeated after the 2016 and 2020 halvings, reinforcing the belief that post-halving years typically end in bullish territory.
That historical trend appears to have broken in 2025.
Bitcoin closed the year lower than where it began, marking the first time the asset has finished a post-halving year in the red. Halvings occur roughly every four years, reducing mining rewards by half and slowing the pace of new supply entering the market. Traditionally, this mechanism has fueled accumulation phases, followed by bull market peaks, sharp corrections, and extended bear markets.
While previous cycles followed this script, the most recent halving in April 2024 has not produced the same outcome. Bitcoin is currently trading more than 30% below its all-time high of $126,080, which was set on Oct. 6. According to market data, the asset ended the year below its opening price despite the reduced issuance.
The four-year cycle has long been used as a framework for analyzing Bitcoin’s price behavior. However, throughout 2025, several analysts warned that structural changes in the market could render the model obsolete.
Vivek Sen, founder of Bitcoin-focused PR firm Bitgrow Lab, stated that Bitcoin closing the year down confirms that the four-year cycle is now effectively over. His view echoes growing sentiment that the market no longer responds to halvings in the same predictable way.
Investor Armando Pantoja also pointed to the rise of institutional participation as a key reason. He argued that Bitcoin no longer trades like it did in 2016 or 2020, as exchange-traded funds, corporate treasuries, and professional investors respond primarily to macroeconomic forces such as liquidity conditions, interest rates, regulation, and geopolitical risk rather than a fixed halving schedule.
While Pantoja acknowledged that halvings still matter over the long term, he noted that much of Bitcoin’s supply is now locked up, miners have access to financing, and price dynamics are no longer automatic or purely supply-driven.
Industry leaders remain divided on the issue. Executives such as Cathie Wood, Arthur Hayes, and Bitwise leaders Matt Hougan and Hunter Horsley have suggested that the four-year cycle has lost its relevance.
Others disagree. Markus Thielen, head of research at 10x Research, has argued that the cycle still exists but now plays out differently. According to Thielen, Bitcoin’s price action is no longer driven primarily by programmed supply cuts, but by broader market structure and macroeconomic forces.
