Grayscale research lead and former Goldman Sachs economist Zach Pandl shared his views on X on July 22, stating that “Bitcoin is a macro asset, and it will move along with macro variables.” He also argued that if the FED decides not to continue raising interest rates, Bitcoin may have already completed this round of bottom testing. Pandl’s view directly challenges the market’s widely held traditional four-year halving-cycle framework.
Pandl’s View: Sensitivity to Fed Policy and Bitcoin’s Macro Asset Positioning
According to Pandl’s public posts on X, his core arguments are as follows: Bitcoin’s price action depends heavily on expectations for the FED’s monetary policy rather than simply following past historical cycles. He clearly said, “Bitcoin is a macro asset, and it will move along with macro variables (such as economic growth and policy expectations).”
In a conditional assessment, Pandl said that if the FED decides next not to continue raising interest rates, Bitcoin may have already completed the bottom test for this cycle. This conditional analysis is intended to highlight that the FED’s policy stance is the most critical external variable right now.
Pandl’s post sparked lively discussion in the crypto community. Many analysts exchanged views on the future direction of the FED, the correlation with ether (ETH), and the applicability of other macro models.
Grayscale Analysis Report: The Applicability of the Traditional Four-Year Halving Cycle Framework Is Being Questioned
Based on the Grayscale analysis article shared by Pandl, titled 《Bitcoin: Four-Year Cycle or Macro Asset?》，the main points are as follows:
Traditional Four-Year Cycle Framework: For more than a decade, the market has widely believed that Bitcoin strictly follows a halving cycle every four years. If only this framework is considered, market conditions suggest that investors may still need to face a longer bear market.
Overwriting Effect of Macro Forces: Pandl believes that macroeconomic forces are already strong enough to override cycle inertia, and that the FED’s policy decisions are a more direct basis for determining Bitcoin’s bottom.
Structural Impact of Institutional Capital Flows: Ongoing inflows of institutional capital from Wall Street deepen the linkage between the cryptocurrency market and the global macroeconomy, which reduces the predictive accuracy of the traditional cycle framework.
Changes in Analytical Tools: Pandl used chart analysis to examine trends in the correlation between Bitcoin and macro factors.
FAQ
Where did Pandl’s view on Bitcoin as a macro asset come from, and when?
Based on the views shared by Grayscale research lead Zach Pandl on X (July 22, 2026, Taipei time), he believes Bitcoin is a macro asset and that the FED policy stance is the key variable determining its bottom—along with sharing Grayscale’s analysis article 《Bitcoin: Four-Year Cycle or Macro Asset?》.
Why does Pandl think the traditional four-year halving cycle framework may no longer apply?
According to Pandl’s X post, he believes that as more and more institutional capital from Wall Street enters the market, the linkage between the cryptocurrency market and the global macroeconomy has deepened. Macro factors (such as FED policy) are already sufficient to override traditional cycle inertia. This is an analyst’s personal viewpoint; it is for further reference alongside Grayscale’s official report and subsequent market developments.
What is Pandl’s bottoming condition?
According to Pandl’s conditional wording on X, if the FED decides next not to continue raising interest rates, Bitcoin may have already completed this round of bottom testing. This is Pandl’s personal analytical view and does not represent Grayscale’s investment advice.
