#比特币储备战略 Seeing the recent opinions of institutions like Fidelity and Grayscale, I suddenly recalled the lingering discussions from the 2017 national reserve debate. Back then, we all thought that Bitcoin entering national balance sheets was a pipe dream, but Salvatore really did it in 2021, and now even developing countries like Pakistan are exploring it—this logical chain has transformed from a dream into a tangible path.

I agree with the game theory perspective. Once the US or a major economy includes Bitcoin in its foreign exchange reserves, other countries will face real competitive pressure. Doing nothing is essentially relinquishing the pricing power of a scarce asset. Unlike corporate purchases, which can be sold off during a bear market, national reserves are long-term strategic decisions, and supply-side pressures will persist.

But I have to be honest, the four-year cycle issue is still somewhat ambiguous. The fears and greed haven't dissipated, that's true, but the participant structure in this round has changed—large funds, institutions, even government-level demand. The volatility cycle of these factors may have long been rewritten. Whether new highs can be reached in the first half of 2026 still depends on whether the volume of incremental demand can outweigh the selling pressure caused by institutional risk hedging.

History has shown me that the most dangerous moments are often when everyone is convinced of a new paradigm. Now, with institutions flocking in and countries starting to consider reserves, this very pace warrants caution. The logic of long-term holding is sound, but don’t let the narrative of a "new paradigm" blind your eyes.