Four peak-to-peak epochs, one halving in each, measured by the two ratios that matter — how far the top climbs above the last, and how far the crash cuts below it. Both compress, cycle after cycle — and in 2021 their order flipped.
Monthly closes from $0.07 (Jul 2010) to ~$61k (Jun 2026). Triangles mark each cycle peak (up) and the bottom that followed (down), colored by epoch.
Peak ÷ previous peak is the upside multiple between tops. Peak ÷ own bottom is the crash ratio. Both fall every cycle.
| Cycle | Peak | Bottom | Peak ÷ prev | Peak ÷ bottom | Bottom ÷ prev peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | $1,156 | $172 | 37.3× | 6.72× | 5.55× |
| 2017 | $19,783 | $3,189 | 17.1× | 6.20× | 2.76× |
| 2021 | $69,044 | $15,598 | 3.49× | 4.43× | 0.79× |
| 2025 now | $126,198 | ~$60,000* | 1.83× | 2.10×* | 0.87×* |
| 2025 est. | $126,198 | ~$33,000† | 1.83× | 3.85׆ | 0.48׆ |
* current state, low so far (~−52%) — not a confirmed bottom, so the 0.87× breaks the declining sequence. † trend-following estimate: continuing the shrinking drawdown trend (−85.1% → −83.9% → −77.4% → ~−74%) puts the bottom near $33k and the ratio at 0.48×, which continues the pattern: 5.55 → 2.76 → 0.79 → 0.48. Range $30–36k (0.44–0.53).
In 2013 and 2017 the upside multiple was the bigger number — each top dwarfed the last (37× and 17×) far more than it later fell (6.7×, 6.2×). In 2021 the order reversed: peak÷prev (3.49×) dropped below peak÷bottom (4.43×), and 2025 repeats it. That reversal is the same fact as the cycle bottom falling below the previous cycle's peak — the right-hand column crossing 1.0×.
A buyer of the 2017 top was underwater at the 2021 bottom; a buyer of the 2021 top is underwater at the 2025 low. In the first two cycles, that never happened — every floor sat above the prior ceiling. Note the current 0.87× sits above 2021's 0.79× — but only because the 2025 low isn't in yet; following the drawdown trend, the confirmed-bottom ratio lands near 0.48×, continuing the decline rather than reversing it.
The same price series with the two moving-average systems overlaid. Red triangles are death crosses (fast below slow), green are golden crosses (fast above slow). Note how late on the price they land — these are confirmations, not calls.
Peak → death cross → downtrend ends → golden cross (10/21 EMA). A negative Death→Bottom means price bottomed before the cross fired.
| Cycle | Peak | Death X | Bottom | Golden X | Pk→Death | Death→Bot | Bot→Gold | Pk→Bot |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 2013-11 | 2015-03 | 2015-01 | 2016-01 | 16.0 | −2.5 | 12.5 | 13.5 |
| 2017 | 2017-12 | 2019-02 | 2018-12 | 2019-05 | 14.4 | −2.5 | 5.5 | 11.9 |
| 2021 | 2021-11 | 2022-08 | 2022-11 | 2023-11 | 9.7 | +2.7 | 12.3 | 12.4 |
| 2025 | 2025-10 | 2026-06 | pending | pending | ~8 | — | — | — |
13.5, 11.9, 12.4 months across three mature cycles — even as drawdown depth shrank from −85% to −77%.
Every cycle, the low landed months ahead of the golden cross — a lagging confirmation.
Peak → Death → Bottom → Golden held only in 2021. In 2013 & 2017 the bottom came ~2.5 months before the death cross.
Peak→Death cross shrank 16 → 14.4 → 9.7 → ~8 months — the maturing-asset signature.
Peaked on schedule ~17.5 months after the April 2024 halving, then rolled over. The death cross has fired; no bottom is confirmed.
The −52% drawdown is shallow next to prior cycles (−77% to −85%). Either this cycle bottoms higher — consistent with the maturing-asset, ETF-driven thesis that Fidelity and Morgan Stanley have argued may be flattening the four-year rhythm — or it has further to fall toward the historical ~12-month bottom window in late 2026.
Three methods, deliberately kept side by side. None is excluded: the ratio math describes the internal cycle, but exogenous shocks can override it entirely. The "previous peak" anchor is the 2021 top ($69,044); drawdowns are measured from the 2025 peak ($126,198).
The direction of the pattern is that each drawdown is shallower than the last: −85.1% → −83.9% → −77.4%. Continuing that means this cycle bottoms at less than −77.4% — a higher low, not a deeper one. Holding the earlier drawdown-trend estimate as the major case puts the bottom around $35–45k (ratio ~0.50–0.65, drawdown ~−64% to −74%); if the shrink keeps accelerating as the current −52% hints, up toward $50–60k.
The deep band, for completeness: the simple −82% average of the past drops ignores that shrinking direction and sits below the pattern, at ~$22.5k. So the full average-to-pattern-continuation range runs $22.5k (−82%) up to ~$36k (−71%) — and the −82% case only bites if the shrinking trend breaks (the deeper scenarios below).
Ratio 0.23–0.39. The raw "bottom ÷ prev-peak" extrapolation, a COVID-style cross-market shock, and the simple −82% historical-drawdown average ($22.5k) all land here. A deeper-than-trend tail — only in play if the shrinking-drawdown pattern breaks.
Ratio 0.43–0.52. The drawdown-% method: if crashes keep shrinking only at the gentle historical pace (~−5%/cycle), 2025 still mirrors a classic deep cyclical bear, and the −52% so far is not the floor.
Ratio ~0.58–0.67. Partial maturation: drawdown shallower than every prior cycle, but the current low isn't quite it. The arithmetic midpoint of the bear and maturation cases.
Ratio 0.70–0.87. The ETF/institutional bid holds, the −52% already printed is near the floor, and ~$60k today sits close to the bottom. The shallowest of the four.
Major projection (pattern continuation): the better-grounded drawdown method has the ratio settling around 0.50–0.65 — a bottom near $35–45k, shallower than 2021's −77.4% in keeping with the shrinking trend. The −82% average ($22.5k) and the exogenous-shock case sit below that as deeper, lower-odds tails. The spread is the honest output: four data points, one unfinished.
A cycle's bear has two phases: the decline (peak → bottom) and the accumulation/basing (bottom → the golden cross that confirms the next uptrend). The decline is remarkably steady at ~12–13 months; the accumulation window is where patient capital builds positions before the markup, and it has run anywhere from ~5.5 to ~12.5 months.
| Cycle | Decline (peak→bottom) | Accumulation (bottom→golden X) | Total underwater (peak→golden X) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 13.5 | 12.5 | 26.0 |
| 2017 | 11.9 | 5.5 | 17.4 |
| 2021 | 12.4 | 12.3 | 24.6 |
| average | ~12.6 | ~10.1 | ~22.7 |
| 2025 proj. | ~13 → bottom Q4 ’26 | ~6–12 | uptrend ~mid–late ’27 |
Mapping that onto the current cycle: the October 2025 peak plus a ~13-month decline points to a bottom around Q4 2026, and a further ~6–12-month accumulation window would put the next confirmed uptrend somewhere in mid-to-late 2027 — the window in which the scenario prices above would be the accumulation range, not a single day.
As of 26 June 2026 we are 8.6 months past the October 2025 peak — about 69% of the way through the average 12.6-month decline, with roughly 3.5–5 months still to run to reach the historical bottom timing. Three independent "departure point" methods triangulate the date:
| Method | Measure | Projects to |
|---|---|---|
| Bottom-to-bottom spacing | ~47 mo (mature) | Oct 2026 |
| Peak → bottom (from Oct ’25 peak) | 11.9–13.5 mo | Oct–Nov 2026 |
| ~17 mo before next halving (~Apr ’28) | 16.9–17.8 mo | Oct–Nov 2026 |
Central estimate: late October–November 2026 (Q4 2026), with a wider band of ~Jul 2026 → Jan 2027 if a maturing market compresses the spacing. Bottom-to-bottom intervals ran 37.9 / 47.0 / 47.2 months (the first is the immature 2011-era outlier; the two recent cycles are near-identical at ~47). At 8.6 months in, every prior cycle was still falling at this point.
Extreme exogenous conditions sit outside any internal cycle pattern and can force a drawdown deeper than the math implies. In March 2020 the COVID lockdown shock cut Bitcoin roughly in half in a single day ("Black Thursday"), and the dislocation was market-wide, not crypto-specific — WTI crude futures infamously settled negative at about −$37 on 20 April 2020 (Brent fell hard, to the mid-teens, but stayed positive), as forced liquidations and a collapse in demand overwhelmed normal price floors. A leverage-driven cascade like that hits every asset at once.
Crucially, this does not contradict the institutional/ETF thesis — the two coexist. A large structural bid does not put a floor under price during a shock; it often means patient capital simply waits for lower prices. Big players accumulating into a crash and distributing into the next top can amplify the swing rather than dampen it, so a strong long-term buyer base and a violent short-term drawdown are fully compatible. That is precisely why the deep-bear band is kept live even under a bullish long-term structural view: the floor is set by who is forced to sell and how much leverage unwinds, not by the eventual buyers.
These are pattern-extrapolation scenarios on four cycles, not forecasts, and not financial advice. A genuine exogenous shock is by definition unpredictable in both timing and depth.