It is contended by analysts at Glassnode that the current surge of Bitcoin major holder divestitures constitutes a customary component of a terminal-phase crypto cycle when established participants realize gains.
Bitcoin’s recent surge of major holder divestiture pressure is characteristic of a terminal-phase crypto cycle and should not be regarded as more alarming than it was deemed previously, as determined by analysts from Glassnode.
On Thursday, steps toward divestiture were taken by a significant Bitcoin major holder. A digital repository recognized as the property of speculator Owen Gunden transmitted $2,400 Bitcoin BTC, valued at $237 million dollars, to the crypto exchange Kraken, as reported by the blockchain analytics framework Arkham.
It contributes to a recent succession of Bitcoin major holders that are apparently disengaging from the digital currency.
It was asserted, nevertheless, by Glassnode analysts that the metrics demonstrate that narratives such as “Foundational Major Holders Liquidating” or “Bitcoin’s Covert Public Offering” are, in fact, more intricate.
The monthly average outlays by long-duration possessors suggest that inflows have accelerated from exceeding $12,000 Bitcoin daily in early July to approximately $26,000 as of Thursday, it was reported by Glassnode, a pattern that is indicative of consistent and uniform distribution, not “specifically foundational major holder liquidation, but customary bull-market conduct.”
“This steady rise reflects increasing distribution pressure from older investor cohorts — a pattern typical of late-cycle profit-taking, not a sudden exodus of whales.”
“Long-term holders have been realizing profits throughout this cycle, just as they did in every previous one,”
Glassnode added.
Kronos Research Says the Crypto Market Has Yet to Reach Its Peak
It was conveyed by Vincent Liu, the chief investment officer at quantitative trading entity Kronos Research, that major holder divestitures are a structured cycle progression, and consistent profit reallocation, rather than dread, frequently signals a terminal-cycle phase, concurrently with increasing realized profits and robust fluidity.
It was stated by Liu, nonetheless, that this “terminal-cycle” phase does not definitively imply that the market has peaked, provided there are sufficient purchasers to absorb the recent influx of supply.
“Late cycle doesn’t mean the market is capped, it means momentum has cooled while macro and liquidity steer the ship. Fading rate-cut bets and short-term softness have slowed upside, not sunk it,”
Liu said.
“On-chain readings hint at a potential bottom. Bitcoin’s net unrealized profit ratio at 0.476 signals short-term lows may be forming, offering strategic positioning but it’s just one of many indicators that need to be tracked to confirm a market bottom.”
Trepidation has been present in crypto market sentiment as the encompassing sector persists in its decline. This has been ascribed by analysts to a variety of macroeconomic variables, such as speculators transitioning to holdings with more apparent vulnerability to economic policies and credit movements.
Market Peaks Typically Occur Every Four Years
It was asserted by Charlie Sherry, the head of finance at Australian crypto exchange BTC Markets, that major holder divestitures in solitude are not typically consequential, but on this occasion, a discernible deficiency of substantive demand to assimilate that selling is evident.
It is nonetheless believed by him that it is premature to discern if this signifies a cycle zenith, although the notion is tenable.
Market zeniths have, as a rule, materialized approximately four years distant, as was evidenced in December 2017, roughly $1,067 days following the nadir, and subsequently in November 2021, about $1,058 days after the minimum.
“The recent all-time high on Oct. 6 2025 came 1,050 days from the bottom. From that view, it is plausible that we have already topped this cycle and are entering the early stages of a bear market,”
Sherry said.
Traditional Market Cycles May No Longer Apply
Simultaneously, it was observed by Sherry, nonetheless, that the “four-year cycle premise is not impervious,” given that only a few examples are available for reference, and Bitcoin persists in its evolution with varied demand factors propelled by exchange-traded instruments and corporate assets.
“These buyers don’t trade cycles or follow the four-year rhythm. The appetite of these players has been weak recently, but that can change quickly,”
he said.
“Only time will tell whether we have just seen a cycle top. There are fundamental reasons why Bitcoin may no longer follow a four-year rhythm, but the strength of those fundamentals is being tested right now.”
