Everyone expected the halving to increase prices. Why hasn't it?

Welcome to The Roundup. Each week, we use Bitcoin to examine a broader question about capital, risk, and ownership. Not where the market is headed or what the headlines are saying. Instead, we review the structural forces that separate durable wealth from temporary gains.

This week we’re asking why Bitcoin’s halving hasn’t translated into higher prices?

The Roundup is the newsletter from Rhino — the Bitcoin-only app to buy, hold, and borrow against your Bitcoin, with no rehypothecation.

Good morning, Bitcoiners.

Is this the worst Bitcoin halving cycle in history?

Some certainly think so.

Pierre Rochard, CEO of The Bitcoin Bond Company, recently argued exactly that after Bitcoin’s relatively muted performance since the April 2024 halving.

And looking at the data, it’s easy to understand why.

One year after previous halvings, Bitcoin had already entered powerful bull markets. This time, price appreciation has been far more subdued, prompting some investors to question whether the four-year halving cycle is beginning to break down.

Indeed, for investors expecting another explosive post-halving rally, the disappointment is understandable. But before declaring the halving and its effect on price appreciation is “broken,” it’s worth asking a different question.

Has Bitcoin changed or has the market around Bitcoin changed?

Bitcoin exchange-traded funds now hold roughly 1.42 million BTC, while public companies hold another 1.21 million BTC. Combined with countries, private companies and other entities, institutional holders now control more than 18% of Bitcoin’s fixed supply, according to Bitbo.

For years, investors argued that spot ETFs, institutional capital and corporate treasury buyers would either amplify the traditional four-year cycle, or eliminate it altogether. Ironically, both camps were making the same assumption: That history would repeat itself.

The reality is that Bitcoin had never entered a halving with today’s market structure.

History is still useful, but it’s no longer a roadmap.

What if you never had to time another Bitcoin cycle?

Whether this halving ultimately resembles previous ones or not, long-term investors still need an approach that works through both optimism and uncertainty.

That doesn’t mean that the halving no longer matters.

It simply means it now exists in a market with far more powerful forces than it did in Bitcoin’s early years.

History remains valuable, but it provides context, not certainty.

That’s where many investors get caught out. They study previous cycles expecting them to repeat almost exactly, when every cycle has unfolded under a completely different set of market conditions.

The investors who navigate that uncertainty best aren't the ones making the boldest predictions about where Bitcoin will trade six months from now.

See you next week,

Hector