Bitcoin Forum

The recent tension in the Middle East - particularly between Iran and Israel - seems to be reshaping how Bitcoin (BTC) reacts to global events.

Initially, BTC was responding mostly to buyer momentum, trading steadily. But on June 22, things changed dramatically. Iran launched missiles at Israel, followed by Israel’s retaliation, causing a sharp drop in BTC price, dipping below $99K.

Then, on June 23, an Iranian nuclear plant was reportedly hit. Instead of another dip, BTC reacted bullishly - breaking the usual war-dip pattern. The following day, June 24, BTC continued to climb after former U.S. President Donald Trump called for a ceasefire, calming market fears and boosting risk appetite.

While analyzing charts via TradingView on BingX, I noticed:

A strong resistance forming around $106K. If broken, BTC may push toward $107,500 and $109K.

On the downside, if support at $104K fails, BTC could fall to around $102,200.
There was liquidation on those traders who sort BTC yesterday due to surge in price movement majorly as a result of the ceasefire announcement.

I also ran a check using BingX AI to get insights into possible fundamental impacts. The AI hinted that current events are playing a strong role in BTC’s behavior.

So the big question remains:
Is BTC still mainly driven by trader activity and technical patterns, or are we seeing a shift where global fundamental events - like wars and diplomacy - are steering the market?

Such events always affected the broader markets.

And in turn, such 'waves' always came to crypto market too, one way or another.

The uptrend has nothing to do with the ceasefire. Bitcoin is simply reacting to something else within the Bitcoin community.

The problem is that people from the centralized world and their promoters/sympathizers are desperately trying to have Bitcoin influenced by the activities or fundemrntals of their system so that there will be no seperation, that's, if the news over there is positive, Bitcoin reacts positively, if it's negative it reacts negatively. This will mean the two worlds are linked together by thesame fundamentals. But this is not the case. It's very contradictory of the ideals or fundamentals of Bitcoins.
The real case should be, a positive news over there is negative for Bitcoin unless Bitcoin has stronger positive news that cancel that out. A negative news on the centralized side should be positive for Bitcoin. That's basically how it could be, especially since their negatives can affect the dollar or other fiats, and dollar/fiats going down makes Bitcoin higher and vise versa.

But Bitcoin is currently under a strong bullish influence which is why it has remained strong and stronger regardless of the positives in the centralized world.. Besides, the USD and other fiat system are inferior to Bitcoins", and should never be in control

Until Bitcoin demonstrates clearly that it has broad utility, the price will always be based on market speculation about the potential for utility.

The BTC price fluctuation at any time has been a function of both market activities and fundamentals. But what happens is that the ratio of one to the other varies from time to time.
In terms of war like this, it is more of the fundamental. In terms of political alignment and election of top countries like US, the fundamental is also dominant. But devoid of all these factors, we could see the natural market activity which is based on halvings, miners activities, FUD, FOMO etc.
For now, the market is respecting the war.

Well IMO both trader activity and global events are linked with general market
movements.

We also got to remember the Bitcoin market is open 24/7/365 and to anyone with
$10 or $100,000 and this adds to the  way the market can move when something
big globally happens.

The market has already moved up to $105,000 in conjunction with the Israel/Iran ceasefire.

The activities of traders and investors are certainly influenced by the fundamentals of an event that occurs in the real world. War can clearly affect the global economy and at the same time the active role of traders and investors in the market decreases where the impact is that demand tends to be smaller than supply. The market will form a pattern based on trader activity, if the fundamentals are not good then the price will fall. But I don't think global fundamentals like war can completely affect market activity, but the fact is that market activity is very dependent on trader interest and the two are interrelated.

It's a speculative market and the value of it still goes with the electricity and power that's generated by the miners. So, if we're going to think of that the global events like the wars has an impact with the energy sector and that could also play a part as to why the price of it decreases when that happens. Sometimes, there is no direct impact to Bitcoin even with all of these global trends that we're seeing, but sometimes, we see that there is a correlation to it. It's hard to tally them but maybe consider that these events still affect Bitcoin and its demand.

War with a nation threatening nuclear bombs is going to be a fear event and that favors a sell off in alot of assets, Bitcoin is still listed as a speculative risky asset even if we dont think that the traders on many markets do.
   Alot of noise short term will get confusing fast, its best not to rate too much below a weekly bar as that indicative of anything beyond people need dollars from selling any assets to repay their leverage.   Reliable trends only really formed long term and its best not to draw too much from fear events, if you are buying its a cheaper price that week is all that matters longer term.

"Global fundamental events" have driven the Bitcoin price for a long while now, not always, but important events often were probably an influence. I think the shift came with the COVID dip, before most Bitcoin price movements were caused by "internal" problems (i.e. bullish if some major company accepted Bitcoin, and bearish when there was a ban or a exchange bankruptcy) and of course cyclic behavior.

It is also very likely that the Bitcoin price tends to react, since about 2020, in a similar way to external events than the stock market. The connection lies probably in the influence of Central Bank interest rates on the attractivity of risky assets like stocks and Bitcoin.

The change I consider more important in recent times is that Bitcoin doesn't overreact anymore to these events: it reacts with similar or even weaker price swings than the North American stock market, for example. The exception are of course events which influence the Bitcoin market specifically, like political developments enabling the creation of strategic reserves.

What do yourself think about it? ;)

I would say that the 4 year cycle is based on fundamentals while the day to day shenanigans is market driven. This is why you can go day after day explaining why the market is doing what it is doing, but you always know in a 4-year cycle where the price is headed overall. This is probably true with everything. If you want to see fundamentals, zoom out.

I would say that bitcoin is only living it's natural behaviour. Bitcoin volatility has always happened and I still believe that whatever has happened happened as a self driven cum buyer speculation driven. Most buyers are too fearful and speculative, always analysing things that rarely exist.

Bitcoin is not a widely accumulated coin in the middle East and I feel they play not a larger part in bitcoin buying and selling. Even the retaliatory action of the US might not have had any role in it.

All these could be coincidence. How would a single hit on the Iranian nuclear based cause a spontaneous rise in bitcoin price?? Is that bitcoin's way of taking sides??

Speculation is a very big factor that drives the market during panic. Wars have been happening before now so it's not right to down play bitcoin features with what's happening in the middle east.

There wasn't any dramatic event there Op neither is it strange this time of the bitcoin market being significantly affected by global insecurity tensions as a result of the Israel and Ukraine war.
Are you also hearing of the threats that this war may lead to WW2? As news flies, the IS government under Donald Trumps regime is supporting Israel and the Islamic Parliaments and the Iran allies are also throwing stones in coverage of fighting back?

All of that has contributed to disability of the economic system and it has verily affected investors plans on buying of bitcoin. Infact, it has caused discouragement of bitcoin liquidations.
So you must note that there're key elements that influences the price of bitcoin. There're also events that encourages buyers to buy bitcoin which at this time is a bad one for most enthusiasts because, they're all reacting according to the economy conditions which is caused by the ongoing war.
In the bitcoin market you call that emotional sentiments.

Interesting take. I would describe a similar idea but a bit different:

The long term trend is based on Bitcoin fundamentals (price discovery of an asset searching for mass adoption).
The cyclic fluctuations (bullish and bearish phases of the cycle) are driven by the "attention game" (periods when the general public opinion is bitcoin friendly and others when this isn't the case) and Elliot wave speculation, but are also part of the long term trend until now. The first 2 cycles (until 2017/18) were driven by halving dynamics too, but my guess is that the supply fluctuations are now too small for that.
The day to day variations can be explained either by 1) market speculation (in most cases) and 2) some geopolitical or economic events, often US-related, which also affect the stock markets (e.g. with influence on the Fed interest rate) but cannot really be described as "Bitcoin fundamentals".

Let's first clarify the difference between news and fundamental things. News and events are immediate drivers of price whereas fundamentals are deciding factors where the price to reach. This is the reason why people do say that fundamentals will win at the end of the day. Those investors and long term holders just look at fundamentals and will remain calm whereas traders will react to changes of technical patterns. Technical patterns are known of continuously changing whereas fundamentals are subject to rare changes.

A war will impact macro economics like inflation, unemployment, bank interest rates and etc. These are not inhouse factors of bitcoin still these will impact an investors mindset; yes, war may disturb investors like what a fundamental change does. Right now, after ceasefire between Iran and Israel, bitcoin returns back, it seems.

Don't you find it ironic OP that your own assessment, and even that of your AI, against all these recent movements in the past week alone, are really indicative that we're looking at pure market activity? If it were purely fundamental, we should be seeing a steady slide down with the recent news about miner dropoff (even if I don't think it will be the 10% predicted by some places, 7% is still significant). Instead, we're on a fresh attempt at ATH.

Has there ever been a time when global fundamental events didn't steer the market? The market is made up of people, and these people pay attention to the events of the world. Both traders and investors pay attention, so when global events like wars happen, their actions affect the market. If they panic and sell, we see it in the price of bitcoin; if they don't, we also see it I the price.
Trader activity is driven by something. Something makes so many traders sell and something makes so many traders buy, and that something, among other things, is global fundamental events, like wars and diplomacy. It could also be rumours, big sales and many other things.

On which this do shows that the recent war didnt made out such much effect into the price or crypto market. Yes, we did made out some price decrease but its not something that you can be able to connect it out.
It is just that like an ordinary day movement on which we can be able to tell that fundamentals and news doesnt always give out such impact and thats not something new. Its not bad to assume since War is indeed a very significant thing that could affect out economic conditions on which this could be seen into the past on which affecting out those traditional markets but we do know that crypto market isnt something that we can say that it would be always having that kind of impact specially if there would be some situations such as this. It could moved out randomly without any valid reason behind and just like on the recent events on which the entire crypto community had been that expecting that it will be taking up some dive but it didnt happen on which this do simply shows that not all the time it will be giving out that kind of effect and thats normal.

Movement could neither be having that reason behind or just that totally random and thats why you cant be able to apply always having that fundamental analysis and its effect, but its not that bad for you to assume out with those potential effects on which it could make that significant move and you can that act fast at your advantage.

Yes, I do but I think that wasn't WW2 but rather it is WW3. Even though there some evidences already, I still hope it won't escalate further as that sounds scary. As for now, I think economic system still functions at most.

If there are people that can be affected of buying BTC, they can be the people living under those countries where wars are currently happening. They can't sell as well but others outside them still can, resulting for us to see some declines. Actually, this is one of the events where people are encouraged to buy a BTC because BTC is from a different dimension. So, it can only be affected less or won't be affected at all, negatively.

Its something that has been happening over the years, whereby the market always respond to the political activities but does not majors on this alone, instead, it basically depends on it supply and demands in the market.


We should not be moved by what is happening politically or in the general world economy, because they pose no long term effect on the market price, they can only cause a short term shock for it to respond to and later make a correction back, this depends on the nature of the breaking news, some helps in increasing the market while some may cause it to dump on a short range.

Is that hashrate drop bad news though?

There are imo arguments for and against this take: It could indicate that miners are less optimistic now and some are closing their operations due to this. And it also may mean that if some mining farms got bankrupt, they could be selling their coins soon. I think the tiny bit of security loss doesn't really matter.

On the other hand, it could be regarded a healthy correction of an overheated market (not Bitcoin, but Bitcoin mining). I have read several opinions in the last year or so that mining may have arrived in bubblish territory, i.e. in a hashrate/cost region relative to the price where it's not longer sustainable, where a large part of the miners (all costs included, including capital costs) would be mining at a loss and only some very bullish price predictions made them continue. If this "bubblish" phase ends and mining became more sustainable again, it could bring more predictability and stability into the mining business.

Anyway the mining market is seemingly very robust. Even the China mining ban of 2021, which came close to a "worst case" for mining, did only shortly impact the Bitcoin price and even a new ATH was recorded in that year.

I see BTC nowadays leaning toward more of being steered by global fundamental events. Trader activity and technical pattern doesn't mean much but the technical pattern isn't becoming meaningless either.
In the grand scheme of thing bitcoin stays in line with the global narrative of being legitimized through ETF and strategic reserve yet tied tightly with global events such as geopolitics.

It's no wonder because bitcoin has become 5th biggest asset. Since there are more and more institutional investors who also leans to trade based on ongoing global events, it's to be expected.

It's never been bad news for me, but such a significant drop (and predicted to not recover so soon) is still an important fundamental -- at the very least, it can't be seen as good news. The security loss is negligible because long term, the trend will always be for nett increase.

But if it is as you say, that fundamentalists view it as a culling of mining casuals, then if this is the bubble popping, definitely good signs for the medium and long term. But still -- should have had an impact now on markets. That it didn't seems to me to strongly suggest the answer to OP's question is that what we're seeing now is quite clearly market driven.