Bitcoin Breaks $80,000: Is a New Bull Market Officially Underway?

 

Bitcoin pushed above $80,000 on August 25, reaching its highest level in more than three months. Reuters attributed the move to a soft U.S. dollar following Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's steps to calm the bond market, which revived what traders call the debasement trade. From roughly $63,000 on August 17, Bitcoin gained more than 20% in a week and is up about 27% over the past month.

 

The question has therefore shifted from why it rallied to something harder: whether this is a bear market bounce or the start of a new bull market. The disagreement inside the market is explicit. Among analysts CoinDesk spoke to, Quantum Economics founder Mati Greenspan argued that a pattern beginning with a short squeeze, a large green candle and breaks above technical levels is generally what bottoms look like. AdLunam co-founder Jason Fernandes said he would be cautious about calling the bear market over without sustained spot ETF inflows and clear macroeconomic easing.

 

The sentiment backdrop deserves separate attention. The crypto Fear and Greed Index has climbed to 83, in extreme greed territory, while on August 18 comparable gauges still sat at 40 in fear. Travelling from fear to extreme greed in six days is itself a signal worth reading on its own terms.

 

 

 

On drivers, three forces stacked. The Treasury raised the maximum size of long-end liquidity support buybacks from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation, pulling yields and the dollar lower. Washington delivered a run of supportive regulatory signals. And a large accumulation of short positioning was forcibly unwound, with crypto short liquidations reaching a record of roughly $2.7 billion on August 19 alone.

 

On flows, the shift is real. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $1.92 billion in net inflows for the week ended August 21, their strongest since October 2025, while spot Ether ETFs drew $697.2 million, with both categories posting their best week of 2026. Context matters, though: Bitcoin ETFs remain roughly $2.91 billion in net outflow for 2026, having shed $2.43 billion in May and $4.51 billion in June.

 

On structure, historical trading volume between $80,000 and $90,000 is unusually thin, and price tends to move quickly through such zones in either direction. Several analysts now treat $83,000 as the next decisive level and $75,000 to $76,000 as where a healthy pullback would land.

 

 

 

Understanding the character of this move requires unpacking the volume profile. According to Adam Morgan McCarthy, lead researcher at LO:TECH, more than half of the 7.1% gain on August 19 landed inside a single hour, on roughly a third of that day's volume. That mismatch between time and volume is the signature of a short squeeze rather than sustained buying.

 

The scale confirms it. Data compiled on the move shows forced short liquidations of $1.44 billion across major exchanges on August 19, with $1.29 billion closing inside one hour and more than 110,000 traders caught, against $3.26 billion in total liquidations over twenty-four hours. Across the full advance, more than $4.3 billion of short positions were force-closed.

 

Tobias Bauer, co-founder at TBV, noted that Binance traded $1.26 billion of Bitcoin futures inside a single sixty-second window, 361 times a normal minute, with funding rates at exchange maximums. The implication is direct: in that moment, the buying was involuntary rather than allocative.

 

 

Read only the liquidation data and this looks like a leverage accident. ETF flows point the other way. Per SoSoValue figures, BlackRock's IBIT took in roughly $1.33 billion across five consecutive sessions, accounting for most of the week's Bitcoin ETF total, while August 20 produced $606.3 million in a single day, the largest in more than three months.

 

That distinction matters. A squeeze explains a price jump measured in hours. It does not explain nearly $2 billion of weekly allocation. The first is a positioning event; the second is behaviour. Whether this rally deserves the bull market label depends on whether the second survives the end of the first.

 

Ryan Lee, chief analyst at Bitget Research, framed the same issue in comments to CoinDesk: short sellers closing losing positions pushed price higher, and the market now needs spot demand, including institutional buying, to take their place, with continued ETF inflows strengthening the case for another leg up.

 

 

 

Different providers currently publish materially different fear and greed readings, and understanding why matters more than memorising any single number. Some trackers show 83 in extreme greed, others weighted differently print 77, and several widely cited versions sit at 73 to 74 in ordinary greed. The divergence comes from input selection: volatility, momentum and volume, social media activity, Bitcoin dominance and search trends carry different weights across models, and some also incorporate whale activity and order book pressure.

 

The practical use is not to chase a specific value but to watch direction and velocity. On August 18, the mainstream reading was 40, in fear, after a seven-day low of 26. A month earlier it sat between 25 and 29 in extreme fear. Covering more than forty points in six days carries more information than the endpoint does.

 

 

One reasonably durable pattern is that advances beginning in fear, without a matching sentiment spike, tend to run further than advances beginning in greed. This move genuinely satisfied that condition at the outset, with no funding blowout and no unusual social volume expansion.

 

The condition has changed in recent days. With sentiment above 80, the daily relative strength index pushing toward 84, and price trading outside the upper Bollinger band, the market no longer holds the low-expectations advantage. Further gains now require new buyers rather than position repair.

 

At this stage, trading discipline carries more value than directional conviction. The trading data tools offered by MEXC let investors review how they actually behaved across different sentiment regimes, which is more useful than reviewing any single price move.

 

 

 

 

Chris Sullivan of Hyperion Decimus made several observations worth recording: the break above key moving averages, rising volume and improved market breadth together point to a possible change in trend. Bitcoin reclaimed its 200-day moving average during this advance after months of trading below it.

 

Joel Kruger, market strategist at LMAX Group, went further, arguing that the move through $67,300 and $70,000 provides evidence that a significant cycle low may already be in place, with $83,000 as the next major upside level.

 

Cycle context sharpens the picture. Bitcoin peaked near $126,000 in October 2025, then retraced close to half, reaching roughly $58,000 in July of this year. If Kruger is right, the current level sits well above the cycle low, while remaining about 37% below the prior high.

 

 

Sullivan also cautioned that previous crypto bear markets produced sharp short-covering rallies that were later erased. That historical pattern has to be confronted directly. Declaring a bull market on price breaks alone is insufficient. At minimum, three conditions need to hold simultaneously: spot demand replaces forced covering as the dominant bid, macro liquidity stops reversing, and price defends a higher low on the next pullback.

 

Only the first has preliminary evidence. The second remains open. The third has not been tested. That is precisely why most analysts are watching the next decline rather than the next high.

 

 

 

Hashdex Chief Investment Officer Samir Kerbage supplied the most technically substantive point in this debate: the region between $80,000 and $90,000 has very little historical volume, and price tends to move through thin zones quickly, for better or worse.

 

The practical consequence is about risk management. Dense historical volume creates support and resistance because trapped and profitable positions there generate natural buying and selling. In a thin zone that cushion disappears and volatility amplifies. Kerbage suggested consolidation between $75,000 and $83,000 would be healthy for building a base, and that a sustained move above $83,000 might open a path toward testing $100,000.

 

 

Lee's near-term range is $74,000 to $81,000, with a retreat toward $75,000 to $76,000 consistent with normal profit-taking, and a sustained push above $80,000 potentially opening $82,000 to $87,000. Sullivan watches lower ground, treating $67,000 to $70,000 as the key area if the retreat deepens.

 

On shorter horizons, technical work published on August 25 places resistance at $88,000 to $90,000 and support at $75,000 to $76,000, with market-wide liquidations of roughly $400 million over twenty-four hours including about $160 million in Bitcoin shorts. That figure is far smaller than last week's, indicating the most vulnerable positioning has already been cleared and further gains must rest on genuine demand.

 

 

 

The buyback expansion lifted risk assets because it pulled long-end yields and the dollar lower. But the measure only takes effect on September 9 and runs to the November 4 quarterly refunding. If long-end yields resume climbing once it is live, confidence in the tool takes a direct hit.

 

The magnitude of that risk is not small. Research cited in coverage of the bond market found that following comparable spikes in yields, Bitcoin's median absolute move over the subsequent sixty days has been roughly 30%, in either direction. The same analysis noted investors are focused on whether long-term Treasury yields keep rising, whether U.S. and Iran tensions become a sustained energy shock, whether inflation risks return, and whether global risk premiums expand further.

 

 

McCarthy's contrast deserves separate mention: gold rallied cleanly on the Treasury doubling its bond-buying operations, without any of the forced buying that inflated Bitcoin's price. His conclusion was that gold, not Bitcoin, showed where investors were actually hedging currency and inflation risk that week.

 

This does not invalidate the Bitcoin advance, but it flags an important distinction. Under an identical macro event, gold's gain was composed of active allocation and Bitcoin's contained a large passive component. When the narrative is shared, the quality of the flows behind it may not be.

 

 

Federal Reserve communication comes first. The Jackson Hole symposium runs August 27 to 29 and features the new chair's first address in that setting, with markets watching how he describes the relationship between long-end rates and the policy framework. The September FOMC meeting follows.

 

Regulatory process comes second. The SEC crypto offering rules proposed on August 18 remain in their comment period, and the Senate procedural vote on market structure legislation is scheduled for mid-September. Neither is settled.

 

Flow persistence comes third and is the most measurable. Bitcoin ETFs remain in net outflow for 2026, and August's inflows have not yet reversed the annual picture. One strong week is a necessary condition for a turn, not a sufficient one.

 

 

This question is hard because bull market is usually treated as a price label when it is really a description of flow structure. Clearing $80,000 says selling pressure vanished at a level. It says nothing about who bought. The most important numbers from this move are not the price but the $1.29 billion of short liquidations that cleared inside a single hour on August 19, and the $1.92 billion of weekly ETF inflows. The first is non-repeatable; only the second can persist. Their price effects look similar and their forward implications are entirely different.

 

The most probable misreading right now is treating the sentiment jump from 40 to 83 as confirmation. The opposite is closer to the truth. A sentiment gauge earns its keep as a contrarian reference at extremes, not as a coincident indicator agreeing with price. With the daily relative strength index near 84, price outside the upper Bollinger band, and funding at exchange maximums, the easiest part of the move has already been priced. The cost of entering now is not just a higher price but the carry on a leveraged long.

 

The second overlooked detail is the volume vacuum. Thin historical trading between $80,000 and $90,000 means conventional support and resistance analysis loses reliability there. Most traders anchor stops to prior high-volume zones, and that method degrades in an air pocket. Stops need to reference a wider volatility band rather than a tighter technical level. This is purely a position sizing question, independent of whether you are bullish or bearish.

 

For a watch list, three data series outrank price over the next four weeks. First, whether ETF inflows form a consecutive series, since $1.92 billion in one week is a point and only several weeks establish changed behaviour, especially against a year-to-date net outflow of roughly $2.91 billion. Second, how perpetual funding normalises after the squeeze, because a rapid return to extreme positive readings would indicate leveraged longs taking over and risk rebuilding. Third, the shape of the first meaningful pullback, where the market needs to see real bids near $75,000 rather than continued momentum from forced covering.

 

For cross-asset investors, the lesson is that the pricing anchor for risk assets is migrating from the corporate earnings cycle toward sovereign credit and liquidity conditions. In the same week, gold rose on active allocation and Bitcoin rose on passive buying, under the same narrative. That divergence is a reminder that a shared story does not imply shared flow quality. Judging whether a move is sustainable depends on who is buying and how, not on what the market is talking about. All of the above rests on publicly available data and analysis and is not a definitive conclusion about future direction.

 

 

 

The proximate trigger was a softer dollar. Treasury measures aimed at calming the bond market pulled long-end yields lower and weakened the dollar, reviving the debasement trade. On top of that, a large stock of accumulated short positioning was forcibly closed, amplifying the move. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs simultaneously recorded their strongest weekly inflows since October 2025, providing allocation-level support beneath the price.

 

 

The evidence does not yet support that conclusion, and the market itself is split. The bullish case cites reclaimed moving averages, rising volume, improved breadth, and the argument that clearing $67,300 and $70,000 suggests a cycle low is in. The cautious case notes that previous bear markets produced sharp short-covering rallies that were later fully erased. Confirmation requires spot demand replacing forced covering, stable macro liquidity, and a higher low on the next pullback.

 

 

It means sentiment has entered extreme greed, a zone historically associated with more short-term risk than short-term opportunity. Readings differ across providers, with some showing 83 and others 77 or 73, because volatility, momentum, social activity and dominance carry different weights in each model. The more useful observation is velocity rather than level: comparable gauges sat at 40 in fear on August 18.

 

 

A large share. Forced short liquidations reached $1.44 billion across major exchanges on August 19, with $1.29 billion clearing inside a single hour and more than 110,000 traders caught, against $3.26 billion in total twenty-four-hour liquidations. Across the whole advance, more than $4.3 billion of shorts were force-closed. Research on the session found more than half of the 7.1% daily gain landed in one hour on roughly a third of the volume.

 

 

Several analysts treat $83,000 as the next decisive level, with a sustained hold potentially opening a path toward $100,000. Above that, resistance sits around $88,000 to $90,000. On the downside, $75,000 to $76,000 is where normal profit-taking would land, and $67,000 to $70,000 is the deeper support zone if the retreat extends. Note that historical volume between $80,000 and $90,000 is thin, so price can move quickly in either direction there.

 

 

The weekly picture improved clearly. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs took in $1.92 billion for the week ended August 21, the strongest since October 2025, while spot Ether ETFs drew $697.2 million, both records for 2026. The annual picture warrants restraint: Bitcoin ETFs remain roughly $2.91 billion in net outflow for the year, having lost $2.43 billion in May and $4.51 billion in June. One week is not yet a trend.

 

 

Macro. The Treasury buyback expansion only takes effect on September 9 and ends November 4, and if long-end yields resume rising during that window the logic underpinning this rally weakens. Research has found the median absolute Bitcoin move over the sixty days following comparable yield spikes is roughly 30%, direction unspecified. Returning inflation, an energy shock from geopolitical conflict, and widening global risk premiums could hit risk assets simultaneously.

 

 

This article offers no trade recommendations, but the methodological issues are worth naming. Price entering a thin historical volume zone reduces the reliability of standard support and resistance analysis, so stops need to reference a wider volatility band. When sentiment sits in extreme greed, position sizing matters more than directional calls. And with perpetual funding at exchange maximums, the carrying cost of a leveraged long has risen materially, which belongs in any expected return calculation.

 

 

This article is provided for information and market analysis purposes only and does not constitute investment advice, financial advice, legal advice, tax advice, or any recommendation to transact. Prices of crypto assets, equities and other related financial instruments can move sharply, and none of the price data, flow statistics, technical indicators, sentiment gauges or analyst views referenced here can guarantee future outcomes. The levels, cycle inferences and macro scenarios described are forward-looking and may not be realised. Historical performance, on-chain data and technical patterns provide no assurance about future direction. Investors should reach independent conclusions based on their own financial circumstances, investment objectives, experience and risk tolerance, consulting a qualified professional where appropriate. The MEXC Crypto Pulse team accepts no liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this article.

 

 

James Mitchell specializes in technical analysis, market trends, and trading strategies for both Bitcoin and altcoins. Based in London, he has over 10 years of experience in financial markets. Before joining MEXC Learn, James worked as a senior analyst at a leading European investment firm, where he developed expertise in risk management and quantitative trading. His transition to cryptocurrency markets began in 2017, and he has since become recognized for his data-driven approach. He holds a Master's degree in Financial Economics from the London School of Economics. His analytical approach combines traditional technical analysis with on-chain metrics to provide readers with actionable insights.

 

His areas of expertise span technical analysis, market trends and cycles, trading strategies, Bitcoin and altcoin analysis, and risk management.

 

 

 

Want the fastest access to MEXC's latest updates? Join our official Telegram group now!

MEXC Platform: Download App | Zero Fee Trading | Buy USDT Now

Join MEXC Community: X (Twitter) | Telegram | Discord

Get Insights: MEXC Learn | Terms of Service | MEXC Blog | MEXC News

Account Verification: Understand KYC | How to Complete KYC

External Content Platforms: Substack | Medium | Paragraph | LinkedIn | X(News)