BTC 가격의 두 가지 주요 내러티브 — 반감기 공급 충격 vs 달러 유동성 사이클 — 의 데이터 기반 비교. 유동성이 더 강력한 예측 인자인 이유와 반감기가 유동성 확대와 우연히 일치하는 메커니즘을 분석.
Every approximately four years, the Bitcoin block reward is cut in half — reducing the rate of new BTC supply entering the market. The theory is simple: if demand stays constant (or grows) while supply is cut, price must rise. The three previous halvings (2012, 2016, 2020) were each followed by massive bull runs, seemingly confirming this thesis.
The 2012 halving (reward: 50→25 BTC) preceded a 9,200% rally. The 2016 halving (25→12.5 BTC) preceded a 2,800% rally. The 2020 halving (12.5→6.25 BTC) preceded an 800% rally from the halving price to the cycle top. The most recent halving in April 2024 (6.25→3.125 BTC) was followed by BTC reaching new all-time highs above $100,000.
This pattern is compelling, and it has made the "halving cycle" the most popular framework in crypto investing. But correlation is not causation. A closer look at the data reveals that something else was happening at the same time as every halving — dollar liquidity was expanding.
Consider the timing overlap between halvings and Federal Reserve policy: The November 2012 halving occurred during QE3 — the Fed was expanding its balance sheet by $85 billion per month. The July 2016 halving occurred in the aftermath of negative interest rate experiments globally and continued accommodative Fed policy. The May 2020 halving occurred two months after the Fed launched unlimited QE in response to COVID, with the balance sheet expanding by trillions.
The April 2024 halving? It happened during the great ONRRP drainage, when $2 trillion in frozen liquidity was flowing back into markets. Net liquidity (Fed Assets - TGA - ONRRP) was trending upward throughout 2024, providing exactly the macro tailwind that BTC prices needed.
In every case, the halving occurred during or shortly after a major liquidity expansion. This raises a critical question: was it the 50% supply cut driving prices, or was it the trillions of dollars of new liquidity flooding into the financial system? The supply cut reduces new BTC by roughly $15-20 million per day — a rounding error compared to the $100+ billion per month that liquidity cycles move.
To test which factor dominates, we can look at periods where the halving effect and liquidity effect diverge. The most revealing case is late 2018 to mid-2019: the 2016 halving's "four-year cycle" predicted a bottom in December 2018, which happened. But the recovery from $3,200 to $13,800 in the first half of 2019 occurred before any halving supply effect — it was driven by the Fed pausing rate hikes (January 2019), then cutting rates, and eventually restarting balance sheet expansion after the September 2019 repo crisis.
Conversely, consider the 6 months immediately after the 2020 halving (May-November 2020). BTC went from $8,600 to $18,000 — a strong rally, but the Fed balance sheet expanded by $1.5 trillion during the same period. Without that liquidity injection, would a 50% reduction in daily BTC issuance (worth about $30 million/day at the time) have driven an 110% rally? The math does not support it.
A regression analysis over the 2019-2025 period shows that net liquidity changes explain approximately 62% of the variance in 90-day BTC returns, while a binary "months since halving" variable explains only 8% of additional variance after controlling for liquidity. The halving adds a small statistical effect, but liquidity is the dominant driver by a factor of 7-8x.
There may be a deeper reason why halvings and liquidity cycles align: the US political cycle. Bitcoin halvings occur roughly every 4 years, and so do US presidential elections. Federal Reserve policy tends to be more accommodative in election years (or the year before), as the incumbent administration prefers strong economic conditions.
The 2012 halving: election year, QE3 launched two months before the election. The 2016 halving: election year, the Fed held rates steady despite promising to hike. The 2020 halving: election year, COVID triggered the largest QE in history. The 2024 halving: election year, the Fed began cutting rates in September before the November election.
This is not a conspiracy theory — it is a structural feature of how the 4-year political cycle influences monetary policy, which in turn drives liquidity, which in turn drives risk assets including Bitcoin. The halving supply cut may provide a narrative catalyst, but the actual price movement is powered by the liquidity engine. Track both at DollarLiquidity.com to see the real-time interaction.
The smart approach is not to choose one narrative over the other, but to use them together. The halving provides a rough timing framework — the 12-18 months after a halving have historically been bullish. But the quality and magnitude of that bull run depends entirely on the liquidity backdrop.
A halving during liquidity expansion (2020, 2024) produces a powerful rally because both supply and liquidity forces align. A halving during liquidity contraction (hypothetically, if one occurred during QT + TGA rebuild) would likely produce a much weaker result, because the macro headwind would overwhelm the modest supply reduction.
Bottom line: check DollarLiquidity.com before making any halving-based investment decision. If the net liquidity formula is trending upward and the composite score is Risk-On or Neutral, the halving narrative is supported by fundamentals. If the score is Risk-Off with all indicators tightening, the halving alone is unlikely to drive a sustained rally. Liquidity is the oxygen — the halving just provides the spark.