As of early July 2026, the Bitcoin market has entered the late stage of the bear cycle. In the latest issue of Adler AM, I broke down an early bottom signal based on the Net UTXO Supply metric.

Historically, signals like this have appeared near cycle lows, which is clearly visible on the chart in the green lines. But this signal matters not as a standalone confirmation of a bottom, but as an addition to the other Core metrics we cover in Weekly Engine.

Also this week, the daily ETF outflow streak was broken, but the structural stress in the segment has still not been lifted. Before that, the cumulative outflow during the streak exceeded $2.7 billion, and June became the worst month for Bitcoin ETFs since launch, closing with net outflows of $4.5 billion. At the same time, IBIT from BlackRock continues to show persistent outflows and has now closed its eighth straight week in the red. In essence, this means that even after a local pause in the selloff, there is still no sign of a sustainable reversal in ETF demand - the pressure remains systemic, not episodic.

On the on-chain side, the basic LTH picture remains unchanged. Long-term holders continue to hold a record share of supply, while LTH MVRV remains around three-year lows. This means that old money has not capitulated and continues to accumulate supply. That is exactly what makes the current phase look like the late stage of the bear cycle, where price weakens, holder margins are compressed, but the strongest cohorts still have not thrown their coins onto the market.

🔸

Now to the main point: let’s move on to the weekly breakdown. What the market is showing, which signals have triggered, which new triggers have appeared, and what verdict the Weekly Engine is giving on Bitcoin right now.

Below is the full breakdown.

Read more

Series: Decision Architecture for Bitcoin
Part: 6 of 9

Series roadmap:

1. Why most traders misread signals

2. Which metrics matter first

3. How to read conflicting signals

4. When macro breaks a beautiful on-chain picture

5. Where the real holder pain sits

6. How to Read Flow Signals Without Myths ← you are here

7. How derivatives distort the spot market

8. How to compress 20 signals into one verdict

9. Why even good signals can lead to losses

What you will get after this lesson:

• Understand why coin flow is not a directional signal, but a fact of movement whose meaning is set by context

• Learn to read the same outflow or inflow in four different ways depending on the market regime and who the sender is

• Get the Flow Context Matrix - a map that translates a raw flow number into a meaningful conclusion

• Learn to separate the supply side (BTC flow) from the demand side (stablecoin inflows) and stop mixing them together

• Read flow in the current July 2026 data and see that flow confirms rather than predicts

DECISION QUESTION

Coins are leaving exchanges en masse. Is this confident accumulation, a structural migration to cold storage, or preparation for selling through OTC? And why is the direction of coins not the direction of price?

In the previous issue, we built the Holder Pressure Map: a cost basis map by cohort. It answers the question of “who and where” - who among holders is underwater relative to their cost basis. But that is static. The pressure map shows position, not movement.

Flow signals are the dynamic part. They show where coins are actually moving: onto exchanges or off them, into ETFs or out of them, whether stablecoins are coming in as dry powder for buying. And this is exactly where the biggest myths in on-chain analysis are born.

Because flow is the most tempting metric for false causality. Coin outflows from exchanges are emotionally read as a “bullish signal”, inflows as “bearish”. It is convenient, intuitive, and too often wrong. This issue is about how to read flow the way the system reads it: not by the direction of the arrow, but by context and by sender.

TL;DR

Flow by itself is not a directional signal. The same coin movement can mean opposite things depending on the regime the market is in and who the sender is. Outflow in strength and outflow in panic are two different markets. Inflow in a rising market and inflow in a falling market are too.

The key skill is not to read the flow number itself, but first to identify its context (strength or stress) and its cause (whale or retail, spot or derivatives, selling or internal transfer). Only then does flow turn into a signal.

And separately: BTC flow is the supply side, while stablecoin inflows are the demand side. People constantly mix them into one thing called “liquidity”, even though they answer different questions.

Key takeaways:

• Flow is not a directional signal, but a fact of coin movement - meaning comes from context, not the arrow

• The same outflow or inflow means four different things depending on the regime (strength or stress) and the sender (whale or retail)

• BTC flow is the supply side, stablecoin inflows are the demand side - they cannot be merged into one “liquidity” measure

• Exchange Reserve in USD is distorted by price and is a slow structural level, not a tactical buy signal

• Flow is a confirming signal, not a leading one

1. Why the mistake happens

1.1 The typical mistake

An analyst sees a large coin outflow from exchanges, opens the Exchange Netflow chart, sees a sustained red zone, and delivers the verdict: “supply shock, coins are leaving exchanges, get ready for upside.”

He reads not the context of the flow, but only the direction of the arrow. Outflow equals bullish, inflow equals bearish. And he never asks the only two questions that matter: what regime this flow is happening in, and who exactly is creating it.

1.2 Why the mistake feels logical

Because flow creates a false physical intuition. Coins left the exchange - so they “won’t be sold.” Coins came to the exchange - so they are “being prepared for sale.” It sounds like a conservation law, but markets do not work like that.

An outflow can be confident accumulation, or it can be protective withdrawal in a panic - and those are two opposite signals. An inflow can be preparation for selling, or it can be an internal transfer between exchange wallets, a market maker rebalance, or a deposit that will never be sold. The arrow is the same. The meaning is different.

1.3 How it breaks the decision process

By reading flow as direction, the analyst systematically catches false signals. He buys an outflow during distribution - because “coins are leaving exchanges” actually meant that whales had already sold what they wanted, and the remaining outflow was retail at a local top.

He reads not the context of the flow, but only the direction of the arrow. Both mistakes come from the same belief: that coin movement has built-in direction. It does not.

2. The Flow Context Matrix

Read more

FUD around Strategy Inc. (MSTR) remains in the market: this week, the company’s mNAV closed below 1 for the first time in its history.

The drop in mNAV is a break in the market premium attached to Strategy’s business model. In essence, the market is no longer willing to pay more for MSTR than the value of its Bitcoin reserve. This does not mean the company is facing an immediate collapse, but it does mean that raising new capital to buy BTC, especially through common stock issuance, has now become more difficult.

So the main question now is whether Strategy can service its dividend obligations and continue raising new capital without selling BTC.

I wrote in more detail about the reasons behind this shift and the key risks for Strategy in the previous issue of Weekly Engine #101 and in Adler AM issue 199: Strategy (MSTR) is down 78% from its peak.

This week, I published a corporate report for institutional investors on the state of the Bitcoin market at the end of June 2026. It breaks down the market's transition into a structural stress regime: localized capitulation among short-term holders, deteriorating liquidity, negative new capital inflows, key valuation and support levels, and the weakening of Strategy (MSTR) as the main corporate proxy for Bitcoin. If you work in the financial sector, you are most likely familiar with this type of report. I deliberately used this format to describe the Bitcoin market in a language professional investors understand.

I also recommend actively tracking the Bitcoin Realized Price Bands chart. It shows where the current Bitcoin price sits relative to realized price and its key multiples, in other words, relative to the average cost basis of coins held by market participants. In practice, it is one of the most useful reference points for judging whether the market is in an overheated zone, a fair value zone, or a structural stress zone, and also how close price is to levels that in past cycles acted as support, resistance, or the final capitulation zone.

🔸

Now for the main part: we move to the weekly breakdown. What is the market showing, which signals have triggered, which new triggers have appeared, and what verdict does Weekly Engine give on Bitcoin right now.

Below is the full breakdown.

Read more

Issue: Institutional Analysis - June (I) 2026
Data period: June 11-25, 2026
Publication date: June 25, 2026
Data source: CryptoQuant
Classification: CONFIDENTIAL

Part I. Executive Brief

Bitcoin Market Dynamics and On-Chain Metrics: June (I) 2026 Report

This briefing provides a comprehensive overview of Bitcoin market conditions, on-chain metrics, and derivatives structure based on data for the period from June 11 to June 25, 2026. It analyzes the market’s transition from a bullish phase to a period of structural stress, localized capitulation, and shifting institutional behavior.

Methodology note. All signals and framework assessments in this report are generated by Weekly Engine - a 7-layer model that defines the cycle phase (Bull/Bear) and produces a weekly action from the following set: BUY, BUY DIP, HOLD, WAIT, REDUCE, SELL, EXIT. A full description of the architecture, signal taxonomy, and track record is provided in Appendix A. Data sources and disclosures are provided in Appendix B.

Executive Summary

The Bitcoin market is currently defined by a “risk-off” regime against a backdrop of rising structural stress. Although several indicators point to a bottom-formation process, the market still lacks the final extreme capitulation seen in previous cycles. Key observations:

Read more

Decision Terminal is built to help investors navigate the Bitcoin market.

The usual problem looks like this: you open dozens of charts, watch YouTube channels, listen to podcasts, read opinions on X, look at the price, and still do not know what to do. At the bottom, buying feels scary. At the top, selling feels greedy. Every day feels like you are either late or catching a falling knife. There is too much information, but no decision.

Decision Terminal compresses that noise into one structured answer to three questions:

1. What to do right now.

2. How confident to be.

3. What needs to change for the decision to change.

That is it. One verdict and the logic behind it. Below is how to read the four tabs and in what order.

Four tabs - four questions

At the top of the terminal, there are four tabs. Each one answers its own question, and together they form one decision.

Weekly Engine - what to do

This is the main screen. Every decision starts here. The screenshot shows the date 2025-09-28, when Weekly Engine identified the weekly status as PIVOT DEFENSE near the end of the bull cycle and gave the verdict: SELL / REDUCE TO 60%.

Problem: “I do not understand what to do this week - buy, hold, wait, or reduce?”

What it shows:

• the weekly decision: BUY / HOLD / WAIT / REDUCE / EXIT;

• allowed risk - Cap, meaning the maximum share of capital;

• why the decision is what it is - the Top Drivers block;

• what needs to happen next week for the plan to change.

How to read it. First, look at Action - what to do. Then Cap - what share of capital. Then Top Drivers - why the system gave this verdict. Finally, look at the block about next week: what needs to change for the plan to change.

The point is not to guess the market. The point is to understand the current decision and the condition that would change it. A bottom or a top is not defined by one single point, but by a ladder of signals - the engine guides you through it step by step.

Cycle Radar - where we are in the cycle

This is cycle context. Its job is to show which phase the market is in.

Problem: “Is this drawdown a buying opportunity or the start of a collapse? Am I accidentally buying euphoria at the top?”

What it shows:

• where the market is inside the cycle;

• whether this is an accumulation, overheating, or transition zone;

• how far the market is from extreme phases.

How to read it. The main verdict is CYCLE REGIME. Possible regimes: BOTTOM, ACCUMULATION, FUD SHAKEOUT, FALLING KNIFE, EUPHORIA BUILDING, EUPHORIA PEAK RISK.

Next to it are the key metrics and the STANCE / WATCHING block: the current diagnosis and what the system is watching next.

The rule is simple: if Cycle Radar shows FALLING KNIFE or EUPHORIA PEAK RISK, do not jump into longs just because the local chart looks green. Cycle context matters more than short-term noise.

The point is to avoid buying euphoria and avoid selling the bottom in panic. The same -20% drawdown can be a healthy shakeout, a real bottom, or a breakdown after the peak. Cycle Radar helps separate them.

Risk On/Off - whether the external environment is favorable

This is the external environment filter. It shows whether global markets support risk or, on the contrary, punish it.

Problem: “The Bitcoin chart is green, but the price is still falling. Why?”

What it shows: the state of global financial markets. The dashboard is calculated across 18 global instruments: Asian equities, European equities, US futures, VIX, DXY, oil, gold, and BTC ratios.

How to read it. Two numbers from -10 to +10: STRICT SYNC - everything aligned to the same date, and LIVE NOW - the latest data. Green zone - RISK ON, yellow - NEUTRAL, red - RISK OFF.

The rule is simple: if Risk On/Off shows RISK OFF, do not enter longs just because the local chart looks strong. The global filter can override the local signal.

The point is to avoid confusing a local bounce with a safe environment for risk.

Intraday - whether this is being confirmed right now

This is short-term confirmation on top of the weekly idea.

Important: in version 1.8, this block was rebuilt. Before, it was an intraday traffic light that produced its own verdict. Now it relies on Weekly Engine data and inherits the regime from it, while the MQS and EWS logic is fully preserved.

Problem: “The weekly idea is there, but when exactly should I act? Am I entering against the current move?”

What it shows:

• whether the weekly idea is being confirmed right now;

• whether the move is strengthening or weakening;

• whether the market is following the scenario or moving against it.

How to read it. The main verdict is MARKET REGIME:

• ACTIVE - the weekly context and intraday are aligned;

• SELECTIVE - the weekly context is still valid, but intraday confirmation is only partial;

• STAND ASIDE - no new positions: either the weekly rule does not allow exposure, or quality is weak;

• TRANSITION - a phase transition zone, where score reliability is lower.

The two circles - MQS and EWS - show the quality of the environment and the quality of the entry moment. Even with high MQS, if Weekly Engine does not allow risk, the final regime will be STAND ASIDE.

The point of Intraday is to check timing and alignment with the weekly idea. In other words, not to enter against the weekly decision and against the current flow.

The correct order of use

The tabs should not be read randomly, but as a chain. Each next layer refines the previous one.

1. Start with Weekly Engine - it gives the main decision.

2. Check Cycle Radar - where the market is in the larger cycle.

3. Check Risk On/Off - whether the external environment supports this decision.

4. Open Intraday - whether the idea is being confirmed right now.

If all four layers point in the same direction, the signal is strong. If they contradict each other, that is a signal to reduce risk or wait. The terminal does not remove contradictions for you - it makes them visible.

What the terminal does NOT do

It is important to understand the limits of the tool.

• The terminal shows whether the environment is favorable, and this is not a price prediction. It describes the current regime, not the future. The word “now” matters most here.

• It is not a replacement for your judgment. The terminal narrows the decision space, but the final decision remains yours.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which tab should a beginner start with?
Always start with Weekly Engine. It is the main decision of the week. The other three tabs are context that either strengthens that decision or warns you to be cautious.

What is the difference between Weekly Engine and Intraday?
Weekly Engine is the source of the weekly decision: regime, action, and Cap. Intraday does not produce its own strategic verdict. It checks whether the weekly idea is being confirmed right now and whether the quality of the entry moment has deteriorated.

First comes the decision - Weekly Engine. Then comes the alignment check - Intraday.

Why does Cycle Radar matter more than it seems?
Because the same drawdown means different things in different cycle phases. The tactical tabs do not distinguish this, but Cycle Radar does. It helps you avoid buying euphoria and avoid selling the bottom in panic.

How often does the terminal update?
Data is recalculated every 6 hours, while Weekly Engine is recalculated once a week. On Sunday, in the Substack newsletter, you receive the report on the Weekly Engine decision. On Monday, the terminal updates the full data for the previous week.

Additional guides:

How Weekly Engine helps identify the Cycle Bottom
Cycle Radar - a new block in Decision Terminal
Risk On/Off - a new block in Decision Terminal

Questions - in chat.

Axel

Read more

This week, one of the hottest topics on X was Strategy. Let’s break down what is really happening with Michael Saylor and how it could affect the market.

Strategy Inc. (MSTR) is a high-risk stock with leveraged exposure to BTC, a complex debt and preferred-share structure, risk of further dilution, and stress around STRC.

Here is what we see right now: MSTR price $112.53, market cap $39.9 billion, BTC $64,150. Strategy holds 846,842 BTC, purchased for $64.07 billion at an average price of $75,656.

What is an MSTR shareholder actually buying?

MSTR is not a Bitcoin ETF. Strategy itself describes MSTR as “amplified exposure” to Bitcoin, but the company directly warns that owning its stock does not give holders ownership rights or redemption rights to BTC, and that the company is not a spot Bitcoin ETF and does not have a share creation and redemption mechanism to keep the price close to NAV.

The business model now works like this: Strategy issues common stock, preferred shares, and debt, then uses the proceeds to buy BTC. This works when capital can be raised cheaply and above the intrinsic BTC value per share. It breaks when BTC falls, MSTR trades weaker, preferred shares drop below par, and new share issuance starts to look less like a way to increase the value of shareholders’ stake and more like a reduction of their ownership in the company.

The main valuation math

A simple “market cap / BTC value” calculation gives roughly 0.70x: $37.6 billion of market cap against $54.1 billion of BTC. At first glance, that looks cheap. But this is an incomplete metric, because debt and preferred shares stand ahead of common shareholders. After the May repurchase, Strategy reported $6.7 billion of convertible debt and $15.5 billion of notional preferred shares, while the USD Reserve was $1.1 billion on June 14.

Calculation of “Net BTC value to common”:

The key takeaway from the table: at the current BTC price, MSTR is not trading at a huge discount to net value for common shareholders. Ignoring the software business, the current market cap implies BTC around $69,300. The software business is not worth zero, but it is small relative to the Bitcoin balance sheet: in Q1 2026, revenue was $124.3 million, while the net loss was $12.54 billion, mainly due to an unrealized loss on digital assets.

Why the situation got worse

The main problem now is not just the drop in BTC, but the fact that Strategy’s whole financing machine has started to creak.

1. BTC is below the average purchase price. Strategy’s average purchase price is $75,656, while the current BTC price is $64,150, so the market does not see “a huge balance-sheet profit”, but a large floating loss relative to cost basis.

2. The STRC preferred lost stability. STRC fell below $83 and closed at $88.59. This matters because Strategy’s ability to issue STRC near par was part of the cheap financing mechanism for BTC purchases.

3. The cost of capital has risen. STRC has a dividend rate of 11.50% for June 2026, and when the price is below par, the effective yield becomes even higher. The lower STRC trades, the more expensive it becomes for Strategy to finance new BTC purchases through preferred shares.

4. The company has already sold a small amount of BTC. On June 1, Strategy reported the sale of 32 BTC for $2.5 million, with the proceeds intended to fund preferred-share payments. The size of the sale is tiny relative to 846,842 BTC, but symbolically it breaks the old narrative of “we only buy, we do not sell.”

5. New share sales are putting pressure on shareholders. From June 8 to June 14, the company sold 1,732,553 MSTR shares and raised $209 million, while buying 1,587 BTC for $100 million. The remaining capacity under the MSTR issuance program is $25.75 billion, meaning the company can continue selling new shares, while existing shareholders’ ownership stake in the business gets smaller.

What is positive

There is a positive scenario, but it is almost entirely tied to BTC and the recovery of financing conditions. If BTC moves back above Strategy’s average purchase price and markets again allow the company to issue stock or preferred shares on favorable terms, MSTR can once again become a “BTC flywheel”: issuing securities, buying BTC, increasing BTC per share, rebuilding confidence, and issuing again. The company also reduced debt by repurchasing $1.5 billion of 2029 notes for $1.38 billion, lowering total convertible debt from $8.2 billion to $6.7 billion.

The software business is alive, but it is not the main driver of valuation: Q1 2026 revenue rose to $124.3 million, gross profit was $83.4 million, but the full scale of the financial result is overwhelmed by BTC revaluation.

What is negative

MSTR is the junior layer of the capital structure. Creditors and preferred shareholders stand ahead of common shareholders. Strategy itself warns that buying BTC with debt or preferred shares can increase BTC-per-share and BTC Yield, while also increasing senior claims on assets, which those metrics do not reflect.

Liquidity risk is also real. Strategy directly states that BTC is less liquid than cash, that BTC does not generate cash flow, and that a decline in the BTC price could harm its financial condition and results.

Another risk is accounting volatility. After BTC is accounted for at fair value, changes in the BTC price flow through the income statement. In Q1 2026, the unrealized loss on digital assets was $14.46 billion, which caused the company to report a massive net loss.

How this could affect BTC over the next quarter

For BTC, this does not look like an immediate forced selling scenario. Strategy still holds a huge Bitcoin balance, and the sale of 32 BTC was symbolic in size. But the market will now look at MSTR not as an endless buyer, but as a structure with debt, preferred shares, dividends, and dependence on access to capital.

The main risk for the next quarter is the disappearance of the “Saylor bid”. If STRC stays below par, the cost of capital rises, and MSTR trades weakly, it becomes harder for Strategy to issue securities and buy BTC at the same pace. This does not necessarily create direct selling pressure, but it removes an important source of demand on pullbacks. For the market, that means weaker support during declines and a more nervous reaction to any new BTC sales from Strategy.

The conclusion is that the impact on BTC over the next quarter is likely moderately negative, but not catastrophic. As long as BTC stays below Strategy’s average purchase price of $75.6K, MSTR will amplify volatility and weigh on sentiment. If BTC moves back above $75K-$80K and STRC stabilizes around $100, the risk can fade quickly and Strategy can again become a bullish factor. But until that happens, MSTR is not a source of strength for the BTC market, but an additional layer of risk.

BTC US ETF Flow Monitor

Let’s also look at the ETF market to assess the scale of the corporate segment. US BTC ETF flow remains in a zone of heavy outflows. The 30-day Rolling Flow fell to -87.81K BTC, a new low for the entire period. Over the past 4 weeks, the total outflow was -53.72K BTC, with every week negative. The latest week was less aggressive, but the sign is still red.

Pressure from ETFs has eased compared with the worst weeks, but demand has not recovered yet. For BTC, this means the market is still holding without support from the institutional ETF channel. For the structure to become stronger, we need to see Rolling Flow return above zero and several weeks of sustained inflows.

Decision Terminal

From our internal updates: this week, Decision Terminal was updated to version v1.8. The terminal now includes the Weekly Engine tab and historical data. Through the date dropdown menu, you can now select any past week, for example the week of the previous cycle bottom, and compare the market structure then with the current market situation. I also recommend reading the latest educational post, How Weekly Engine helps identify the Cycle Bottom. It breaks down the Weekly Engine dashboard functionality in detail and shows how to use it to analyze market phases.

🔸

Now to the main part: let’s move on to the weekly breakdown. What is the market showing, which signals have switched on, what new triggers appeared, and what verdict does Weekly Engine give for Bitcoin right now?

The full breakdown is below.

Read more

Weekly Engine answers one simple question:

What should you do this week - buy, buy the dip, hold, or wait?

Most importantly, the engine does not try to guess the exact bottom price. No one can point to a single candle and say, “That is the low.” Weekly Engine helps identify the bottom step by step, through a sequence of signals. First an early sign appears, then confidence builds, then the reversal is confirmed.

In this post, we will look at how this worked in real time. We will take the end of the 2021-2023 bear market - that exact moment when, after the FTX collapse, price fell to $15,500 and then turned higher. Then we will go week by week and see what Weekly Engine was showing.

Why this matters

Catching the bottom manually is almost impossible. The bottom is always scary. The news is bad, price is falling, and everyone around you is saying, “It is going lower.” That is exactly when you need to buy, but it is also when it is psychologically hardest to do it.

Weekly Engine solves that problem. It does not say, “Buy everything right now at peak fear.” It says something else:

It looks like we are in the late phase of a bear market. Start buying carefully, with no more than 60% position size. The bottom is not confirmed yet, but the accumulation window is already open.

So you are not entering the market with one all-in bet, but gradually, under risk control. And when the reversal is finally confirmed, you already have a position. You did not miss the bottom, and you did not put everything into one risky entry point.

How to read the main Weekly Engine card

Every week, Weekly Engine gives you one card - the Weekly Decision Matrix. Let us go through its fields one by one.

STATE - the main label and the color of the card. This is the current regime. For example, LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION or BULL RE-ENTRY. Next to it, you see the phase code, for example BEAR-S6-01, and the number of weeks spent in that phase.

ACTION - what to do. BUY, BUY DIP, or HOLD.

CAP - the maximum position size. 60% means: keep buying, but do not go above 60% of full size. 100% means: you can build a full position.

PLAN - whether the plan changed versus the previous week. CHANGED or UNCHANGED. This is a useful marker: if it says CHANGED, the card deserves extra attention.

CORE (L1) - the base layer. This is the underlying regime: BEAR or BULL. It is the slowest and most important layer.

GOAL - the goal for the week. In practice, this is ACTION phrased in plain language.

PHASE - the detailed name of the phase inside the regime.

AGE - how many weeks the market has already spent in this phase. The longer it lasts, the more mature the setup becomes.

POSTURE - the current risk stance. For example, RE ENTRY, FULL RISK ON, RISK ON DIP, or RISK ON.

RULE - the operating rule in plain language. For example: “Buy the dip. Maximum allocation 60%.”

MARKET READ - a block with four parts:

• NOW - what to do right now

• WHY - why this is the right move

• WHAT CHANGES IT - what needs to happen for the plan to change

• NEXT-WEEK TRIGGERS - the specific triggers for next week

The last two parts are the logic of the engine. They show the conditions under which the system will switch into another regime. This is not a prediction, but a decision map: if A happens - we move into one scenario, if B happens - we move into another.

The sequence: how the engine moved into and through the bottom

Now for the most important part. Let us walk through five stages and see how Weekly Engine led into the bottom and then through it.

October 2, 2022 - the first signal

STATE: LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION · ACTION: BUY DIP · CAP: 60% · PLAN: CHANGED

This is the early signal. For the first time, the engine said: we have entered the late phase of the bear market, and the accumulation window is open. The phase code is BEAR-S6-01, week one. The posture is RE ENTRY, meaning a cautious re-entry.

The rule is simple: buy the dip, but do not go above 60% position size. The base layer is still BEAR, and the bottom is not confirmed. That is why the system deliberately limits risk.

What changes the plan: if the end of the bear market is confirmed, the action becomes BUY at 100%. If the late-bear signal is invalidated, the system goes back to WAIT and zero allocation.

The message here is simple: “It looks like we are close to the bottom. Start buying, but do it carefully and in small pieces. Do not go full size yet.”

November 27, 2022 - maximum readiness

STATE: LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION · ACTION: BUY DIP · CAP: 100% · PLAN: CHANGED

Nine weeks have passed in this phase, BEAR-S6-09. During that time, the market lived through the FTX collapse and dropped to $15,500 - the ultimate low of the cycle. At peak fear, the engine did not panic. It did the opposite and raised the cap from 60% to 100%.

Notice this point carefully: the regime is still called LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION. The bottom is still not officially confirmed. But confidence in the accumulation zone has grown enough for the system to allow a full position.

That is the key lesson. Peak fear is not a reason to run - it is a point of action. This is exactly where Weekly Engine gives its maximum accumulation limit, even before the formal reversal confirmation.

In other words: “It is very painful and very cheap. This is the best buying zone. Buy it in full, even though the regime is still formally bearish.”

December 4, 2022 - the verdict: the reversal is confirmed

STATE: BULL RE-ENTRY · ACTION: BUY · CAP: 100% · PLAN: CHANGED

This is the main switch. The base layer changed from BEAR to BULL. The phase is Bear-end confirmation, code BULL-S7-01, week one. The posture is FULL RISK ON.

The action changed as well: no longer “buy the dip,” but simply BUY. The rule is short: take the position, maximum 100%.

This is the regime change. The bottom was not guessed from one candle - it was confirmed through the structure of signals. By this point, if you had been following the engine, your position had already been built from October through November. The December verdict simply confirmed that the trend had turned.

The meaning is straightforward: “The bear market is officially over. This is now a bull regime. Full entry is allowed.”

December 11, 2022 - the first pullback in the new bull cycle

STATE: BULL DIP ACCUMULATION · ACTION: BUY DIP · CAP: 100% · PLAN: UNCHANGED

After the reversal was confirmed, the market pulled back slightly. The engine read that pullback as a chance to add inside the new bull regime. The phase is Bull dip accumulation, and the posture is RISK ON DIP.

What changes the plan: if the panic selling stops, the action returns to HOLD. So in this case, the pullback is a temporary window to add, not a reason to panic.

Put simply: “Price pulled back, but the market is already in a bull regime. This is not a fresh reversal lower - it is a discount. Buy the dip.”

January 15, 2023 - the final verdict: the market has settled

STATE: BULL · ACTION: HOLD · CAP: 100% · PLAN: UNCHANGED

At this point, the full picture had come together. The regime is simply BULL, phase S1, a normal bull phase, code BULL-S1-01. The posture is RISK ON. The action is HOLD: the position is already built, and now it just needs to be held.

The rule is: hold the position, maximum 100%, and watch for signals of euphoria or panic. No unnecessary movement - just normal bullish conditions.

This is the final outcome of the whole sequence. The bottom-identification process is complete. From the first cautious signal in October, through maximum accumulation during fear in November, and reversal confirmation in December, the system moved into calm position holding in a bull regime.

In the trigger block, the engine is already looking ahead at downside risks: if euphoria rises and profit-taking becomes aggressive - cut allocation to 20%; if the market drops hard and panic returns - get ready to buy again. The bottom is behind us, but the system still keeps fresh scenarios ready in case conditions change.

In other words: “The market has stabilized. We are in a bull regime, the position is built, and now it should be held. The bottom is already behind us.”

The main takeaway

Look at the whole sequence at a glance:

This is the essence of Weekly Engine:

1. The bottom is not identified as a single point, but as a staircase.
First an early signal appears with a small cap, then the cap grows, and only after that comes confirmation. You enter the market gradually, not with one all-in bet.

2. The scariest moment is often the actual signal to act.
After FTX, the engine raised the cap to 100%, even though the regime was still formally bearish. The system moves against the crowd, but it does so under risk control.

3. Confirmation comes later, and that is normal.
The official reversal, BULL RE-ENTRY, came in December, after the November low. By then, the position was already in place. The engine does not try to buy the exact bottom - it helps you buy in the bottom zone, and confirms it later.

4. The cap matters more than the headline.
You do not need to guess whether “this is the bottom or not.” You just need to follow the action, ACTION, and the cap, CAP, every week.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION and BULL RE-ENTRY?
LATE BEAR ACCUMULATION is the regime where the market is close to the bottom, but the reversal is not confirmed yet. The system suggests building a position carefully. BULL RE-ENTRY is the confirmed reversal, where the base layer has switched to BULL and full entry is allowed. The first is preparation, the second is confirmation.

Why was the cap 100% at the bottom in November if the regime was still bearish?
Because the engine separates two things: the attractiveness of the accumulation zone and the formal confirmation of the reversal. At peak fear, the accumulation zone was strong enough for the system to allow a full cap. But the base layer moves more slowly and confirms the reversal only when the signals fully resolve into a new structure.

Why is there a BUY DIP phase inside the bull in December?
To distinguish a healthy pullback from a new reversal lower. After the bull regime is confirmed, the first pullback is a chance to add, not a panic signal. The engine says it directly: buy the dip, do not cut the position.

How often is Weekly Engine updated?
It is a weekly engine. It closes the week and gives a verdict on the completed week. For live reading during the week, the Intraday tab is used.

Questions - in the chat.

Read more

This week saw the largest-ever SpaceX IPO. Against the backdrop of this news, politicians slightly eased the pressure on the market. Overall, even though Global Risk On/Off stayed in the red all week in the terminal, the offering was successful, and the company’s current market capitalization already exceeds Bitcoin’s market capitalization.

For the leading cryptocurrency, the week was a recovery phase after the drop to the $60K level. Over the week, Exchange Netflow came in at -20.9K BTC, which points to ongoing structural pressure from sellers. Even so, the market is trying to recover through Short Liquidations, as the volume of short positions has built up noticeably over the past month.

Thursday's Adler AM #189 issue was fully focused on miners. In it, I compared the current state of the market with the bottoms of past cycles through the lens of three models. Even on the current Bitcoin Puell Multiple chart, you can clearly see the broader pattern that separates full capitulation from the market's current state.

From our internal updates: we are continuing to test the next version of Terminal 1.8. It will include the main Weekly Engine dashboard with signal history, the current main Terminal block will be renamed Intraday, and a basic Help section will be added for general navigation around the terminal.

The Weekly Engine tab will also be updated on Mondays to close the data gap that appears between the publication of the Sunday Weekly Engine report on this Substack and the full terminal update. In essence, the Sunday publication on Substack will serve as an early signal ahead of the full Weekly Engine update, while the extended Trader’s Evidence analysis will be available only on Substack, so you get an edge in decision-making.

Now to the main point: let’s break down what the market showed this week, which signals have already played out, which triggers are still in play, and what verdict the Weekly Engine is giving on Bitcoin right now.

Below is the full breakdown.

Read more

Where is Bitcoin in the cycle right now?

Why this matters

Cycle Radar analyzes on-chain metrics and brings them together into a single map: where we are in the cycle, how well that is confirmed, and what is driving the current phase.

Why this matters: the same -20% drawdown can be a FUD shakeout in a healthy bull market, a real bottom after capitulation, or a distribution break after the peak. MQS and Risk On/Off do not distinguish between these scenarios. Cycle Radar does.

The rule is simple: if Cycle Radar shows FALLING KNIFE or DISTRIBUTION BREAK - do not step into longs, even if MQS shows IN PLAY. Cycle context matters more than the tactical signal.

How to read the screen

Main panel

Cycle Radar - June 10, 2026. At the top of the screen there are eight cards.

Left card - CYCLE REGIME

CYCLE REGIME
FALLING KNIFE
SCORE 2026-06-03 · PRICE 2026-06-10

This is the main verdict. The cycle regime is determined by the combination of all engines. Not by a single indicator, but by the intersection of bottom structure, capitulation, peak risk, stress, and conflict.

All possible regimes:

Below the panel is the line: RADAR FALLING KNIFE · TERMINAL BEAR · RISK RISK OFF · ALIGNED

The terminal’s three systems are aligned: Radar sees a falling knife, Terminal is in a bearish phase, and Risk Off is confirmed. ALIGNED means all three layers point in the same direction. That strengthens the signal.

The cards on the right - key metrics

BTC         MVRV      30D DD     STRESS    BOTTOM SC   TOP SC    CAPITULATION   CYCLE POS
$61,732     1.24      19.8%      87        68          16        92             24

Let’s break down each one:

BTC $61,732 - the current price.

MVRV 1.24 - the ratio of market value to realized value. A reading of 1.24 means the market is only 24% above aggregate cost basis. Historically, this is a deep value zone, but by itself it is not a bottom signal.

30D DD 19.8% - the drawdown from the 30-day high. Nearly -20% - already meaningful pressure.

STRESS 87 - a stress score of 87 out of 100. That is a high level. Fear & Greed, drawdown, trend stress, ETF outflows, and the Coinbase discount all come together into one picture: the market is under pressure. When stress moves above 55, the fear interpretation is activated - the system begins to distinguish the nature of that fear.

BOTTOM SC 68 - the bottom structure score. 68 out of 100 is a strong zone. The market is cheap on valuation, LTH are accumulating supply, and ETF demand has not disappeared completely. But this is a stock metric: it says the bottom structure is forming, not that the bottom has already been reached.

TOP SC 16 - the peak risk score. 16 out of 100 is close to zero. Distribution, froth, and cycle timing exhaustion are not dominant right now. The market is far from the peak zone.

CAPITULATION 92 - a capitulation score of 92 out of 100. Extremely high. STH are realizing losses, and underwater supply has risen sharply. This is an active surrender flow.

CYCLE POS 24 - cycle position from 0 to 100, where 0 is the bottom and 100 is the peak. A reading of 24 suggests the cycle is closer to the bottom zone. But this gauge cannot be read in isolation. Next to it are edge and conflict scores, which determine whether this number can be trusted.

Stance block

STANCE        stress without confirmed bottom
WATCHING      whether valuation and structure reset enough for a bottom confirmation

These are the two lines that translate all the scores into one decision:

• STANCE - the current diagnosis: stress is present, but the bottom is not confirmed.

• WATCHING - what the system is watching next: whether valuation and structure have reset enough to confirm a bottom.

At the bottom: 6d in state · typ ~2d - the system has been in the current regime for 6 days, while the typical duration of this state is around 2 days. A prolonged regime is additional context.

Regime Timeline

A full-screen chart: Bitcoin with color-coded cycle regimes across the full history.

Each vertical bar is one day, colored by the current regime:

What this says today:

The current moment, marked as NOW, is colored purple - FALLING KNIFE. The chart shows that purple zones have historically aligned with periods of continued decline. The median 60-day forward return from FALLING KNIFE is -8.25%, and the positive rate is only 39.82%. This is not a zone where you should rush to buy.

In the legend, each regime is shown with its historical positive rate - the share of days with a positive 60-day forward return. BOTTOM: 67.86%. ACCUMULATION: 64.52%. FALLING KNIFE: 39.82%. This is historical context, not a forecast.

By clicking the legend badges, you can disable individual regimes and highlight only the zones you want to study on the chart.

Historical Returns + AI Analysis

The lower block consists of two panels.

Left table - HISTORICAL 60D RETURNS · AFTER STATE · FULL HISTORY

This table shows: if the system classified a day as a given regime, what historically happened to price over the following 60 days.

How to read vs HODL: MID CYCLE is the baseline. All other regimes are compared against it. For example, FALLING KNIFE: -27.0 vs HODL means that entering in this regime historically produced a result 27 points worse than simply holding. BOTTOM: +1.1 means a small edge, but with a higher positive rate.

Important: this is descriptive statistics, not a forecast. The forward return columns show historical context, not the probability of repetition.

Right panel - AI ANALYSIS

Cycle Radar is in FALLING_KNIFE: stress without confirmed bottom. Bottom score 
is 67.7, top risk is 16.1, and stress is 86.6. That score mix points to a 
cycle-context read driven by current stress and structure, rather than a fully 
resolved transition. Scores are as of 2026-06-03, while price is updated through 
2026-06-10. Watch whether valuation and structure reset enough for a bottom 
confirmation. A stronger read would require the score mix to improve, while 
deterioration would come from weaker structure or heavier stress. This is a 
cycle-state read, not a price forecast or trade signal.

AI Analysis describes the current phase. It does not invent metrics and does not add outside context. Inside it are three blocks:

1. The verdict with the numbers - the regime, the key scores, and what is driving them.

2. What to watch next - the specific conditions for improvement or deterioration.

3. Disclaimer - this is a cycle-state read, not a forecast or a trade signal.

Five engines under the hood

Cycle Radar is not a single oscillator in the style of “0 = bottom, 100 = peak”. It is five independent engines, and each one answers its own question.

Bottom Structure (BOTTOM SC) Is the market cheap, is supply being absorbed, and has modern demand held up? It is built from four blocks: valuation stock (a basket of on-chain valuation and profitability ratios), absorption stock (long-term holder supply trends and short-term holder cleanup), demand floor (institutional flow and stablecoin liquidity trends), and trend mean reversion. A high bottom score is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for the BOTTOM regime.

Capitulation (CAPITULATION) Are participants surrendering right now? This is a pure flow signal: short-term and market-wide spending profitability, the rate of change in underwater supply, coin dormancy, and realised-loss momentum. If bottom structure says “cheap”, then capitulation says “it hurts, and participants are realizing losses”. One without the other is not enough.

Peak Risk (TOP SC) Are there signs of a peak zone or distribution? This includes valuation stretch, cycle timing, long-term holder distribution behaviour, speculative froth, and demand exhaustion on the institutional side. Peak Risk does not trigger just because price is high - it takes a full combination of overheating signals.

Stress How intense is the pressure on the market right now? Sentiment extremes, multi-timeframe drawdown depth, trend stress, institutional outflow pressure, and exchange pricing dislocations. When stress crosses its activation threshold, the fear interpretation gate is engaged. Below that threshold, the system does not try to classify the nature of fear, because fear is not yet present as a signal.

Conflict Are the signals aligned, or are they contradicting each other? There are three types of conflict: transition conflict (stress + top-process + no capitulation), flow conflict (stress + capitulation + top-process still alive), and structural overlap (bottom-process and top-process at the same time). High conflict means a simple label is dangerous - the system falls into TRANSITION HIGH CONFLICT.

When stress is active, Cycle Radar breaks the current fear into three components:

These three scores are not mutually exclusive and are not probabilities. They are activated confluence scores - they are active only when stress is above the threshold. In a calm market, all three are zero.

How to use it together with the terminal

Cycle Radar is the strategic layer. You should look at it before making tactical decisions.

Current situation (June 10, 2026): Cycle Radar shows FALLING KNIFE. Terminal - BEAR. Risk - RISK OFF. All three layers are aligned. Stress is 87, capitulation is 92, bottom structure is 68, while top risk is only 16. This means: the pain is real, capitulation is underway, and the bottom structure is forming - but there is still no confirmation. The system is watching whether the reset is sufficient for a transition from FALLING KNIFE to BOTTOM.

Frequently asked questions

How is FALLING KNIFE different from BOTTOM?
FALLING KNIFE is stress + an unconfirmed bottom. BOTTOM is stress + capitulation + a confirmed bottom structure. The difference is that in FALLING KNIFE, capitulation may not have reached its peak yet, and the bottom structure may not yet be strong enough. A transition from FALLING KNIFE to BOTTOM means the worst is over.

Why is bottom structure 68, capitulation 92, and the regime is still FALLING KNIFE?
Because the state machine does not check one score, but a combination of thresholds. To transition into BOTTOM, several conditions must line up at once: real_bottom_score must be above the threshold, bottom_score and capitulation_score must be high enough, and top_process must not block the regime. A bottom structure reading of 68 is strong, but the system still does not consider the full combination sufficient.

What is CYCLE POS 24?
It is a visual map from 0 to 100, where 0 is the bottom and 100 is the peak. A reading of 24 means the market is closer to the bottom zone. But this gauge cannot be read literally without edge and conflict scores. If edge is low, the position is unreliable. If conflict is high, the position may be misleading. Only with DIRECTIONAL quality can this number be used as a guide.

Why is the positive rate for BOTTOM only 67.86%, not 90%+?
Because this is real statistics, not curve-fitting. 67.86% of the days classified as BOTTOM produced a positive 60-day return. The remaining 32% were cases where the bottom turned out to be intermediate, or where the model triggered too early. Cycle Radar shows this honestly instead of drawing the illusion of 100% accuracy.

How often does it update?
The scores are recalculated every 4 hours together with the rest of the terminal. Price updates more frequently.

Questions - in the chat.

Axel

Read more

This week was controlled by the bears. Bitcoin price dropped toward $60K and fully erased the April rally to $80K.

The market once again highlighted the main problem for investors: how to react to FUD, whether the market has really found a bottom, whether it is worth buying the dip, or whether this is just another false rally?

Until now, these questions had remained open. That is exactly why in April we began developing the next version of Terminal. It includes a new dashboard - Cycle Radar.

Inside, you will see the full history of Bitcoin divided into 6 market phases: BOTTOM, ACCUMULATION, FUD SHAKEOUT, FALLING KNIFE, EUPHORIA BUILDING, and EUPHORIA PEAK RISK.

For convenience, each phase can be turned off separately to get a more detailed visual report on the chart. Each phase is formed on the basis of on-chain and market data, without a rigid link to halving cycles.

In essence, Cycle Radar is market navigation that helps you understand what stage Bitcoin is currently in. And it is important to stress the key point here: Cycle Radar does not define the global market regime - BEAR or BULL. For that, we have Weekly Engine and more advanced analytics. Cycle Radar works differently: it is an independent navigation layer inside the cycle that helps you see the current market phase through on-chain and market structure data. A detailed HELP guide for the dashboard will be released this Wednesday in the Adler Education section. I hope this dashboard becomes an indispensable assistant for you.

Now to the main point.

Let’s break down what really happened in the market this week: which patterns are already visible in the data, which triggers remain active, and what verdict Weekly Engine shows for Bitcoin right now.

Because after the drop toward $60K, the main question worrying all investors is whether this is the bottom or whether the market is still inside a falling knife.

The answer is below.

Read more

Series: Decision Architecture for Bitcoin
Part: 5 of 9

Series roadmap:

1. Why most traders read signals incorrectly

2. Which metrics matter first

3. How to read conflicting signals

4. When macro breaks a clean on-chain picture

5. Where the real holder pain is ← you are here

6. How to read flow signals without myths

7. How derivatives distort the spot market

8. How to compress 20 signals into one verdict

9. Why even good signals can lose money

What you will get after this lesson:

• You will understand why “holder pain” is not about the price level, but about where price sits relative to the cost basis of a specific cohort

• You will learn to distinguish between two types of pressure: capitulation - forced selling at a loss, and distribution - selling in profit

• You will get the Holder Pressure Map - the reading order for cost basis layers: STH-RP, Aggregate RP, LTH-RP

• You will see how the same “drop” can be read in opposite ways depending on who the marginal seller is

• You will read the pressure map on current June 2026 data

DECISION QUESTION

Price is below the cost basis of one cohort, but above the cost basis of another. Whose pain is actually driving the next move - and does “pain” mean a bottom is forming or that the decline continues?

In the previous issue, we broke down when macro has the right to temporarily put the on-chain picture on pause. Macro set the ceiling. The on-chain layer showed whether the market was structurally alive. But “structurally alive” is an average across the whole market. Inside that average, some holders are sitting on 3x profit, while others are deeply underwater.

Price is one number. The market is a set of cohorts with different cost bases. Most analysts see a drawdown and automatically read it as a bearish signal. But a drawdown for a holder who bought the highs and a drawdown for a holder sitting on five years of profit are two different markets with opposite consequences.

This issue is about how to read pressure not by price, but by who is sitting how far from their cost basis.

TL;DR

Holder pain is not a low price. It is price below that holder’s cost basis. Different cohorts have different bases, which means the same market can hurt short-term holders while leaving long-term holders comfortably in profit.

There are two fundamentally different types of pressure. Capitulation is loud, visible in price, and in a mature structure more often signals exhaustion, not continuation. Distribution is quiet, not visible in a rising price, and it is what forms the real tops.

The key skill is to identify the marginal seller before reading a drawdown as a bearish signal.

Key points:

• Price is one number, the market is a set of cohorts with different cost bases

• Pain is price below a cohort’s realized price, not a low price by itself

• STH underwater while the LTH base is intact is tactical pressure that usually exhausts

• LTH distribution in profit is structural pressure and the real top mechanism

• Full alignment, when even LTH go underwater, is rare and marks the historical bottom zone

1. Why the Mistake Happens

1.1 The Typical Mistake

An analyst sees a 15-20% drawdown, opens SOPR, sees a value below 1, looks at a rising “percent supply in loss”, and delivers the verdict: “the market is breaking.”

He is looking at the aggregate and not asking the only question that matters: relative to whose cost basis is this pain appearing?

1.2 Why the Mistake Seems Logical

A drawdown is emotionally read as a threat. Aggregate metrics - general MVRV, general SOPR - average all cohorts into one number. That number hides the main thing: pain can be fully localized in one holder layer.

This creates categorical confusion. Pain depth - how far a cohort is underwater - gets mixed with pain breadth - how many coins are in loss. Many addresses in a small loss and a few addresses in a catastrophic loss can produce similar aggregate numbers, but these are completely different markets.

1.3 How This Breaks the Decision Process

Without separating cohorts, the analyst systematically makes two mirrored mistakes.

He exits during short-term holder capitulation - near the bottom, when pain is loudest. And he holds through quiet long-term holder distribution - near the top, when no pain is visible at all.

He sells pain and buys euphoria. Both mistakes come from one source: reading price instead of reading cost basis.

2. The Holder Pressure Map

Read more

This week, an almost detective story unfolded around Strategy: 411.5 BTC worth about $30M was sent from the company’s wallets to Coinbase Prime and then returned. The operation itself deserves attention, but it no longer seems to shock the industry as much as the recent SEC notice about the potential sale of Bitcoin by Michael Saylor’s company.

Official Strategy documents still do not explain this operation. On the SEC Filings and Documents page after May 29, Form 144 and DEFA 14A are visible, but there is no separate 8-K explaining the BTC transfer. So the question of why the BTC was sent to Coinbase Prime and then returned remains open for now.

US BTC ETFs have posted net outflows for a third straight week, pointing to weakening institutional demand. The 30-day rolling ETF flow has moved into negative territory and stood at -18.96K BTC as of May 29, while on the four-week chart the largest pressure once again comes from IBIT: cumulative outflows reached -13.01K BTC. At the same time, there is no fresh inflow leader anymore, and the only notable positive leader over the past 4 weeks remains MSBT with +795 BTC, which is far too little to offset the large capital withdrawals from the biggest funds.

Following Decision Architecture for Bitcoin | Part 4, where I break down in detail the Macro Framework built on DXY, 10Y US Treasury Yield and VIX, this week also saw the release of SQL of the Week with a model based on this framework. The model answers one key question: when does macro have the right to put on-chain on pause?

A тревожный signal is forming on the Bitcoin Realized Price chart: Cost Basis is converging with its annual average. Once the crossover is confirmed, the market will get a capitulation setup - a scenario in which the key level becomes Realized Price = $54K.

We do not know when the market will reach this phase. But Weekly Engine already shows where the market has broken, where it is still holding, and whether the early warning system has triggered for a new entry point. Let’s break these questions down.

Read more

Bitcoin vs Macro Risk Score - a model that translates three key macro variables (DXY, 10Y US Treasury Yield, VIX) into a single numerical score from 0 to 100 and determines when the macro environment takes priority over on-chain structure.

On-chain metrics describe Bitcoin’s internal state: who’s holding, who’s selling, how far price has detached from cost basis. But on-chain doesn’t see what’s happening outside: a Fed pivot, carry trade unwinding, a dollar liquidity shock. All of this can temporarily suppress even a perfect on-chain setup.

The core idea: on-chain tells you where Bitcoin is structurally. Macro tells you whether that structure can express itself right now.

The model doesn’t replace on-chain. It solves one specific task: determine whether a macro override is active - a state where the external liquidity environment temporarily suppresses the market’s internal structure. We covered this in detail in the latest issue of Decision Architecture for Bitcoin, and today, based on that lesson, we’ll break down the ready-made Macro Risk Score model.

Read more

In the middle of the week, Adler AM issue #173 touched on one of the key themes of the current market.

Bitcoin lost its structural bullish impulse exactly when the macro backdrop sharply deteriorated. This is an important signal: the market looks like a risk-off regime, where every BTC bounce remains unconfirmed until Impulse returns above zero.

That same week, Decision Architecture for Bitcoin | Part 4 was also published, where I break down the Macro Framework in detail, built on DXY, 10Y US Treasury Yield, and VIX.

The main idea of the issue: not every move in the dollar, yields, or volatility breaks the on-chain picture. But when macro truly switches on override mode, even a constructive on-chain setup can temporarily lose strength. This issue is especially relevant right now.

This week, we added a new dashboard for US Spot Bitcoin ETF. In addition to the main data on weekly net flow and cumulative flow, it includes additional charts on 30-day ETF Flow Momentum, demand dynamics over the last 4 weeks and flow distribution by each fund.

The main value of the dashboard is that it shows medium-term demand pressure from ETFs. Current momentum is now $362.8M, while the peak reached $13.21B in December 2024, and the low dropped to -$5.36B in November 2025.

This makes it easy to understand where ETF demand currently stands: in an accumulation phase, a cooling phase, or a structural outflow phase.

And of course, do not forget to check the Coinbase Premium Index - one of the key US Spot Demand Proxy indicators. If ETF flows show how institutional capital enters or exits through funds, Coinbase Premium helps reveal broader demand from the U.S. spot market.

When Premium holds sustainably above zero, it confirms the presence of US demand. When it moves into negative territory, even a BTC price increase becomes less reliable, because there may be no real American buyer behind the move.

Everyone looking at the chart from the past few days is asking the same question: should I buy, or is this a trap? Weekly Engine breaks the market down into seven layers and shows what is actually holding the price up, and what is ready to push it lower.

This week, the picture split in two and new constraints appeared that were not there just seven days ago. Let’s break this down.

Read more

Why a constructive on-chain picture can still become irrelevant - and how to understand when macro has the right to temporarily pause it.

SERIES CONTEXT

Series: Decision Architecture for Bitcoin Part: 4 of 9

Series roadmap:

1. Why most traders read signals incorrectly

2. Which metrics matter first

3. How to read conflicting signals

4. When macro breaks a beautiful on-chain picture ← you are here

5. Where the real pain of holders is located

6. How to read flow signals without myths

7. How derivatives distort the spot market

8. How to compress 20 signals into one verdict

9. Why even good signals can produce losses

What you will get from this lesson:

• You will understand why macro can override a fully constructive on-chain picture - and when it cannot

• You will learn to distinguish three macro override scenarios and respond correctly to each

• You will get a hierarchy rule: when DXY, yields, and VIX take priority over the Structural layer

• You will see how this looked in real data across three market situations

• You will understand the current macro context and what it means for today’s on-chain picture

DECISION QUESTION

All three on-chain layers are aligned. MVRV is constructive. Holders are not selling. Flows look healthy. Then DXY turns higher, yields rise, and Bitcoin falls together with risk assets. Was on-chain analysis wrong - or is something else happening?

In the previous issue, we learned how to resolve conflicts between on-chain layers. Now comes the next level: what to do when the entire on-chain stack is aligned, but macro enters the picture and temporarily suppresses its influence on price.

Most analysts respond in one of two wrong ways. They either completely ignore macro - “only on-chain matters” - or they panic and abandon the structural thesis at the first move higher in DXY. Both are mistakes.

Macro is not a replacement for on-chain analysis. It is the external environment that determines whether structure can express itself in price right now.

TL;DR

A constructive on-chain picture tells you where Bitcoin is structurally in its cycle. It does not tell you whether a macro shock is compressing all risk assets at the same time - regardless of their individual fundamentals. When two or more macro variables move against risk assets at the same time - DXY rises sharply, yields accelerate higher, VIX enters the fear zone - Bitcoin’s correlation with equities usually rises, and on-chain signals temporarily lose near-term priority. The key skill is distinguishing a macro override event from macro noise. Override events are rare, sharp, and driven by changes in the liquidity regime. Noise is everything else.

Key theses:

• On-chain tells you about the structural state. Macro tells you whether that state can express itself right now

• Three macro variables carry real weight: DXY direction, the level and speed of the 10Y yield, and the VIX regime

• When two or more of the three variables move against risk assets at the same time, on-chain temporarily loses near-term priority

• Macro override events can be identified in real time - they have specific signatures

• On-chain structure can survive a macro shock, but the timing of its expression often breaks

1. Why the mistake happens

1.1 The typical mistake

An analyst has a clean setup. MVRV is in a constructive range. NUPL is positive, but nowhere near euphoria. Holders are not distributing. Exchange outflows are steady. Every on-chain layer is saying the same thing: the market is structurally healthy.

Then Bitcoin falls 15% in a week.

The analyst’s reaction: “on-chain analysis does not work.”

That is the wrong conclusion. On-chain analysis did not fail. It correctly described Bitcoin’s structural market condition. What it did not describe - and cannot describe - is whether the Fed is about to signal a policy shift, whether the yen carry trade is unwinding, or whether a dollar liquidity shock is temporarily compressing all risk assets at once.

1.2 Why the mistake seems logical

On-chain metrics measure what Bitcoin holders are actually doing: holding, selling, accumulating, panicking. This is real behavior. It does not become wrong just because macro moved against it.

The mistake is category confusion. On-chain metrics answer one question: what is the internal structural condition of the Bitcoin market? Macro metrics answer a different question: what is the external liquidity and risk environment that determines whether this structure can express itself right now?

When you treat a macro shock as proof that your on-chain thesis was wrong, you are confusing two different questions.

1.3 How this breaks the decision process

An analyst without a clear framework for macro override will do one of two things.

First: completely ignore macro, hold the structural thesis while the market is compressing, take unnecessary drawdown, and eventually capitulate near the bottom - exactly when the macro shock resolves and on-chain regains priority.

Second: abandon the structural thesis on every piece of macro noise, lose the structural position early, and miss the recovery - because the on-chain setup was right the whole time.

Both outcomes destroy returns. The correct response requires a precise understanding of when macro has priority over on-chain - and when it does not.

2. The Macro Override Framework

The three-variable macro stack

Read more

On Friday, in Adler AM 170, I broke down the current market structure in detail and the pressure forming around the $82K zone. Bitcoin approached this level three times and pulled back three times: each time, STH-SOPR rose to the 1.0 mark and rolled over - short-term holders are using every rally to exit, not to hold positions.

This is not a random technical pattern, but a mechanism: resistance at $82K, where the 200D SMA sits, is supported not only technically but also behaviorally. Until STH-SOPR SMA(7) holds above 1.0 for several consecutive days and price delivers a confident daily close above the 200D SMA, every bounce remains a candidate for selling.

US stocks ended Friday’s session lower amid rising concerns around the conflict with Iran: the risk of further energy price growth increases inflationary pressure and raises the probability that rates will stay higher for longer than expected. The S&P 500 lost 1.2%, the Nasdaq fell 1.5%, and the Dow Jones dropped 537 points.

WTI futures gained more than 4%, closing near $106 per barrel. The Strait of Hormuz effectively remains closed, which continues to support concerns over global oil supply.

The yield on 10-year US Treasuries rose toward 4.6%, setting a new yearly high. The geopolitical premium remains priced in: Iran's latest proposal was rejected, and the Trump-Xi summit ended without meaningful agreements. Against this backdrop, the market began pricing a higher risk that the Fed will be forced to keep rates higher for longer than previously expected.

This week, I added the Bitcoin Rainbow Chart, adjusted for volatility. Unlike the classic version, where the width of the bands stays fixed regardless of the cycle, this model adapts the ranges to the actual volatility of each halving era: when the market is calmer, the bands compress; when it is more turbulent, they expand.

This makes the signal more honest: the same price level can mean different regimes in different cycles.

Also this week, the morning brief became available in podcast format on all major streaming platforms - a live discussion around the same metrics: market structure, key levels, and what to watch today. You can subscribe and listen here.

We have dealt with the news - now let’s move to the main point. What verdict did Weekly Engine deliver this week?

The market is facing a key question: is this a confirmed recovery or a strong bounce inside an unfinished bear structure? The answer is not obvious, and one model is not enough here.

In the new issue - a full breakdown of changes across layers L1-L7 versus last week: where the structure really strengthened, what continues to press from above, what new constraints appeared, and what allowed this mini-rally to happen at all.

Seven layers. One conclusion. Let’s break it down. 👇

Read more

NUPL-MVRV Harmonic Composite is an index that combines the two most well-known market cycle indicators into a single number.

NUPL and MVRV separately speak to the same thing: how far the current price has diverged from the real value of the coins on the network. But each has its own weaknesses. NUPL is sensitive to the volume of unrealized profit, MVRV to the ratio of market capitalization to realized capitalization. The harmonic mean combines them so that neither dominates the other.

The main idea: one indicator can be ignored, two synchronous ones cannot. When both simultaneously move into negative territory, it reflects a structural market state that has occurred only four times in 14 years of observations.

Read more

In the middle of the week, James Van Straten from CoinDesk wrote to me on X:

You’ve been bearish the whole way up lol.

And here I have to admit it: lately, I really have been too aggressive toward the bullish scenario. So it is worth explaining my position more precisely.

After Bitcoin fell from $125K to $60K, the market has been trying to recover. And if you look at the terminal, the AI periodically reminds you of this. But a recovery is not yet a confirmed new bull cycle. Many on-chain metrics have not yet reached the zones that corresponded to a full market bottom. Let’s dig into the data.

Look at the weekly Bitcoin Supply in Loss chart, especially the quarterly UTXO Supply in Loss 90DMA metric. Am I really the only one seeing this pattern?

Bitcoin LTH Realized Supply shows that long-term holders have not yet reached the accumulation structure that usually appears closer to the end of a bear cycle. We need more time before we see the blue bars.

Have we seen real spot selling pressure in this cycle? Also no. Bitcoin: Sales Pressure confirms that the market has not yet gone through a full phase of spot capitulation. There has not been real stress in the market yet.

I could continue, but the idea is clear. My position remains the same: the current move higher is a recovery after a sharp decline, not a confirmed start of a new bull cycle, which several major KOLs claimed last week.

For me to change my view, I need to see not just price growth, but confirmation from the on-chain structure, sustainable spot demand, and the removal of key supply-side pressure risks. Until then, I remain cautious. Not because I want to be bearish, but because the structure of the Bitcoin market does not yet provide strong enough confirmation of the opposite.

The on-chain data is clear, so let’s look at the broader narrative.

Deloitte’s Financial Well-Being Index fell back to 101 points in March. The reason is rising anxiety about the future and higher inflation expectations.

The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index fell to a record low of 48.2 in early May 2026.

Brent crude futures are holding near $100 per barrel after renewed clashes between the United States and Iran. This is increasing doubts about the durability of the fragile ceasefire and has cooled hopes for a quick peace agreement. For the global economy, oil closer to $70 per barrel would be more comfortable: anything above $100 starts to intensify inflationary pressure and weighs on consumers, transportation, production, and business margins.

Jurrien Timmer (Dir. of Global Macro Fidelity) writes: "All this may be happening when the long bond is coiling inside what looks like a bearish continuation pattern. Real rates are rising, as are inflation expectations via the TIPS market. Remember: nothing good happens above 4.5% (for the 10-year)." The bond market is signaling that rates will stay high longer than the market would like. This creates pressure for stocks, real estate, lending, and the economy as a whole. The rule is very simple: high interest rates put pressure on assets.

Jerome Powell’s term as Fed Chair expires on May 15. From that date, Kevin Warsh could take over as Fed Chair if his nomination is approved by the full Senate. The Senate Banking Committee has already approved his nomination in a party-line vote: 13 Republicans in favor, 11 Democrats against. Formally, Warsh has not been confirmed yet, but the process is moving forward, and May 15 remains the key date for a change in Fed leadership.

But the main question is not Warsh’s candidacy itself, but the fact that the market is no longer pricing in a scenario of quick rate cuts. According to Bloomberg, the swaps market now sees a probability above 50% that the Fed’s next meaningful move could be a rate hike, not a cut. In other words, traders are not hedging quick cuts, but the risk that the new Fed will be forced to keep rates high or even raise them. This is a strong shift from the March consensus among economists, where a Bloomberg survey still expected two rate cuts in 2026 of roughly 50 bps, with the first cut in June.

CME FedWatch confirms the cautious picture: for the next meeting on June 17, 2026, the market is almost fully pricing in no change in rates, rather than a cut.

The takeaway is simple: even if Warsh is politically perceived as a more dovish candidate, the rates market is saying something else right now. With oil at $100, rising inflation expectations, and the 10-year Treasury yield above 4.5%, it will be difficult for the Fed to quickly move toward easing.

I hope I have clarified my market position.

Let’s move on to product news. This week there was another terminal update, thank you for sending feedback, but the main news is elsewhere.

We are finishing development of the ASK AI widget - an intelligent assistant trained on a layer of on-chain and market data. Next week, we plan to launch it on my personal website and begin the process of further training it on your real queries.

After this stage is complete, the Pro version of ASK AI will appear in the terminal without the limitations that will apply to the free version. The assistant will get access to my research, Weekly Engine data, all terminal data, and AI conclusions.

But most importantly - the market-cycle limitation that currently exists in Weekly Engine will be removed.
This means ASK AI will become an independent analytical expert built on top of all the data layers we collect and analyze.

I am really looking forward to this launch myself, because I am extremely interested to see how a modern LLM model will interpret the market when it has access not to noise, but to the right data.

Nevertheless, the main weekly verdict on the market still comes from Weekly Engine. Only a comprehensive weekly analysis of the entire market can produce a clear conclusion. And this is the main question right now: is this already a confirmed market recovery - or just a strong rebound inside an unfinished bearish structure?

In the new issue, we break down what changed across layers L1-L7 compared with last week: where the market really became stronger, what continues to weigh on the structure, where new constraints appeared, and which factors supported this week’s mini-rally.

Read more

Why a conflict between layers is almost never a real conflict - and how to make a decision when the layers say different things.

SERIES CONTEXT

Series: Decision Architecture for Bitcoin Part: 3 of 9

Series roadmap:

1. Why most traders misread signals

2. Which metrics matter first

3. How to read conflicting signals <- you are here

4. When macro breaks a clean on-chain picture

5. Where the real pain of holders is

6. How to read flow signals without the myths

7. How derivatives distort the spot market

8. How to compress 20 signals into one verdict

9. Why even good signals can produce losses

What you will get from this lesson:

• Understand why a conflict between layers is most often a normal market condition

• Learn to distinguish three types of conflict and work with each of them

• Get the priority rule: which layer “weighs” more and in what context

• See how this conflict looked on real data across three market situations

DECISION QUESTION

Structural says one thing, Trigger says another. Is this an analysis error - or a normal market condition? And how do you make a decision when the layers are not aligned?

In the last issue we broke down the hierarchy within each layer. Now the next question: what to do when the layers diverge from each other?

Most analysts at this point either panic or choose the signal that confirms their already-formed opinion. Both options are a mistake.

A conflict between layers is not a system defect. It is information. The question is how to read it correctly.

Live version of the framework: https://axeladlerjr.com/charts/bitcoin-analysis-framework/

TL;DR

When Structural and Trigger diverge - this almost never means that one of them is “wrong”. It means the market is in a transitional phase. The Structural Layer sets the strategic context, which is not overridden by tactical noise. The Trigger Layer only tells you whether the move is being confirmed right now. A conflict between them is a signal to observe, not to act immediately.

Key points:

• A conflict between layers is information about a transitional phase, not an analysis error

• The Structural Layer takes priority over Trigger on the question of strategic position

• Three types of conflict require three different responses

• Conflict is a signal to observe, not to act immediately

• Full alignment across all three layers is rare. Divergence is the norm

1. Why conflict occurs

1.1 The typical mistake

An analyst sees the following picture:

• MVRV = 1.50, NUPL = 0.33 -> Structural says: market is in a neutral zone, not overheated

• SOPR 7d slightly above 1.0 -> Tactical says: pressure holds, but no panic

• Funding Rate negative -> Trigger says: market is cautious, longs are not paying

The conclusion of most: “signals are contradictory, analysis does not work.”

In reality there is no contradiction here. Each layer answers its own question - and all three answers can be correct simultaneously.

1.2 Why conflict seems like a problem

Because we want one answer. Bullish or bearish. Buy or sell.

But the market is not built that way. It can be simultaneously structurally alive, tactically pressured, and trigger-unconfirmed. This is not a contradiction - this is a description of a transitional phase.

1.3 How conflict breaks the decision process

An analyst without a framework reacts to the most recent signal. Funding went negative - “bear market”. SOPR came back above 1.0 - “bull market”. The position changes every few days chasing fast signals, ignoring the slow structural context.

This is the main cost of conflict without rules for resolving it.

2. Three types of conflict

Read more

This week the market was filled with loud claims that Bitcoin’s bottom is already in and growth lies ahead. Against this backdrop, the large joint report by James Check and Unchained is particularly telling. The authors do not claim that the market has definitively bottomed, but they allow that after the capitulation to $60K, Bitcoin entered a base formation phase, and the main downside momentum may already be behind us.

At the same time, their conclusion is framed not as a confirmed fact but as a probabilistic scenario. The authors openly acknowledge they may be wrong, emphasize that a sustainable base does not have to form quickly, and allow for months (6-12) of heavy sideways consolidation, as well as one more leg down. Moreover, the thesis of the report is largely built on the premise that True Market Mean = $78K has already become a more important cycle boundary than the classical Realized Price = $54K. They view the $80K-$85K zone as key resistance and the dividing line between the current bear market and the next bull cycle, and the $52K-$54K area as the likely lower boundary if the market still receives one final capitulation sell-off.

Following these statements, I updated the classic RP model and introduced Bitcoin Adjusted Realized Price Bands (Alive Coins) - a new version of Realized Price adjusted for 4-year cycles and lost coins, including Satoshi Nakamoto’s coins. The result is a new, more precise range where Realized Price Alive = $59K, and the adjusted lower boundary of the range sits around $47K.

After my post on X, interesting comments appeared, and I would like to discuss one of them. The main thesis was this: if in this cycle the price did not reach the upper boundary of the Realized Price Band at $189K, then the bottom should not fall to the lower boundary of the range either. In other words, a price drop below RP Alive - which essentially reflects full market capitulation and a deep bear phase, which is what the adjusted model Bitcoin MVRV Regime actually shows - is a big question mark.

Responding to this thesis, I see the situation differently. In the 2020-2021 cycle, the market went through a parabolic rally that was then interrupted by a black swan - the mining ban in China. The main spot selling pressure fell on the cycle peak. In the last bull cycle we saw three tops, and in each of them LTHs began actively selling. Therefore I see no reason why the price cannot go below Realized Price Alive = $59K to form a proper bottom. The problem with this argument is that it assumes symmetry between the top and the bottom. But the market does not work that way. Especially given that, as I have written many times and will repeat again, real demand is only formed on long-term prospects and on the fact that real spot demand for coins appears.

Another important point - the futures market, where bears currently dominate. If you strip away all the technical nuances around Funding Rate and explain it in simple terms, the picture looks like this: traders do not believe in Bitcoin’s growth and therefore keep shorting the market. The chart clearly shows that one of the conditions for sustained price growth remains bull dominance, and that is not present in the market right now.

Overall I see the picture differently: ahead, there are likely still up to 6 months of consolidation with a test of the lower RP Alive boundaries, where the market needs to show real spot demand. As for the current recovery after the move to $60K in February - the very next day I wrote on X that the market would need time to recover. That is essentially what has been happening ever since.

This week we also updated the Terminal to version 1.6.1. The main focus was on adjusting the LLM data interpretation so that the AI more accurately reflects the real market picture.

I am genuinely glad we have two unique products - Weekly Engine and Terminal. The reason is simple: I do not believe in accurate and consistently error-free interpretation of data by a human. There are a million reasons why an analyst might distort data in their favor or simply make a mistake. A machine is not perfect either, but it is far less prone to such distortions. That is why for me the final verdict of the Weekly Engine is practically more valuable and precise than the opinion of any individual analyst.

That is exactly why I have questions about James Check’s 34-page report, which contains no concrete conclusion about what an investor should do: buy, sell, or hold. What is the point of such a report if the analyst cannot give a clear recommendation on the asset? If in an investment bank a CIO called in an analyst and asked for a report on an asset, and instead of concrete actions they brought a set of abstract scenarios and probabilities, they simply would not be taken seriously. The essence of the financial analyst profession is not to list options, but to formulate a clear position on an asset and guide the investor on what to do. That is exactly what Weekly Engine does: it delivers a recommendation based on all the data layers the machine analyzes.

Let us now move to the Weekly Engine and break down what exactly the data shows this week and how the machine interprets these signals.

Read more