Bitcoin's four-year cycles seem to be an *inevitable* byproduct of 1. Mechanical changes in the bitcoin market, 2. Human psychology. Every bull run happens because people anticipate that if demand remains constant and supply halves, then price will go up. People that act earlier on this are more likely to have conviction in bitcoin and patience in waiting for it to succeed. People that act later on this are more likely to have no conviction in bitcoin and no patience. As the price climbs higher, you get more and more uncommitted people, with each entrant even less committed than the last, so when the price stalls, the least committed pull the cord immediately, and they cause a cascading failure through each level of “commitedness” as they all try to minimise their losses. The drawdowns are so brutal, that even many of the committed start liquidating, some in fear and some opportunistically to buy back lower. It’s all completely inevitable, baked into the psychology of buying a fast appreciating new monetary asset. The massive drawdowns are not going to end until the massive price runups end. Even during the supercycle—the death of fiat, the moment of hyperbitcoinisation—there will be a period where the purchasing power of bitcoin vastly exceeds its fair value, and people are selling assets way below their value just to get their hands on bitcoin, because no one wants USD or other fiat any more. Eventually bitcoin’s purchasing power will settle and they’ll regret the decision, but it’s inevitable that some people will do this. Bitcoin's four-year cycles are here to stay while, 1. bitcoin is getting globally monetised and goes through aggressive price discovery, and 2. the halvening supply shocks are still relevant (the halvenings’ relevance to stock-to-flow diminish over time, eventually their effects on the “flow” will be so minimal that there’s no reason that any cycles would revolve around them). Institutions are not immune to the market psychology that accompanies bitcoin's market cycles—if anything, thanks to their rule by committee and moral hazard ("other people's money") they'll probably be even worse than retail. They'll increasingly pile in and eventually panic along with the rest of the market. Perhaps even worse.