Bitcoin failed to participate in a broader rally that saw major equity indices and gold reach record levels following the Federal Reserve’s decision to maintain interest rates steady on July 29. The cryptocurrency remained slightly below levels recorded one week prior and trailed the S&P 500 by more than four percentage points. Oil similarly moved lower as geopolitical tensions eased, but Bitcoin’s stagnation persisted despite significant market activity elsewhere.
A major security incident affecting approximately 500 self-custodied wallets resulted in the theft of around 594 BTC, valued near $38 million. The breach prompted holders to move approximately 119,000 BTC that had been dormant for at least one year—nearly 200 times the stolen amount. However, only roughly one-tenth of that reactivated supply reportedly reached exchanges. New address creation normalized within three days, and wallet holdings younger than one month increased by approximately 40%, suggesting most affected users transferred funds to new storage rather than preparing to liquidate positions. Bitcoin’s price showed minimal reaction to this activity.
Data from Glassnode characterized the market as “priced for nothing and reacting to everything,” with volatility near historic lows despite sharp short-term sentiment swings on modest price movements. The Seller Exhaustion Constant, which combines supply profitability with realized volatility, reached its lowest point in the current cycle, though it remained roughly one-third above levels seen at previous bear-market bottoms.
Institutional demand indicators showed weakness, with US spot Bitcoin ETFs experiencing outflows of approximately 65,800 BTC in June—their worst monthly performance on record. Corporate treasury purchases continued but proved insufficient to counterbalance ETF withdrawals. Most striking was the options market, where upside implied volatility fell to an all-time low near 23%, indicating traders had largely ceased purchasing calls that would profit from a Bitcoin rally. Downside volatility remained relatively ordinary, suggesting the bearish skew stemmed from diminished bullish appetite rather than increased demand for downside protection. While historical patterns suggested comparable compressions typically resolved upward, analysts noted that previous breakouts had occurred with stronger demand conditions, whereas current weakness persisted amid negative ETF flows and an incomplete bottoming process.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI