A new wave of bearish debate around Bitcoin is gaining traction after a prominent macro strategist outlined a scenario that goes far beyond a routine correction.
Instead of discussing near-term volatility or technical pullbacks, the argument reframes Bitcoin’s entire post-pandemic rise as a deviation that may still need to be unwound.
Key Takeaways
A prominent macro strategist argues Bitcoin’s post-2020 rally was driven by excess liquidity rather than lasting fundamentals.
Common support levels may offer little protection if markets move into a deeper normalization phase.
A deflationary macro backdrop could push investors away from risk assets and toward cash and traditional hedges.
That view comes from Mike McGlone, who has increasingly shifted his focus from crypto optimism to macro discipline. In a recent online post, the strategist suggested that commonly cited support levels offer false comfort. From his perspective, prices stabilizing around $50,000 would not signal safety – only progression.
Bitcoin $50,000 in 2026 On the Way to $10,000?
2025 may have marked peak Bitcoin/cryptos. Gold has only three major precious-metal competitors: silver, platinum and palladium. By contrast, Bitcoin was the first crypto in 2009, but now has millions of digital-asset competitors.… pic.twitter.com/3PSQF4zVwU— Mike McGlone (@mikemcglone11) December 28, 2025
A cycle already behind us
McGlone’s core assumption is that Bitcoin’s major growth phase has already concluded. Rather than expecting another leg higher, he sees the market transitioning into a normalization phase after years of extraordinary conditions. The surge that followed 2020, in his view, was less about structural adoption and more about an abundance of liquidity searching for returns.
As those conditions fade, he expects markets to revert toward longer-term averages. That process, he argues, is rarely gentle.
The level McGlone keeps returning to is $10,000, not as a shock value target but as a reference point. That price roughly reflects where Bitcoin traded before stimulus-driven capital flooded risk assets. To him, that era represents a baseline uninflated by emergency policy, leverage expansion, and speculative excess.
If markets are indeed entering a tighter monetary and economic environment, McGlone believes prices could gravitate back toward that historical center of gravity.
Questioning the scarcity narrative
Another pillar of his argument challenges one of Bitcoin’s most enduring narratives. While gold’s scarcity is rooted in physical constraints, McGlone draws a line between that and digital assets. Even if Bitcoin itself has a capped supply, he views the broader crypto universe as endlessly expandable, with new tokens continually competing for the same pool of capital.
In that framework, scarcity becomes diluted. Capital does not concentrate, it disperses.
What makes McGlone’s stance notable is how far it has shifted. During the stimulus era, he was among the most visible institutional voices projecting Bitcoin toward six-figure prices and positioning it as a maturing reserve asset. That thesis unraveled, in his mind, as market correlations changed.
He now points to a widening gap between traditional hedges and crypto. While gold has continued to set new highs, Bitcoin has struggled to keep pace, a divergence he interprets as meaningful rather than temporary.
Deflation as the dominant risk
At the heart of the call is a broader macro expectation. McGlone believes the global economy is drifting toward deflationary pressure, not inflation. In such environments, liquidity becomes scarce, risk tolerance drops, and cash regains appeal.
If that backdrop takes hold, assets that thrived on excess liquidity may face disproportionate downside. For Bitcoin, that would mean a repricing not just of momentum, but of its role in portfolios.
McGlone’s message is not a short-term trading call. It is a challenge to assumptions built during a very specific economic period. If he is right, the next major move in Bitcoin will not be about breaking resistance – but about discovering where “normal” really lies.
