当比特币不再避险?币股同跌揭示全球资金新去向

In the past few years, the relationship between the crypto market and the US stock market has been like a love story full of ups and downs. Sometimes Bitcoin surges independently, seemingly unaffected by macro factors; at other times, it experiences fluctuations alongside the NASDAQ and S&P indexes, sharing in their highs and lows. Now, amidst high inflation, repeated expectations of interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve, and the integration of AI and blockchain technologies into financial markets, the linkage between cryptocurrencies and stocks is once again at a critical juncture. Investors are beginning to rethink whether digital assets serve as a safe haven or merely an extension of high-risk tech stocks. This pattern of simultaneous rise and fall may indicate the arrival of a new cycle—the direction of the market is quietly changing.

At this crossroads: should we continue this linkage, or bring it to an end prematurely?

What determines the direction isn’t the price itself, but whether the transmission efficiency can be restored. Over the past month, there have been several issues related to financial management, financing, and operations.

Let’s look at financial management first. Take SharpLink (SBET) as an example. Over the past month, it has continuously updated its holdings in Ethereum, simultaneously implementing additional issuance measures, and sending signals that it would consider repurchasing shares if their value fell below their net value. By the end of August, SharpLink became the second-largest holder of Ethereum. However, its stock price didn’t strengthen along with ETH. In fact, its stock price declined overall in August, and its total market value fell below the value of its Ethereum holdings. The market cares more about how assets are managed and governed than just how much they are held. Having a large balance now makes it difficult to earn a premium valuation.

Secondly, the phenomenon of financing influencing stock prices is having the opposite effect. The previous practice of using shares to buy tokens and thereby linking market value to token prices is now collapsing. Take ETH Z as an example: although the company announced that it had over $349 million in ETH reserves, its large-scale stock issuance plan led to concerns about dilution, resulting in a sharp drop in its stock price. This confirms that “financing is not a means to boost stock prices, but rather a source of pressure.”

Finally, there’s the issue of operational factors. Mining companies are facing financial pressures, and exchanges are struggling to grow. All these factors are weakening the link between stock prices and token prices. According to Coinbase’s second-quarter financial reports, its transaction revenue was only around $764 million, a decrease of nearly 40% compared to the previous quarter. Overall revenue also decreased from $2.034 billion in the first quarter to $1.497 billion, a decrease of 26.4%. This indicates that while BTC and ETH prices are rising, the performance of exchanges hasn’t improved accordingly, making it difficult for stock prices to rise along with them.

All these factors combined result in a more cyclical situation. Token prices start to show fluctuations more frequently, and their momentum becomes less sharp. Stocks, on the other hand, are more vulnerable—with premiums declining, financing becoming less effective, and operational flexibility failing to keep up. Stocks often “outlast” tokens, leading to a shift from mere phenomena to a consensus.

Repair or disconnection? It depends on three small things.

From this, it can be inferred that even if these companies continue to purchase BTC/ETH, their marginal returns are likely to approach the “net value” more quickly, rather than maintaining a premium above the net value as in the past. This is the core issue at the crossroads: should we fix the mechanisms that drive these connections, or accept a longer-term disconnection?

There’s no need to bet on grand narratives to determine the direction of the market. Instead, we can focus on these three key factors:

1. Look at the discount of mNAV: Can it narrow down within 3–4 weeks, or even return to a premium range?

2. Consider the financing activities: Is there a shift from high-frequency ATM/convertible bonds to more cautious strategies, accompanied by repurchases/lockups, thereby stabilizing the net value per share?

3. Examine operational metrics: Has the fee structure on the blockchain increased, has the cash cost of mining companies decreased, and has the proportion of non-trading revenues such as exchange derivatives/trust accounts increased?

If any two of these indicators meet, then there may be further developments in the market. Otherwise, the “decoupling” will become more pronounced, and cryptocurrencies will face greater penalties during downturns.

Conclusion

In general, this wave of “gradual cooling” isn’t accidental—it’s part of an open-ended stress test. Investors now have two choices: continue to invest in companies whose stories align with their mechanisms, or switch to underlying assets and more transparent investment tools. For the industry, this is essentially a revaluation of models. Are cryptocurrencies truly a bridge to mainstream capital, or are they just another illusion that will fade away during the next market cycle? The crossroads is right before us, and time isn’t infinitely patient.