Bitcoin’s Profitability Metric Signals Potential Market Reset Zone
Imagine nearly 61% of all Bitcoin (BTC) is currently in profit. That’s the striking figure from on-chain data this Thursday, with the total supply in profit sitting at 60.6%. This level places the market squarely within a historical range often observed during major cycle resets. To put this in perspective, this metric had recently dropped to 50.8% on February 5th—its lowest point since January 2023—meaning a huge swath of holders were essentially at breakeven or underwater. History suggests such compression in profitability can precede significant upward price movements.
Lessons from Past Accumulation Phases
Consider the parallels. Back in January 2023, when Bitcoin traded around $16,682 and the supply in profit was nearly identical at 51%, it set the stage for a monumental rally that eventually propelled the price toward $126,000 by 2025—a gain of approximately 655%. A similar, even more dramatic setup unfolded in March 2020. As COVID-19 fears gripped markets, the supply in profit fell below 50% with BTC at roughly $6,500. That moment of widespread holder pain was followed by the bull run that peaked near $69,000 in 2021.
Over the last five years, the 50-60% profitability band has repeatedly marked a critical “accumulation zone.” During these periods, a large portion of the network’s holders sits near their cost basis. This dynamic compresses unrealized gains across the board and, crucially, reduces the financial incentive for holders to sell during price weakness. The metric itself doesn’t predict an exact bottom; rather, it highlights a zone where long-term accumulation has been intense and selling pressure from profit-taking has eased.
Why This Cycle Looks Different: The Institutional Shift
To understand the current landscape, we must look beyond the aggregate percentage. In past bear markets (2015, 2018, 2022), true capitulation bottoms were signaled when the Long-Term Holder Net Unrealized Profit/Loss (LTH-NUPL) turned deeply negative, indicating that even the most steadfast investors were holding at a loss. Today, the LTH-NUPL is near 0.40, meaning long-term holders as a group are still comfortably in profit.
This divergence between overall supply profitability and long-term holder health points to a fundamental shift in Bitcoin’s ownership structure. A growing and significant share of the supply—now approximately 15.8% of circulating BTC, or 3.3 million coins—is held by corporate treasuries and spot Bitcoin ETFs. These entities typically operate with a multi-year horizon and exhibit far lower sensitivity to short-term price volatility. As a result, the current compression in network-wide profitability does not translate into the same level of forced, panic selling from long-term holders that fueled deeper crashes in previous cycles. This helps explain why the metric can revisit historical accumulation zones while long-term holder profitability remains elevated.
Exchange Flows and Valuation Models Confirm the Picture
On-chain activity supports this narrative of reduced reactive selling. Analyst Darkfost noted that inflows of Bitcoin from short-term holders to exchanges like Binance plummeted to a new low of 25,000 BTC on March 25th. This is a stark contrast to the roughly 100,000 BTC that flooded into exchanges during the early February sell-off, indicating a significant decline in panic or reactive selling from newer market participants.
For a broader view of market stress and valuation, analyst GugaOnChain points to key models. Metrics such as the Market Value to Realized Value (MVRV) ratio falling below 1, a NUPL dipping under -0.2, and a Puell Multiple near 0.35 have historically coincided with periods of heavy retail pressure and what were ultimately undervalued conditions. While none of these indicators can pinpoint an exact bottom, they collectively highlight zones where historical downside risk has been limited relative to long-term upside potential, offering a clearer view of overall market positioning.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision. While we strive to provide accurate and timely information, Cointelegraph does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information in this article. This article may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Cointelegraph will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from your reliance on this information.
