Key takeaways:

Heavy liquidations played a role in Bitcoin’s return to $95,000.

Bitcoin’s weakening correlation with stocks highlights its growing independence as an asset.

Bullish institutional investor positioning contrasts with retail traders’ caution, supporting a rally above $100,000.

Bitcoin (BTC) gained 11% between April 20 and April 26, demonstrating resilience by holding near its two-month high around $94,000. This relief rally followed signals from the Trump administration about easing import tariffs, as well as strong corporate earnings reports.

Investor confidence in Bitcoin was further boosted by a record $3.1 billion in net inflows to spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) over five days. However, a key BTC derivatives indicator showed signs of bearish momentum, raising questions about whether the $100,000 target is still realistic.

Perpetual Bitcoin futures contracts are favored by retail traders because their prices closely track the spot market. A positive funding rate means that buyers pay to maintain their positions, so a reversal in this rate is typically linked to bearish trends.

Bitcoin perpetual futures annualized funding rate. Source: Laevitas.ch

The sharp negative funding rates recorded on April 26 are highly unusual during bull markets, as they indicate stronger demand from sellers. This metric has been volatile since April 14, but sellers were caught off guard as Bitcoin’s price climbed above $94,000. Since April 21, over $450 million in BTC short positions have been liquidated.

Some of the renewed confidence and Bitcoin’s price strength can be attributed to the S&P 500’s 7.1% weekly gain. However, despite this optimism, US President Donald Trump reportedly said on April 25 that negotiations would depend on China making concessions, causing traders to question the sustainability of recent gains.

Companies are now reporting first-quarter earnings from before the escalation of the trade war, so the factors driving the stock market and Bitcoin are different. In fact, Bitcoin’s price is no longer closely correlated with the S&P 500.

30-day correlation: S&P 500 vs Bitcoin/USD. Source: TradingView / Cointelegraph

Currently, the 30-day correlation between the S&P 500 and Bitcoin stands at 29%, well below the 60% level seen from March to mid-April. While this lower correlation does not mean a complete decoupling, since investor sentiment is still influenced by macroeconomic factors, it does show that Bitcoin is not simply a proxy for technology stocks.

Bitcoin’s status as an independent asset has strengthened

Gold’s inability to maintain its bullish momentum after reaching an all-time high of $3,500 on April 22 was also seen as significant for Bitcoin’s status as an independent asset class. Some traders had questioned the “digital gold” narrative, but the longer BTC remains above $90,000, the more confidence investors may have, potentially paving the way for further gains.

The increased demand for bearish leverage in perpetual BTC futures does not align with the sentiment of professional traders. Monthly Bitcoin futures contracts avoid fluctuating funding rates, so traders know their leverage costs in advance.

Bitcoin 2-month futures annualized premium. Source: Laevitas.ch

On April 26, the two-month Bitcoin futures premium (basis rate) rose to its highest level in seven weeks, indicating greater interest in bullish positions. At 6.5%, this metric remains within the neutral 5% to 10% range, but is moving away from bearish territory.

The disconnect between leverage demand in perpetual futures and monthly BTC contracts is not unusual. Even if retail traders remain cautious, substantial accumulation by institutions could be enough to push Bitcoin’s price above $100,000 in the near future.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Key takeaways:

Norges Bank lost $40 billion in Q1 2025 as US tech stocks fell, exposing the risk of concentrated positions.

The bank’s indirect Bitcoin exposure via stocks reached $356 million, raising sell pressure risk amid a global trade war and recession concerns.

Abu Dhabi’s $437 million spot Bitcoin ETF stake shows sovereign wealth funds see Bitcoin as a hedge.

Norges Bank, Norway’s $1.7 trillion sovereign wealth fund, reported a $40 billion loss in the first quarter of 2025, with most of the decline caused by a drop in the value of US-listed technology companies. Norges Bank also indirectly owned 3,821 BTC through its stock market investments by the end of 2024, presenting a potential sell pressure risk to Bitcoin, especially when considering the socio-political uncertainty and the risk of an economic recession caused by the global trade war.

In such times, could Norges Bank increase its investments in Bitcoin-related companies or even buy spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) as a way to hedge risk?

For now, it seems unlikely that Norway’s investment fund would consider buying a Bitcoin ETF, especially since the fund does not hold any gold. Besides stocks and bonds, Norges Bank invests in real estate, including retail, industrial, renewable energy, and logistics properties worldwide.

Norway sold all of the central bank’s gold by early 2004, when gold was trading below $400. Since then, gold has outperformed the S&P 500 by 280%. Equities now make up 71.4% of the fund’s total investments, so if the global trade war continues, significant losses could occur.

Gold/USD (orange) vs. S&P 500. Source: TradingView / Cointelegraph

Norges Bank investments generated $222 billion in profits in 2024, and its stock market portfolio dropped by only 1.6% in the first quarter of 2025. Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is “mainly index-driven,” according to CEO Nicolai Tangen, specifically following the FTSE Global All Cap Index.

Although this index includes over 7,100 stocks from both developed and emerging markets, it is based on market capitalization, which means 65% of the exposure is to North American companies. But, according to Norges Bank Deputy CEO Trond Grande, there is some flexibility for active investment, and their exposure to US-listed tech stocks has been below the benchmark for the past 18 months.

Some of these holdings, such as Strategy, Mara Holdings, Coinbase, and Riot Platforms, hold large amounts of Bitcoin (BTC) on their balance sheets. As a result, even if not intentional, the sovereign wealth fund had a $356 million indirect exposure to Bitcoin at the end of 2024.

FTSE Global All Cap (purple) vs. FTSE + 10% Bitcoin (green). Source: TradingView / Cointelegraph

Data shows a 5% hypothetical allocation in Bitcoin back in 2018 would have boosted the fund’s equities benchmark performance by 56%.

Buying Bitcoin ETFs seems unlikely, but indirect exposure remains possible

Technically, it seems unlikely that Norges Bank could buy into the spot Bitcoin ETF without changing the fund’s mandate. However, increasing exposure to companies with significant Bitcoin holdings appears possible. Still, there is no sign of such a move, although Nicolai Tangen stated on April 24 that the fund will increase investments in US stocks.

Related: China may shift from US Treasurys toward gold, crypto — BlackRock exec

The fact that Mubadala Investments, one of Abu Dhabi’s sovereign wealth funds, held a $437 million stake in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) helps build a case for such investment. Similarly, the State of Wisconsin Investment Board held $321 million in spot Bitcoin ETFs, showing the growing use of cryptocurrency as a hedge.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Michael Saylor’s Strategy is “synthetically halving Bitcoin” (BTC) by purchasing half or more of the newly minted supply from miners every single month, according to Adam Livingston, a BTC analyst and author of “The Bitcoin Age and The Great Harvest.”

Livingston said miners currently produce around 450 BTC per day or approximately 13,500 BTC per month, but Strategy acquired 379,800 BTC in the last six months. This translates to the firm purchasing roughly 2,087 BTC per day — far in excess of daily miner output. The author added:

“When Bitcoin becomes this scarce, access to Bitcoin will require paying a premium. Lending against Bitcoin will cost more. Borrowing Bitcoin will become a luxury business reserved for nation-states and corporate whales, and Strategy will control the bottleneck.”

“BTC’s global cost of capital will no longer be set by ‘the market.’ It will be set by the gravitational policies of the first Bitcoin superpower: Strategy,” Livingston continued.

The author’s prediction of a Bitcoin supply crunch translates into much higher BTC prices if Strategy can continue its pace of BTC acquisitions while market demand for the supply-capped digital asset grows among institutional and retail investors.

The Bitcoin miner reserve, a metric tracking the total amount of BTC held in miner wallets, continues to decline. Source: CryptoQuant

Related: Michael Saylor hints at Bitcoin purchase as whales stack aggressively

Institutions like Strategy are driving the world toward hyperbitcoinization

Cypherpunk and Blockstream CEO Adam Back predicted that Strategy and other institutions that have adopted a Bitcoin corporate treasury plan will drive the market capitalization of BTC to $200 trillion.

“Strategy and other treasury companies are an arbitrage of the dislocation between the Bitcoin future and today’s fiat world,” Back wrote in an April 26 X post.

Critics of the company warn that the debt-based approach to BTC acquisition could sink Strategy financially if a prolonged BTC bear market takes effect and also warn of greater systemic risks to BTC from such a high concentration of the digital currency held by a single entity.

An overview of Strategy’s Bitcoin investment performance. Source: Michael Saylor

However, Bitcoin advocate and author Saifedean Ammous recently said that Strategy’s concentration of BTC doesn’t threaten the protocol.

Ammous argued that institutions like BlackRock and Strategy holding high concentrations of BTC could not engineer a hard fork increasing Bitcoin’s maximum supply, as it would massively devalue their holdings, which, at the end of the day, belong to shareholders with the power to divest.

Magazine: Bitcoin in Senegal: Why is this African country using BTC?