Beyond the Halving: Bitcoin’s New Industrial Cycle, Ethereum’s 1971 Moment, and the Tokenized Future of Finance
Beyond the Halving: Bitcoin’s New Industrial Cycle, Ethereum’s 1971 Moment, and the Tokenized Future of Finance
Author: Zion Zhao Real Estate | 88844623 | 狮家社小赵
Author's note: Not financial advice, please do your own due diligence!
Tom Lee’s November 2025 Chairman’s Message for BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR) core claim is bold: the familiar “Bitcoin four-year cycle” is breaking down; Ethereum is entering its own “1971 moment”; and tokenization, anchored on Ethereum, is emerging as the financial system’s next major unlock. What all these may mean for Bitcoin, Ethereum and the rise of digital-asset treasuries such as BitMine’s “Alchemy of 5%” strategy?
Throughout, this is analysis, not investment advice. Crypto assets remain highly volatile, policy-sensitive and speculative. Any allocation decision belongs within a diversified, risk-managed portfolio and appropriate legal/tax advice.
Crypto is shifting from simple “four-year halving cycles” to deeper macro and structural drivers. Historically, Bitcoin’s price seemed to follow its quadrennial halving, liquidity waves and retail speculation. Today, those forces still matter, but they no longer fully explain major peaks. Instead, Bitcoin increasingly trades in line with industrial activity and the business cycle, captured by indicators like the copper–gold ratio and the ISM Manufacturing Index. Past Bitcoin tops align more closely with peaks in these macro gauges than with the halving itself, and current readings suggest we are not yet in late-cycle territory.
Ethereum is framed as entering its “1971 moment” — a parallel to the U.S. dollar’s break from gold and evolution into the core fiat anchor of global finance. Post-Merge, Ethereum has become a dominant settlement and collateral layer for DeFi, stablecoins and real-world-asset (RWA) tokenization, with a growing share of ETH staked to secure the network. Scenario analysis based on ETH/BTC ratios highlights Ethereum’s convex upside if it remains the preferred “financial operating system,” though this is balanced by regulatory, technical and competitive risks.
Tokenization is presented as the next major unlock: moving assets like Treasuries, funds or even corporate cash flows onto programmable ledgers. Beyond simple fractionalization, I aim to explore “factorization” — slicing cash flows by time, product or geography. This promises finer risk-sharing but raises complexity and regulatory questions.
Finally, I examined digital-asset treasuries such as BitMine’s “Alchemy of 5%” Ethereum strategy, positioning public companies as leveraged proxies on core networks. These structures can amplify returns through staking and accretive capital-raising, but also magnify volatility and policy risk. Overall, the piece urges investors to move from cycle folklore toward a systems-based view of crypto’s role in macro, market infrastructure and tokenized finance. Without further ado, let us get into the main bulk of the essay!
1. From Halving Folklore to Industrial Cycles: Rethinking Bitcoin’s “Four-Year Rule”
1.1 How the halving story took hold
For most of Bitcoin’s history, the market has been hypnotized by a simple narrative: every four years, the block reward halves, supply growth slows, and a powerful bull market follows. Empirically, that pattern did fit the first decade remarkably well. Academic work documents how the 2012, 2016 and 2020 halvings each coincided with substantial price appreciation in the subsequent 12–18 months. (Eastasouth Institute)
Yet the 2024 halving has behaved very differently. One year on, Bitcoin’s gain—around 40–50%—is the weakest post-halving performance on record and far below the explosive rallies of previous cycles. (MarketWatch) This has prompted a wave of research and institutional commentary arguing that halving-centric models are losing explanatory power as the asset matures and institutional participation deepens. (Fidelity Australia)
Tom Lee leans into that shift. He does not deny that halvings matter; instead, he argues they are no longer the dominant “clock” for Bitcoin’s price. In his framing, the cycle is being re-anchored by industrial activity, the gold–copper relationship, and the business cycle rather than a purely mechanical four-year supply shock.
1.2 Halving, liquidity and speculation: useful, but incomplete
Lee reviews three traditional explanations before introducing his preferred macro lens:
Halving-driven supply shocks.
Economically, halving reduces the flow of new coins, strengthening Bitcoin’s “digital scarcity” narrative. Studies confirm that halving events have historically affected volatility and return profiles, especially when Bitcoin was smaller and more retail-dominated. (Eastasouth Institute)
But as Bitcoin’s market cap, derivatives markets and ETF inflows have grown, the marginal impact of new issuance has faded relative to overall float and institutional flows. (Fidelity Australia)Monetary policy and liquidity.
Bitcoin is often described as “liquidity-sensitive”: periods of low rates, quantitative easing and abundant M2 growth have coincided with strong crypto rallies. (SSRN)
However, peak Bitcoin prices have not consistently lined up with peaks in Fed balance-sheet expansion or money supply. There are lags, feedback loops, and episodes (such as post-ETF approval) where Bitcoin rallies despite tightening expectations. In other words, liquidity clearly matters—but not in a simple four-year rhythm.Retail leverage and margin debt.
In the 2010s, Bitcoin trading was dominated by retail and high-leverage offshore venues. Retail margin cycles, tracked via FINRA margin debt and exchange data, show some correlation with past crypto tops, but they do not line up cleanly with every major Bitcoin peak. (SSRN)
Today, institutional products—U.S. spot ETFs, CME futures, total-return swaps—and even state-level reserves dilute the explanatory power of retail margin dynamics. (Wikipedia)
Taken together, the classic triad—halving + liquidity + retail hype—still helps explain shorter-term swings but no longer fully explains where the big secular peaks occur.
2. Copper, Gold and the Business Cycle: A New Lens on Bitcoin
2.1 The copper–gold ratio as a macro “thermometer”
Lee’s more original contribution is to focus on the copper–gold ratio and the ISM Manufacturing Index as better descriptors of Bitcoin’s long-term peaks:
Copper vs. gold is often treated as a proxy for “industrial risk-on vs. monetary risk-off”:
Copper correlates with global manufacturing demand.
Gold is a monetary safe-haven and store of value.
A rising copper–gold ratio usually signals strong industrial activity and risk appetite; a falling ratio signals caution and growth concerns. (Longterm Trends)
The ISM Manufacturing PMI is a widely followed diffusion index:
Readings above 50 indicate expansion; below 50, contraction. (Corporate Finance Institute)
Historically, peaks in ISM have often preceded or coincided with later-stage bull markets and risk-asset tops.
Recent empirical work finds that the copper–gold ratio contains meaningful information about Treasury yields and broader macro risk sentiment, while ISM remains a robust leading indicator of the U.S. business cycle. (CFA Institute Daily Browse)
Lee’s overlay—Bitcoin peaks vs. copper–gold and ISM peaks—is visually compelling: the major Bitcoin tops line up more closely with high copper–gold ratios and ISM peaks than with the exact timing of halvings or margin-debt highs. While this remains a correlation rather than a proven causal law, it resonates with Bitcoin’s evolving role as a hybrid macro asset: part “digital gold,” part high-beta risk asset tied to global growth and liquidity.
2.2 Where are we now? ISM 48.7 and a non-peaking copper–gold ratio
As of late 2025, U.S. manufacturing remains in mild contraction. The ISM manufacturing PMI has hovered below 50, with the August reading at 48.7—its sixth consecutive month in contraction territory. (Reuters)
At the same time, copper–gold metrics have not approached the euphoric levels seen near previous global growth peaks. Macro commentary across research shops still describes an environment of weak but stabilizing manufacturing, offset by strong capex in AI-related equipment and intellectual property. (Reuters)
If Bitcoin’s structural peaks are increasingly aligned with late-cycle industrial exuberance rather than rigid four-year clocks, Lee’s conclusion follows:
On macro grounds alone, it is premature to declare that Bitcoin’s cycle has topped.
That does not guarantee further upside—regulatory shocks, ETF flows, or an adverse macro shock could easily derail the market—but it does highlight that industrial and business-cycle indicators are nowhere near late-stage extremes.
3. Ethereum’s “1971 Moment”: From Smart-Contract Platform to Financial Rail
3.1 Why 1971 matters
When Lee calls 2025 Ethereum’s “1971 moment,” he is invoking the year when the United States ended dollar convertibility into gold. That break from the Bretton Woods system transformed the dollar into a pure fiat anchor for global finance—no longer constrained by gold but instead backed by institutions, legal regimes and economic scale.
The analogy is not perfect, but the intuition is clear:
Bitcoin, like gold, is scarce, non-yielding, and largely outside the state.
Ethereum, like post-1971 dollars, is evolving into an infrastructure layer: a programmable settlement network where other assets, claims and contracts live.
3.2 Ethereum as settlement and collateral layer
Several data points support the view of Ethereum as a dominant on-chain financial rail:
By late 2025, Ethereum accounts for roughly 60% of DeFi total value locked (TVL), with rivals like Solana and Bitcoin far behind. (imfconnect.org)
Ethereum remains the primary chain for decentralized stablecoins and collateralized lending; stablecoins represent ~40% of DeFi TVL and are heavily concentrated on Ethereum-centric ecosystems. (CoinLaw)
The IMF and BIS both note that Ethereum is the leading settlement layer for complex DeFi protocols, despite methodology differences in TVL measurement. (imfconnect.org)
Crucially, Ethereum has already undergone its own “monetary regime change” with the Merge:
In September 2022, Ethereum transitioned from energy-intensive proof-of-work to proof-of-stake (PoS).
Event-study analysis finds that the Merge reduced Ethereum’s energy consumption by ~99.95–99.98%, turned net issuance deflationary at times, and modestly improved network efficiency. (MDPI)
By mid-2025:
Around 29–31% of all ETH is staked, equivalent to 35–37 million ETH securing the network. (CoinLaw)
PoS economics research shows that staking yield, issuance and security are tightly linked; an optimal policy balances token dilution against the security benefits of higher stake. (SSRN)
This is exactly the sort of monetary and institutional regime shift that invites comparison to 1971: Ethereum has re-defined its base asset (ETH), its reward structure, and its environmental profile in a way that sets it apart from Bitcoin’s fixed proof-of-work issuance schedule.
3.3 Is Ethereum really “deeply undervalued”?
Lee’s valuation scaffolding is ratio-based. He argues that if ETH/BTC simply returns to:
its eight-year average ratio, ETH could trade around USD 12,000;
its 2021 high ratio, ETH might approach USD 22,000;
an even more aggressive “payment rail of the future” scenario would support ETH in the $60,000+ range.
These are scenarios, not guarantees. They make two implicit assumptions:
Ethereum sustains or grows its share of global on-chain settlement, tokenization and stablecoin activity, despite growing competition from L2s and alternative L1s. (imfconnect.org)
Regulatory frameworks evolve in a way that allows staking, tokenization and DeFi to scale institutionally (for example, via ETFs that can stake, regulated tokenized funds, and compliant on-ramps). (Sygnum Bank)
From a risk-management perspective, investors should treat such numbers as illustrative stress tests rather than precise price targets. They highlight convexity—Ethereum’s upside can be very large if it remains the preferred “financial operating system”—but they coexist with material risks: smart-contract bugs, regulatory reclassification, fee-market fragmentation, and competition from permissioned blockchains.
4. October’s Liquidation, Market-Maker Stress and the Perils of Leverage
Lee’s November message also comments on the October 10, 2025 crypto liquidation, noting the unusual pattern of price action:
A sharp, synchronized sell-off across majors.
Two weeks of “languishing” prices with thin liquidity.
Signs that one or more market-making firms were balance-sheet constrained, likely de-risking or raising capital rather than providing liquidity.
While on-chain and order-book forensics remain proprietary, this pattern of liquidity gaps driven by market-maker stress is familiar from previous episodes: the March 2020 “Black Thursday” in DeFi, the FTX collapse, and various stablecoin de-peggings. Academic work on crypto microstructure documents how a few large intermediaries often dominate liquidity, creating fragility when they are forced to step back. (SSRN)
Lee’s practical takeaway is straightforward and defensible:
Extreme fear readings on sentiment indices (such as the Crypto Fear & Greed Index) often coincide with medium-term opportunity.
But if market-makers are deleveraging, adding more leverage at that point can be catastrophic for individual traders.
Given the history of cascading liquidations in crypto derivatives, a simple risk principle follows: in stressed liquidity regimes, position sizing and unlevered exposure matters more than trying to perfectly time the bottom.
5. Tokenization: From Fractional Ownership to “Factorized” Cash Flows
5.1 From buzzword to infrastructure: what tokenization actually is
Tokenization is often described loosely as “putting assets on a blockchain.” McKinsey offers a more precise definition: it is the issuance of unique digital representations of real-world or financial assets on a distributed ledger, so that these tokens can be traded, pledged as collateral or embedded into programmable contracts. (McKinsey & Company)
Central banks and researchers see three main areas of impact for real-world asset (RWA) tokenization:
Trading and settlement: on-chain delivery-versus-payment can compress settlement times from days to minutes, lowering counterparty and funding risk. (macroeconomics.lv)
Custody and collateral mobility: tokenized Treasuries, money-market funds and securities can move between venues without legacy plumbing, enhancing collateral reuse in repo and derivatives markets. (JPMorgan Chase)
Access and composability: fractional ownership and programmable rights enable finer-grained claims on cash flows, risk exposures and even identity attributes. (McKinsey & Company)
The wave of tokenized U.S. Treasury funds—from BlackRock’s BUIDL to Abu Dhabi’s Realize T-Bills and Goldman Sachs/BNY Mellon’s tokenized money-market structures—illustrates how quickly this has moved from pilot to production. (Axios)
5.2 Why Ethereum sits at the center (for now)
Although tokenization is theoretically chain-agnostic, in practice most institutional RWA pilots have gravitated towards Ethereum and Ethereum-compatible networks:
BlackRock’s BUIDL launched first on Ethereum and remains the largest tokenized RWA product, now extended to other chains. (CoinDesk)
JPMorgan’s Onyx Digital Assets platform, used by banks like DBS, OCBC and BNP Paribas for intraday repo, relies on tokenized securities and cash on permissioned Ethereum-based ledgers. (ledgerinsights.com)
The BIS and IMF both emphasize Ethereum’s outsized share of DeFi, stablecoin and RWA experimentation relative to other chains. (imfconnect.org)
This does not guarantee Ethereum’s monopoly, but it amplifies Lee’s thesis: if tokenization really is the “next generation for markets”—to borrow Larry Fink’s phrase—then the dominant settlement layer stands to capture significant value. (Yahoo Finance)
5.3 From fractional ownership to “factorization”: time, product and geography
Lee pushes the tokenization narrative further with a conceptual leap: factorization of cash flows. Using a Rembrandt painting and Tesla as examples, he distinguishes between:
Fractionalization:
Splitting an asset into identical fractions (e.g., 10,000 tokens each representing 0.01% of a painting).
Factorization:
Splitting an asset into orthogonal dimensions of value—time, product, geography, or financial-statement line items.
In a tokenized framework, you could in principle:
Time-tokenize earnings: buy a claim only on Tesla’s 2036 earnings, perhaps aligned with an executive compensation milestone.
Product-tokenize revenue streams: isolate the present value of Tesla’s autonomous-driving software or robotaxis, separate from EV hardware.
Geographically tokenize regional revenue: hold only a tokenized claim on Tesla’s Southeast Asia profit stream.
Economic research on tokenization confirms that such fine-grained, programmable claims could deepen risk-sharing and enable new forms of securitization—but also warns about new layers of complexity, legal enforceability and systemic risk. (macroeconomics.lv)
From a regulatory and investor-protection standpoint, this is where “social media compliance” becomes critical. Even if the technology allows infinite slicing of cash flows, securities law, disclosure standards and suitability rules will rightly constrain how such instruments are marketed and to whom they can be sold.
6. Digital-Asset Treasuries and the “Alchemy of 5%”
6.1 From MicroStrategy to BitMine: the treasury-as-thesis model
The idea of a public company using a single cryptoasset as its core treasury reserve was pioneered by MicroStrategy—now rebranded as Strategy Inc.—with Bitcoin. By late 2025, Strategy holds over 640,000 BTC (more than 3% of total supply), funded by aggressive issuance of equity and preferred stock. (Wikipedia)
BitMine Immersion Technologies is explicitly adapting this model to Ethereum:
In mid-2025, BitMine pivoted from Bitcoin mining to an ETH-centric treasury strategy, raising roughly USD 250 million to purchase ETH. Its share price briefly surged 3,000% in a week as investors repriced it as an “Ethereum treasury company.” (Business Insider)
Subsequent disclosures and independent analysis indicate that BitMine has become the largest publicly traded holder of ETH, with hundreds of thousands of ETH on its balance sheet and a roadmap to accumulate up to 5% of total ETH supply—the “Alchemy of 5%” thesis. (ap-south-1.graphassets.com)
The shareholder register now includes prominent institutional investors such as ARK Invest, Founders Fund and Bill Miller’s funds, mirroring the “institutionalization” of Strategy’s cap table. (Reuters)
In other words, BitMine is positioning itself as to ETH what Strategy is to BTC: a leveraged, publicly traded proxy for investors who want exposure to Ethereum’s upside (plus staking yield and tokenization optionality) without holding ETH directly.
6.2 How an Ethereum treasury creates value (and risk)
Lee outlines several levers by which a digital-asset treasury can grow ETH per share:
Issuing equity at a premium to NAV and deploying proceeds into additional ETH.
Using equity-linked or preferred securities to raise capital at a cost below expected ETH appreciation. (Investopedia)
Operating profitable infrastructure businesses (mining, staking, data centers) that generate fiat or ETH-denominated cash flow.
Staking ETH to earn yield in return for securing the network.
From an academic perspective, this is an extreme form of corporate balance-sheet concentration and asset-liability mismatch. Corporate-finance theory would flag several key risks:
Price risk and volatility: Operating performance is dominated by mark-to-market swings in a single, highly volatile asset. (SSRN)
Financing risk: Capital-raising windows can shut abruptly if sentiment turns, trapping companies with high leverage and underwater equity. (The Guardian)
Regulatory and accounting risk: Changes in securities, tax and accounting treatment for digital assets can dramatically alter reported earnings and capital ratios. (KPMG Assets)
On the positive side, if Ethereum does become the dominant settlement layer and tokenization backbone, a well-managed ETH treasury with robust risk governance could generate:
Staking yield as quasi-“digital carry,” grounded in network security economics. (SSRN)
Optionality on tokenization growth, as on-chain treasuries and RWA platforms increasingly need aligned ETH holders and governance-capable validators. (McKinsey & Company)
The “alchemy” is therefore not mystical. It is simply the compounded effect of asset appreciation + yield + accretive capital-raising, offset by dilution, risk and execution.
7. Governance, Staking and the Role of ETH as “Operating Collateral”
Lee also notes that stablecoin issuers and tokenization platforms will eventually want to stake ETH, both to secure the network on which their contracts live and to gain governance voice.
This is consistent with:
PoS design research, which frames staking as a core mechanism for aligning users, validators and investors in shared security. (arXiv)
The steady rise in Ethereum’s staking ratio toward ~30% of supply, driven not only by retail but also by institutional custodians, ETFs in some jurisdictions, and liquid-staking protocols. (CoinLaw)
However, there are also important concentration and governance risks:
Large staking pools (e.g., Lido, major exchanges, centralized custodians) can accumulate significant on-chain voting power and MEV (maximal extractable value) influence. (coinIX)
RWA tokenization projects often operate permissioned smart contracts with back-door controls to comply with KYC/AML and sanctions—creating tension with the ideals of open, credibly neutral infrastructure. (Investopedia)
For treasuries like BitMine, this means that staking and governance are not “free yield”; they involve real responsibility for network security, regulatory compliance and protocol-level politics.
8. Risks, Open Questions and Responsible Framing
Tom Lee’s message is deliberately optimistic: he is chairman of a company whose business model is levered to Ethereum’s success. As an analyst, I see several genuine strengths in his framework—but also some open questions and necessary cautions for a responsible, social-media-compliant discussion:
Correlation is not destiny.
The historical alignment between Bitcoin peaks, copper–gold highs and ISM tops is intriguing but not a deterministic law. Structural breaks—such as widespread state-level Bitcoin reserves or regulatory shocks—could decouple crypto cycles from traditional industrial indicators. (ScienceDirect)Tokenization may be unevenly distributed.
Institutional tokenization is currently concentrated in high-grade fixed income and money-market assets(Treasuries, funds) rather than equities or exotic products. (Investopedia)
The leap from today’s “tokenized fund wrappers” to fully factorized, retail-accessible earnings tokens will require regulatory innovation, not just smart contracts.Ethereum’s moat is strong, but not unassailable.
Ethereum dominates TVL and RWA experiments today, but competing L1s and L2s continue to innovate on throughput and cost. Some institutional players may prefer permissioned chains where legal control is clearer. (imfconnect.org)Treasury-heavy corporate structures are knife-edge strategies.
Strategy Inc.’s experience shows that crypto-centric treasuries can deliver spectacular returns—but also expose shareholders to extreme volatility and funding risk. (Barron's)
BitMine’s “Alchemy of 5%” thesis should be weighed against that backdrop: it is high-beta equity overlayed on high-beta crypto, not a bond substitute.Regulation is the ultimate gating factor.
The pace at which ETH-backed treasuries, staking-enabled ETFs and tokenized instruments can scale will hinge on securities regulators, tax authorities and prudential supervisors. The same tokenization features that excite technologists (24/7 markets, fractionalization) also challenge existing investor-protection frameworks. (KPMG Assets)
For investors and policymakers alike, the responsible stance is curious but critical: recognize the structural potential of Ethereum and tokenization, but stress-test narratives, diversify risk, and avoid over-reliance on any single cycle model.
9. Conclusion: From Cycles to Systems
Tom Lee’s November 2025 Chairman’s Message reflects an important transition in how serious market participants think about crypto:
Bitcoin is no longer just a halving-driven curiosity; it is increasingly analyzed through the lenses of industrial activity, safe-haven demand and state-level reserve strategies.
Ethereum is no longer just a smart-contract sandbox; it is becoming a core settlement and collateral layer for DeFi, stablecoins and a growing wave of tokenized real-world assets.
Tokenization is moving from marketing buzzword to concrete infrastructure, with major asset managers, banks and regulators now engaged in building, supervising and scaling these systems.
BitMine’s “Alchemy of 5%” vision—amassing a strategically significant share of ETH and positioning itself as a bridge between Ethereum and Wall Street—is a direct bet on this structural shift. It is ambitious, high risk and high beta. But as institutional rails around Bitcoin, Ethereum and tokenized assets deepen, it may not be the last such structure we see.
For now, the most useful takeaway is not a price target but a framework:
Crypto is gradually shifting from a story about cyclical halvings to a story about systems—industrial cycles, settlement networks, and programmable claims on real-world cash flows. In that world, the question is less “when is the next halving?” and more “which rails will the world’s assets actually run on?”
Position Your Capital for the Tokenized Future — With Singapore Real Estate at the Core
In a world where Bitcoin is shifting to industrial cycles, Ethereum is evolving into financial infrastructure, and tokenization is reshaping how assets are owned and traded, you cannot afford a real estate advisor who only understands property in isolation.
I am a Singapore-based Real Estate Salesperson who lives at the intersection of property, macroeconomics and markets. Every day, I dedicate hours to writing research-led essays like “Beyond the Halving: Bitcoin’s New Industrial Cycle, Ethereum’s 1971 Moment, and the Tokenized Future of Finance”, and to studying global macro, equities and cryptocurrency flows. I do my due diligence—so that your real estate decisions are grounded in data, not headlines.
With a background in economics, portfolio construction, technical analysis, and working knowledge of Singapore Land Law, Business Law, statutes and regulations, I help you integrate Singapore property into a broader, risk-managed portfolio. My experience as an Officer Commanding (Captain) in the SAF shapes how I approach your wealth: disciplined, structured, and focused on long-term resilience.
For international, China Chinese, Southeast Asian and Singapore investors—whether you are UHNW, an institutional allocator, a family office, or parents planning for 陪读 / 留学—Singapore real estate can provide a less volatile, income-generating anchor alongside your equity, crypto and alternative exposures. Properly selected assets can offer:
Defensive characteristics in turbulent markets
Potential capital appreciation in a stable, rules-based economy
Rental yields that function like a steady, “dividend-style” cash flow
If you want an advisor who understands Bitcoin, Ethereum, tokenization, geopolitics and macro—and can translate that into concrete, compliant, and sensible strategies in Singapore property—reach out to me.
Let’s build a portfolio where your real estate works in harmony with your other asset classes, positioning your capital for both stability and the opportunities of the new financial era.
References
Baltais, M., & Sondore, A. (2024). Economic impact potential of real-world asset tokenization. Latvijas Banka / Latvijas Banka Macroprudential Division. (macroeconomics.lv)
Chan, J. Y. L., et al. (2023). The Bitcoin halving cycle: Volatility dynamics and safe-haven properties. Mathematics, 11(3), 698. (MDPI)
International Monetary Fund. (2025). Crypto Assets Monitor – October 2025. IMF. (imfconnect.org)
Jermann, U. J. (2025). Optimal issuance for proof-of-stake blockchains. SSRN Working Paper. (SSRN)
Kapengut, E., & Mizrach, B. (2023). An event study of the Ethereum transition to proof-of-stake. Commodities, 2(2), 96–110. (MDPI)
KPMG. (2024). Virtual assets: 2024 review and 2025 outlook. KPMG Global. (KPMG Assets)
Liu, W. (2025). The effect of the cryptocurrency halving event. Journal of Empirical Finance (in press). (ScienceDirect)
McKinsey & Company. (2024). Tokenized financial assets: From pilot to scale. McKinsey Global Banking Practice. (McKinsey & Company)
Parnes, D. (2024). Copper-to-gold ratio as a leading indicator for the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield. Research in International Business and Finance, 67, 102207. (ScienceDirect)
Pratama, R. A., Suripto, S., & Harori, M. I. (2025). The role of Bitcoin halving in influencing the dynamics of Bitcoin trends in 2012–2025. Economic and Social Journal, 10(2), 45–60. (Eastasouth Institute)
Saggese, P., et al. (2025). Towards verifiability of total value locked (TVL) in DeFi. BIS Working Paper No. 1268. Bank for International Settlements. (Bank for International Settlements)
Tastytrade Research. (2023). Why the copper–gold ratio is so important to traders. tastylive Insights. (TastyLive)
U.S. Institute for Supply Management. (2025). Manufacturing PMI® reports and methodology. ISM. (PR Newswire)
EY. (2024). How does the Ethereum Merge help the real and virtual world save energy? EY Insights. (EY)
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says tokens are “the next generation for markets.” (2023). Forbes. (Forbes)
BitMine Immersion Technologies. (2025). BMNR is building the world’s premier Ethereum treasury (Investor presentation). (ap-south-1.graphassets.com)
Reuters. (2025, July 16). BitMine shares soar as billionaire Thiel reveals 9.1% stake. Reuters Markets News. (Reuters)
Business Insider. (2025, July 3). The stock of a small crypto miner soared 3,000% in a week on a plan to amass a trove of ethereum. Business Insider. (Business Insider)
Investopedia. (2025). Why BitMine—sort of like Strategy for Ether—is hot with investors. Investopedia Digital Assets. (Investopedia)
CoinGecko. (2025). Top blockchains ranked by total value locked (TVL). CoinGecko Data Portal. (CoinGecko)
Coinlaw. (2025). ETH staking statistics 2025: Unlock real rewards. Coinlaw Analytics. (CoinLaw)
Fireblocks. (2024). Ethereum staking & liquid staking: Risks, rewards & opportunities. Fireblocks Institutional Research. (Fireblocks)
(Additional journalistic sources from Reuters, MarketWatch, Axios, and others cited inline support specific data points on ISM readings, tokenized funds and corporate treasury behavior.)
Comments
Post a Comment