Bitcoin may be moving into the later part of the current bear market, according to Jamie Coutts, chief crypto analyst at Real Vision. In an interview with Cointelegraph’s Trade Secrets, Coutts said downside momentum appears to be easing, even though he stopped short of declaring the downturn over.

He characterized BTC’s current trading behavior around the $63,000 area as a “typical garden-variety bear market,” noting that the price remains roughly 50% below Bitcoin’s October 2025 all-time high of $126,100. Coutts also pointed to a softer volatility regime, saying volatility is down by about 50% compared with the prior market cycle—an indicator he views as potentially signaling a less severe drawdown than earlier bear markets.

Key takeaways

Real Vision’s Jamie Coutts believes Bitcoin is approaching the “second half” of the bear market, with selling pressure showing early signs of slowing.
He highlighted a decline in volatility of roughly 50% versus the previous cycle, which could mean the current downturn is structurally different.
Coutts said technical trend indicators remain bearish overall, even if momentum on longer time frames shows early improvement.
On longer-term price targets, he expressed skepticism about a $1 million Bitcoin case by 2030, offering a nearer-term range closer to $200,000–$250,000.
He also emphasized that community action by around 2027 may be needed to address quantum-related concerns.

Early signs of deceleration, but the trend is still bearish

Coutts stressed that markets rarely follow historical playbooks perfectly, even when charts start to resemble familiar bear-market phases. While he believes the sell-off may be losing some intensity, he cautioned that “all the trend indicators” are still bearish from a technical standpoint.

The more constructive element in his view is that he has begun to notice a “bullish divergence” on longer time frames tied to momentum. In practical terms, that type of divergence often suggests negative momentum is decelerating—meaning the rate of deterioration is weakening—even if prices have not yet flipped into a sustained uptrend.

Importantly, Coutts framed this as an early-stage change, not a technical “get out of the bear market” signal. He said the appearance of divergence does not automatically mean the broader downturn is finished.

Why the Q4 drawdown may not have been purely liquidity-driven

Much of the market narrative around Bitcoin’s fourth-quarter weakness has focused on tightening global liquidity conditions. Coutts agreed that liquidity matters, but he argued it doesn’t tell the whole story.

In his view, on-chain fundamentals also deteriorated, contributing to the drawdown alongside macro factors. He described “onchain demand” as a key driver of price action and said that this demand weakened in parallel with broader business-cycle dynamics.

“So onchain demand, which definitely drives price and is somewhat correlated to things like global liquidity and the business cycle, they started to deteriorate as well.”

That linkage matters for investors because it suggests the recovery case may depend on more than just easing financial conditions. If on-chain demand takes longer to stabilize than liquidity, BTC’s rebound could be delayed or uneven—even if macro indicators improve.

Coutts’ comments also echo the theme that sentiment and flows can remain heavy even when some sell pressure begins to fade. In separate reporting, Cointelegraph covered how Bitcoin ETFs ended a period of steep selling alongside new outflows (see: Bitcoin ETFs end ‘most overwhelming’ $2.7B sell-off amid new $85M net outflow). While that specific ETF-flow story isn’t part of Coutts’ interview claims, it provides additional context for why liquidity and demand signals can diverge during bear-market transitions.

Bitcoin’s upside debate: $1 million by 2030 vs nearer-term realism

Coutts was cautious when asked whether he aligns with far-reaching Bitcoin projections discussed by high-profile industry figures. He referenced long-range forecasts from Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood that Bitcoin could reach $1 million by 2030.

His response suggested he sees such outcomes as highly dependent on how much liquidity expansion (“money printing,” in his framing) is required over the coming years. Coutts said models he previously worked with implied $1 million nearer to 2032–2033 rather than 2030, adding that the pathway is fundamentally a function of macro settings.

When shifting to a shorter horizon, Coutts appeared more specific: he said he is “more comfortable” with a forecast that Bitcoin could reach roughly $200,000 to $250,000 within the next two to three years. Beyond that window, he described it as “very hard to say,” signaling that uncertainty rises sharply the farther investors look.

He also pointed to a new variable that could shape demand formation: AI. Coutts argued that as “wallets spin up for agents,” the ecosystem will need to clarify what those agents store value in and whether their decision-making patterns will mirror humans. While he didn’t offer a quantified impact, his point highlights a broader question for the next market cycle: how usage and custody patterns evolve as software agents become more common.

Quantum computing risk and the need for protocol planning

Beyond price mechanics, Coutts also addressed longer-term security threats. He said the Bitcoin community will need to take more decisive action by around 2027 to address the potential threat posed by quantum computing.

His framing emphasized both urgency and timing constraints. He warned that if there isn’t firm movement, quantum concerns could become increasingly central to discussions around the network’s long-term resilience. He also noted that even if risk mitigation is identified, implementation would take time—he said it could take about five years for a major protocol upgrade to be carried out.

“If there isn’t really firm movement on this, this will become an increasingly talked-about issue for the network because as much as everything is under risk from quantum, Bitcoin is a decentralized network. It’s going to take five years for it to actually implement a major protocol upgrade.”

Coutts further argued that dismissing quantum risks is the “wrong side of this,” adding that Bitcoin developers who downplay the issue may be underestimating how serious the timeline implications could become.

That matters for investors and builders because quantum risk isn’t a short-term catalyst—it’s a roadmap question. Decisions made in the next few years could influence whether the network is positioned comfortably for future cryptographic challenges, or whether it faces more disruptive choices later.

For now, traders and long-term holders will likely keep watching two fronts: whether momentum divergence develops into a broader trend reversal, and whether on-chain demand stabilizes alongside (or despite) macro liquidity shifts. Separately, the market will also be monitoring how the Bitcoin community addresses quantum planning milestones ahead of the 2027 window Coutts highlighted.