Short-Term Holders Drag Bitcoin Below $115,000

Short-Term Holders Drag Bitcoin Below $115,000

Bitcoin (BTC) has come under fresh selling pressure, slipping below $115,000 on Tuesday for the first sustained dip under that mark since January. The decline follows a nearly 5 percent pullback from its all-time high above $124,000, and on-chain data points to a selling wave among “Short-Term Holders” as the main catalyst.

On-chain analytics firm CryptoQuant warns that coins held for less than 155 days have flipped to a loss-realization mode, with the cohort’s Spent Output Profit Ratio (SOPR) dipping below 1—a classic signal that short-term investors are offloading at losses rather than trimming gains.

CryptoQuant data also shows the total Bitcoin supply held at a loss by these Short-Term Holders surged from 190,300 BTC to roughly 1.27 million BTC over the past week, marking the largest loss-selling event from this group since early 2025.

Technical analysts flag $112,000 as the next critical support zone. A break beneath that level could expose Bitcoin to a deeper pullback toward $108,000, driven by thin bid liquidity between those ranges and a widening gap in order-book defenses.

Yet institutional players remain undeterred by the short-term weakness. Treasury firms MicroStrategy and Metaplanet added a combined 1,205 BTC to their balances this week—over $140 million in fresh buys on red days—underscoring steady long-term conviction even as retail traders step aside.

Opinion & Outlook  

This episode underscores a familiar pattern: short-term entrants often capitulate after parabolic runs, only to set the stage for healthier recoveries as selling exhausts itself. If Bitcoin holds above $112,000 and SOPR stabilizes back above 1, panic-driven capitulation could give way to bargain hunting. However, investors should brace for transient volatility. Watching the tug-of-war between bleeding Short-Term Holders and resilient institutional flows will be key to gauging whether this is a routine reset or the start of a deeper correction.

Comments