This analysis is based on Brian Kim’s broadcast of (the second week of September). At that time Bitcoin traded near $76,800; when this article was published on , it was near $84,400 (reference prices: CoinGecko daily data). The price levels and conditions discussed below (such as a break above $82,814) refer to the market as it stood at the time of the broadcast.
Most traders watching Bitcoin right now are positioned for a continuation higher, treating the current market structure as confirmation that a new leg up is already underway. Elliott Wave analyst Brian Kim holds the opposite view. In his latest analysis, he laid out a case that the B-wave currently in progress has not yet completed, that one more upward push remains inside the structure, and that the more significant move — a C-wave decline that undercuts the June 29 low — has not yet begun. He was direct about the fact that this reading puts him in the minority, and he offered a specific structural reason for why he is not willing to abandon it simply because market sentiment is pushing the other way.
The analysis covers Bitcoin’s position within a larger corrective sequence, examines the internal wave count inside the current B-wave, and presents the condition that would shift the picture toward an earlier completion of that B-wave. The reasoning throughout is grounded in pattern structure rather than in external catalysts, and Brian acknowledged openly that his labeling is not guaranteed to be correct — while also explaining why he has not yet changed it.
The Internal Count That Keeps the Upside Scenario Alive
Brian’s preferred reading is built on a straightforward structural observation. He stated that the C-wave component inside the current B-wave requires five internal waves to be considered complete. Looking at the count as it stands, he said he can only identify four of those waves so far: waves one, two, three, and four. Because wave five has not yet appeared, he concluded that the B-wave has not finished.
He described this not as a speculative guess but as the reading that is consistent with how Elliott Wave patterns are supposed to be constructed. He noted that forcing a completion onto the current structure without the fifth wave would mean stuffing the count — his phrase for bending the labels to fit a narrative rather than following the pattern as it actually develops. He said that approach amounts to speculation, and that as long as the structure continues to look like a textbook progression, he is not willing to deviate from it.
The condition attached to this preferred scenario is precise. Kim said that for the final fifth wave to be confirmed, the price needs to break above the prior high in the vicinity of 83,000 USD — because only by exceeding that level does the sequence of waves one through four become locked in. That 83,000 USD level functions as a target in the preferred scenario, the destination the fifth wave is working toward if the reading remains valid.
He also noted that wave four in the current count may be taking the form of a triangle — a common pattern at the end of a motive wave sequence, as he had observed in earlier parts of the chart as well. Whether wave four resolves sideways before the final push, or whether it has already completed and the fifth wave is ready to begin, the structural requirement remains the same: the prior high needs to be exceeded.
The Alternate Path: B-Wave Already Done at 82,814
Brian did not dismiss the possibility that the move up has already ended. He presented an alternate scenario in which the B-wave completed at 82,814 USD, and in that case the chart needs to be read differently going forward.
Under this alternate reading, both the A-wave and the B-wave have already finished, and the focus shifts to the beginning of a C-wave move lower. The condition that defines this alternate scenario is the failure of price to break above 82,814 USD — if the prior high is not exceeded, Kim said, that level stands as the completion point of the B-wave, and attention turns to the downside.
He was careful about how he framed this. The alternate scenario is a possibility he is holding, not the view he currently expects to play out. He acknowledged that the B-wave could have ended there, but he said his preferred count still calls for one more peak above that area. The two scenarios are mutually exclusive and hinge on whether the price can push through that prior high or not.
He also noted that if the market were to drop sharply before the fifth wave appeared — driven by some external shock — he would have no choice but to close out the count without the fifth wave, fitting the labels around what the market actually did. He described this as a less satisfying outcome structurally, but acknowledged it is always possible when real market conditions deviate from ideal wave formation.
Why Brian Is Going Against the Crowd — and Why He Thinks Elliott Wave Works Best There
One of the more substantive parts of the analysis was Brian’s reflection on why he is maintaining a downside-focused outlook when the majority of market participants are positioned for further gains. He said that Elliott Wave analysis tends to be most accurate precisely when it conflicts with the crowd, and he described the current setup as an example of that dynamic.
He observed that most people on social media and elsewhere are talking about Bitcoin continuing higher, and that voices calling for a decline are being dismissed or ignored. He connected this to a broader behavioral pattern: people prefer to hear analysis that confirms what they already hold, and they tune out views that threaten their position. He said he is aware that his current reading is unpopular, and that the absence of engagement or agreement does not change what the structure is showing him.
His approach, as he described it, is to explain logically why a particular path is required by the pattern — not to follow where sentiment is flowing. He noted that he has adjusted his count before when new information genuinely changed the structural picture, citing a revision he made roughly three to four weeks prior in response to developments in the bond market. But he said a count change has to be driven by logic and evidence, not by the desire to align with the crowd or to avoid criticism.
He also made a point of separating Elliott Wave analysis from the kinds of price calls he sees circulating online — large round-number targets stated without structural justification. He said those claims are speculation, and that what he is doing is different: he can explain why the pattern calls for a particular path, and he updates that explanation when the facts require it.
The Larger Picture: June 29 Low as the Structural Benchmark
Stepping back from the near-term wave count, Brian kept returning to one reference point as the measure of whether the larger bearish structure has resolved: the low established on June 29. He said that until that low is broken, his overall focus remains lower.
He was explicit that breaking the June 29 low would not by itself end the bear market. The C-wave decline, once it begins, would itself need to develop a complete internal count — five waves of its own — before the larger corrective structure could be considered finished. He said the bear market ends only when that full internal count is in place, not simply when a particular price level is touched.
On timing, he offered a general observation that fully drawing out the pattern as he currently sees it would likely take longer than the remaining weeks in the current calendar period, suggesting the structure could extend into the following months. He was not specific beyond that, and he did not offer a precise end date or a price target for where the C-wave would ultimately find its low.
The overall framework he laid out has three sequential components in the preferred scenario: the final fifth wave of the B-wave’s internal C completes above the prior high area, then a larger C-wave decline begins and works its way below the June 29 low, and then the internal count of that C-wave forms completely before the bear market is declared over. Each of those steps is conditional on the one before it, and none of them has been confirmed yet.
Structural Discipline Over Narrative Convenience
What comes through most clearly in Brian Kim’s analysis is a commitment to following the structure as it presents itself, rather than adjusting the count to match the story that is easiest to tell or most comfortable to believe. He acknowledged that his current reading could be wrong — he said his labeling is not 100 percent certain — but he also said he will not change it without a structural reason to do so.
For traders watching Bitcoin, the practical implication of this analysis is that the current move has not yet resolved the larger corrective sequence. In the preferred scenario, one more upward push toward the 83,000 USD area, the level Brian identified as the target if the B-wave’s internal C-wave is still in progress, remains the immediate expectation before the larger decline takes shape. In the alternate scenario, the B-wave ended at 82,814 USD — the level Kim cited as its completion point under the condition that price fails to exceed the prior high — and the C-wave lower has already begun.
Either way, his focus remains on the downside as the dominant direction until the June 29 low is broken and the internal count of the C-wave is complete.
Full video analysis: https://youtu.be/ZR9ZlEl4vj0?si=yQOyA5g7TlwBdNZr
