This analysis is based on Brian Kim’s broadcast of (the third week of October). At that time Bitcoin traded near $81,600; at the time of writing () it was near $82,700 (reference prices: CoinGecko daily data). The price levels and conditions discussed below refer to the market as it stood at the time of the broadcast.
Markets rarely offer clear warnings before they inflict the most damage. The setup that Elliott Wave analyst Brian Kim identified in his latest analysis is precisely one of those moments when surface-level optimism and underlying structural reality point in opposite directions. With inflation data printing stronger than expected, U.S. Treasury yields pushing toward historically significant pressure zones, and social media overwhelmingly bullish on Bitcoin, Kim stood apart from the consensus and argued that the corrective pattern in both Bitcoin and broader risk markets has not yet completed.
The core of his argument is structural rather than speculative. According to Kim, a genuine corrective cycle does not end until it traces a large A-B-C formation, and he stated that the C-wave still has not arrived with the force and clarity that history demands. Until a clear five-wave count appears within that C-wave decline, he said he cannot confirm that the bear market is finished. That is not a cautious hedge around an otherwise bullish view. It is the analytical foundation for his continued bearish posture in an environment where, as he put it, not a single voice on social media is saying anything negative about Bitcoin except his own.
The Macro Backdrop: Inflation, the Fed, and Treasury Yields
The host said CPI and PPI results had come out that week and that there was talk of substantial increases. He stated plainly that when inflation reports print this strong, the Federal Reserve has no choice but to raise rates. He pointed to market pricing drawn from CME surveys showing that at the time of the broadcast, experts were split: 71% expected the Fed to hold rates at 3.75 to 4%, while 28% saw rates rising to 4.00 to 4.25%. With several more meetings remaining on the calendar, Kim noted that if inflation data continues to disappoint, rates could potentially move to 4.50 or even 4.75%.
The connection between this rate environment and Bitcoin is, in Kim’s framing, straightforward but worth stating carefully. He referenced a published headline that asked why rising Treasury yields raise the bar for Bitcoin to attract investors. His answer drew on a basic dynamic: the 10-year Treasury yield reached 5.3% and had earlier touched 5.365% on his Elliott Wave reading before bouncing at 5.039%, which he described as a choppy fourth-wave trace. Because Treasuries now offer more than 5% with relative safety, Bitcoin must demonstrate substantially higher return potential to justify its volatility, which he described as capable of wiping out 20% or 30% of an investment almost immediately.
He then cited commentary from a bond fund manager who said the 10-year yield could reach 6%, a view Kim said he found sufficiently credible to take seriously given the wave count on the Treasury chart. Kim stated that Treasury yields in the 5.5% to 6% range represent an important pressure zone for Bitcoin and other risk assets. He kept this as a structural observation rather than a direct causal link to any specific Bitcoin price level, in line with his discipline of separating macro context from wave-count conclusions.
The broader macro picture he assembled included observations from investors he respects. He mentioned one prominent macro investor who said he expects to be short U.S. stocks throughout 2027, citing what that investor described as the most unfavorable supply-demand backdrop for equities since 2002. Kim summarized the reasoning: stock buybacks and mergers-and-acquisitions activity have reduced float and supported prices for years, but the prospect of major IPOs from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic threatens to flood the market with new supply. The same investor attributed roughly a 60% probability to significant market pressure ahead, driven in part by a fiscal deficit Kim identified as reaching 40 trillion dollars.
Elliott Wave Structure: Why the C-Wave Has Not Arrived
The heart of Kim’s analysis rests on his reading of the Elliott Wave count for Bitcoin. He described corrective cycles as always tracing a large A-B-C structure, and he said the current situation has not yet completed that pattern. His analogy was deliberately simple: even a child looking at a prior zigzag decline would know that the next corrective phase should follow the same general shape, because that is how corrections work. The C-wave, he argued, needs to descend with significant force, and nothing in the current count suggests it has.
He described the B-wave as a wave that deceives traders. In his view, the bounce phase of a correction creates the appearance of a new uptrend and draws in buyers, which is precisely its function. Kim said the C-wave scares people who bought at A, who may then think they should sell. Kim noted that from the Elliott Wave perspective, the moment when the C-wave reaches its worst is historically the correct buying point, accompanied by the most negative news cycle imaginable.
He also discussed the five-wave count requirement that he keeps watching for. He stated that for the corrective pattern to complete properly and for an uptrend to be confirmed, the count must show a clear five-wave sequence within the C-wave decline. Currently, he does not see that five-wave structure, and he said the absence of it means the pattern is not finished. He applied the same framework to the KOSPI chart he referenced, noting that the orange sub-waves within the C-wave have not yet appeared in a way that satisfies the count.
Regarding the question of what level would change his view, Kim stated his position in two parts. On the preferred scenario, he said the June low of $57,000 must be broken for the pattern to take shape to any meaningful degree. In his preferred scenario, the June low of $57,000 remained a target to breach for the pattern to take shape to some degree. On the KOSPI chart, he said confirmation requires a break through 5,262 and a clearly visible five-count. He was explicit that even then, the five-wave structure would need to be genuinely clear, not ambiguous.
Crowd Psychology, On-Chain Data, and the Risk of Consensus
A significant portion of Kim’s analysis addressed the intellectual environment surrounding Bitcoin at the moment. He described a situation in which virtually every voice on social media, every popular analyst, and several high-profile on-chain data providers are calling for the bear market to be over and a new bull cycle to begin. He was careful not to dismiss on-chain analysis entirely, but he raised pointed questions about the reliability of selecting a small number of favorable metrics from a very large data universe and using them to declare a definitive market direction.
He referenced an on-chain data firm whose CEO published headlines stating that the Bitcoin bear market is over and that one to two years of gains lie ahead. Kim walked through a case where that same firm’s indicators had issued a signal on a specific date in 2025, and he noted that following that signal at the time would have produced a significant missed opportunity when the market continued to rise. His point was not that on-chain data is worthless but that no single framework, on-chain or otherwise, should be treated as a guarantee. He stated that Bitcoin, unlike equities, has no income statement, no balance sheet, and no standard valuation metric. What it has is investor psychology, and Elliott Wave analysis is, in his description, a method for reading that psychology through price structure.
He said he sees zero evidence from the wave count that a bull market has started. He also acknowledged the inverse: he cannot declare with complete certainty that the bear market is continuing. Markets are probabilities, and he repeated that framing several times. His stated posture is that the probability of further downside remains high, based on the absence of a completed corrective pattern, the absence of a clear five-wave sequence, and the absence of the $57,000 breach that the preferred count requires.
Kim also invoked a historical cycle framework he described as having achieved high accuracy across multiple decades, with exceptions only around 1926, 1935, and 1945, where the timing was off by two to three years. According to that framework, the reference year of 2026 still has roughly two months remaining within its window. He mentioned that several macro investors he tracks, including the one who spoke about a stock market nightmare for 2026 and 2027, are currently positioned short. He said this combination of factors does not tell investors what to do but does suggest that proceeding cautiously is more appropriate than following the dominant bullish consensus. Kim said that if Elliott Wave analysis, technical analysis, on-chain data, and macroeconomic data all agree, the market’s chances of rising would be very high.
Conclusion: The Pattern Is Not Finished
Brian Kim’s analysis presents a structural case for patience and caution rather than immediate action in either direction. The corrective A-B-C formation he has been tracking across Bitcoin and related markets has not resolved. The C-wave has not produced the five-wave decline he considers necessary, and the June low of $57,000 has not been tested in the way the preferred wave count requires before the pattern can begin taking a meaningful shape. At the same time, he maintained his characteristic discipline by refusing to call the bear market over with certainty, and by laying out the alternate scenario clearly: if $5,262 is decisively broken and a five-wave count becomes visible, the structural picture would require reconsideration.
The macro environment adds pressure in the same direction his wave count points. Treasury yields in the 5.5% to 6% range represent a notable headwind for Bitcoin as a non-yielding risk asset, and the inflation data that was released at the time of the broadcast suggests the Federal Reserve may have limited room to ease. The consensus, as Kim described it, is overwhelmingly bullish. His reading is that this consensus is itself a structural warning, not a confirmation.
For traders watching Bitcoin, the framework he presented asks for a specific structural development before the corrective case is abandoned. The pattern needs to complete. Until it does, Kim said he has no choice but to remain skeptical of the bull case.
Full video analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG4DhR2nnFA&t=237s
