Crypto news

Brent crude oil prices recorded their strongest weekly drop in recent months, plunging by 9%. However, Bitcoin, contrary to the expectations of many market participants, only responded with a symbolic decline of 1%. This price gap calls into question the established dogma of a close correlation between "black gold" and "digital gold." My analysis over the past five years shows that this connection is nothing more than an illusion, supported only by isolated episodes.

This week, the global benchmark Brent fell below the $80 per barrel mark, while the US benchmark WTI headed towards $70. The decline occurred against the backdrop of news about the resumption of negotiations on the Strait of Hormuz. A popular narrative among traders is that after a sharp decline in oil, Bitcoin often forms a global bottom. Some expect a new surge in energy prices in the second half of the year due to a possible escalation between Iran and Israel. According to their logic, this oil rebound will trigger another wave of Bitcoin sell-offs and form the year's low.

The risks of such scenarios cannot be dismissed. Iran has just suspended 60-day negotiations with the US — this could push prices up again. However, as the data shows, the link between oil and Bitcoin is based only on isolated episodes, not on a stable long-term trend.

Five-Year Data: Correlation Approaches Zero

The mathematical correlation between Bitcoin and oil over the past five years was only 0.036. Recall that this coefficient is measured from +1 (complete alignment of trajectories) to -1 (strictly opposite movement). A level of 0.036 clearly demonstrates a complete absence of a stable relationship between these assets.

However, average values can be deceptive. It is widely believed that the dependence on commodities is activated only during periods of strong price shocks. To test this hypothesis, I divided the historical period into two: a calm period and one with high volatility.

The results speak for themselves:

• Calm period: correlation coefficient +0.05.
• High volatility: correlation coefficient -0.02.
• Last 30 days: correlation coefficient -0.21.

As can be seen, even with detailed segmentation, both indicators remain as close to zero as possible. The conclusion is unequivocal: there is no serious investment relationship between the assets under any conditions. The last thirty-day indicator dropped to -0.21, indicating a short-term divergence in rates in opposite directions, but the overall connection remains extremely weak. In simple terms, no historical scenario allows the use of oil quotes as a reliable leading indicator for cryptocurrency.

Moreover, the very chain of macroeconomic influence from energy to digital assets is largely broken. Fuel costs do affect inflation expectations with a weight coefficient of 0.41. However, this impulse almost completely fades and does not reach the real yield of US government bonds after deducting inflation. And since bond yields themselves have a weak influence on cryptocurrency, the final signal is ultimately lost along this long path.

Currently, a much more powerful and direct impact on financial markets is exerted by the US Federal Reserve System. The new chairman of the agency, Kevin Warsh, decided at the meeting on June 17 to keep the base interest rate unchanged. At the same time, nine out of eighteen members of the US regulator forecast its increase during 2026.

When Oil Rose: "Whales" Did Not Panic

Historical examples clearly confirm this thesis. When Brent crude rapidly rose to its local peak around $119 at the end of March, the price of the leading cryptocurrency did not fall but demonstrated enviable stability. During the same period, long-term investors, holding coins in wallets for more than 155 days, steadily increased their positions. Their net purchase balance remained consistently positive until the beginning of June. This behavior marked an important reversal after major sell-offs in the second half of 2025. This upward trend clearly proves that the most patient large investors were not at all frightened by expensive fuel.

Perhaps the only direct economic link between these industries lies through the mining sector. Electricity is the main resource for cryptocurrency mining, so an abnormally high cost of energy can reduce business margins. Nevertheless, the total network hashrate, reflecting the overall computing power of equipment, has been confidently increasing recently. This occurs despite the fall in the WTI price. Such growth in power against the backdrop of cheaper resources testifies to miners' fundamental belief in the long-term prospects of the industry. Notably, the computing power remained virtually unchanged even during the March rally in the hydrocarbon market.

Since large investors and miners demonstrate high resilience, the source of the current pressure must be sought elsewhere. The main catalyst is the derivatives market.

Where the Pressure on Bitcoin Comes From

Key warning signals are now clearly visible in the derivatives sector. The Bitcoin open interest indicator, reflecting the total value of active futures contracts, increased from $21.83 billion to $23.45 billion since June 11. Simultaneously, the funding rate sharply changed, moving from a positive zone around +0.0023% into a negative area around -0.002%.

Recall that funding represents regular payments between long and short traders to balance the price. A negative funding rate means that sellers are forced to pay buyers to maintain their positions. This dynamic clearly reflects the predominance of bearish sentiment. The increase in the number of open contracts along with the drop in the rate indicates that speculators are actively opening shorts, rather than rushing to buy the current dip.

This situation contains important market logic. If cheaper commodities truly acted as a powerful driver for cryptocurrency growth, exchange players would be massively opening long positions. However, in practice, short positions currently dominate. This picture creates ideal conditions for a short squeeze. In such a situation, any random upward impulse will force bears to panic close their positions and buy back coins, leading to an avalanche-like rise in quotes.

And here lies the main mental trap for investors. If a short squeeze does occur, many commentators will rush to explain the price surge by the fall in oil prices. Although, in reality, the upward movement will be triggered solely by the technical closing of margin positions, and not by commodity factors. At the same time, the overall background will remain negative, causing the impulse to be short-lived.

As of today, Bitcoin's connection to the oil market is too weak to exert a real influence on quotes. While Brent trades around $79 per barrel, Bitcoin holds the $62,800 level — approximately half of its historical October high of $126,200.

My conclusion: The cryptocurrency market has finally outgrown the stage of a "commodity appendage." The next powerful price impulse for Bitcoin will be dictated not by the cost of a barrel, but by the decisions of the US Federal Reserve and conditions in the derivatives market. Investors should focus on these macroeconomic and structural factors, rather than outdated narratives about correlation with oil.