Bitcoin’s fall to around $60,000 on February 5, 2026 was not the result of a single shock.
In the assessment of economist and crypto analyst Alex Krüger, the drawdown was the outcome of a long-running structural unwind, a pileup of forces that steadily drained liquidity, confidence, and risk appetite until price finally gave way.
Below are all 15 reasons, laid out explicitly and in line with Krüger’s original framework.
The sharp sell-off on October 10, 2025 permanently shifted market behavior. From that point on, Bitcoin developed a brutal downside skew, where rallies invited selling instead of follow-through.
Corporate crypto treasuries flipped from narrative tailwind to dead weight. As prices fell, many DAT-linked equities traded below NAV, turning balance-sheet Bitcoin from validation into pressure.
The U.S. Department of Justice indictment of Cambodia’s Prince Group in October 2025 abruptly reversed large illicit flows. That hidden liquidity had quietly supported volumes, once gone, markets became structurally thinner.
Discussion around practical quantum advances began to materially affect the store-of-value narrative, introducing a new category of long-term uncertainty that markets had not previously priced.
Capital rotated aggressively into AI.
Talent followed.
Even miners began reallocating infrastructure.
Crypto faced a clear opportunity-cost problem as returns and narratives shifted elsewhere.
Foreign demand weakened, particularly from China. Krüger notes that Chinese buyers, previously key drivers of metals and alternative-asset uptrends, were largely absent.
Crypto shifted from cypherpunk, rebel technology toward ETF-first, institutional infrastructure. What once attracted misfits and innovators became a line item in a 401(k).
Bitcoin’s alignment with Donald Trump introduced political asymmetry. Markets began asking what happens if Democrats return to power, adding regime risk to pricing.
Outside of a few standout protocols, Krüger argues innovation has stalled. The lack of new, compelling primitives reduced speculative energy and long-term conviction.
The memecoin supercycle, amplified by platforms like Pump.fun, destroyed large amounts of retail capital. Instead of onboarding users, it burned them, souring sentiment across the ecosystem.
Nearly 30 million cryptocurrencies tracked by CoinMarketCap created extreme dilution. Attention, liquidity, and narrative bandwidth became hopelessly fragmented.
Most major altcoins had been structurally broken for months. Persistent downtrends removed the reflexive bid that normally supports Bitcoin during risk-off periods.
A steady stream of tokens that pumped briefly and then collapsed reinforced the perception that insiders, not users, were the primary beneficiaries of new launches.
With geopolitical buyers fading and macro correlations rising, Bitcoin’s digital gold framing weakened, leaving it exposed as a high-beta risk asset.
Multiple equity sectors, particularly software and growth, were already breaking down. Crypto did not crash in isolation; it followed a wider risk-asset deleveraging.
Krüger emphasizes that these factors stacked, not sequentially but simultaneously. Sellers became more aggressive on every bounce. Buyers stopped showing up for dips. Momentum died long before price collapsed.
The final confirmation came when macro expectations shifted toward tighter financial conditions, ending hopes for renewed QE or yield curve control and locking in a risk-off regime.
Despite the severity of the reset, Krüger remains constructive on late 2026, expecting that a more dovish Federal Reserve and deregulation could eventually override current technical damage. For now, though, his conclusion is clear: this was not a random crash, but the logical endpoint of a long structural unwind.
The post Crypto Analyst Lists 15 Reasons Behind Bitcoin’s Market Breakdown appeared first on ETHNews.

