Bitcoin's performance relative to the Nasdaq has fallen 62.2% from its latest peak, according to analysis from Rand Group and The DeFi Report. This decline approaches the magnitude of previous bear-market extremes, when the ratio dropped 75.7% in 2018 and 68.5% during the 2021-2022 cycle.
The current contraction reached roughly 90% of the depth recorded during the previous cycle's drawdown. Analysts identified June 30 as a potential low point for the ratio before conditions shifted in August.
Understanding the Measure
The Bitcoin-Nasdaq ratio tracks relative performance between the two markets rather than Bitcoin's standalone price movement. This distinction matters: while Bitcoin lost approximately 83% between its December 2017 peak and December 2018 low, and roughly 77% between November 2021 and November 2022, the ratio measures how one outperformed or underperformed the other.
Earlier in 2026, the comparison moved decisively toward technology stocks. During the second quarter, Bitcoin fell 13.4% while the Nasdaq 100 surged 27.7%. Analysts attributed the divergence to weaker structural demand, tighter liquidity, and concerns about selling by digital-asset treasury companies.
August Recovery and ETF Inflows
Bitcoin rebounded from approximately $58,500 in late June to above $80,000 in August. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs received $1.92 billion between August 17 and 21, marking their strongest weekly inflow since October 2025.
By August 26, analyst Michael Nadeau's outlook had turned more bullish following the rapid recovery. Bitcoin traded near $78,200 on August 30 after exceeding $81,000 earlier in the month.
Macro Conditions Remain in Focus
Despite the rebound, macroeconomic factors continued to influence markets. Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh's Jackson Hole remarks increased expectations for tighter monetary policy, with traders raising the probability of a September rate increase from approximately 35% to above 55%.
The Nasdaq fell 0.52% on the following Friday, while Bitcoin dropped more than 3%, reflecting broader market volatility.
The historical ratio comparison provides context but not confirmation of a market bottom, analysts noted. Sustained relative outperformance, continuing ETF demand, and stronger liquidity would provide firmer evidence than the historical comparison alone.
