Bitunix Analyst: The market is in the stage of "risk re-pricing and deleveraging incomplete," with the Wash variable acting more like a rhythm adjuster rather than a systemic shock.

BlockBeats News, February 4 — Bitunix analysts stated that the current market risk environment remains tilted towards de-risking and structural deleveraging. After Kevin Woorh was nominated as Federal Reserve Chair, the market quickly focused on his consistent hawkish stance and advocacy for significant balance sheet reduction. However, this variable alone is not sufficient to trigger a new liquidity crisis.

From a cross-market perspective, recent experience has shown that the “mechanical positive correlation” between the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet and the US stock market is weakening. Even during quantitative tightening phases, the US stock market can remain resilient supported by fiscal deficits, corporate earnings, and technological industry momentum. This suggests that even if Woorh pushes for more aggressive balance sheet reduction, its impact on risk assets is more likely to manifest as increased volatility and diverging capital preferences rather than a one-way crash.

For the crypto market, the key is not whether the Fed is shrinking its balance sheet, but whether such actions trigger dollar funding pressures, disorder in the Treasury market, or reserve shortages. Once these pressures become apparent, the capacity of risk assets to absorb shocks will be truly limited; conversely, if fiscal and regulatory frameworks still provide buffers, tightening is more like extending the deleveraging cycle rather than an accelerant.

BTC is seen as a thermometer for whether capital is willing to re-engage with high-risk assets. If, amid rising macro uncertainty, BTC can maintain structural stability above 75,000, it indicates that the market’s pricing of systemic liquidity risk remains restrained; if it falls below, it reflects that risk appetite has not yet recovered.

Looking ahead, Woorh’s true policy boundaries are still constrained by bank reserve requirements and money market stability. If tightening triggers market disorder, its policy path is likely to be forced to adjust. In the short term, this is more a test of policy style and communication rather than the start of a new macro storm.