#比特币宏观表现 Seeing the divergence in perspectives between Tom Lee and Sean Farrell, I actually view this as a positive sign. It reminds me of the 2017 cycle when institutions first entered the market—analyst disagreements were far more intense back then.
Different analytical frameworks, different client bases naturally lead to different strategies. Tom Lee caters to large capital allocators with only 1-5% allocation to BTC and ETH, focusing on long-term structural trends and disciplined positioning; Sean Farrell targets professional clients with 20%+ crypto asset allocation, needing tactical cycle trades to outperform the market. This fundamentally reflects the current multi-tiered differentiation of institutional investment.
What's interesting is they actually agree on one critical judgment—Bitcoin will challenge new highs before year-end. The disagreement is only on timing: one says late January 2026, the other suggests it might dip to 6-6.5k first before rallying. From historical cycle patterns, this kind of timing divergence is actually quite common.
What stands out in my memory is that whenever we discuss "perfect pricing," it's often the most dangerous moment. Sean's point that current market pricing is nearly perfect but risks remain is quite thought-provoking. Government shutdowns, Fed leadership changes, miner pressure, original holder liquidations—these variables do exist.
Those who've lived through multiple cycles understand: the hardest part isn't predicting direction, but controlling risk and waiting for confirmation signals. The institutional voices showing disagreement actually signal the market is transitioning from single-narrative thinking to multi-dimensional analysis. That's true maturity.
#比特币宏观表现 Seeing the divergence in perspectives between Tom Lee and Sean Farrell, I actually view this as a positive sign. It reminds me of the 2017 cycle when institutions first entered the market—analyst disagreements were far more intense back then.
Different analytical frameworks, different client bases naturally lead to different strategies. Tom Lee caters to large capital allocators with only 1-5% allocation to BTC and ETH, focusing on long-term structural trends and disciplined positioning; Sean Farrell targets professional clients with 20%+ crypto asset allocation, needing tactical cycle trades to outperform the market. This fundamentally reflects the current multi-tiered differentiation of institutional investment.
What's interesting is they actually agree on one critical judgment—Bitcoin will challenge new highs before year-end. The disagreement is only on timing: one says late January 2026, the other suggests it might dip to 6-6.5k first before rallying. From historical cycle patterns, this kind of timing divergence is actually quite common.
What stands out in my memory is that whenever we discuss "perfect pricing," it's often the most dangerous moment. Sean's point that current market pricing is nearly perfect but risks remain is quite thought-provoking. Government shutdowns, Fed leadership changes, miner pressure, original holder liquidations—these variables do exist.
Those who've lived through multiple cycles understand: the hardest part isn't predicting direction, but controlling risk and waiting for confirmation signals. The institutional voices showing disagreement actually signal the market is transitioning from single-narrative thinking to multi-dimensional analysis. That's true maturity.