- BTC active addresses dropped 39.80%, falling from 821,000 to 494,000 over the past two weeks of consolidation.
- Apparent Bitcoin demand hit -147,000 BTC, marking the weakest accumulation reading recorded since late 2025.
- Bitcoin’s correlation with global liquidity has fallen below the -2 sigma band, a rare extreme not seen in a decade.
BTC active addresses have dropped 39% over the past two weeks, falling from 821,000 to 494,000.
This sharp decline is happening alongside weakening demand and a price consolidation near the $75,000 level.
Analysts are reading the data as a sign that short-term participants are stepping back. What is left in the market, according to on-chain observers, is a base of long-term, high-conviction holders.
BTC Active Addresses Signal a Major Shift in Market Participation
BTC active addresses recorded a 39.80% decline over a two-week period. The count moved from 821,000 down to 494,000 during ongoing price consolidation.
This kind of drop in network activity tends to reflect a change in who is participating in the market.
Crypto analyst Ali Charts addressed the trend directly in a post on X. He explained that when network activity thins during consolidation, short-term speculative noise exits the ecosystem.
Bitcoin $BTC network has cooled off, with active addresses falling 39.80% from 821,000 to 494,000 over the last two weeks.
When network activity thins out like this during a price consolidation, it typically tells us that short-term speculative noise is leaving the ecosystem.… https://t.co/aVostSQxeq pic.twitter.com/Ux4PNTCJEc
— Ali Charts (@alicharts) May 26, 2026
The participants who remain are typically those with stronger convictions and longer time horizons.
This pattern has appeared before during Bitcoin’s previous consolidation phases. Each time, the reduction in active addresses preceded a cleaner directional move in price. On its own, however, the metric does not confirm which direction that move will take.
Weak Hands Exit as Demand Hits Its Lowest Point Since Late 2025
As short-term participants step back, apparent Bitcoin demand has fallen to around -147,000 BTC.
That is the weakest reading recorded since late 2025, reflecting supply outpacing accumulation. The gap between coins entering circulation and buying from holders has widened considerably.
Analyst Lucky pointed to several factors driving this weakness. Supply from miners and circulating coins is currently ahead of accumulation activity by holders.
Been seeing headlines about Bitcoin demand hitting its most bearish level of the year, and it got me reflecting. Apparent demand is now around -147k BTC, the weakest reading since late 2025.
A few reasons stand out:
➡️Supply from miners and circulating coins is outpacing… pic.twitter.com/wKVie5KTmk
— Lucky (@LLuciano_BTC) May 26, 2026
A recent price rally to $82,000 was also mostly futures-driven, with little strong spot buying supporting it.
ETF flows have softened following earlier rounds of inflows that briefly added buying pressure. Price is now testing critical support in the $70,000 to $77,000 zone.
Lucky noted that similar readings of this depth have historically served as solid long-term entry points.
Long-Term Holders Remain as Bitcoin Liquidity Correlation Hits Decade Lows
While short-term activity cools, long-term holders are becoming the dominant force in the market.
Their continued accumulation stands in contrast to the broader demand weakness seen across the ecosystem. On-chain data increasingly points to a market being consolidated in stronger hands.
Adding to this picture, Bitcoin’s correlation with global liquidity has moved to an extreme low. New data from analyst Andre Dragosch, shared by Bitcoin News on X, places the reading below the -2 sigma band. That level has rarely been sustained over the past decade.
The chart tracks Bitcoin and gold against global liquidity using a z-score model. Bitcoin’s current deviation from liquidity trends is among the most extreme seen in over ten years.
Some analysts view this as a compressed setup ahead of a sharp mean reversion, while others believe the historical correlation has simply broken down.
