Hey everyone, and thanks for jumping back into the cryptoverse today. We're going to talk about Bitcoin, and we're going to be discussing the Pi Cycle Top indicator. If you guys like the content, make sure you subscribe to the channel, give the video a thumbs up, and check out the sale

on into the Cryptoverse Premium at intocptv.org. And the general idea is that it predicts Bitcoin's top to within 3 days. Now, you may be curious how it works. Essentially, all it is is taking the 111-day SMA and the 350-day SMA times two and figuring out

when they cross. And when they cross historically, that's when Bitcoin's price tops out to within 3 days. Now, you may look at this and say, 'Well, that's pretty good.' In 2013, remember this was created in 2019, so it's easy to go back and find

stuff to fit to. What's more difficult is getting future peaks, which this one actually did. There's a lot of indicators that fail to do that. This one actually did that. That's why we're talking about it. So in 2013, you can see that it it, you know,

within 3 days again, fit in 2019, same thing in 2017, right within 3 days of the cross. And in 2021, when it first got put to the test, you can see that at the first top, it got it to within 3 days. Now, the

second top obviously it did not, but in the Pi Cycle Top's defense, I don't really think there were hardly any indicators that got the second top, um, you know, to the day or anything like that. And so, and I also think the argument is that well, if you sold at 64k in April, the price of

Bitcoin still went to 15K, you know, a year and a half later. Um, so what if you missed out on it going up to 69K and it only was for a few days, and again it was like half a year later. So in this case, though, what I want to draw

everyone's attention to is, I, I could envision a scenario in the cycle where everyone's waiting for this thing to cross, and I'm not suggesting this time has to be different, but I want to show you something that I have shown you before, but because there's going to be

some new people, it's probably time to show them too. So one of the things you'll notice is that every time they've crossed the time, the amount of time that they stay crossed for has gotten less and less, and the extent of their crossing has

diminished, right? Look at this one, keep this in mind, then look in 2017. You can see that was much less significant of a cross, and then look at 2021, it barely crossed. I'm still sick. Um, so then I wondered what if we were to

take these two moving averages, right, two times the 350 SMA and 111 SMA. What if we divided them by each other? If you do that, you see diminishing peaks. In order for them to cross, this has to go above one, right? That's when

the moving averages are equal to each other, and you can see that last cycle it barely got above one. The cycle before that it was all the way up here at, you know, 1.07. The cycle before that it was all the way up at 1.18, and

1.23 and so you can see that where people might go wrong with this in the future is assuming it gets back up to one. What if it doesn't? Right? What if it doesn't go all the way back to one? Because what if you're getting diminishing peaks so

if you extrapolate this, which you really shouldn't do, and any good scientist or engineer will tell you that interpolation is okay generally speaking, but extrapolation is is not a good way um to navigate things. But this is dubious speculation, my friends, right? And and of

course, we're going to speculate dubiously over here, so if we did and we said what if we connect the peaks? Where would it put it? Well, I'm glad you asked. If you ignore that one, right, and you just connect this one, the actual top

right, you know, the extent of the moving average division. So then the next one and the next one, then you get over here and you can see it would be, if it were to occur now, it would be around 0.9. Obviously, if it occurred later, it might be less than

point nine. Right now the moving average division is at 0.55, but obviously this is going to start moving up pretty aggressively soon because Bitcoin just had a fairly explosive rally, right? So it's going to take some time for those moving averages to catch up. By definition, moving average

is in fact a lagging indicator and in fact in the first couple of cycles, you know, you can see that by the time the moving average division peaked, it was a month or two after the actual top was in. It was only, I mean, in 2017 it occurred about a month

beforehand, but last cycle they basically occurred simultaneously, so you can see that it's getting shifted each time to within, you know, to where the actual top is occurring. So back in March and April, we did a video on this and I suggested that

you know, April would be a, or that March was a midcycle top and not a market cycle top and that we'd have about 6 to 9 months of a downtrend. And the reason I suggested a midcycle top and not a market cycle top

one of the reasons was because the P-cycle indicator had only gone up to 735 or so, and if you extrapolate it, it would have suggested that that wasn't really high enough for it to justify being a market cycle top, but at some point down the line and I

don't know when it's going to be and we can't even know if it's actually going to happen or not. Right, things happen, markets don't always go how we plan, but at some point down the line, especially within the next year or so, if

this moving average division of these two moving averages that make up the P-cycle top, if we see them getting back above 0.8, then you shouldn't just throw caution to the wind, right? I mean, it, it would certainly warrant some level of skepticism as to how much higher it's

going to go now. Again, extrapolation would suggest 0.9 could happen. If it happens now, if it happens a year from now, then it could be lower than 0.9. Um, so it really all depends on, on, on when it happens and exactly how that plays

out, but I did think that this is a worthwhile exercise. I know the last time I did this video, uh, there were some mixed results or mixed comments, mixed feedback. I think some people liked the insight that this gave, and then other people were like, "Well, you know, you're"

basically saying this time is different." I suppose the other way to look at it is to just draw a horizontal line and to say that, you know, it'll hit it again, but you can at least see the concern right, as to what if it doesn't hit it again, um,

what if it just sort of continues this trend and then the indicator uh doesn't actually fire in the same way that it has before? To be clear though, I mean I wouldn't really consider that to be a failure of the indicator. I think it's

actually a really interesting indicator, and the interesting aspects of it can sometimes be buried, right? And if you actually take these things and you know you you play around with them and you and you kind of see any interesting underlying trends, you can find them and you can see that the indicator typically

bottoms out moving average division around .3, right? .3, and every time it hits around .3, that's around the bottom, so just something for you guys to think, you know, to to think about and keep in mind. I'm not going to go on with

this any longer for this video, but you guys get the idea. Again, this is created by Philip Swift back in 2019. I'll link his Twitter or his ex, um, his ex account in the uh description below if you guys want to follow him, which I think you

should I think he's a good voice in the space, but we will go ahead and wrap it up there guys. Thank you for tuning in, subscribe, give the video a thumbs up, and again check out the sale on Into The Crypt Premium at intothecryptoverse.com.

Bitcoin: Pi Cycle Top Indicator

You have just jumped into the cryptoverse, which provides high quality cryptocurrency education to those who want to dive deeper into the metrics that are driving the market. We all know that there are thousands of people/websites discussing cryptocurrencies, so what makes this different? Many sites discuss cryptocurrencies solely in the form of memes and catchy slogans. Analysis is typically limited to price and price predictions, rather than looking at metrics that drive the price. As an academic, I approach cryptocurrency from a practical perspective and use my science/engineering/programmatic background to package these metrics in an easily digestible way for the community. I try and keep a level head with my discussions and provide you information that is helpful to you as you research different coins.