Bitcoin is holding well above the critical support at $47,000. Trading at $50.067 with 1.6% in the 1-hour chart and sideways movement in the 24-hour chart, BTC seems to be on a path to recovery on the lower timeframes. As many in the crypto space have said, this bull-run will be defined by its quick bounce backs and consolidations periods.

Trader Josh Rager compared BTC’s past price action with the current price performance. For Rager is a normal part of a bull-run for BTC to trend below its 100 days Exponential Moving Average (EMA). During 2017, the cryptocurrency saw at least 3 drops below this metric.

The trader believes investors should be “concerned” if the price breaks below its 200D EMA. In contrast, BTC never trends below this metric while on bullish price action.

During the weekend, the trader expects a bounce if BTC drops to the mid-$40,000. Currently, the 10W EMA is converging with the weekly support level, as Rager explained. This could serve as a good entry point for a long position in both BTC and altcoins, as the trader said:

The bottom could be in, but if Bitcoin bounces and then goes down to lower $40ks. Would love to buy in that area both $BTC and alts. As long as price holds there we could see some major rallies over the next few months as BTC slowly uptrends.

In the meantime, some side movement could be Bitcoin’s new normal for the short term. Lex Moskovski, CIO at Moskovski Capital, believes the recent crash “cooled off” BTC’s major overheating indicators.

As seen below, Moskovski compares 2017 bull run metrics with the current market and determined that Bitcoin is around 44% from potentially reaching a peak on its upside trend. On the contrary, there could be even more upside momentum after this week’s crash. Moskovski said:

Bitcoin has cooled off a bit and according to the major overheating indicators has even more upside now.

What Could Break Bitcoin’s Market Structure?
Economist and trader Alex Krüger provided further arguments for a long-term BTC bullish case. As Krüger said, this cryptocurrency has seen massive adoption with macro-economic conditions that benefit it. Since 2020, the thesis of Bitcoin as a store of value has gained a lot of strength among institutional investors.

Krüger laid out two possible scenarios. In one, “major catalysts” re-heat the market, and BTC’s price pushes into a new discovery period. The economist said:

The first half of this dump was expected, not so the second, which was news-driven. Shit happens. But nothing major has changed aside of a healthy cleansing. When expecting a range good to avoid getting bullish on breakouts, or risk getting head chopped off.

In the second scenario, the U.S. Government and its Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen launch new regulations for crypto and digital assets. Krüger expects any “draconian” rules to negatively impact the market.

Read more: NEWSBTC

NatWest, the UK retail bank, has announced it will not engage with business customers who accept payment in bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. It follows recent announcements from HSBC that it won’t allow transfers from digital wallets and won’t enable customers to buy shares in companies associated with cryptocurrencies, such as Coinbase or MicroStrategy.

The feeling from both banks is that cryptocurrencies are high risk and therefore justify a cautious approach, though they note that their stance could change if and when regulation evolves.

Interestingly, this is not a view shared by institutions across the Atlantic. Both Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are now offering their wealth management clients the opportunity to invest in bitcoin. Indeed, the initial uptake has been strong, with Morgan Stanley alone drawing in nearly US$30 million (£22 million) of investment in two weeks.

Why the caution?
The cautious approach of NatWest and HSBC stems from the 2012 recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force, a G7 initiative geared towards defeating money laundering. These recommendations mandate each member state to implement measures requiring their banks to scrutinise customers’ transactions for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing.

Under recommendation one, the anti-money laundering framework is to be applied on the basis of perceived risk. In other words, if a transaction or business activity is perceived to be more risky than usual, it needs closer scrutiny by the bank to ensure compliance with the framework.

This increases the strain on bank resources to verify that a transaction or business activity is safe to continue, but they also face large fines for non-compliance where there are deficiencies in their implementation of the framework or if things go wrong.

NatWest and HSBC are no strangers to being under the spotlight for compliance issues. HSBC was fined US$1.9 billion by US authorities in 2012, while NatWest faces charges over significant compliance breaches in the UK. While these charges relate to traditional money-laundering compliance breaches, perhaps it goes some way to explaining the caution of the two banks.

Banks view digital currencies as risky because they have the potential to be used for money laundering, they are targets for fraud and scams, and their value can be extremely unstable in the short-term. Indeed, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority has warned that those investing and dealing with cryptocurrency are at risk of losing all their funds. Rather than face the enhanced burden of investigating businesses and individuals dealing with these assets, it is easier for banks to avoid the risk and not engage with them.

This situation is not unique to cryptocurrencies. For instance, it has long been a byproduct of the anti-money laundering requirements that banks have refused to offer financial services to charities operating in high-risk jurisdictions. The banking sector accepts this reality, particularly given that charities tend to be relatively low-value customers.

The wrong approach?
On the face of it, banks are perfectly entitled not top offer financial services to businesses transacting in digital currencies. As well as anti-money laundering, banks are bound by anti-fraud measures and consumer protection. Fradulent crypto transactions are both difficult to spot and impossible to reverse, so the risks of engaging are high, at least until the market establishes itself and the business case to engage is stronger.

Of course, this is not to say that they have necessarily made the right call. The fact that the leading US banks have taken a different approach suggests that they think the potential rewards are worthy of the compliance burden. In defence of cryptocurrencies, they are both more traceable than cash, and used less for money laundering.

And while it is true that there is a risk of significant losses with cryptocurrency investments, there is also clear potential for big gains. Banks are profit-making businesses: the returns from crypto investments in recent months – notwithstanding the big sell-off in the past couple of days – plus the very bullish forecasts, ought to prompt them to at least speculate in the area, regulatory burden aside.

We could simplistically blame the UK banks for either being too cautious or not doing enough to help these businesses, but it overlooks the bigger design flaw in the anti-money laundering framework. Compliance measures are a significant drain on a bank’s resources where a transaction or business is considered high-risk. Banks and their workers also face criminal sanctions, including large fines, where they fail to properly implement the rules, which is particularly troublesome when it is almost impossible for a bank to identify what a suspicious crypto transaction looks like.

Without a guaranteed high return for the bank, it is easier to de-risk and not engage with these businesses. This represents a missed opportunity for banks, and a potentially unnecessary stifling of legitimate business growth for companies wishing to deal with cryptocurrencies.

Banks are portrayed as the public villain, but the bigger problem is at a much higher level. It is a political and legal issue which requires the attention and intervention of lawmakers to address the fact it is much easier for banks to de-risk than to comply with the rules and help these businesses grow.

Read more: THE CONVERSATION

Bitcoin is now reeling after a rejection prevented further highs around the time Coinbase Global went live on the Nasdaq. The same stock market has also been booming alongside crypto – both markets gone parabolic against a common denominator: the dollar.

The greenback’s “exponential decay” is poised to continue, further benefiting crypto and equities. However, some short term abatement of hyperinflation could bring pause to the bull market.

When nearly every stock or crypto chart denominated in the same asset USD $ is parabolic, you’re looking at an exponential decay of the denominator. In the short term, there is a risk that they crash the market in order to abate some of the effects of the ongoing hyperinflation.

— Jess Martini 🍸 (@btcty) April 20, 2021

USD Inflation Drop Goes Parabolic Against Bitcoin, Stock Market
Flash back to around 14 months ago, before Black Thursday rocked finance and to when the pandemic first began. The stock market and cryptocurrencies were decimated by the panic that ensued.

But as a result of governments flooding the money supply with more money than ever before, both markets went ballistic. A bull market broke out in both stocks and cryptocurrencies, bringing all major indices to new all-times, and Bitcoin breaking all previous records.

The stock market and crypto are doing well for completely different economic factors and are such different asset classes, the real reason for the sudden parity is due to the dollar.

Exponential Decay To Continue, According To Dollar Currency Index
The dollar is in trouble – there’s no doubt about it. It’s value against other top world currencies according to the DXY has fallen. Against Bitcoin and stocks, the drop has gone parabolic.

Zooming out on the DXY could suggest that the worst is yet to come for the greenback. A massive symmetrical triangle has formed, similar in shape as the one Bitcoin broke upward from to start the bull market.

Except before Bitcoin consolidated, the previous trend was up. In the dollar, the prevailing trend has been down, and that’s where things could still be headed if “exponential decay” continues as expected.

A fall of such magnitude as the measure rule would project, could take the top currency in the world down to historic lows. And with USD as the base currency at which all other assets are measured, price action could get a little wild.

If that happens, even if somehow a strategy rolls out to prevent against short-term inflation and the dollar gets some air, fiat is dying a fast death at the hands of Bitcoin.

Technical factors in Bitcoin and stocks also point to correction enough to where the dollar gets some immediate relief. But after that, it is right back to destruction of the global reserve currency.

Read more: NEWSBTC

UK bank HSBC found itself under fire again, with commenters arguing that the bank which had appetite for drug money does not have appetite for bitcoin (BTC). After it had been fined for its involvement in facilitating money laundering by Mexican and Colombian drug cartels, HSBC’s recent move – allegedly banning the users of its online share trading platform from purchasing US-based software developer MicroStrategy stock – suggests its thirst for cash does not extend to the world’s number one crypto.

The story has been discussed for several days now, fuelled by unverified sources, but a message addressed to an HSBC InvestDirect client has now been reported on by Reuters as well – and it indicates that the bank does not want to facilitate transactions related to or referencing the performance of cryptocurrencies.

Per a picture shared online by Twitter account Camiam, the bank seemingly said it “has changed the policy on virtual currencies (such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and other digital currencies)” and it “will not participate in facilitating (buy and/or exchange) product related to virtual currencies, or products related or referencing the performance of virtual currency.”

The message assured customers that it would allow them to hold, sell or transfer-out MicroStrategy stock on their InvestDirect accounts, but it would not permit any new purchases or transfers-in of the company’s shares.

MicroStrategy has positioned itself as one of the most bullish non-crypto businesses, embarking on a bitcoin shopping spree over the past months. Earlier this month, the company spent a further USD 15m on the cryptocurrency, buying BTC 253. As of April 5, MicroStrategy held a total of BTC 91,579 (USD 5.76bn).

Commenting on its new stance, HSBC said in a statement that it had “no appetite for direct exposure to virtual currencies and limited appetite to facilitate products or securities that derive their value from VCs (virtual currencies),” as reported by Reuters. The bank also said its policy towards crypto had been in place since 2018 and is kept under review, while it couldn’t immediately say which countries the ban applied to.

Meanwhile, crypto industry players were unimpressed by HSBC’s hardline policy, accusing the bank of discriminating bitcoin – while eagerly accepting funds from highly controversial sources.

Mentions of the bank’s involvement in drug money laundering schemes, a decision that cost HSBC some USD 1.92bn in fines, were a particularly popular reference among the crypto commentariat. HSBC agreed to pay this sum to US authorities in 2012, apologizing and acknowledging that it failed to maintain an effective program against money laundering, after Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel and Colombia’s Norte del Valle cartel laundered USD 881m through HSBC and a Mexican unit, per the US Department of Justice (DOJ).

“[HSBC] was fined [USD] 1.8B for laundering cartel cash,” said Eric Meltzer, a founding partner at blockchain investment firm Primitive Ventures. “[HSBC] enlarged windows at certain Mexican branches to facilitate drop off of giant boxes of $ from cartel operatives. [The DOJ] report detailed a culture of abuse, coke, alcoholism and a complete disregard for the law. [D]isgusting.”

But another question arose online – what about other companies connected to crypto then, including giants like Tesla, which started accepting BTC payments, or Square, which invested millions in the cryptocurrency?

For example, Twitter user Chilipiper234 asked: “HSBC better take that cartel money, right? Do you also forbid your customers to buy Tesla or Square because they have Bitcoin on their balance sheet?”

That question is something the MicroStrategy legal department should look into, argued The Investor’s Podcast Network host Preston Pysh.

Read more: cryptonews

Currency instability and hyperinflation seemed unreal until a global pandemic struck, sending many nations into economic turmoil. Most economists began to wonder if the end of the pandemic would mean the birth of another Venezuela, which faced a 438% (hyper) inflation rate. However, like several other Bitcoin enthusiasts like Max Keiser thinks that inflation and the price of Bitcoin are correlated.

The aforementioned data is the long-term compounding of past, present, & possibly future base money, since 1970.

In a recent interview Matthew Mežinskis spoke about the inflation rate of the global monetary base, weighted averaged by each base money’s equivalent in USD. What’s important to note here is, it matched the overall 12.8% CAGR (6-year doubling time) we already saw above.

For all of 2019, central banks were actually on track to deflate their currencies. This would have been a first in the modern fiat era. So interestingly, no matter what one argues for money printing, 2019 ended with positive inflation, weighted at 1.5%.

Furthermore, he touched upon the role of monetary metals like gold. Gold’s rate of growth had, in fact, been around 1.8% per annum for the last 170 years.

Almost similar with silver – it’s almost as politicized as its “bigger brother of gold”. Lastly, he shed some light on Bitcoin. He added:

“Remember why the overall compound growth, thus far, is so high, and why it will never be that high again. And now is about the time for a clarification note on the Bitcoin system’s compound annual growth rate, specifically.”

Bitcoin’s finite supply, which may overcome inflation risks is what comforts many. However, this narrative keeps evolving as well.

What’s interesting to note here is, the phrase “supply issuance” for Bitcoin’s chart titles, and not “inflation.” Bitcoin’s “inflation,” economically, was already baked in. As already demonstrated, its growth rate is known until 2141, per the protocol. So when it comes to bitcoins, “inflation” is not the best term.

Even though the price of Bitcoin may indeed surge, its path to the target could be volatile. In the past, the asset’s price has appreciated and even collapsed several times. But some stated that even as Bitcoin increased in price, the rate of inflation, and forecasts for inflation, “remained stable.” Some provide a contrary opinion that economies need a bit more inflation, not less. At the same time, they do not expect hyperinflation to occur again, after the last great recession.

Read more: CRYPTOCOIN

Bloomberg outlined in a recent report the main drivers that could push Bitcoin to $400,000.

A new report suggests that Bitcoin’s fundamental and technical values are improving despite its recent lackluster price action.

Bitcoin’s Mainstream Adoption Accelerates
Bloomberg released a new edition of its monthly cryptocurrency outlook report, titled “Rising Bitcoin Adoption Tide.” The financial media giant evaluates the different factors contributing to the increasing demand for BTC and provides a forecast to see where the leading cryptocurrency is heading next.

Notably, the study is overwhelmingly bullish, citing a paradigm shift favoring the pioneer cryptocurrency in replacing gold as the “global digital-reserve asset.”

According to Bloomberg, Bitcoin has built a price floor at $50,000 while the overhead resistance around $60,000 has been weakening over time. The firm expects prices to slice through this hurdle and advance higher over the next few months after the ongoing consolidation period.

But in the event of a sell-off, the 20-week moving average at $40,000 is seen as the most “extreme downside risk.”

One of the key factors cited in the report that supports the bullish narrative was Tesla’s bold move to allocate some of its wealth into Bitcoin.

Bloomberg refers to such development as an “inflection point” that may encourage other firms to diversify into the digital asset. Now, there is a higher probability that BTC migrates into traditional investment portfolios because of “the risks of missing out on the potential for Bitcoin becoming the global benchmark digital asset.”

In essence, BTC’s fundamental and technical underpinnings are improving, making a solid case for it to replace gold as a store of value in investor portfolios. Such market conditions suggest that the flagship cryptocurrency would reach “price extremes” akin to those in the 2013 and 2017 bull runs.

Under such circumstances, Bloomberg believes that Bitcoin would rise to $400,000.

Read more: CRYPTO BRIEFING