2025-12-11 11:00:43

#数字资产生态回暖 Renowned analyst Tom Lee has recently put forward a bold view—$BTC's super cycle is just one trigger away. He pointed out on a financial program that the key factor is whether the US ISM index can break through the 50 line.

According to his logic, historical data shows that once the ISM index surpasses 50, $BTC and $ETH typically enter a疯狂上涨的超级周期. Those who argue "the four-year cycle underperforms this year"? He directly refutes this as a misreading of history. Tom Lee even confidently predicts that Bitcoin could reach a new high by early next year.

Currently, the ISM index is oscillating below 50, but once it breaks through effectively, institutional funds are highly likely to rush in. Will this rally really happen? From a macro perspective, the data turning point is indeed worth noting. Of course, any prediction must be accompanied by risk management—after all, the market always loves surprises.

BTC0,84%

ETH0,18%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GovernancePretender

· 2025-12-14 10:56

Tom Lee is at it again, saying that if ISM breaks 50, it will explode? Man, I've heard this line quite a few times, always predicting a new high early next year, but what happened then...

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerAirdrop

· 2025-12-14 08:24

Tom Lee is at it again, claiming a super cycle if the ISM breaks 50? I've heard this kind of statement too many times, and the index is still fluctuating below 50. Even if institutions come in, they still have to look at the market sentiment. Don't take it too seriously. Wait, a new high early next year? This guy is really bold to say that, want to place a bet? It's really just betting on macro data; the ISM is just an excuse. Is history repeating itself? Ha, the market never repeats exactly. Feels like it's time to go all in again, but I'll still wait and see.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainWorker

· 2025-12-13 06:41

Tom Lee is back at it again, claiming that a super cycle begins once the ISM breaks 50? Just listen and don't take it seriously. --- Another "only one condition away" prediction, this time with the ISM. I just want to ask, when has this condition ever truly occurred? --- Breaking 50 and rushing in? How come institutions are so obedient? Feels like someone is writing a script. --- The "logic" of historical data is like Schrödinger's cat in the crypto world—used to flip the page when relevant, face-plant when not. --- Hitting new highs early next year... familiar lines, heard them last year, and the year before. --- The ISM has been oscillating around 50 for so long without breaking through. Doesn't that seem a bit off? --- The macro turning point does matter, but compared to Tom's words, the data itself is more trustworthy. --- Every time, it's a "risk management" disclaimer—say nothing when making money, only remember this when losing. --- Does this 50 line really seem so magical? I feel it's just a number.

View OriginalReply0

PonziDetector

· 2025-12-12 16:06

Will ISM rise above 50 to take off? Tom Lee is starting to spin a story again. What can historical data really tell us... Even if institutions actually come in, they might not follow his script. Don't be blinded by predictions.

View OriginalReply0

Blockwatcher9000

· 2025-12-11 11:30

Tom Lee is at it again, claiming that an ISM index above 50 can trigger a super cycle? Just listen and don't believe it for a second.

View OriginalReply0

BakedCatFanboy

· 2025-12-11 11:28

Tom Lee is at it again, claiming that the ISM50 can trigger a super cycle? What about the previous predictions—have you forgotten them?

View OriginalReply0

consensus_failure

· 2025-12-11 11:27

Tom Lee is starting to tell stories again, saying that once ISM breaks 50, it's a super cycle? I remember he said the same thing last year... Wait, do institutions really listen so obediently? That seems a bit too idealistic. Can the logic of entering the market when breaking the level really work? Anyway, I don’t believe in predictions. Historical data looks good, but the market never follows the script. In the end, it's still about risk control, so what’s the point of predictions? Is the ISM index really that critical? The macro environment feels too complex. Once again, making a definitive statement—let’s wait and see if this one is reliable.

View OriginalReply0

ChainProspector

· 2025-12-11 11:25

Tom Lee is at it again, talking about stories—ISM breaking 50 means a super cycle? I feel like this logic has been used for three years. A new high early next year? Come on, let's wait until ISM truly stabilizes; right now, it's still throwing punches below 50. But to be fair, if institutional funds really flood in, we retail investors will definitely need to hop on the bandwagon and enjoy some of the benefits.

View OriginalReply0

CommunityJanitor

· 2025-12-11 11:21

Tom Lee is at it again, hearing the story over and over about the ISM50. When that day finally breaks, it might actually cause a sell-off. Historical data is always right in hindsight, but the key is that institutions are also waiting for this signal, which makes it even harder. A new high early next year? Come on, let's see what the Federal Reserve has to say first. One data point deciding the super cycle? That's way too simplistic, my friend. Macro turning points can be watched, but don't go all in, everyone. Everyone has experienced the pain of cutting losses. By the way, how many times have Tom Lee's predictions been accurate? My impression is that the odds are not great. How long do we have to wait for the ISM to break 50? It's a long wait, and it might be enough to serve time in prison. Better to look for other signals. Wait, wait, isn't this the same old story? Every market cycle, they hype it up like this. They talk big, but the real money is made by those who quietly position themselves. Instead of trusting predictions, it's better to trust your own risk management—that's the truth.

View OriginalReply0