Bitcoin correlation shifts vs S&P 500 since FTX collapse

What to Know:

• Bitcoin–equity correlation is weak; ‘weakest’ and ‘43%’ claims remain unverified.
• Missing index, frequency, and window prevent independent testing of ‘weakest’ claim.

Bitcoin–stock correlation appears weak, but the claim that it is the “weakest since the FTX collapse” and “down 43% in 6 months” remains unverified. Correlation and price drawdowns are distinct and should not be conflated.

Available commentary points to softening ties with equities without validating the superlative or the 43% figure. According to Deutsche Bank, Bitcoin’s correlation with equities has recently eased into the mid‑teens, far below stress‑period highs and consistent with a weaker co-movement regime.

The statement also omits essential context: reference index, return frequency, and window length. Without a defined 30‑, 60‑, or 90‑day window versus the S&P 500, the “weakest” label cannot be independently tested.

Why a weaker correlation matters for portfolios and miners now

If Bitcoin’s correlation with the S&P 500 is lower, diversification potential within multi‑asset portfolios may improve temporarily. However, correlations are regime‑dependent and often rise during risk‑off events, so benefits can be transient.

For miners, equity performance can decouple from spot BTC when business models pivot toward AI or high‑performance computing. As reported by Bloomberg’s David Pan, the fast‑evolving AI sector is creating a schism among listed Bitcoin miners, complicating any simple read‑through from BTC to miner stocks.

Institutional integration has also reshaped correlation behavior since 2020 through ETFs and futures that embed BTC more deeply in macro rotations. “Historically Bitcoin–equity correlation was around 0.2 for daily returns pre‑2020,” said Dr. Mark Shore in CME Group commentary, “rising to 0.5 or higher during pronounced risk‑on/risk‑off swings.”

Rolling 30/60/90-day correlations: method, data sources, cautions

Rolling 30/60/90‑day correlations typically use Pearson correlations of daily returns between BTC and equity benchmarks such as the S&P 500 or Nasdaq‑100. Shorter windows are noisier; longer windows smooth regime shifts, which can mask turning points in the rolling 90‑day correlation.

Data inputs should be aligned by timestamp and currency, and sources should be disclosed, including regulated futures settlements or reputable index levels. Choices on windows, holidays, and outlier handling can materially change point‑in‑time readings, so reproducibility requires precise documentation.

Claims such as “weakest since the FTX collapse” require a specified index, window, and computation method to be testable. Absent those details, both the 43% number and the superlative remain unverified and should be treated as provisional.

As reported by AOL, Galaxy Digital’s head of research Alex Thorn has characterized Bitcoin’s next phase as unusually volatile, underscoring why correlation metrics can shift quickly across regimes. This volatility context cautions against over‑generalizing from a single recent window.

At the time of this writing, Bitcoin trades near $65,393, with very high recent volatility of 10.41% and a neutral RSI(14) of 31.58, based on provided market data. These figures are descriptive market context, not forward guidance.