Anthony Scaramucci said Bitcoin may not see a meaningful recovery until October or November, arguing that the current drawdown still fits the asset’s historic four-year cycle despite a more favorable regulatory backdrop in Washington.

Speaking on the Thinking Crypto podcast from the Solana Policy Summit, the SkyBridge Capital founder framed the market weakness as a cyclical bear phase rather than a structural break. He said investors had expected a stronger policy-driven rally after the change in US administration, but that whales and long-time holders have continued to sell into ETF-driven demand.

“I’m old school. I’ve been in the category that this is a cyclical bear market traditional to the four-year cycle of Bitcoin,” Scaramucci said. “You’ve just crossed the halfway mark of the halving and so you’re on your way to the back half of this thing. You typically don’t get any type of real recovery until the first quarter of next year.”

Scaramucci added that Bitcoin’s timeline may have been slightly accelerated by macro factors, including President Donald Trump’s tariff-related messaging and geopolitical conflict. Still, he said Bitcoin has remained “fairly sticky” during the war period referenced in the interview.

“You probably won’t see a recovery in Bitcoin until maybe the first month of the last quarter,” he said, pointing to “October possibly November” as a more realistic window.

Why Bitcoin ETF Demand Has Not Been Enough

The comments address a central frustration across the crypto market: why prices have failed to respond more forcefully to a pro-crypto administration, institutional ETF access, and improving legislative momentum.

According to Scaramucci, the answer lies partly in supply. ETF activity has brought new buyers into Bitcoin, including older investors using traditional brokerage channels, but that demand has met heavy distribution from whales and early holders.

“You’re still seeing a lot of Bitcoin buying. A lot of boomers are buying Bitcoin, but it’s just not enough,” he said. “You got whales that are selling into the — the OGs in this industry believe in the four-year cycle. And so what they do is they fulfill the prophecy of the four-year cycle by acting on the four-year cycle and selling.”

He said whales were “pumping lots of coins into the supply at around $100,000,” which in his view contributed to Bitcoin falling into the high $60,000s.

Scaramucci also tied Bitcoin’s next phase of institutional adoption to US market-structure legislation, especially the Clarity Act. He argued that the idea Bitcoin is “valueless” is now “completely off the table,” but said banks are unlikely to move aggressively without clearer rules.

“If you don’t get the Clarity Act legislation passed, you’re not going to get the banks to really open up,” he said.
He cited experimental custody programs at Bank of New York and SoFi, while arguing that real adoption requires major money-center banks to offer custody, yield, and borrowing against Bitcoin on more competitive terms. Until then, he said, investors will not see “real full-throated adoption.”

Scaramucci also criticized the political and lobbying dynamics around stablecoin yield and crypto legislation. He said banks are pushing back because of their entrenched market position, while warning that holding out for a perfect bill could delay progress.

“I’m a little bit more practical. I probably would have tried to get something done and I would not make the perfect deal the enemy of progress,” he said. “The best example I can give you is the Bitcoin ETF. Gary Gensler hates us. He did not want that to happen. He lost the lawsuit, so he was forced to have it happen.”

Bitcoin Reserve Debate Still Politicized

On the question of whether the US government should hold Bitcoin in strategic reserves, Scaramucci said yes, but only if the issue can move beyond partisan framing.

“It’s very hard to hold Bitcoin in a strategic reserve if it’s a partisan issue,” he said. “If we can get this to be a transformative post-partisan what’s right or wrong for the country, what’s right or wrong for the American taxpayer, then the answer is yes.”

He said he would not aggressively push the issue before broader consensus forms, instead favoring an approach where government-held Bitcoin from legal actions is retained rather than sold. He also said he was unsure whether the US government had completed an audit of its Bitcoin holdings.