Bitunix Analyst: The energy channel game has evolved into supply chain restructuring, with real-world risks dominating asset pricing

Mars Finance News, April 14 — The core market contradiction has shifted from a single energy price increase to a game over “energy transportation rights and supply availability.” As the U.S. pressures Iranian ports and the Strait of Hormuz, and Saudi Arabia warns of possible retaliatory blockades in the Red Sea, market concerns about the stability of the global energy supply chain have intensified. This is reflected not only in rising oil prices but also in a fundamental change in pricing logic — WTI has rarely traded at a premium to Brent, indicating that funds are shifting from “global benchmarks” to “physical deliverability,” and energy is officially transitioning from a commodity to a strategic asset.
From policy and market responses, this structural shift reinforces the risk of inflation becoming sticky. Federal Reserve officials have explicitly stated that if oil prices remain high, the impact will gradually spread to other prices, implying that future inflation will no longer be a short-term disturbance but may become broadly transmitted. Meanwhile, the EU is preparing to introduce measures to adjust energy prices and taxes, showing that major economies are beginning to passively respond to imported inflation. Coupled with a significant decline in OPEC production, the combined effects of supply contraction and geopolitical risks make it difficult for energy prices to fall quickly, further constraining global policy space.
Turning to the crypto market, BTC has now entered an area where previous high supply zones intersect with dense liquidation regions, essentially reflecting funds tentatively absorbing macro uncertainty. Clear pressure forms around 75,000, with 75,600 as a key liquidation trigger zone. Once triggered passively, the total liquidation scale could expand to over $600 million, temporarily boosting liquidity; however, in an environment with overall limited liquidity, such upward movements are more likely to be structural squeezes rather than trend-driven capital inflows. Support at 73,400 needs to be monitored for whether the zone continues to hold; if support is lost, prices may return to lower-liquidity areas for rebalancing.
Meanwhile, extreme upward cases like RAVE show that the current market is driven less by fundamentals and more by liquidity squeezes under low circulation and high leverage structures. This phenomenon is consistent with the nature of BTC’s liquidation zones at high levels — the market is shifting from a “funds-driven trend” to a “structure-triggered volatility,” where any price extension heavily depends on leverage and liquidations rather than new capital inflows.
Overall, the market has entered a phase dominated by physical supply risks. Energy, shipping, and geopolitical factors are no longer just background variables but are directly determining liquidity and asset pricing. Under this framework, the volatility of BTC and the crypto market is essentially a reallocation of global funds amid uncertainty, rather than an independent market trend.