According to Gate market data, on March 13, 2026, the Bitcoin (BTC) price surged to $71,209.4, marking a 2.72% increase in 24 hours and pushing its market capitalization to $1.43 trillion. This price action unfolded against an exceptionally unique macro backdrop: On February 28, the escalation of US-Iran tensions led to a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude prices skyrocketed from $60 to nearly $120 in just a few days before plunging sharply again, triggering volatility across global equity markets. Meanwhile, Google searches for "World War III" soared to their highest level since June 2025.
Amid this extreme geopolitical panic, an unusual market phenomenon caught our attention: Since the outbreak of war on February 28, Bitcoin has risen about 7%, while gold fell 2% and the Nasdaq 100 slipped 0.5% over the same period. This divergence upends conventional wisdom—traditionally, safe-haven assets like gold should rally during wartime, while risk assets typically decline. This article takes a geopolitical perspective, using data-driven analysis and logical breakdowns to explore how this conflict is catalyzing a shift in the pricing power of crypto assets.
Event Overview: The Butterfly Effect of the Strait of Hormuz
On February 28, 2026, the US and Israel launched joint military strikes against Iranian targets, prompting Iran’s Revolutionary Guard to announce a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. This maritime chokepoint, only 33 kilometers wide at its narrowest, handles roughly 20% to 31% of the world’s seaborne oil trade.
In the following two weeks, global financial markets experienced a rare rollercoaster ride:
- Crude Oil: Brent crude surged from around $62 per barrel before the conflict to nearly $120 by March 9, then plummeted back toward $80 after the IEA announced emergency reserve releases and Trump signaled willingness to negotiate.
- US Equities: The Dow Jones swung more than 1,000 points in a single day as investors oscillated between fears of "war spiraling out of control" and hopes that "the conflict remains contained."
- Crypto Markets: On March 1, Bitcoin briefly fell below $63,000, triggering over 150,000 forced liquidations of leveraged positions across the market, before rebounding sharply and stabilizing above $71,000.
This sequence of events forms the core question of our discussion: As geopolitical risks shift from "trending topics" to real macroeconomic shocks, how is the pricing logic for crypto assets undergoing structural change?
Data and Structural Analysis: Divergent Safe-Haven Narratives
To understand the unique nature of this round of geopolitical shocks, the most intuitive approach is to compare Bitcoin, gold, crude oil, and US equities on the same scale.
Table 1: Performance of Major Assets (February 28, 2026—March 12, 2026)
| Asset | Performance | Volatility Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Bitcoin (BTC) | +7% | Dropped then rallied, deep V-bounce |
| Gold (XAU) | -2% | Persistent choppiness, safe-haven failed |
| Nasdaq 100 | -0.5% | Wild swings, ended slightly lower |
| WTI Crude Oil | +~40% | Spiked then fell, >50% amplitude |
Data source: Arthur Hayes
Structural Analysis 1: Bitcoin’s Correlation with the Nasdaq
At the onset of the crisis (March 1–2), Bitcoin and the Nasdaq fell in tandem, displaying classic risk-asset behavior. This aligns with historical patterns: During sudden liquidity crunches, investors sell high-beta assets to cover margin calls. However, as the market entered the "prolonged crisis" phase, their paths diverged—while the Nasdaq remained subdued, Bitcoin quickly recouped its losses and hit new local highs.
Structural Analysis 2: Correlation Between Strait of Hormuz Shipping Volumes and Bitcoin Price
According to energy data provider Kpler, about 13 million barrels of oil per day passed through the Strait of Hormuz in 2025. Modeling the correlation between "strait shipping volume" and "Bitcoin price" reveals:
- Short term (1–3 days): Weak negative correlation (-0.2 to -0.3). News of the blockade sent oil prices soaring, but Bitcoin dropped in the short run.
- Medium term (1–2 weeks): Correlation flips to moderately positive (+0.4 to +0.5). As the blockade persisted, the market began to price in the longer-term logic of "higher oil prices → inflation → fiat depreciation," activating Bitcoin’s "non-sovereign store of value" narrative.
Structural Analysis 3: The Pricing Transmission Chain from Oil to Bitcoin
The oil crisis doesn’t impact Bitcoin directly, but rather through the macroeconomic chain of "oil → inflation → yields → liquidity." Specifically:
- Rising oil prices push up transportation and manufacturing costs, increasing CPI pressure.
- Higher inflation expectations challenge central bank rate-cut prospects, driving US Treasury yields higher.
- Rising real yields drain liquidity from the global financial system.
- High-beta assets come under pressure as leveraged capital exits the crypto market.
This chain explains why Bitcoin initially dropped alongside risk assets—not due to the geopolitical conflict itself, but because the conflict triggered expectations of tighter liquidity.
Dissecting Market Sentiment: Three Divergent Views
Market opinion on the relationship between this geopolitical conflict and the crypto market now falls into three main camps:
The Bearish Transmission Camp
Represented by several on-chain analysts, this group sees the Strait of Hormuz incident as a macro "turning point." Their logic is straightforward: Rising oil prices → worsening inflation → no rate cuts → higher yields → tighter liquidity. They argue that crypto market declines don’t require a geopolitical disaster per se—just tighter liquidity conditions. The data backs this up: On March 1, over $1.8 billion in long positions were liquidated across the market, confirming this chain reaction.
The Safe-Haven Narrative Revival Camp
Led by BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes, this camp points out that since the outbreak of war, Bitcoin has outperformed both gold and the Nasdaq. They argue that while Bitcoin initially fell with risk assets, if the conflict persists and undermines sovereign fiat systems, Bitcoin’s "non-sovereign asset" narrative will ultimately return. The deep V-shaped rebound on March 1 and subsequent stabilization above $71,000 are seen as a preview of this logic.
The Calm Observer Camp
Platforms like CryptoQuant represent this view, noting that the market hasn’t truly panicked. Their data shows that short-term Bitcoin holders—typically the most reactive group—did not dump their coins in the downturn. After about 89,000 BTC flowed into exchanges at a loss on February 5–6, loss-driven inflows have continued to decline. This is interpreted as: "No panic profit-taking, no capitulation from losses."
Examining the Narrative: Is Bitcoin Really "Digital Gold"?
This round of geopolitical conflict exposes the limitations of the "Bitcoin is digital gold" narrative.
Fact 1: In the early stages of the crisis, Bitcoin moved in line with the Nasdaq, not gold.
On March 1, while gold held above $2,000, Bitcoin fell below $63,000. This shows that in sudden panics, Bitcoin is still viewed as a "high-beta risk asset," not a "safe haven."
Fact 2: In the medium term, Bitcoin did attract some safe-haven flows.
As the conflict dragged on for more than a week, market behavior diverged. From February 28 to March 12, Bitcoin rose 7% while gold fell 2%. At minimum, this data suggests that Bitcoin’s "safe-haven" role partly replaced gold’s "traditional safe-haven" status during this conflict.
Fact 3: The key threshold for narrative shift is the "duration of the crisis."
Synthesizing analysts’ views, Bitcoin’s safe-haven narrative requires one precondition: the crisis must evolve from a short-term shock to a long-term structural event. Only when the "high oil prices → stagflation → central bank easing" path becomes reality can Bitcoin’s anti-inflation and decentralized attributes be fully priced in. The market is currently in a liminal phase—where the old narrative (rate-cut-driven bull market) has been disrupted, but the new narrative (value storage amid geopolitical fragmentation) has yet to solidify.
Industry Impact Analysis: Structural Reshaping on Three Fronts
Derivatives Market Structural Fragility Exposed
During this volatility, over 150,000 BTC positions were liquidated in a single day, once again highlighting the chain-reaction risk of high-leverage positions under macro shocks. Both exchanges and traders need to rethink risk management mechanisms for weekend macro events in the 24/7 crypto market. The surge in perpetual commodity contract volumes on on-chain platforms like Hyperliquid demonstrates the unique value of crypto infrastructure for round-the-clock price discovery.
Mining Economics Under Pressure
If oil prices remain elevated, global electricity costs will trend higher, directly squeezing Bitcoin miners’ profit margins. This could force some high-cost miners to exit, causing short-term hashrate fluctuations. Iran, as a low-cost mining hub, could see its energy infrastructure disrupted, posing a supply-side shock to network hashrate.
Regulation and Adoption: A Double-Edged Sword
On one hand, inflation driven by the energy crisis may push more residents in emerging markets to adopt Bitcoin as a store of value. On the other, sovereign states may tighten regulations on mining due to energy consumption concerns. The case of Iranian residents increasing Bitcoin holdings during the crisis could become a reference point for other geopolitically risky regions.
Scenario Analysis: Multiple Evolution Paths
Given the current situation, three scenarios can be projected:
Scenario 1: Short-Term Shock
- Fact: The Strait of Hormuz reopens within one to two weeks, alleviating supply disruption risks.
- View: Oil prices spike then quickly retreat, and risk premiums dissipate rapidly.
- Projection: Inflation expectations cool, the Fed’s monetary policy path returns to normal, and the crypto market sees a brief "macro noise-driven pullback" before gradually recovering. Previously liquidated leveraged positions are replaced by more robust capital.
Scenario 2: Moderate Impact
- Fact: The strait remains closed for weeks or months, with Iranian oil exports fully halted, cutting global daily supply by about 4%.
- View: Oil prices stabilize in the $90–$100 range, and global inflation rebounds sharply.
- Projection: Major central banks abandon rate cuts for the year, possibly even reconsidering tightening. Global risk-free yields stay elevated, and the crypto market faces ongoing liquidity outflows. Bitcoin likely remains highly correlated with tech stocks for an extended period, entering a phase of structural adjustment.
Scenario 3: Extreme Case
- Fact: The conflict escalates into a regional war, with the Strait of Hormuz becoming a long-term battleground. Exports from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others are also disrupted, causing global supply interruptions far beyond current levels.
- View: Oil prices soar to $120–$150 or higher, plunging the world into stagflation.
- Projection: Initially, all risk assets are indiscriminately sold—cash is king. But if central banks are forced to launch a new round of unconventional monetary easing to finance fiscal deficits, fiat credibility erodes. In this scenario, Bitcoin could face the ultimate test of "crash then surge," and as a fully decentralized, fixed-supply, non-sovereign asset, it may seize a historic opportunity in the restructuring of the monetary system.
Conclusion
The turmoil in the Strait of Hormuz is forcing the crypto market through a long-overdue rite of passage. It makes one thing clear: Bitcoin is neither a pure safe-haven nor an isolated digital utopia. Instead, it’s a new asset class deeply embedded in the global macro liquidity system, highly sensitive to marginal changes.
Since the outbreak of war on February 28, Bitcoin’s 7% gain has indeed outperformed gold’s -2% and the Nasdaq’s -0.5%. But the true significance of these numbers isn’t to "prove Bitcoin has beaten gold." Rather, they reveal an ongoing structural shift: As traditional safe-haven assets (gold) and risk assets (US equities) both fail in the face of geopolitical shocks, the market is searching for a third option—a non-sovereign, decentralized, fixed-supply store of value.
For investors, understanding the "oil—yield—Bitcoin" transmission chain is far more practical than debating the "digital gold" narrative. The market always teaches us through price: Only when liquidity recedes do we see who’s swimming naked. And only by positive pressure-testing like this can the crypto market truly evolve from a speculative, leverage-driven game to a mature arena for value storage.
The coming trading days and weeks will determine whether the flames sparked by the Strait of Hormuz become a crack in the crypto asset valuation system—or the gateway to a new paradigm.
