#美伊局势影响 The impact of joint military strikes between the United States and Israel on the cryptocurrency market is not simply a straightforward linear logic of “risk shocks—price declines,” but occurs through three main pathways: liquidity transfer, capital rotation, and narrative shift, which profoundly alter the short-term operational structure of the market.

1. Liquidity Transfer: 24/7 Trading as a Short-Term “Pressure Valve”
The timing of the military strike coincides with the closure of traditional markets such as the US stock market and commodities. The 24/7 trading feature of the cryptocurrency market makes it the immediate escape route for global funds to absorb sudden geopolitical risks. Large amounts of safe capital are quickly withdrawn from high-risk assets, with Bitcoin, as the most liquid asset in the crypto market, naturally taking on the role of “liquidity pressure valve,” becoming the main beneficiary of the selling pressure. This is one of the primary reasons for the sharp initial price decline. At the same time, risk aversion drives the US dollar index to a level close to its two-month high, increasing short-term pressure on digital assets. When traditional financial markets reopen, the capital flow pressure eases, and the crypto market quickly reverts to its fundamental operational logic. Notably, widespread internet outages in Iran caused local crypto markets to stagnate, with Bitcoin’s hash rate, accounting for 4%-7% of the global total, facing risks related to power supply disruptions, temporarily threatening investor confidence.
2. Capital Rotation: Compliance-Backed Assets and Tokenized Commodities as Main Flow Fields
In this geopolitical event, the flow of funds in the crypto market shows a clear classification, breaking the previous pattern of “widespread decline across all sectors.” Demand for compliant stablecoins increased. During the panic sell-off, large amounts of capital flowed into sovereign-backed stablecoins with clear compliance frameworks. Coinciding with the countdown to the first stablecoin licenses in Hong Kong and the progress of the US clarity law, market confidence in “value-linked” compliant instruments continued to rise, making stablecoins the main choice for safe temporary funds. Among these, on-chain trading volume for US dollar stablecoins reached $1.16 trillion within 48 hours, a 38% increase compared to pre-conflict levels. However, USDC, linked to US sanctions rules, saw a 13% decrease in trading volume in the Middle East, while USDT, known for its lack of transparency in reserves and used for sanctions evasion, experienced a 32% increase in regional trading volume. Gold-backed tokens became prominent, with their total market value surpassing $6 billion by February 2026, adding about $2 billion this year, supported by over 1.2 million ounces of physical gold. After the outbreak of conflict, open interest in tokenized gold contracts steadily increased, approaching an all-time high of $5,600 per ounce in spot gold. Many investors used perpetual contracts within the crypto ecosystem to hedge risks during the closure of traditional commodity markets. This “hedging method combining cryptocurrencies + traditional commodities” has become a new emerging market pattern resulting from this conflict. Sector segmentation intensified, with small- and medium-cap coins declining by more than 4% on average, while leading compliant assets like BTC and ETH showed resilience. Bitcoin’s market dominance remained around 58.6%, with a clear trend of capital flowing toward higher-tier compliant assets.
3. Narrative Shift: “Hedging Inflation + Compliance” Logic Replaces Traditional Perceptions
This conflict also broke the traditional narrative of Bitcoin as “digital gold.” In the early stages, Bitcoin and gold showed a temporary divergence, with global gold ETFs attracting $19 billion in one month, while Bitcoin experienced short-term declines. Data shows that their correlation since September 2025 has fallen to a four-year low of -0.7. Bitcoin’s annual volatility is about 52%, 3-4 times higher than gold, and its high-risk nature keeps its correlation with tech stocks high at 0.73, indicating it has not yet gained the typical resilience of traditional safe-haven assets. As the market gradually recovers, the narrative logic shifts decisively. Investors’ focus shifts from “geopolitical safe haven” to inflation expectations triggered by the conflict. Iran officially announced a full blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which accounts for 20% of global oil transportation and 27% of maritime oil trade. The conflict pushed Brent crude prices to $82.37 per barrel, and low-sulfur shipping fuel prices rose significantly compared to pre-conflict levels. The global energy supply chain was disrupted, and inflationary pressures continued to rise. In this context, Bitcoin’s role as “inflation hedge” and “decentralized store of value” was reinforced. Meanwhile, the global trend toward cooperation in crypto regulation makes “compliance” the fundamental logic supporting asset prices. Short-term geopolitical shocks have not shaken the long-term trend toward industry normalization and mainstream adoption.
The market disruptions caused by the joint military strikes between the United States and Israel are essentially a necessary test in the process of transitioning the crypto market from a “highly volatile speculative path” to a “mature asset class.” The results of this test clearly show that: leverage has been fully reduced, resilience to shocks has greatly improved; the capital structure is still evolving, with compliant assets becoming the core pillars of the market; and the narrative logic is becoming clearer, with long-term fundamentals being key to market direction. In the short term, the market will continue to be influenced by ongoing developments in the conflict, the crossing of the Strait of Hormuz, and changes in US dollar liquidity. The $65,000 level will serve as a key support for Bitcoin; if it can hold this range, it may attempt to challenge the $74,000 zone.
From a long-term perspective, the short-term effects of geopolitical conflicts will eventually fade. The future of the industry will be determined by clarifying global regulatory frameworks, normalizing institutional allocations, deepening asset tokenization, and integrating AI and blockchain technologies into industries. For market participants, these events also offer important insights: in an era of recurrent geopolitical risks, participation in the crypto market requires abandoning the “safe haven myth,” focusing on compliant assets, strictly limiting leverage, closely monitoring changes in global energy supply chains and geopolitical landscapes, and viewing industry evolution and changes from a long-term and rational perspective.