Reason to trust
How Our News is Made
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Ad discliamer
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
Former CoinRoutes CEO Dave Weisberger argued in an X post on February 23 that Bitcoin’s early-2026 hashrate rebound is more than a mining-cycle recovery and may be a lagging signal of a broader price move ahead. His core thesis is that sovereign-linked mining activity is starting to play for Bitcoin the same structural role central bank gold buying played for gold before its breakout.
Weisberger frames the comparison through the recent gold cycle, where he says sovereign accumulation preceded price discovery by years. In his telling, the key signal was not ETF demand or retail flows, but central banks steadily adding reserves as geopolitical fragmentation and fiat-risk concerns rose.
“The result? A parabolic gold rally that few saw coming in real time,” he wrote. “Gold has surged to record highs well north of $5,000/oz in this cycle, leaving the ‘it’s just inflation’ crowd scrambling. The buying came first. The price discovery followed later.”
Why Bitcoin’s Hashrate Recovery Is Signalling The Next Rally
Applying that framework to Bitcoin, Weisberger points to what he describes as a “textbook V-shaped recovery” in network hashrate in early 2026. After a sharp pullback of roughly 15% to 20% from prior peaks, he says computational power rebounded from below 900 EH/s to above 1 ZH/s, accompanied by one of the largest absolute difficulty increases on record, at nearly 15%.
For Weisberger, that recovery is not just a post-stress normalization after winter curtailments, regional shutdowns, and post-halving margin compression. He argues it reflects a different class of miner stepping in. “This isn’t random noise. It is the direct footprint of sovereign mining stepping in where private miners hesitated,” he wrote.
A central part of the post is Weisberger’s claim that at least 13 nation-states are now mining Bitcoin at a governmental or state-linked level (backed by VanEck research). He cites Bhutan, the UAE, and El Salvador, and also names Russia, Iran, and Ethiopia as countries deploying energy assets into mining.
“These are not retail or even corporate miners chasing daily hashprice,” he wrote. “These are governments converting stranded or strategic energy into a portable, verifiable, seizure-resistant reserve asset. They mine for policy reasons: revenue without printing more local currency, network security in which they hold a direct stake, and positioning in a world where financial sovereignty matters.”
Weisberger argues sovereign miners operate with different constraints than private miners: longer time horizons, different cost of capital, and less need to sell output into market weakness. In that framework, sovereign mining becomes a mechanism for absorbing newly issued BTC directly into long-term holdings, reducing sell-side pressure while also strengthening network security.
Weisberger explicitly describes hashrate recovery as a lagged, not coincident, indicator, because sovereign mining expansion requires hardware procurement, energy contracts, infrastructure buildout, and policy approvals. Those processes move slowly, often during periods when price action appears flat or corrective.
He argues that this sequence can change market structure before price reflects it: stronger security, tighter issuance flow, and broader validation of Bitcoin as a reserve asset rather than a purely speculative vehicle. His conclusion is blunt: “The hashrate recovery isn’t just technical resilience. It is a sovereign signal flashing bright. Governments are voting with energy infrastructure and balance sheets.”
At press time, BTC traded at $63,209.
