Does this protect Bitcoin from harsh crypto winter?

Bank of America forecasts US real GDP growth of 2.4% in 2026, propelled by five different tailwinds. Meanwhile, JPMorgan stressed various headwinds for the macroeconomic landscape next year.

The OBBBA fiscal package adding roughly half a point through consumer spending and capex, lagged Fed cuts boosting activity in the second half, more growth-friendly trade policy, sustained AI investment, and base effects lifting measured output are listed in BofA’s forecast.

Additionally, headline PCE runs at 2.6%, core at 2.8%, unemployment drifts to 4.3%, a soft landing with mildly sticky inflation, and a Fed partway through its easing cycle.

For equity bulls, that reads like permission to stay long. For Bitcoin holders, the question is whether 2.4% growth arrives with the falling real yields and expanding liquidity that historically fuel BTC rallies, or whether tariffs and deficit pressures keep the real-yield environment too restrictive for a non-yielding asset to shine.

JPMorgan sketches the risk map that could turn BofA’s base case into a bumpier ride.

The S&P 500 gained roughly 14% in 2025 on AI enthusiasm, but 2026 brings stress points. Supreme Court review of President Donald Trump-era tariffs that generate nearly $350 billion in annual revenue ties directly into the projected 6.2% of GDP deficit.

US-China tensions and China’s leverage over critical minerals introduce a risk of stagflationary supply shocks. The 2026 midterms could flip the House, raising the odds of gridlock.

Early labor-market strain and cost-of-living pressure could sap consumption even with a positive GDP.

BofA and JPMorgan describe the same canvas, modest growth, above-target inflation, partial Fed easing, but BofA leans into tailwinds while JPMorgan warns the setup is fragile.

Why real yields determine Bitcoin’s path

The key variable for Bitcoin isn’t whether GDP prints 2.0% or 2.4%, but where inflation-adjusted yields sit.

S&P Global research finds Bitcoin has developed a clear negative correlation with real yields since 2017, outperforming when policy eases and liquidity expands.

A 21Shares analysis argues that in the post-ETF era, BTC trades as a macro asset whose pricing reflects ETF flows and liquidity rather than just on-chain fundamentals.

Binance’s macro explainer frames it plainly: Bitcoin “thrives when liquidity is abundant and real yields are low or negative,” because that’s when investors pay up for long-duration, zero-yield assets.

Current real-yield levels complicate the bullish case. Two- and 10-year TIPS yields in 2025 sit near the top of their 15-year ranges. When real yields spike, cash and Treasuries offer attractive positive real returns.

Crypto analysts frame falling real yields as the precondition for a renewed BTC leg higher: when real yields decline, capital rotates into growth and high-beta exposures.

Forecasts show policy rates settling in the mid-3% range by end-2026, implying mildly positive real rates if inflation behaves as BofA projects. That’s looser than the 2022-23 hiking peak but not 2020-style negative territory.

The question is whether that mild easing pulls real yields down from current levels, or whether tariffs and deficit pressures keep them sticky.

ETF flows as the transmission mechanism

BlackRock’s IBIT and its peers have become the primary conduit for US Bitcoin demand.
Single-day movements can be both inflows and outflows of over $1 billion.

When real yields fall, and the dollar softens, flows swing back into risk, and the ETFs amplify that move. When yields spike on tariff or deficit fears, flows can reverse just as violently.

Just as ETF flows can create a cushion against retail selling pressure, the funds’ structure can make Bitcoin more sensitive to macro shifts. Traditional portfolios can now express a view on real yields through BTC exposure as easily as they rotate into tech or commodities.

Additionally, Bitcoin’s correlation with risk-on sentiment has tightened. In 2022, Bitcoin followed global liquidity down as central banks tightened. Between 2023 and 2025, it followed liquidity back up.

If 2026 brings the clean easing BofA envisions, ETF flows support a rally. If JPMorgan’s risks materialize and real yields stay elevated, those same channels amplify the downside.

Mapping JPMorgan’s risks back onto the real-yield curve

JPMorgan’s tariff, China, and political risks aren’t abstract. They are transmission channels that could keep real yields higher than 2.4% growth alone would suggest.

UBS analysis warns tariffs are likely to keep inflation elevated into the first half of 2026, with core PCE peaking around 3.2% and staying above 2% into 2027.

If nominal yields remain sticky while inflation drifts slowly lower, the TIPS curve stays at the high end of its recent range.

That’s precisely the environment analysts identify as hostile for Bitcoin: real yields high enough that cash and short-duration bonds offer attractive returns, competing directly with a non-yielding asset.

Tariff uncertainty adds another layer. If the Supreme Court upholds current structures, revenue supports deficit financing but keeps import inflation alive. If tariffs are rolled back, the deficit widens, potentially forcing the Treasury curve higher on supply concerns.

Either outcome complicates the Fed’s easing path and could leave real yields elevated longer than equity markets price.

China’s control over critical minerals introduces supply-shock risk that skews stagflationary: weaker growth, higher inflation, tighter conditions.

That combination historically crushes risk assets, including Bitcoin.

The 2026 midterms add political volatility. Together, these risks describe a world where 2.4% growth on paper coexists with higher-for-longer real yields, a setup in which Bitcoin competes with Treasuries rather than front-running them.

The conditional answer

If BofA’s world materializes cleanly, with 2.4% growth, OBBBA-boosted spending, AI capex, inflation easing toward but staying slightly above target, and a Fed that keeps cutting into 2026, the odds favor Bitcoin benefiting rather than fading.

That combination usually means softer real yields and looser financial conditions. Bitcoin has tended to rally in those environments, especially now that ETF rails allow traditional portfolios to quickly express that macro view.

Falling real yields pull capital out of fixed income and into long-duration, high-beta assets. ETF flows amplify the move. BTC front-runs the easing rather than lagging it.

If JPMorgan’s world dominates, with tariffs keeping inflation sticky, Supreme Court uncertainty disrupts revenue assumptions, US-China tensions shock supply chains, midterm politics spook risk sentiment, then 2.4% growth on paper can still coexist with higher-for-longer real yields.

The opportunity cost of holding BTC against 4% to 5% nominal yields and positive real TIPS stays high, and ETF flows would remain choppy or negative. Bitcoin would fade amid macro strength, as that strength comes with inflation and yield pressures that make competing assets more attractive.
The 2.4% US growth figure by itself is neither bullish nor bearish for Bitcoin.

The real story is whether that growth comes with falling real yields and expanding liquidity, in which case BTC is a prime beneficiary, or with tariff-driven, deficit-fueled inflation and sticky real yields, in which case Bitcoin ends up competing with Treasuries for capital instead of capturing flows from them.

BofA gave the tailwinds, JPMorgan gave the ways those tailwinds could stall. For Bitcoin, the difference between those two worlds isn’t measured in GDP points. It’s measured in basis points on the TIPS curve and billions of dollars of ETF flow reversals. That’s the hinge.