Well ... at least according to these researchers. Their analysis tells them that the bottom is still a long way off
https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-value-to-lose-43-billion-by-years-end-researchers-argue/
But his isn't just FUD. It's good analysis. You can't call the mathematics FUD because you don't like the conclusion. Here's some dense academic verbiage about the techniques: https://www2.math.su.se/matstat/reports/serieb/2009/rep7/report.pdf
While we can't dismiss this work as FUD, what we can do is challenge the assumptions made by the authors. The Bitcoin market is so new and so volatile that analyzing it the same way you do stock markets and other well known financial systems isn't going to capture all of the nuances.
Two things that could invalidate this analysis is another rapid influx of users and the increasing adoption by institutions, hedge finds and other big investors. The increase in active users increases the network value and the big investors skew the balance of that value. This analysis makes a big assumption that user growth and institutional interests won't cause material change in the calculations. But they know this and will certainly rework their numbers as things evolve.
This type of analysis is actually a good thing. How do we value a crypto project? What metrics do we need to use? What new metrics need to be developed? This is important stuff. Maybe some mathematicians will get under our skin because their analysis doesn't say what we want. But it's important information that you should consider as you risk your hard earned money in the crypto markets.