[marketneutral]

BTC is down 50% from ATH while Nasdaq is off 30% and S&P 20%, Bonds (AGG) down 15%, all in the span of 6 months. BTC's investment thesis is not invalidated for sliding along with every single other asset class in one of the worst historic starts to a year.

Try a longer term perspective, and BTC is indeed still deflationary - its potential to replace central bank functionality and to be a secure, global SoV is still valuable to investors.

[notahacker]

It's claimed ability to be a SoV is rather damaged by it falling more than other asset classes. If it was a more secure alternative to gold it should have headed in the other direction...

[eldenwrong]

Its on the path to become a SoV. You don't get there on a straight line...

[notahacker]

It's only claim to be a SoV (unless you still believe it's on the path to being used as a means of payment) is the belief that it might have the weird countercyclical properties of gold (i.e. everyone buys it out of habit when they lose confidence in assets valued for their future returns like stocks and bonds and/or local currency)

Instead, when asset prices crashed and most countries experienced their highest inflation in decades, BTC not only failed to gain in value as a "safe haven" but actually fell much faster. Impossible to stress how favourable this year should have been to an "uncensorable" abstract store of value whose supply doesnt vary according to economic conditions.

[yakkityyak]

It's all just more proof that BTC is mostly for speculative gambling - something that has been obvious for the past half decade.

[pclmulqdq]

It's been on that path for 15 years, when is it supposed to get there?

[lampshades]

Are you blind? It is getting there quick. 15 years is not a long time.

[pclmulqdq]

In terms of tech innovations in the modern day, 15 years is an eternity. Google didn't take 15 years to become a massive search engine, FB didn't take 15 years to become the dominant social network.

Bitcoin was supposed to have started acting counter-cyclically (like gold) when it got mass adoption. So, 2018?

Instead, it acts like leveraged NASDAQ in its pricing, and has absolutely none of the utility that a cryptocurrency probably should have. The only benefit of bitcoin is name recognition. That doesn't create a currency or a store of value. The volatility of BTC/USD has only increased, as well as the correlation with QQQ, which does not suggest that BTC will ever become a store of value.

All fundamental signs point to a $0 value for bitcoin. Unfortunately, the dinosaur coin (BTC) will probably drag down the coins with utility (eg Solana, Zcash, and Monero) with it.

[datadata]

It is notable that Bitcoin took fewer years than both Google and FB to reach a 1 trillion market cap. Now market cap is a pretty horrible metric (and 1 trillion is arbitrary), but one way to compare totally different things. Note that bitcoin has always been the dominant cryptocurrency, and google/FB were dominant search engine/social networks much earlier than they reached 1 trillion market cap. What took a long time for them was for the market to value those innovations more highly. In crypto's case, the market valuation actually came quite quickly.

> The volatility of BTC/USD has only increased

Do you have a source for this? The data I have seen is that it is just slightly decreasing if anything, but there are many ways to measure volatility.

[lampshades]

Bitcoin is supposed to replace every central bank on Earth, not MySpace. It's hardly comparable.

[vkou]

No, you get there by having the Tether money printer prop up valuations, until there's too much money to keep printing, and without that upward pull, it just starts correlating with NASDAQ.