Kalshi is applying to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for permission to introduce perpetual futures contracts on gold, silver and platinum. This move comes part of the company’s latest strategy to expand its derivatives trading from crypto perpetual futures.
Kalshi To Launch Gold, Silver, Platinum Perps For this, Kalshi went through the CFTC’s self-certification process with the proposed contracts, per a Bloomberg report published Tuesday. Within this structure, the regulator will have 45 days to determine if the products can proceed for approval, or whether it should be rejected.
The proposed agreements would not have expiration dates. Traders would have the ability to hold their positions open without going into new futures contracts periodically. It’s not like a traditional futures contract, which has an expiration date.
Kalshi is planning to open for 24-hour derivatives trading from Monday to Friday. Those hours would follow a similar time frame to that used by the underlying precious metals markets.
The company will consider trading hours further down the road, Chief Risk Officer Udesh Jha said.
Perpetual futures were the first to become popular in the crypto trading space. They enable traders to obtain leveraged exposure without a settlement deadline. Generally, the price is maintained in close proximity to the underlying asset by periodic transactions of funding payments between traders.
In recent months, there has been a growing interest in similar contracts of traditional assets. There are already a few crypto-native trading platforms that have launched commodities-based perpetual products, like gold and crude oil.
There was also an increase in demand during the US-Iran conflict. The crypto-based trading platforms that were set up for oil-linked perpetual contracts continued to operate while conventional futures markets were closed.
Recent Legal Battle With CME Group Earlier this year, Kalshi became the first regulated U.S. marketplace to be approved to offer crypto perpetual futures. It launched Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP futures among other crypto products. This later became the basis for a lawsuit brought by CME Group.
In June, CME filed a lawsuit against the CFTC, claiming perpetual contracts should be classified as swaps, rather than futures. Kalshi says the lawsuit will not affect their product plans.
The move is the latest in an arms race among exchanges to make trading accessible. CFTC just rejected a proposal from the CME to trade oil continuously. CME is also readying up to offer gold futures trading 24/7, adding to the competition in the precious metals derivatives market.
Iran’s IRGC on Monday said it struck US bases in the Gulf countries, including Kuwait, Bahrain and Jordan, in retaliation for US strikes. Oil prices climbs 5% as Iran declared the Strait of Hormuz closed and escalated the US-Iran war, causing gold, stocks and Bitcoin to tumble significantly.
US-Iran War Escalates, Oil Prices Climbs 5% U.S. Central Command reported on July 13 that US forces struck dozens of Iranian military targets, including air-defense systems, coastal radar sites, missile and drone capabilities, and small boats.
“The Strait of Hormuz is a vital maritime corridor for global trade. Iran does not control it,” CENTCOM stated.
The US launched multiple strikes in the last few days to reduce Iran’s ability to continue attacking international shipping flowing through the Strait of Hormuz.
In retaliation, Iran’s IRGC launched multiple missiles and drones towards US bases across the Middle East, including Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain.
IRGC claimed it has destroyed fuel and ammunition depots at Prince Hassan Airbase, Jordan, facilities at US 5th Fleet HQ & Sheikh Issa Airbase, Bahrain. Iran forces also destroyed fuel tanks, Patriot air defense systems, and radar at the Ali Salem & Ahmad Al‑Jaber bases in Kuwait, as per Sputnik.
As a result, crude oil prices jumped 5% on Monday amid the Strait of Hormuz’s closure declared by Iran.
BREAKING: US oil prices extend gains to nearly +5% on the day as Iran declares the Strait of Hormuz closed again. pic.twitter.com/5APWlLYsQg
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) July 13, 2026
Gold and Bitcoin Prices Fall Gold prices slipped 1.55% to $4,050 lows on Monday, remaining under pressure amid US-Iran war escalation. Silver also plunged almost 3% amid higher oil prices. Notably, Iran rejecting talks with the U.S. is keeping broader markets under pressure, despite President Trump’s claims that Iran wanted to resume talks.
As traditional precious metals react to geopolitical tensions, investors looking to hedge on-chain can learn how to buy tokenized commodities like gold and silver directly from their Web3 wallets.
The latest strikes also sparked jitters among investors as they await key US CPI inflation data due this week for further clues on the US Fed monetary policy outlook. Meanwhile, Fed Chair Kevin Warsh is also scheduled to make his first appearance before the US Congress on Tuesday.
The US 10-year Treasury yields climbed to around 4.60% on Monday, hovering near 7-week highs. The US dollar index (DXY) climbed above 101, putting pressure on Bitcoin prices amid renewed missile strikes between the US and Iran.
Bitcoin price tanked more than 2% in the past few hours, with the price currently trading at $62,769. The 24-hour low and high were $62,806 and $64,340, respectively.
Furthermore, trading volume has increased by 22% in the last 24 hours as traders moved to buy the dip. US futures were also down nearly 2.50% in the past 24 hours.
Bitcoin was sold as digital gold, an uncorrelated hedge that would hold up when markets broke. In 2026 it fell roughly 50% alongside the Nasdaq while gold hit record highs. So what is Bitcoin now, and did the hedge thesis ever survive contact with Wall Street?
Summary
Bitcoin has spent 2026 moving with the Nasdaq rather than against it, with rolling correlations to U.S. tech indices reaching as high as 0.80 early in the year while its link to gold fell toward zero. The change traces to the spot ETF era: once institutions could hold Bitcoin inside the same portfolios as tech stocks, the same capital flows began driving both, tying Bitcoin to equity risk appetite. Analysts describe the current setup as the worst of both worlds, with Bitcoin taking the downside when stocks fall but not the full upside when they rally, behaving as a high-beta tail of macro risk instead of a standalone store of value. The counter-case is that Bitcoin is not a clean tech proxy either, since it fell on crypto-specific shocks even when tech rose, and that long-term holders kept accumulating, pointing toward an independent asset class instead of a tech clone. Whether the correlation is structural or a feature of the current tight-liquidity regime is the open question, and it decides whether the digital gold thesis is dead or merely dormant. Bitcoin was supposed to be the asset that zigged when everything else zagged. For years it was sold as digital gold, an uncorrelated hedge that would protect a portfolio when stocks fell and uncertainty rose. In 2026, it has done close to the opposite. Bitcoin is down roughly 50% from its October 2025 record near $126,200, and it fell in near lockstep with technology stocks while gold climbed to record highs above $5,000 an ounce.
The asset marketed as a crisis hedge behaved like a leveraged bet on the same risk appetite that drives the Nasdaq. This piece works through the evidence that Bitcoin now trades like a tech stock, why that happened, and the serious counter-argument that the story is more complicated than a simple correlation chart suggests. The answer matters because it changes how investors should size Bitcoin, how they should compare it with gold, and whether the ETF era strengthened the asset or quietly rewired it into the same macro trade it was supposed to diversify away from.
The evidence: Bitcoin moves with the Nasdaq now The correlation data is the starting point, and it is stark. Rolling 30-day correlations between Bitcoin and the Nasdaq 100 reached about 0.80 early in 2026, the highest level in close to four years, and Bitcoin’s longer-run five-year correlation with the tech-heavy index sits near 0.54. Standard Chartered analysts have pegged the Bitcoin-Nasdaq correlation around 0.5 with peaks near 0.8, while short-term readings against U.S. tech indices have ranged between roughly 0.55 and 0.68 through the year. However you measure it, Bitcoin and the Nasdaq have been moving together.
The relationship with gold has gone the other way. As Bitcoin’s tie to tech strengthened, its correlation with gold fell toward zero, at points reaching just 0.2. And the price paths made the divergence impossible to ignore. While Bitcoin dropped through 2026, gold surged to record highs above $5,000 and briefly toward $5,600 an ounce, outperforming Bitcoin by a wide margin over the same stretch.
The clearest test came under real stress. When conflict in the Middle East pushed oil higher and rattled markets, gold did what a safe haven does and climbed, while Bitcoin fell alongside risk assets. A hedge is supposed to prove itself precisely in those moments, and Bitcoin did not. The pattern that defined 2026 is simple to state: when the tech trade got hit, Bitcoin got hit, and when investors fled to safety, they chose gold.
Why the digital gold thesis mattered To understand what has been lost, it helps to recall what the digital gold pitch actually claimed. Bitcoin’s founding appeal to institutions was not only its potential for gains but its supposed independence from everything else. It had a fixed supply capped at 21 million coins, no central issuer, and no cash flows tied to the economy, which in theory made it a store of value that would not move with stocks, bonds, or the business cycle. In its early years, Bitcoin was not just uncorrelated with equities; it was uncorrelated with nearly every major asset class, which made it look like the ultimate portfolio diversifier.
That property was the entire institutional case. A diversifier that zigs when the rest of a portfolio zags reduces overall risk, and that is worth paying for. Wall Street bought into the idea that Bitcoin could serve as a hedge against monetary debasement, market volatility, and economic uncertainty, a role gold has played for centuries. The digital gold narrative underpinned much of the adoption story, from corporate treasuries to the campaign for spot ETFs, because it promised something distinct from a simple speculative growth bet.
The trouble is that an asset’s identity depends not only on its design but on who owns it and how it is traded. Bitcoin’s code did not change in 2026. What changed is the profile of the people holding it and the machinery through which they buy and sell. That shift, more than anything about the protocol, is what turned the hedge into a high-beta risk asset.
What changed: the ETF made Bitcoin a portfolio asset The pivotal event was the arrival of spot Bitcoin ETFs in January 2024, and the irony is sharp. The ETFs were celebrated as the moment Bitcoin was legitimized, folded into the regulated financial system at last. That same integration is what tied it to the equity market. Research published in late 2025 found robust evidence that ETF approval structurally altered Bitcoin’s role, marking a shift from an independent, idiosyncratic asset toward a conventional risk asset whose correlation with the S&P 500 rose sharply after the launch.
The mechanism is straightforward once you follow the money. Before ETFs, much of Bitcoin sat with crypto-native holders who traded it on its own logic. After ETFs, large institutions could hold Bitcoin exposure inside the same portfolios as their technology stocks, managed by the same risk desks using the same tools. When those desks adjust risk, they buy or sell Bitcoin and tech at the same time, for the same reasons, which welds the two together.
The marginal dollar in Bitcoin became, increasingly, the same dollar chasing artificial intelligence and growth equities, so when that dollar turned cautious, it sold both at once. This is the deeper story behind capital rotating into AI stocks that has drained crypto momentum all year. It is not only that money left Bitcoin for semiconductors; it is that the money still in Bitcoin now behaves like the money in tech, responding to the same Federal Reserve signals, the same liquidity conditions, and the same growth expectations. Bitcoin did not choose to become a tech stock. Its new owners made it one.
The worst of both worlds: downside without the upside If Bitcoin simply tracked the Nasdaq one for one, that would be a clean story. The reality analysts have flagged is worse for holders. Trading firm Wintermute has argued that while Bitcoin’s directional correlation with the Nasdaq stayed high, the quality of that correlation deteriorated into what it called a bearish skew. In plain terms, Bitcoin has kept the downside beta, falling hard when equities fall, while losing much of the upside participation, failing to rally proportionally when equities recover.
Wintermute’s Jasper De Maere tied this to a shift in investor attention. As mindshare and risk-on capital crowded into mega-cap tech, Bitcoin remained correlated when global sentiment turned negative but stopped benefiting fully when optimism returned. He described Bitcoin as reacting like a high-beta tail of macro risk rather than a standalone narrative, keeping the downside beta while shedding the upside premium. The Kobeissi Letter put the same idea more bluntly, noting that Bitcoin was increasingly behaving like a leveraged technology stock.
That combination, all of the downside and only part of the upside, is the least attractive profile an asset can have. It means Bitcoin has been amplifying the pain of equity selloffs without delivering the diversification that justified holding it, and without matching the gains of the tech names it now mirrors. For a portfolio manager, an asset that adds volatility without adding either diversification or reliable upside is hard to defend, which is part of why some funds have re-labeled Bitcoin from a long-term hedge to a tactical growth position sized like any other speculative bet.
The counter-case: Bitcoin is decoupling, just not how bulls hoped Here the story turns, because the simple tech-proxy narrative has a serious flaw. If Bitcoin were purely a leveraged Nasdaq, it would have risen when tech rose. Instead, for stretches since the October 2025 peak, Bitcoin fell while the Nasdaq strengthened, a divergence that some analysts said had rarely been so wide. Tech stocks climbed on strong earnings while Bitcoin dropped more than 30% from its high, driven by forces that had nothing to do with corporate profits.
Those forces were crypto-specific. The October 10 flash crash triggered a cascade of leveraged liquidations that hit Bitcoin while barely touching equities. Spot ETF outflows accelerated, pulling out the marginal buyer. The reflexive feedback loop around Bitcoin treasury companies like Strategy, most visibly Strategy, threatened to reverse from a buyer of last resort into a source of supply. And post-halving mining economics added their own pressure through miner selling pressure. None of that is in a Nasdaq chart.
So the honest reading is that Bitcoin is not a clean tech proxy: it takes the downside when tech falls, but it also falls on its own crypto-native shocks when tech rises. That is a worse outcome than pure correlation, but it also means Bitcoin is not simply a technology stock in disguise. The distinction matters for anyone trying to model the asset. A pure tech proxy would at least be predictable, rising and falling with the Nasdaq. What Bitcoin actually did in 2026 was absorb equity-market downside through the ETF-era ownership channel while simultaneously generating its own downside through leverage unwinds, ETF redemptions, treasury-company stress, and miner selling. It behaved less like gold, less like a clean tech stock, and more like a uniquely fragile hybrid during a bad year.
The maturation argument: a third asset class There is a more optimistic frame that some analysts and long-term holders favor, which is that Bitcoin is becoming its own asset class instead of a copy of gold or tech. On this view, the correlation to equities is a phase driven by who happens to hold the marginal coin today, not a permanent identity. Bitcoin still has properties neither gold nor a tech stock shares: a hard-capped supply that cannot be expanded by decision, no cash flows or earnings to miss, and no management team or governance structure that can fail. Those features do not disappear because a correlation chart spikes.
The behavior of long-term holders supports the maturation read. During the same 2026 window when the ETF complex bled, the supply held by long-term holders moved in the opposite direction, with those flows running far larger in magnitude than ETF flows and skewing toward net accumulation. In other words, the traders treating Bitcoin as a high-beta risk asset were selling through ETFs, while conviction holders who treat it as a long-term store of value were buying. Two different populations, two different theses, playing out in the same asset at the same time.
Which group defines Bitcoin’s identity depends on which one is setting the marginal price, and that can change. Standard Chartered, for its part, has kept multiyear price targets well above current levels even while acknowledging the rotation into AI, framing the moment as a question of timing and competition for capital rather than a verdict on what Bitcoin fundamentally is. The maturation argument does not deny that Bitcoin trades like a risk asset right now. It argues that the current correlation is a snapshot of a particular ownership mix and liquidity regime, not the final word on an asset that is still only in its second decade.
Is this structural or cyclical? The whole debate reduces to one question: is Bitcoin’s correlation with tech a permanent feature of the ETF era, or a temporary product of the current environment? The case for structural is that the ownership change is not reversing. ETFs are here to stay, institutions will keep managing Bitcoin alongside equities, and as long as they do, the flows that link the two assets will persist. If that is right, the digital gold thesis is effectively dead for as long as this ownership base dominates, and Bitcoin is a growth allocation that happens to be more volatile than most.
The case for cyclical rests on how correlations behave over time. Cross-asset correlations tend to spike during tight-liquidity, risk-off regimes and to loosen when liquidity returns and assets trade more on their own fundamentals. Bitcoin’s correlation with the Nasdaq has swung dramatically before, from deeply negative to strongly positive within weeks, which is not the signature of a fixed relationship. A shift in Federal Reserve policy, a change in the liquidity backdrop, or a rotation of capital away from the crowded AI trade could all loosen the tie and give Bitcoin room to trade on its own narrative again.
Some analysts even argue the correlation has already begun to break, though so far in the unhelpful direction of falling while tech rose. What would restore the digital gold thesis is a period where Bitcoin holds up while equities fall, proving the hedge in the only way that counts. That has not happened in 2026, which is why the thesis is on the ropes. But a single bad year in which a leverage-driven crypto drawdown collided with an AI-fueled equity rally is not a controlled experiment, and reading a permanent identity change off it may be as premature as the original digital gold claim was.
What it means for how to hold Bitcoin For anyone actually holding Bitcoin, the practical takeaway is to match the thesis to the timeframe. Over the horizon that matters in 2026, Bitcoin has behaved as a high-beta risk asset, so treating it as a crisis hedge or a portfolio insulator has not worked and is not supported by the data. An allocation sized as if Bitcoin will hold up when stocks crash is mis-sized, because this year it fell harder than the stocks it was meant to hedge. The more defensible approach in the current regime is to treat Bitcoin as a volatile growth position, size it to risk tolerance, and watch the Nasdaq and AI-stock sentiment as closely as the crypto charts, because that is where much of the near-term direction is being set.
Over a longer horizon, the store-of-value case does not depend on short-term correlation. The fixed supply, the absence of governance and cash-flow risk, and the accumulation behavior of long-term holders are the pillars of that argument, and they survive a year of trading like a tech stock. The honest conclusion is that Bitcoin is currently being priced as a leveraged expression of risk appetite, not as digital gold, and that this reflects who owns it in the ETF era more than any change in what it is. Whether it grows into the independent, hedge-like asset its supporters imagine, or stays a high-beta satellite of the tech trade, will be settled by the next regime, not this one.
For now, the market has given its answer, and it is not gold. The strongest near-term read is not ideological; it is practical. In a world of a hawkish Fed and tight liquidity, Bitcoin behaves like a risk asset, and risk-off market sentiment matters as much as on-chain conviction. The digital gold thesis is not dead by definition, but in 2026 it has not been the trade.
Frequently asked questions Is Bitcoin still considered digital gold? Less and less in practice. Through 2026, Bitcoin behaved like a high-beta risk asset instead of a safe haven, falling alongside technology stocks while gold climbed to record highs. Its correlation with the Nasdaq reached as high as 0.80 while its link to gold fell toward zero. The digital gold label describes Bitcoin’s design and long-term thesis, but its 2026 trading behavior did not match it.
Why does Bitcoin move with tech stocks now? The main driver is the spot ETF era that began in January 2024. Once institutions could hold Bitcoin inside the same portfolios as technology stocks, managed by the same risk desks, the same capital flows started moving both. When those desks adjust risk exposure, they buy or sell Bitcoin and tech together, which ties Bitcoin to equity market sentiment and Federal Reserve policy the same way growth stocks are.
How correlated is Bitcoin with the Nasdaq? Correlation varies with the time window, but it has been high in 2026. Rolling 30-day correlations with the Nasdaq 100 reached about 0.80 early in the year, the highest in nearly four years, and the five-year correlation sits near 0.54. Short-term readings against U.S. tech indices have ranged roughly between 0.55 and 0.68. Correlations shift over time and have swung from negative to strongly positive within weeks.
Did the Bitcoin ETFs cause this? They appear to be the central cause. Research from late 2025 found that spot ETF approval structurally raised Bitcoin’s correlation with the S&P 500, marking a shift from an independent asset to a conventional risk asset. The ETFs legitimized Bitcoin by integrating it into traditional finance, and that same integration tied its price to equity flows and institutional risk management.
What is the bearish skew analysts mention? It refers to Bitcoin keeping the downside of its tech correlation while losing much of the upside. Trading firm Wintermute described Bitcoin as falling hard when equities fall but failing to rally proportionally when they recover, behaving as a high-beta tail of macro risk. That combination, full downside and partial upside, is a poor profile because it adds volatility without reliable gains or diversification.
Is Bitcoin just a leveraged tech stock then? Not cleanly. If Bitcoin were purely a leveraged Nasdaq, it would have risen when tech rose, but for stretches in 2026 it fell while tech strengthened, driven by crypto-specific shocks: the October flash crash, ETF outflows, treasury-company stress, and miner selling. So Bitcoin took equity downside while also generating its own downside, which is a fragile hybrid instead of a simple tech proxy.
Could Bitcoin become a hedge again? It is possible, and it hinges on whether the correlation is structural or cyclical. Cross-asset correlations tend to spike in tight-liquidity, risk-off regimes and loosen when liquidity returns. A shift in Federal Reserve policy or a rotation away from the crowded AI trade could let Bitcoin trade on its own narrative again. Restoring the hedge thesis would require Bitcoin to hold up while equities fall, which has not happened in 2026.
How should investors treat Bitcoin given this? Match the thesis to the timeframe. In the current regime, Bitcoin trades as a volatile growth asset, so sizing it as a crisis hedge is not supported by the data, and investors may watch the Nasdaq and AI sentiment as closely as crypto charts. Over a longer horizon, the store-of-value case rests on fixed supply, no governance risk, and long-term holder accumulation, which do not depend on short-term correlation.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Cryptocurrency prices are highly volatile, and correlations between assets change over time and may not persist. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell any asset. Always do your own research and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before making investment decisions. Information is accurate as of July 2, 2026, and may change.
Legendary investor Jeremy Grantham — co-founder of asset management firm GMO and one of Wall Street’s most prominent bubble-spotters — came at Bitcoin again on Friday, calling the asset a “useless, speculative mechanism” destined for slow decline into irrelevance.
Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Grantham predicted that Bitcoin will “dwindle away, I suspect — not with a bang, but a whimper.” He said he has never owned Bitcoin and believes it will fall to zero, not through a sudden crash but through a gradual erosion of interest over years and decades.
“All Bitcoin does is allow fraudsters to move money around,” he said.
Grantham pointed to Bitcoin’s instability as evidence against its status as a store of value. The coin “halved for no particular reason in a strong economy,” he noted — a critique with fresh teeth given where Bitcoin stands today.
Gold, he added, has delivered solid gains over the same period.
Perhaps Grantham is right, the selloff has been severe. BTC hit an all-time high near $126,000 in October 2025. Since then, the digital asset has shed more than 50% of its value. As of Friday, BTC traded in the $60,000 range, testing what analysts consider a critical support zone that, if broken, could open a path to the $40,000s.
Bitcoin fell toward $62,000 in mid-June as hawkish signals from the Federal Reserve spooked risk markets. Rising U.S.–Iran geopolitical tensions sent oil prices higher and reignited inflation fears, pushing Fed officials to abandon any talk of rate cuts — with some floating the possibility of rate hikes. U.S. spot BTC ETFs posted four consecutive days of net outflows totaling around $113.8 million.
Bitcoin’s attempt to reclaim higher ground ran straight into its 200-day moving average, which served as hard resistance and triggered a roughly 30% decline from that ceiling. The current drawdown is among the 5th worst in Bitcoin’s history — territory that tests the resolve of long-term holders. Some institutional buyers, however, are treating the dip as an entry point, with Coinbase reporting that major institutions have stepped in to buy the crash.
Another billionaire bets big on bitcoin On the flip side, Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas Pliego has placed 70% of his investment portfolio into BTC — up from just 10% in 2020 — and has even convinced his wife to mortgage their home to buy more.
The founder of Grupo Salinas traces his skepticism of fiat currency to family dinner table conversations about Nixon ending the gold standard, and views Bitcoin as superior to both cash and gold because it is unseizable and borderless.
His conviction has survived a $150 million loan scam, regulatory pushback on his plans to make Banco Azteca Mexico’s first Bitcoin-accepting bank, and multiple market cycles.
He recently pointed to a decade of London property prices as proof of his thesis — a home that cost 4,000 BTC in 2016 now costs fewer than 30 — and urges ordinary investors to convert their home equity into BTC exposure, calling it “an asymmetrical bet to the upside.”
Micah Zimmerman
Micah first discovered Bitcoin in 2018 but remained a skeptic on the sidelines for too long. Since 2021, he has covered crypto and business and now works as a news reporter for Bitcoin Magazine, based in North Carolina.
Coinbase, Kraken and other cryptocurrency exchanges are taking positions on proof-of-work consensus and Bitcoin mining. Despite criticisms against proof-of-work, they argue there is little risk of centralization-induced attacks.
Proof-of-work is one of Bitcoin’s core features which allows to reach consensus and keep the blockchain secure. Miners are responsible for finalizing transactions and generating new Bitcoins. However, proof-of-work isn’t perfect – to its critics, it’s a system that results in centralization of power.
Though there are alternatives, proof-of-work is here to stay as far as Bitcoin, Litecoin, Monero and many other cryptocurrencies are concerned. Proof-of-work largely operates behind the scenes, but it can have far-reaching effects — which has led some exchanges to weigh in on the matter.
Coinbase Endorses ASIC Mining Coinbase has recently argued that proof-of-work networks can benefit from ASIC mining. This is a controversial claim — it’s widely held that ASICs bring about monopolized ownership because they are specially designed to mine certain coins. CPUs and GPUs, by contrast, are general purpose chips that are available to anyone who owns a computer.
However, Coinbase sees things differently. It argues that general purpose hardware is a greater threat to centralization. There are many GPUs and CPUs that are not being used for mining, and these could suddenly be harnessed to attack a mining network. ASIC devices, which are only useful for certain types of mining, can’t suddenly join a network en masse.
Advertisement
Coinbase adds that Bitcoin Gold, Vertcoin, and Verge have fallen victim to 51% attacks despite attempts to become ASIC-resistant. The company suggests that coins should bring about decentralization in a different way — they should instead turn to ASIC-friendly algorithms that support affordable manufacturing and turn ASICs into a widespread commodity.
Coinbase concludes that ASIC mining is inevitable: “Participants have to ask themselves if the industry is going to be secured by hobbyists running old laptops,” it insists. “Every at-scale, professional industry utilizes specialized equipment — it is naive to think that cryptocurrency mining will or should be any different.”
Kraken Argues Mining Pools Are Secure Kraken has published its own in-depth report on mining mentioning centralizing effects of mining pools. At the time of its publishing in April, many people were concerned that a few major mining pools could coordinate a 51% attack due to their hashrate dominance. That fear has intermittently come and gone.
Kraken argues that there is little reason to fear such an attack. It believes that heavily invested miners cannot carry out an attack sustainably as the effects on market price would devalue any profits. “We believe there is a greater incentive for [pools] to conduct honest operations and uphold the value of the network,” Kraken says.
Citing rules of game theory, Kraken suggests that dishonesty is a poor strategy for miners: “Any deviation will certainly result in short-term cost with unpredictable compensation.” It also notes that pools don’t have guaranteed dominance —since users can switch between pools, new pools can form to deter collusion.
Other Exchanges Are Also Getting Involved Some exchanges have attempted to get involved in mining more directly. Huobi, for example, runs a mining pool that accounts for 6% of Bitcoin’s hashrate, while OkEX runs a much smaller pool. Though they are not very significant, their existence does indicate that exchanges are interested in taking on big, Bitmain-owned mining pools.
BitMEX, meanwhile, is trying to keep mining security in check. It runs Forkmonitor.io which scans Bitcoin and its forks in real time for unusual activity. BitMEX Research also covers various mining-related issues, some of which are quite obscure and gain very little coverage elsewhere.
Finally, Binance has courted controversy by overstepping boundaries. After it suffered an attack in May, Binance briefly considered incentivizing miners to undo the theft. Binance eventually refrained from pursuing that plan — while miners showed no interest in complying. However, the event did raise the question of whether mining is truly irreversible.
Why Exchanges Care About Proof-of-Work Exchanges typically have no direct influence over mining and proof-of-work. They can only suspend trading activity and block bad actors if an attack or vulnerability occurs. Coin developers are ultimately responsible for designing proof-of-work schemes that produce a decentralized, accessible, and secure mining network.
Instead, exchanges are concerned with mining because they adjust their services around each coin’s proof-of-work model. For example, Coinbase recently decided that it is safe to reduce its confirmation times for Bitcoin, Zcash, and Ethereum Classic. On the other hand, exchanges like Bittrex have delisted attack-prone coins entirely.
Some investors make decisions about which coins to invest in based on technical matters such as proof-of-work. Though exchanges are naturally concerned with market data, they often tend to keep investors informed about technical matters — a level of dedication to the public that often goes unnoticed.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Mike Dalton. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Bitcoin Gold (BTG), a less popular Bitcoin spinoff, was hit with a 51% attack last week, as per a report published on GitHub. While bitcoin is up by a meager 3.19% amid a crypto market-wide resurgence, BTG has gained over 12% in the last 24 hours. This rally comes despite the attackers making away with roughly 7,000 BTG.
Bitcoin Gold Suffers Two 51% Attacks In A Span Of Hours Vertcoin maintainer and researcher at MIT’s Digital Currency Initiative, James Lovejoy, published a report on GitHub over the weekend. He explained that two deep reorganizations had taken place on the Bitcoin Gold network on January 23 and 24.
By mining with more than half of BTG’s hash rate, the attacker stole 7,000 BTG within a period of approximately six hours. In particular, 1,900 BTG was double spent in the first attack on Thursday, Jan 23 and then 5,267 BTG was double spent a few hours later on Friday, Jan 24. At current market prices, these two attacks led to a loss of $84,840.
Conducting a 51% attack on other proof-of-work networks like Bitcoin, for instance, is practically impossible. This is especially because of Bitcoin’s high hash rate which would render such an attack unprofitable. BTG’s hash rate, however, has been on a firm downtrend since July 2018.
As such, Lovejoy observed that based on the present Nicehash prices, the attacker spent approximately $1700 for each reorg. He added:
“Therefore, it is possible that the attacks were profitable if the double-spends succeeded at defrauding the attacker’s counterparty, or break-even if the double-spends were unsuccessful. This suggests that a confirmation requirement on the order of tens of blocks for BTG is still far too few to make the budget constraint to launch an attack insignificant.”
At the moment, leading crypto exchange Binance has increased its withdrawal times from 12 confirmations to 20 blocks to avoid another attack in the future.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time the Bitcoin Gold blockchain has been hit with a 51% attack. Back in May 2018, BTG worth $18 million was lost through double-spending, which led to the coin being delisted by exchanges like Bittrex.
BTG is among the best performing cryptocurrencies today, outperforming its big brother and most of the cryptocurrencies in the top 50. It has gained 12.71% in the last 24 hours to trade at $12.12. The rally has put its total market capitalization at $209.49 million.
This upsurge comes as a big surprise given that the Bitcoin Gold network recently fell victim to two separate malicious attacks. Moreover, it’s not clear what’s behind the surge, but with the coin’s deteriorating fundamentals (case in point, the hash rate), it is likely going to be a short-lived rally.
MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative has delved into a recent attack on Bitcoin Gold and discovered counterattacks in which miners put the blockchain back on its original course.
James Lovejoy, who publicized the attack earlier this year, published a Medium post on the topic today, co-authored by MIT DCI researchers Dan Moroz and Neha Narula.
Counterattacks on Bitcoin Gold In January and February, attackers carried out a series of attacks on Bitcoin Gold.
Those attacks involved chain reorganizations (reorgs), double spending, and 51% attacks, all of which require the attacker to wield a considerable amount of mining hashpower.
The MIT DCI team, which has been monitoring attacks on several proof-of-work blockchains, reported those attacks publicly at the time. However, the group has since discovered “retaliation games” that were not apparent at the time.
The researchers explain:
Advertisement
“It started as a typical attack, as a transaction was reversed in a double-spent, but then that double-spend was itself reversed, with the original transaction valid again. On February 8th the attacker and counterattacker went back and forth four times over the course of 2.5 hours.”
Ultimately, the counterattacker won, invalidated the double spend, and restored the original chain.
The team additionally observed two shorter “one-shot” counterattacks on Feb. 9 and 11. Those counterattacks restored Bitcoin Gold’s original blockchain as well.
Alternate Explanations At first glance, it appears that miners carried out counterattacks to maintain Bitcoin Gold’s original chain, but MIT DCI researchers speculate that this may not be the case.
Instead, a single actor may have been on both sides of the attack. For example, an exchange or merchant service may have been testing the strength of the blockchain. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that one counterattack had no double spends, suggesting that profit was not the motive.
Alternately, the counterattacker may not have been attempting to restore Bitcoin Gold to its original condition; instead, the counterattacker may have intended to steal the reward for themselves.
Finally, technical errors, such as a network partition, a software bug, or random chance could have caused reorgs to arise naturally—though researchers say that most of these cases are unlikely.
Of course, the counterattacks may be exactly what they seem to be.
NiceHash May Not Be to Blame NiceHash is a service that allows users to rent hashpower, which is instrumental in 51% attacks. The service was responsible for the hashpower used in an recent attack on Vertcoin, for example.
MIT DCI researchers note that NiceHash and other hashrate marketplaces pose a threat to proof-of-work blockchains, and that NiceHash offers enough hashpower to attack Bitcoin Gold.
However, the research team says that they have not seen “conclusive evidence” that the hashpower used to attack Bitcoin Gold originated from NiceHash. That evidence is obscured due to the fact that Bitcoin Gold’s hashrate and price fluctuate regularly even when no attack is underway.
Researchers add that NiceHash and similar services may even be beneficial: by enabling counterattacks, hashrate marketplaces could discourage attackers from attempting an attack in the first place.
The researchers conclude, though, that high costs are “still the [most] important deterrent” when it comes to preventing attacks that aim to sabotage a blockchain.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Mike Dalton. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Cryptocurrency analyst Joao Wedson shared a noteworthy market assessment regarding the relationship between gold and Bitcoin. According to Wedson, the excessive optimism observed in the gold market at the beginning of the year was a classic “peak buying” signal, and this expectation was quickly realized.
Wedson noted that gold experienced a strong increase in volatility at the beginning of January as it approached its all-time high, followed by a correction. According to the analyst, although gold retested its all-time high, it failed to create new peaks and has recently started to record sharp declines again. This movement is said to be the beginning of a long consolidation process that could last for months.
The analyst argued that this scenario was an analysis based on data and market experience, rather than a prediction.
On the Bitcoin side, a different dynamic emerges. According to Wedson, Bitcoin generally reacts negatively during the final stages of gold’s decline. However, these declines occur much faster and more sharply compared to gold; sharp pullbacks can be seen within hours or days.
However, it is stated that the truly critical transformation will begin as the distribution process of gold nears its end. Wedson expects that at this stage, liquidity in the markets will gradually shift towards riskier assets, especially Bitcoin. However, he points out that this transition will not be sudden, but a process that could take months.
According to the analyst, this liquidity rotation is likely to become more pronounced towards the end of 2026. Wedson stated that they will continue to monitor whether this scenario materializes in the coming period.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Gold prices have fallen sharply to about $4,340, making this the largest weekly drop in over 40 years. This comes even as the conflict between the US, Israel, and Iran enters its fifth week,
At the same time, the crypto market is also down by 1.6%. Meanwhile, flagship cryptocurrency Bitcoin has slipped from $76,000 to around $68,000, raising concern in markets around the world
Why is the Gold Price Crashing Today?According to recent market data, gold prices dropped below $4,340, marking one of the biggest declines this year. Gold had earlier reached nearly $4,600 in March, but suddenly fell nearly 5% in a single day.
The main reason behind this drop is rising U.S. 10-year Treasury yields, which have climbed to around 4.40%, increasing nearly 45 basis points in just three weeks. A stronger dollar usually pushes gold prices lower.
Another major reason is forced liquidation. In just a few hours, gold and silver together erased nearly $2 trillion in market value. Silver alone fell below $65, dropping more than 4%, and wiping out around $150 billion in market cap.
Also, rising oil prices near $112 are increasing inflation concerns. This makes markets expect the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates high until at least 2027. Polymarket traders see a 75% chance of no rate cuts in 2026.
Recently, Donald Trump issued a two-day ultimatum to Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face potential strikes on power plants. In response, Iran warned it could shut the crucial waterway and target energy and infrastructure facilities if attacked. This increased geopolitical tension, but gold still fell instead of rising.
How Falling Gold Prices Are Impacting the Crypto MarketThe crypto market is also feeling the pressure. The total crypto market cap has dropped around 1.6% to $2.34 trillion. Meanwhile, Bitcoin has fallen to near $68,000 after recently touching $76,000.
Other major cryptocurrencies like Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and Dogecoin have also fallen around 3%.
Currently, Bitcoin is not acting like gold. Instead, it behaves more like a liquidity asset, moving with interest rates and money supply. When rates rise and liquidity tightens, both stocks and crypto usually fall.
However, one important long-term trend is that Spot Bitcoin ETFs have attracted $56 billion in less than 2 years, almost matching gold ETF inflows built over 15 years, making Bitcoin ETFs one of the fastest capital accumulation stories in ETF history.
Bitcoin vs Gold Chart PredictionCrypto trader Blade shared the BTC/Gold chart, showing a repeating historical pattern. According to the chart, Bitcoin usually consolidates against gold for around 14 months, and then enters a strong expansion phase.
The same structure appears to be forming again in 2026, which could mean Bitcoin may soon start outperforming gold in the next phase of the cycle.
If this happen bitcoin will soon retest its all-time-high price of $126K.
Never Miss a Beat in the Crypto World!Stay ahead with breaking news, expert analysis, and real-time updates on the latest trends in Bitcoin, altcoins, DeFi, NFTs, and more.
FAQsWhy is gold price crashing today?
Gold is falling due to rising US bond yields, a stronger dollar, and forced liquidation, which are reducing demand despite ongoing geopolitical tensions.
Although tensions usually boost gold, strong yields, tight liquidity, and forced selling are currently outweighing its safe-haven demand.
How is the gold crash affecting Bitcoin and crypto?
Gold’s drop signals tighter liquidity, which is also pressuring crypto markets, causing Bitcoin and altcoins to fall alongside risk assets.
Can Bitcoin outperform gold after this drop?
Bitcoin may outperform gold if historical patterns repeat, especially as ETF inflows grow and liquidity conditions improve over time.
Story Ends Here
Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.
Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.
Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.
The cryptocurrency market continues its decline, led by Bitcoin. This drop follows geopolitical tensions linked to US President Donald Trump and Iran.
Yesterday, US President Donald Trump threatened to attack Iran’s energy infrastructure if Iran did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours. These statements by Trump caused a decline in both Bitcoin (BTC), altcoins, and gold.
Gold prices took a sharp hit, falling below $4,200 and recording their biggest weekly drop in over 40 years. This decline came as the conflict between the US, Israel, and Iran entered its fifth week, shaking investors across global markets.
Normally, gold prices rise during periods of geopolitical crisis like this. However, the opposite is happening this time. Even as the conflict between the US and Iran escalates, gold prices remain under pressure and are falling.
According to analysts, one of the main reasons for this is the rise in bond yields. The US 10-year Treasury yield has increased sharply in recent weeks, rising to approximately 4.40%. Analysts say that higher yields make interest-bearing assets more attractive, reducing demand for gold.
User X, named Covey Letter, stated in their post that “gold prices have fallen by approximately 22% from their peak and have officially entered a bear market.”
Bitcoin fell from around $71,000 to below $68,000 following Trump’s statements. With this drop, BTC also fell below the critical $69,000 level, and analysts expect this level to now act as resistance. The next support level is seen as $65,000.
According to Coinglass data, $393.3 million worth of leveraged positions were liquidated in the last 24 hours. Of this amount, $307.1 million consisted of long positions and $86.2 million of short positions.
In the last 24 hours, 173,371 investors were liquidated, with the largest liquidation occurring on Binance’s XAU/USDT trading pair.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
With tensions escalating between the US and Iran, global markets are experiencing one of their most volatile days in recent years. Bitcoin’s sharp fluctuations and gold’s historic losses have raised questions among experts about whether the concept of a “safe haven” has changed.
Scott Melker stated that the markets were shaken by President Trump’s contradictory statements. He said that when Trump announced the start of peace talks with Iran, the S&P index gained $2 trillion in minutes, but when Iran denied the claim, the market experienced a total volatility of $3 trillion in just 56 minutes.
Bloomberg analyst Mike McGlone claimed that the cryptocurrency bubble has burst and that this bear market could last for years, even decades. He argued that gold and silver have ceased to be “stores of value” and have transformed into high-volatility, risky assets.
McGlone stated that a global recession is approaching, and while keeping oil prices above $100 would accelerate this process, he predicted that in the long term, oil could fall to $50.
Dave Weisberger, former CEO of CoinRoutes, argued that gold is difficult to transport through war zones due to its physical structure, while Bitcoin has performed better than gold during this crisis thanks to its “portability” feature.
He stated that the Fed cannot solve inflation caused by supply shocks by raising interest rates, and that current economic models are outdated.
He believed gold would return to the $5,500 level this year, but argued that Bitcoin would regain momentum as sellers dwindled.
CIO and macro strategist James Lavish described Trump’s unpredictable statements as a “negotiation tactic” to manipulate markets and people. He said investors are short on cash, so they are exiting assets like gold and silver where they were previously in profit.
Lavish said the Fed and the Treasury had no choice but to continue pumping liquidity to support the stock market, otherwise a deep recession would be inevitable.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
According to a new report published by US financial giant JPMorgan Chase, Bitcoin, the leading cryptocurrency, has recently shown greater resilience compared to traditional safe-haven assets.
According to the report, gold and silver have been under significant pressure in recent weeks due to capital outflows, position closures, and deteriorating liquidity conditions. JPMorgan argued that the liquidity squeeze in the gold market, in particular, has reduced the asset’s market access to less than Bitcoin’s, reversing the historical relationship between the two assets. Gold is reported to have fallen by approximately 15% this month from its peak of around $5,500 per ounce in January, while silver has also experienced a sharp decline from its peak of around $120. This decline is attributed to rising interest rates, a strengthening dollar, and significant profit-taking by both individual and institutional investors.
Fund flow data also supports this divergence. In the first three weeks of March, gold ETFs saw a net outflow of approximately $11 billion, while silver ETFs completely wiped out the net inflows they had seen since last summer. In contrast, Bitcoin ETFs recorded consistent net inflows during the same period.
Position data also reveals a striking picture. Institutional activity indicators based on open positions in CME futures show that positions accumulated in gold and silver at the end of 2025 and the beginning of 2026 have rapidly decreased since January. In contrast, positions in Bitcoin futures appear to have remained relatively stable. On the momentum side, CTAs (trend-following large investors) have significantly reduced their positions in gold and silver, causing indicators for these assets to sharply retreat from the overbought region. On the Bitcoin side, the recovery of momentum from oversold levels and its approach to the neutral zone indicates that selling pressure is beginning to weaken.
According to JPMorgan, all this data reveals that Bitcoin is exhibiting a stronger stance compared to traditional safe-haven assets under current market conditions.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Robert Kiyosaki said current economic pressure reflects changes that began in the 1970s.
Summary
Kiyosaki said 1974 policy shifts still shape debt, inflation, retirement pressure, and demand for Bitcoin. He warned baby boomers may face retirement income gaps as pensions gave way to market-based accounts. Santiment data showed Bitcoin bearish sentiment rose, while contrarian traders watched fear levels for reversal signs. Robert Kiyosaki said 1974 marked a major shift in how money and retirement worked in the United States. In a post on X, he wrote that “the future created in 1974 has arrived” and tied today’s financial stress to policy changes from that period.
He connected that year to the petrodollar system and to changes in retirement planning. Kiyosaki said those changes helped shape the debt and inflation concerns now facing households and investors.
Retirement concerns remain part of his warning Kiyosaki also referred to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the wider move away from pension structures that paid workers for life. He said many workers now depend on market-based retirement accounts instead of guaranteed income after leaving work.
He warned that this shift placed more responsibility on individuals. In the same post, he wrote that “millions of baby-boomers will soon find out they have no income once they stop working,” linking that concern to long-term pressure on retirement security.
In addition, Kiyosaki repeated his long-running support for gold, silver, and Bitcoin. He described those assets as “real money” and said people should focus on financial education while looking at alternative stores of value.
His latest remarks follow similar warnings from recent months. Last month, he said a major financial “bubble burst” could send capital into scarce assets and push Bitcoin much higher. He also said Bitcoin could reach $750,000 within a year after such a crash.
Bitcoin sentiment turns more negative At press time, Bitcoin traded near $66,826. Kiyosaki’s latest comments arrived as market sentiment around the asset weakened. Data from Santiment showed bearish discussion on social platforms rose to its highest level since late February.
The platform said the bullish-to-bearish comment ratio fell to 0.81, showing weaker confidence among traders. Santiment also said that extreme fear can sometimes act as a contrarian signal, with markets often moving against the crowd when negative sentiment grows too strong.
Peter Schiff has renewed his criticism of Bitcoin by questioning its long-term value as an investment.
Summary
Peter Schiff: Bitcoin gained 12% in five years, trailing gold, silver, Nasdaq, and S&P 500. Michael Saylor said Bitcoin has outperformed assets since August 2020, arguing time frame changes comparisons. Santiment data showed Bitcoin bearish sentiment reached late-February highs, with ratio at 0.81 in comments. In a post on X, he compared Bitcoin’s five-year return with gains in the Nasdaq, S&P 500, gold, and silver. His remarks framed the debate around whether Bitcoin still offers a stronger long-term case than traditional assets.
Peter Schiff said Bitcoin rose only 12% over the past five years. He also pointed to stronger gains in other markets during the same period. According to the figures shared in his post, the Nasdaq rose 57.4%, the S&P 500 gained 59.4%, gold climbed 163%, and silver advanced 181%.
Schiff used those numbers to raise doubts about Bitcoin’s long-term edge.
“If the appeal of Bitcoin is its superior long-term performance, why should anyone keep HODLing it?,” he asked.
His statement focused attention on Bitcoin’s recent record against both equities and precious metals.
Saylor says time frame changes the picture Michael Saylor responded by arguing that the comparison depends on the starting point. He said, “Timeframes matter,” and added that Bitcoin has led major assets since August 2020. His reply shifted the discussion from a fixed five-year window to a broader performance view.
Saylor also said that a longer chart would favor Bitcoin even more. He wrote that Bitcoin is the top-performing major asset since August 2020 and said the gap “only widens” when the time span increases. His response reflected a common view among Bitcoin supporters who prefer longer-term comparisons.
Kiyosaki links pressure to older policy shifts Robert Kiyosaki added another angle to the discussion by linking current financial stress to changes that began in 1974. In his post, he said “the future created in 1974 has arrived” and tied today’s debt and inflation concerns to that period. He also connected those changes to the petrodollar system and retirement planning.
Kiyosaki said baby boomers now face growing pressure as pensions gave way to market-based retirement accounts. His comments widened the discussion beyond Bitcoin price alone and placed it inside a broader debate about money, savings, and household finances.
In addition, market sentiment data also showed a cautious tone around Bitcoin. Santiment said bearish discussion on social platforms reached its highest level since late February. The platform reported that the bullish-to-bearish comment ratio dropped to 0.81.
That reading showed weaker trader confidence during the latest market discussion. Santiment also noted that extreme fear can sometimes work as a contrarian signal, as markets often move against the crowd when negative sentiment becomes too strong.
The rivalry between Bitcoin (BTC) and gold has been ongoing for a long time. Some analysts advocate for Bitcoin, others for gold, while some argue that both should be included in portfolios.
At this point, Citi, one of the most important names on Wall Street, also states that both BTC and gold should be included in portfolios.
Citi analyst Alex Saunders said that a portfolio allocation of gold and Bitcoin is better than a traditional portfolio mix.
According to CNBC, a study by Citi found that adding gold and Bitcoin together to portfolios has increased the efficiency of bond and stock portfolios over the past 10 years.
According to this research, combining gold and Bitcoin in a portfolio increased returns without increasing risk.
In this context, Citi analyst Alex Saunders stated that investors perform better by holding small amounts of both gold and Bitcoin, rather than preferring one over the other.
“A 5% investment in gold significantly increases portfolio efficiency. Dividing this investment between gold and Bitcoin further enhances performance.”
The Citi analyst concluded by adding that a mixed allocation of gold and Bitcoin has been helpful during bullish periods in bond markets and during downturns driven by fiscal concerns and rising inflation risks.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
The crypto market is consolidating after months of bearish price action, with participants navigating an environment defined by geopolitical tension, macro uncertainty, and a price structure that has yet to confirm a clear direction. In this context, top analyst Darkfost has identified a behavioral shift that cuts across the usual boundaries between crypto and traditional finance — and what it reveals about where market participants are directing their attention is worth understanding.
Since Binance launched gold futures trading in January, the platform has recorded more than $100 billion in trading volume. That figure, accumulated in under four months, is not a product success story. It is a behavioral signal. The participants who typically live in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and altcoins have collectively directed nine figures into the world’s oldest safe-haven asset — and the environment driving that demand is the same one currently suppressing crypto prices.
Ongoing tensions between Iran and the United States continue to limit market visibility and sustain demand for assets that hold value through uncertainty. Gold has been the primary beneficiary of that dynamic, posting gains of approximately 210% since October 2023 before the correction that began in late January.
That correction has since brought gold 16.5% below its all-time high. The safe-haven trade has not reversed — it has pulled back. And in markets, 16.5% corrections after 210% rallies tend to attract a specific kind of attention.
$6.6 Billion in a Single Day — and the Demand Has Not Gone Away The volume evolution on Binance’s gold futures tells the story of a market that found its audience faster than almost anyone anticipated. Standard sessions now regularly record between $500 million and $1 billion in trading activity — a baseline that would have been considered extraordinary for a product that did not exist four months ago.
During the February correction and again in late March, that baseline was left behind entirely. Multiple sessions exceeded $3 billion, and on March 23 the platform recorded $6.6 billion in a single day — a figure that reflects institutional-scale participation, not retail curiosity.
Crypto Perp Volume XAU (Binance) | Source: CryptoQuant Darkfost frames the current consolidation in gold’s price as structurally natural rather than structurally concerning. After a 210% rally over two years, a 16.5% correction represents the kind of profit-taking that follows any sustained advance — and the persistence of Binance gold futures volume through that correction suggests the underlying demand has not reversed alongside the price.
The structural advantage Binance introduced is worth naming directly. Traditional gold markets close on weekends. Binance does not. For a market participant whose primary trading environment operates continuously — where geopolitical developments on a Saturday morning can move prices before any traditional venue opens — permanent access to gold exposure is not a convenience. It is a capability that did not previously exist for this audience.
Darkfost’s assessment is that Binance made the right call. The $100 billion in volume and the $6.6 billion single-day record suggest the market agrees.
BTC/XAU Ratio Tests Structural Support After Sharp Breakdown The BTC/XAU ratio is attempting to stabilize after a decisive breakdown that shifted the relative strength balance back in favor of gold. After topping near the 35–37 zone, the ratio entered a sustained downtrend. Losing both its short-term and medium-term moving averages in sequence — a clear signal that Bitcoin has been underperforming gold across this phase of the market.
Bitcoin Gold correlation showing relief | Source: BTC/XAU chart on TradingView The recent move lower into the 13–15 range marked a significant reset. That level aligns with prior consolidation zones from 2023, suggesting the market has returned to a historically relevant demand area. The reaction so far has been constructive but not yet convincing. Price has bounced modestly and is now attempting to reclaim the 17 level, but it remains below the declining 50-week and 100-week moving averages, which continue to act as dynamic resistance.
Volume expanded notably during the selloff, indicating that the move was driven by strong conviction rather than thin liquidity. The subsequent rebound, by contrast, has occurred on lighter participation — a detail that raises questions about its durability.
Structurally, the ratio remains in a corrective phase. A sustained reclaim of the 20–23 region would be required to suggest a shift back toward Bitcoin outperformance. Until then, the trend continues to favor gold.
Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com
The rivalry between Bitcoin (BTC) and gold has been going on for years. While both have numerous proponents, a Bitcoin supporter has made some significant statements.
Billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Tudor Jones, appearing on the Invest Like The Best podcast, argued that Bitcoin has surpassed gold as the best hedge against inflation.
Paul Tudor Jones, who invested in gold for many years and made a lot of money from it, claims that Bitcoin is “undoubtedly the best inflation hedge.”
Noting Bitcoin’s limited supply of 21 million coins, Jones described Bitcoin as the most suitable hedge against inflation, citing its limited supply and decentralized network.
He emphasized that these features make Bitcoin far superior to gold.
“Bitcoin is one of the opportunities not to be missed and, without a doubt, the best inflation hedge available.”
While acknowledging Bitcoin’s advantages, Jones also acknowledged concerns about potential cyber warfare and quantum computing risks. He warned investors to exercise caution.
“With artificial intelligence advancing so rapidly, who knows when and how we’ll reach quantum computer technology where someone could come along and hack any bank and anything else they want?”
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Billionaire Mark Cuban has revived the Bitcoin vs gold debate, saying BTC has “lost the plot” and it can no longer be used as a safe haven. Cuban’s bearish remarks come after Bitcoin (BTC) price dropped by 29% in the 12 months leading up to May 22, 2026, while gold went up from $3,295 to $4,522 in the same period. Meanwhile, the XAU/USDT ratio has dropped by 28% between March 2, 2026, and May 22, 2026, showing that gold is weakening, but can this help Bitcoin price avoid a drop to $71,000?
Mark Cuban Dismisses Bitcoin as a Safe Haven as Gold Outperforms Cuban has changed his tune towards Bitcoin, saying he is “disappointed” with how poorly it has performed as a safe haven. He said that he has sold most of it because he initially thought it would not react to geopolitical events the same way that fiat does, but this has not happened because it is down by 29% in 12 months.
The billionaire also said that gold is better than Bitcoin because when gold went up to $5,000 in January 2026, BTC had dropped from $123,000 in October 2025 to $87,000.
“It’s not the hedge that I expected it to be, and that was really disappointing. I’d say I am more disappointed in Bitcoin, not as disappointed in Ethereum.” Cuban said.
CoinGape had earlier reported that Cuban fueled the Bitcoin vs gold debate in 2024, saying that Trump would make Bitcoin a global currency. But the underwhelming performance in the last 12 months, from $111,000 to $77,512 at press time, appears to have pushed him towards gold.
But Cuban’s remarks come as XAU/BTC shows that after gold peaked at $5,000 on January 29, it is moving down, and Bitcoin is moving up to close the gap.
The XAU/BTC ratio has dropped by 29% since March 2, from 0.0826 to 0.0584, showing that Bitcoin has performed better than gold for the last 12 weeks.
XAU/BTC Chart A recent Bitcoin price analysis by CoinGape also noted that BTC is performing better than gold because of institutions buying and gold succumbing to the pressure of the war between the US, Iran, and Israel.
Bitcoin Price Forecast as Bear Flag Warns of Crash to $71,000 The 29% rise in the XAU/BTC ratio shows the Bitcoin vs gold debate might favor BTC once again if gold prices drop and Bitcoin rises, but a bear flag warns that a drop to $71,000 is more likely to happen.
Bitcoin price went from $82,000 on May 14 to $76,000 on May 18. The 7.35% drop in four days created the pole of a bear flag. BTC has tried to move up from May 18 to May 22, going from $76,000 to $78,000. But the gains are in a rising channel that forms the flag part of the bearish pattern.
Bitcoin needs to remain above this rising channel to avoid falling by 7.35% to $71,000. It needs to remain above the support of $77,000 to avoid this drop that would revive the Bitcoin vs gold debate in favor of XAU.
BTC Price Chart The CMF reading of 0.10 suggests that the long-term Bitcoin price prediction is still bullish, even if the short-term setup shows that a drop to $71,000 might occur. The AO bars that are green and on the positive side also show that bulls still have a good grip.
Bitcoin will avoid the drop to $71,000 if it moves above the upper line of the rising channel and the resistance at $78,000. That will push it to the psychological support level of $80,000.
As I write this in 2026, the world is becoming more multipolar, and I expect that trend to continue over the next decade through 2036.
In reality, it was this recent unipolar period that was historically anomalous. Starting from the end of World War II in 1945 and especially since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States has existed as the world’s sole hyperpower. For the first time in history, telecommunications and industry connected the whole world, enabling a truly global reach.
Prior to that point, multipolarity was the norm. Even during the height of the Roman Empire nearly two millennia ago, there were other similarly powerful regions of the world, including the Han Dynasty and other Asian kingdoms and empires. That was at a time when distance truly mattered, and great powers could exist simultaneously with only limited contact.
The other side of this multipolar aspect of power was the multipolar nature of money. For thousands of years, it was gold and silver, along with lesser commodities, that served as money. There was no sovereign ledger big enough to serve the whole world, and so only nature’s decentralized ledger could suffice.
But in the age of telecommunications, as commerce and money began to flow at the speed of light in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, even gold wasn’t good enough. The United States dollar became the primary currency for cross-border lending and contract pricing, while the United States treasury bond became the primary reserve asset for central banks. People often point to the existence of prior reserve currencies, such as the British pound sterling or the Dutch gilder, but they weren’t the same thing as the dollar. They were proxies for metal, and gold itself was the real reserve currency in those eras. But during this unipolar hyperpower era, the free-floating dollar and its bond market surpassed the known market capitalization of gold and became by far the largest holding in sovereign reserves.
Many people viewed this unipolar era as the end of history, even though of course history never does end. China and India gradually recovered their economic might from the depths of colonialism and war that defined their 19th and 20th centuries, with China in particular becoming the world’s largest steel producer, electricity generator, and manufacturer now in the early 21st century. The United States, meanwhile, suffered from the Triffin dilemma: in order to maintain the world’s reserve currency, the nation must supply the world with units of its currency, which they do by running deficits. Those deficits, and the associated hollowing-out of industry that they contribute to, is what eventually weakens the trust in that currency.
Now, many of those in power in the United States no longer want the costs of issuing the reserve currency, though few would say it out loud. The imbalances have become too great. Meanwhile, the rest of the world doesn’t want their assets to be devalued or frozen, or their liabilities hardened, at the whim of Washington DC. There are no other sovereign entities willing and able to serve as the world’s ledger either, with all the trust that’s required and all the burdens it entails.
And so, here it is that we witness the gradual trend shift back toward multipolarity of money. Gold is the obvious first choice; it’s the only other liquid and divisible store of value that’s big enough. It’s still not fast enough, but nations see that they didn’t have to go as all-in on the dollar as they did. They can hold gold in lieu of treasuries for a bigger chunk of their savings than they have been doing in recent decades. It may have its flaws, but gold can’t be hacked, can’t be unliterally debased or frozen, and lasts forever.
The second choice is a boring but obvious one: diversification. In a world where there are a handful of major economic powers, nations can diversify their fiat currency exposures. They can hold a plurality of currencies and bonds at roughly equal proportion to the size of their trading partners and capital providers. That spreads out risk, both in terms of debasement and in terms of confiscation. The problem here is about network effects: liquidity begets more liquidity, and entities don’t want assets and liabilities denominated in different units, and so money naturally trends toward one wherever possible. A patchwork combination of gold and two or three major fiat currencies collectively serving as the world’s ledger is a workable one, but not an ideal one.
The third potential choice, still in its relative infancy, is Bitcoin. Nature provided slow but decentralized ledgers, sovereigns provided fast but centralized ledgers, and this third method now provides a ledger that is both decentralized and fast. The hyperpower unipolar world occurred at a time when transaction speeds could move at the speed of light, but final settlement could not. Fast global transactions (i.e. IOUs) only require Morse code over telegraph connections, which are very simple and of low bandwidth, while fast global settlements (i.e. irreversible transfers) require much higher bandwidth communications and hard encryption. Now that fast settlement exists at scale, the reliance on central intermediaries to bridge the gap between fast transactions and slow settlements can be reduced.
However, the challenge from this point on is twofold: security and network effects.
Bitcoin’s ultimate security has been questioned from its inception. Will its economic incentives keep it permissionless and decentralized indefinitely, or will it eventually gravitate toward centralized capture? Will its cryptographic assumptions continue to hold? And related to both of those questions: will it be able to gradually update over time despite its decentralization, so that it can remain functional and secure as the world’s computer infrastructure evolves underneath it? At only seventeen years of age, these questions are still unanswered, but those of us who invest in the asset and participate in development either directly or through the financing of development believe that Bitcoin is the best shot we have, and so we try to create the reality we want to see.
Bitcoin’s network effects are strong, but are still limited. These network effects, along with its simple and robust design, have been sufficient to keep it as the largest cryptocurrency for seventeen straight years since inception, with no true competitors anywhere in sight. However, when looking more broadly, it’s still a minnow in an ocean of sharks. The direct user base is in the low millions, in a world of billions. The market cap is in the low trillions of dollars in a global world of assets that has reached roughly a quadrillion dollars. And speaking of dollars, people use the largest and most liquid money as their unit of account, and that remains the dollar globally and other fiat currencies locally. It’s what people’s paychecks are denominated in, it’s what their business contracts refer to, and it’s what fulfills their liabilities.
In order to grow very large, Bitcoin by definition requires upward volatility. With upward volatility comes euphoria and leverage, which create the conditions for periods of downward volatility. This volatile adoption period, which inevitably takes decades as it chips into the existing network effects of the dollar and other large monies, limits its attractiveness both as a unit of account and as a near-term savings device. It serves as an investable asset, as long-term savings, and as the most unstoppable payment and settlement method for products and services that are otherwise denominated in more stable incumbent monies. Bitcoin’s fate during this adoption period rests on the vision of early adopters whose plans are measured in decades. The larger it becomes, the more stable it can be and the more it can function as an accounting unit and near-term savings, but getting there is a long journey.
To the extent that Bitcoin continues to remain strong in the face of security threats, and continues to chip into the incumbent monetary networks, the more attractive it becomes to individuals, corporations, and sovereigns. In 2036, I believe gold will still be desired, as there is a natural tendency to want to own physical, immortal things. And I believe the largest fiat currencies, troubled as they may be, will still be in widespread use: those trains have quite a while to run yet. If it’s successful, Bitcoin in 2036 would be larger than any stock, and would rival the largest currencies and metals in market size.
The biggest challenge to Bitcoin is not governments, not quantum computers, not rogue developers, and not other digital assets. Instead, the biggest challenge, the biggest risk, is us. The people. All people.
In 2036, war, corruption, and tyranny will still exist. However, it’s a question of ratios and numbers. People imagine that governments impose all of these things on us, when in reality that’s only partially true. The way it works in practice is that people ask for it.
There is a perceived balance between liberty and security. War and tyranny, and the centralized ledgers that fuel them, come not just out of human evil, but also from human fear. When people are afraid of invaders, plagues, technology, and competition over scarce resources, they turn to their leaders for protection. They give up some of their liberty as long as they perceive that they’re under the collective security umbrella, and that the power of the state will be directed at others rather than themselves. This can work for a time, but it breeds corruption. Power begets power, and eventually turns inward. State failures, when they inevitably occur, must be covered up. Critics of the state, whether from without or from within, must be silenced. When liberty is gone, that system which promised security eventually and ironically becomes the biggest threat to it.
People who criticize ubiquitous surveillance and bureaucratic overreach when wielded by their political opponents often turn around to embrace those tools as soon as their political allies are in power. It’s a short-sighted strategy, relying either on staying in power forever, or in the lack of foresight about how those tools will be given back to their opponents at some point, stronger than ever and ready to be used against them yet again.
If Bitcoin fails to catch on by 2036, I think it will be because humanity didn’t want it, or wasn’t ready for it. The technology itself is robust. Proof of work helps keep the network secure. Tight limits on bandwidth and storage help keep the network decentralized. Layers built on top of it help provide scaling and privacy. There is more work to do, but the foundation is already strong, open for business, and being used at scale. To the extent that major challenges arise, the network is upgradable whenever sufficient consensus is achieved.
In this latest bull/bear cycle, Bitcoin further separated itself from other cryptocurrencies, but failed to attract many new users. AI services caught on with the public far more quickly, leapfrogging Bitcoin in adoption, because people and businesses could see AI’s immediate benefits to them, while Bitcoin’s benefits were unclear to many who haven’t gone down a rabbit hole of research.
There are many stores of value to choose from, and volatility is painful. In order for Bitcoin to truly catch on, it will need to be because people value financial sovereignty. It will need to be because hundreds of millions of people, not just several million as we have now, appreciate the importance of self-custodied savings, permissionless payments, and financial privacy. Those collectively are the attributes that Bitcoin uniquely provides at scale.
Prior to Bitcoin, during this century of fast transactions but without fast settlements, governments could impose their control over the financial system in the background. By regulating the banks, they could surveil and contain activities to a significant degree without restricting almost any end-user directly. Thus, most people didn’t see any direct threats to their financial liberty. After Bitcoin, people can run open-source code, can transact without permission, and can hold liquid savings in their own custody. To the extent that governments are threatened by this, they can’t just impose restrictions on thousands of banks anymore; they have to impose restrictions on millions of end-users and developers.
The question is, now that technology has pulled the mask off, will enough people resist and push forward through frictions, or will they comply without protest and move backward?
We have the tools now, but will we use them? That’s the main question to answer for 2036.
Don’t miss your chance to own The 2036 Issue — featuring articles written by many influential figures in the space pondering the challenges of the next decade!
This piece is featured in the latest Print edition of Bitcoin Magazine, The 2036 Issue. We’re sharing it here as an early look at the ideas explored throughout the full issue.
Robert Kiyosaki has urged investors to rely on education and careful thinking as Bitcoin faces another price correction.
Summary
Robert Kiyosaki warned investors not to follow market hype blindly during Bitcoin’s latest correction. He said education remains the key asset, even when buying Bitcoin, gold or silver. Bitcoin’s weak chart setup keeps traders cautious as support and recovery levels remain under pressure. Robert Kiyosaki says education comes before assets The Rich Dad Poor Dad author said investors should not follow market hype without understanding what they are buying. His warning came as Bitcoin continued to trade under pressure after a recent pullback.
Kiyosaki said even assets often viewed as safe can still cost investors money if they buy at the wrong time or without a clear plan. He has long supported Bitcoin, Ethereum, gold and silver, but his latest comments focused more on financial education than price targets.
He told followers not to “drink financial planners’ Kool-Aid” when they describe U.S. government bonds as safe. He also said, “There is nothing safe…from stupidity.”
Don’t drink financial planners Kool- Aide when they tell you US Bonds are safe. There is nothing safe….from stupidity.
Remember even gold, silver, and Bitcoin can cost you money if purchased on hype.
Best watch the cash flowing.
Today many major US Bond holders, like…
— Robert Kiyosaki (@theRealKiyosaki) May 30, 2026 Kiyosaki added that the most important asset is not Bitcoin, gold or silver. He said, “Always remember your greatest asset lies between your right ear and left ear.”
Bitcoin price correction tests investor discipline Bitcoin’s latest correction has brought more caution back to the market. The asset recently traded near $73,700 after a three-day slide, with analysts watching whether buyers can hold key support.
Earlier reports showed that Bitcoin stabilized near $73,000 after geopolitical tensions, ETF outflows and leveraged liquidations weighed on market sentiment. The same analysis said bearish chart signals still pointed to risk of further losses.
Kiyosaki’s message fits that backdrop. He has often told investors to buy scarce assets during market fear, but he also warned that buying only because others are excited can create losses.
That makes his latest warning different from his usual bullish Bitcoin posts. He still favors hard assets, but he says investors must understand cash flow, risk and timing before entering the market.
Bonds, gold and silver remain in focus Kiyosaki also urged investors to watch global cash flows. He pointed to major holders such as Japan and China reducing exposure to U.S. bonds while increasing interest in gold and silver.
He has often criticized U.S. bonds, fiat currency and retirement products tied to traditional markets. In his view, inflation and rising government debt continue to reduce purchasing power.
As previously reported by crypto.news, Kiyosaki recently said Bitcoin and Ethereum may outlast old retirement plans. That report also noted that critics question his timing because some of his past crash calls did not happen within the periods he suggested.
Kiyosaki remains calm during Bitcoin and Ethereum price swings. He has argued that national debt and dollar weakness matter more than short-term market moves.
Alternative asset warning remains balanced Kiyosaki continues to hold a long-term preference for Bitcoin, Ethereum, gold, silver, oil and cattle. He has also said he does not own a 401k or IRA and avoids publicly traded stocks and bonds.
However, he has also said he is not a financial advisor. He told followers that he shares what he is buying and why, but each person must decide with their own advisers.
That point matters because his forecasts are often aggressive. In March, he predicted Bitcoin could reach $750,000 and Ethereum could reach $95,000 after a major crash.
For now, his latest message is more cautious. It tells investors to avoid blind trust in any asset class, including Bitcoin.
The main message is simple. Bitcoin, gold and silver may attract buyers during inflation fears and market stress, but investors still need knowledge, patience and a clear plan before buying.
Gold has lost part of its old safe-haven image as its price action now moves closely with risk assets such as Bitcoin and the S&P 500, according to economist Robin Brooks.
Summary
Robin Brooks said gold has lost part of its safe-haven role as its equity correlation rises. Brooks said gold now trades more like Bitcoin and the S&P 500 during market stress. He linked gold’s changed behavior to retail inflows during the late 2025 debasement trade. Peter Schiff warned Bitcoin could face panic selling if it breaks its latest low. According to Brooks, gold no longer behaves like the traditional hedge investors once expected during periods of market stress. He said the metal now trades as a pro-cyclical, high-beta asset, with its correlation to the S&P 500 rising above 0.50 in recent months.
Gold’s safe-haven role comes under pressure Brooks said gold historically kept a correlation near zero with the S&P 500, while Bitcoin’s long-term correlation with equities usually stayed below 0.15. During the late 2025 and early 2026 “debasement trade,” Brooks said Bitcoin’s equity correlation climbed as high as 0.55.
The correlation of gold with the S&P 500 is now the same as bitcoin. It used to be that gold was uncorrelated with swings in risk appetite and in the S&P 500, but those days are over. These days gold trades like a high-beta asset. Safe haven no more…https://t.co/QFGBrFMbKS pic.twitter.com/Es1Ir2mO0M
— Robin Brooks (@robin_j_brooks) June 5, 2026 At the same time, gold’s correlation with U.S. equities also increased. Brooks said gold now matches Bitcoin’s correlation with the S&P 500, a setup he described as unusual for an asset long treated as a shelter during geopolitical or economic stress.
The economist said gold now falls with equities when investors reduce exposure to risk. In Brooks’ view, that behavior works against the basic purpose of a safe-haven asset.
Retail demand changed Gold’s market behavior Brooks linked the change to the sharp gold rally over the past year and the arrival of new retail buyers. He said the price increase mechanically lifted the value of gold on central bank balance sheets, but he rejected the idea that institutions had suddenly rushed into bullion or abandoned the U.S. dollar.
According to Brooks, heavy promotion of the “debasement trade” in late 2025 brought many retail investors into gold. He said these buyers tend to react more quickly to market stress than older bullion holders.
Brooks said he first expected the high equity correlation to fade after corrections pushed short-term traders out of the market. He now believes gold’s trading structure has changed more deeply.
Schiff warns Bitcoin could face another sell-off Meanwhile, Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff warned that the latest Bitcoin drop could lead to another round of panic selling. Schiff wrote on June 5 that Bitcoin had broken below $60,000 and touched its lowest level since October 2024.
Schiff said the move erased Bitcoin’s gains after Donald Trump’s November 2024 election win. According to Schiff, the rebound above $61,000 came from opportunistic buying rather than a durable recovery.
“If today’s low is taken out, prepare for a Crypto Black Monday,” Schiff said.
Schiff, chief economist and global strategist at Euro Pacific Asset Management, has long argued that gold is a better store of value than Bitcoin. He also founded SchiffGold and became widely known after predicting the 2008 financial crisis.
Bitcoin broke $60K, taking out the low from Feb. 2025. At just below $59,750, Bitcoin was at its lowest since Oct. 2024, wiping out all of its post-Trump-election gains. Bottom fishers sent the price back above $61K. If today's low is taken out, prepare for a Crypto Black Monday.
— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) June 5, 2026 Standard Chartered keeps bullish Bitcoin view Standard Chartered offered a different view in a June 4 client note. Geoffrey Kendrick, the bank’s head of digital assets research, called the latest crypto downturn a “painful week” but kept his long-term bullish outlook.
Kendrick said Strategy could restart heavy Bitcoin purchases, as it has done after past sales. He wrote that investors may later view this period as a buying zone if Bitcoin reaches $100,000 by the end of 2026.
The debate highlighted a stark split over whether volatility is a flaw or a feature of high-performing assets.
Peter Schiff insists that Bitcoin’s bubble has burst following its steep fall from an October 2025 all-time high of $126,000.
However, investor Anthony Pompliano defended the cryptocurrency’s long-term performance and argued that volatility is part of what has driven its returns.
Schiff Makes the Bear Case, Pompliano Leans on the Long Game The two faced off Monday evening on Fox Business in a live debate moderated by Liz Claman, where Schiff opened by claiming that BTC was a “digital nothing” and calling it a pyramid scheme in which early holders have been cashing out on the wave of demand generated by ETFs and Bitcoin treasury companies led by Michael Saylor’s Strategy.
“All the hype, all of the Bitcoin treasury companies, all of the ETFs, all that buying has simply allowed the people who got in early to cash out,” said Schiff to Claman.
According to him, those buying Bitcoin were only acting on the expectation that “somebody else is going to buy it at a higher price,” an approach he contrasted with gold, which he described as a physical asset with industrial and monetary use.
The economist also claimed that the OG crypto has “no real long-term,” arguing that it was barely higher than where it was five years ago, and framed that sideways drift as evidence of a market that was running on fumes rather than real demand. Gold, on the other hand, in Schiff’s estimation, is in a longer-term bull market, with the analyst suggesting that its recent pullback from $2,600 was due to a classic “buy the rumor, sell the fact” move after an overextended run linked to geopolitical risk pricing.
However, Pompliano, wearing a gold tie in a pointed nod to Schiff, pushed back on that framing and pointed out that Bitcoin’s 10-year compound annual growth rate of around 55% to 60% was several times bigger than gold’s, which, according to him, stands at approximately 12%. The ProCap CEO also said that volatility wasn’t unique to BTC and should not be thought of as a flaw, as it is a characteristic shared by high-performing assets.
“One of the misconceptions about volatility is that volatility is bad,” Pompliano noted. “But actually what we find is the best returning stocks, the best returning commodities, they are all highly volatile.”
On Strategy and Political Concerns Of course, a Schiff BTC debate wouldn’t have been complete without throwing shade at Strategy, and the gold bug did not disappoint. He claimed executive chairman Saylor was “sacrificing his own shareholders by destroying value” with the firm’s financial model moving from issuing stocks at premiums to selling shares at discounts and using leverage tools to continue buying Bitcoin.
You may also like: Brutal Bitcoin Liquidation Cascade Imminent Below $59K, Warns Analyst Mining Profits Dry Up Across Bitcoin, DOGE, LTC, and BCH Saylor Should Stop Buying Bitcoin, Says CryptoQuant The company did sell a small amount of Bitcoin recently but returned with a 1,587 BTC buy on June 15, worth $100 million, that took its holdings to 846,842. According to Schiff, the fact that Strategy sold some of its BTC, however small the number, suggests there’s a strain in what he described as its “flywheel” model of perpetual accumulation.
One area of partial agreement between Pompliano and Schiff was political. Pompliano acknowledged that the Trump administration’s backing of crypto represents politicians latching onto donor money rather than principled support, while Schiff was even blunter, calling government involvement in Bitcoin “a serious problem” and describing it as a deliberate misdirection of resources.
Goldman Sachs has cut its year-end gold forecast by $500 an ounce, lowering its target to $4,900 from $5,400.
Summary
Goldman cut its year-end gold target to $4,900 as expected Fed rate cuts faded further. Gold remains above current levels in Goldman’s outlook, but near-term risks now look weaker overall. Higher rates can pressure Bitcoin and gold by keeping cash and bonds more attractive longer. According to Bloomberg, the bank still expects gold to rise from current levels, but it now sees a smaller move than before.
The revision comes as Goldman no longer expects the Federal Reserve to cut rates in 2026. Market reports said the bank now expects the next rate cuts to arrive in 2027, after earlier forecasts pointed to easing sooner.
Goldman Sachs cuts year-end gold target by $500 to $4,900/ounce, doubting rate cuts
"Our gold price views remain structurally constructive but tactically cautious, with near-term downside risk and medium-term upside risk." pic.twitter.com/R9p8l20TUu
— Peter Spina ⚒ GoldSeek | SilverSeek (@goldseek) June 19, 2026 Goldman commodity analysts Lina Thomas and Daan Struyven said their view remains “structurally constructive but tactically cautious.” They also pointed to near-term downside risk and medium-term upside risk.
Fed pause weighs on gold The Federal Reserve held rates steady at 3.50% to 3.75% on June 17. The central bank said inflation remains above its 2% target and pointed to price pressure linked partly to energy.
That matters for gold because bullion does not pay yield. When interest rates stay higher, bonds and cash can look more attractive than holding gold. A stronger dollar can also make gold less attractive for buyers using other currencies.
Reuters reported that gold headed for a third weekly loss on June 19 as the dollar firmed and hawkish Fed signals weighed on prices. Spot gold fell to its lowest level since June 11 during the session.
Bitcoin faces the same liquidity test A delayed rate-cut cycle can also weigh on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Lower rates often support digital assets by improving liquidity and reducing the cost of capital.
As previously reported by crypto.news, Bitcoin fell toward $63,000 after stronger U.S. jobless claims data reinforced the Fed’s hawkish outlook. Traders reduced exposure after the Fed kept rates unchanged and left the door open to tighter policy.
Crypto.news also reported that Bitcoin slipped toward $65,000 ahead of the Fed decision as traders cut risk. Falling oil prices offered some relief, but they did not fully offset concern over rates and inflation.
Traders watch inflation and rate odds Goldman’s lower gold target does not mean the bank has turned fully bearish on bullion. The $4,900 forecast still points to a price above current levels, but the path now looks more dependent on inflation cooling and Fed policy shifting.
The market is also watching whether geopolitical risk can keep demand for safe-haven assets alive. The war in Iran has added uncertainty, but rate expectations and dollar strength have recently carried more weight in daily trading.
For Bitcoin, the same pressure remains visible. Crypto.news earlier reported that rising bond yields hit crypto-linked equities and pushed Bitcoin lower as rate-hike odds climbed.
Gold and Bitcoin are different assets, but both can react to the same liquidity backdrop. If rate cuts stay delayed, traders may keep favoring cash, short-term bonds, and the dollar. If inflation cools and the Fed turns softer, both markets may find a better base.
As the price of Bitcoin rose, many of the market’s altcoins followed suit. However, what was interesting about the market’s movement was that most alts were actually outperforming the world’s largest cryptocurrency, at press time, like Kyber Network, a token that recorded 151% in YTD returns.
Zcash [ZEC]
The 27th ranked coin on CoinMarketCap was performing better than most coins on 3 April as it reported 3.39% growth in its value over the past 24 hours. The coin was being traded at $32.56, at press time, and had a market cap of $312.99 million. The 24-hour trading volume of the coin was $420.75 million.
The coin, while it has established an identity of its own as a privacy-centric cryptocurrency, has failed to impress many with its price movements as its value keeps falling on the charts.
However, according to the Chaikin Money Flow Indicator, the coin had entered the buying zone on the charts, a sign of what could be rising prices in the near future.
Bitcoin Gold [BTG]
Bitcoin Gold, with a market cap of around $131.12 million, was ranked 38th on CoinMarketCap’s charts. However, as the price of Bitcoin reacted to the buyers, the price of most altcoins shot up, including BTG’s. The coin was reporting 2.25% gains in a day, with a 24-hour trading volume of $21.55 million, at press time.
According to the Bollinger Bands, the volatility in the market had fallen as the bands converged and bullishness was back in the market, with the moving average sliding under the candlesticks.
Just recently, BTG saw its adoption scale a new level after Cryptwerk enabled users to identify merchants, shops, and services that accept BTG.
Kyber Network [KNC]
Kyber Network had been a popular alt among many investors, especially when the coin was reporting 151.18% in YTD returns. The coin had been marching upwards until it, alongside the rest of the market, collapsed on 12 March. However, the fall wasn’t enough to wipe out its gains. KNC was being traded at $0.4492 with a market cap of $79.61 million, at the time of writing. Its 24-hour trading volume was noted to be $32.96 million.
According to the Relative Strength Index, the coin was slumping towards the overbought zone. However, interest from investors is expected to remain strong as Kyber Network moves towards a protocol upgrade in Q2 of 2020
Crypto markets have found a new level; Binance Coin pumping hard, EOS and Maker still sliding. Market Wrap Monday’s crypto market dump has found a new level and the selloff has abated over the past 24 hours. This has prevented another huge rout though further losses cannot be ruled out. Total market capitalization has stabilized above $125 billion for the time being.
After dumping $100 yesterday Bitcoin has found a new channel around $3,760 where it has traded for the past day. Daily volume is back up to nearly $9 billion for BTC but it appears to be all bearish at the moment. As predicted Bitcoin fell after failing to break strong resistance at $3,900, all indicators suggest that further losses are imminent.
Ethereum has leveled out at around $127, dropping a further percent or so on the day. All of February’s gains are getting wiped out as ETH continues to weaken and follow in the shadow of Bitcoin. XRP has not fallen in the same magnitude which has reduced the gap between second and third places to just $800 million. The Ripple token is currently trading at $0.305.
Binance Coin price 24 hours. Coinmarketcap.com Only one altcoin is surging in the top ten during today’s Asian trading session and it is developing a pattern of its own. Binance Coin appears to be behaving like a stablecoin; it pumps when markets dump. BNB is currently up 10.5% as it hits an 8 month high of $12.50. Binance boss CZ appears to have taken over from Justin Sun for volume of twitter posts in any given day;
Either way his exchange backed token is flying at the moment as it surges past Stellar and Tron to take eighth spot by market cap which is currently $1.7 billion. Changpeng Zhao’s current AMA and recent DEX announcements are driving momentum for BNB. Tron is the only other altcoin in the green in the top ten as it made almost 3% over the past 24 hours.
Looking further down at the top twenty Bitcoin SV is having a rare bounce as it adds 4% on the day taking its price to $66.50. The rest are still in the red with Maker shedding the most at 5%. Monero, NEM and Zcash are all still weak with further losses of 3% today.
FOMO: MOAC on The Move Today’s fomo induced pump is MOAC which is up 14% at the time of writing. There does not seem to be much driving momentum for this multi-level blockchain scaling platform so it could well be tomorrow’s dump. Also getting a boost at the moment is Loom Network with a 12% pump.
Following a couple of days of fomo, Ravencoin is cooling off today as it becomes the top one hundreds biggest loser dumping 13% on the day. Revain and Bitcoin Gold are not far behind as they both shed 12% making up the only three to drop double digits at the moment.
Total crypto market capitalization has found a temporary floor at $126 billion following the $4 billion dump yesterday. Daily volume has crept back up to $28 billion but signals are bearish and the selloff is likely to continue. Crypto markets are at exactly the same place they were three months ago as the consolidation continues.
Market Wrap is a section that takes a daily look at the top cryptocurrencies during the current trading session and analyses the best-performing ones, looking for trends and possible fundamentals.
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Created by industry experts and meticulously reviewed
The highest standards in reporting and publishing
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
There have been several 51 percent attacks on the proof-of-work (PoW) consensus protocol since it was first proposed a decade ago. Although the Bitcoin blockchain has never been hijacked due to the astronomical power of all computers within the network, the PoW used on other blockchain-based projects like Bitcoin Gold, Litecoin Cash, ZenCash, Verge, or Ethereum Classic, and others haven’t managed to stand the test of time.
Infamous 51% attacks on the PoW consensus algorithm
A 51 percent attack can happen when a miner, or a group of miners, gets in control of over 50 percent of the mining power within a network, known as hash power or hash rate. On the Bitcoin blockchain, the hashing uses the SHA-256 algorithm whereas Ethereum uses ‘Ethash’ and Litecoin uses the ‘scrypt’. One of last year’s most infamous attacks on a PoW-based blockchain was Bitcoin Gold. Using superior computation power, hackers falsified the ledger of the currency, stealing almost $18 million.
ZenCash, a cryptocurrency based on a PoW Equihash mining algorithm, also experienced a 51 percent attack. The attacker reorganized the blockchain, managing to reverse 38 blocks and enabling double spending on two major transactions totaling $550,000.
A PoW consensus that can stand a 51% attack
Amid a series of attacks on the PoW consensus throughout 2018, the ILCOIN project launched an improved version of PoW, deemed as a command chain protocol (C2P). C2P implements bulletproof rules and regulations in the source code to either permit or restrict different activities. Due to the centralized nature of the ILCOIN blockchain, which uses the SHA-256 technology of Bitcoin, the development team at ILCOIN can fully control any corruption attempts on the network, including double spendings and rollbacks.
C2P incorporates three security layers that altogether create an improved environment for end users. According to mentions in the whitepaper, “C2P is the actual next step of security in the cryptocurrency world, in order to turn down the page for all the non-ethical hackers who always try to take advantage on some back doors for some faulty codes, or lack of hashing power, for example, and in the same moment hurt a specific cryptocurrency and the trust of still cutting-edge technology.”
A better Bitcoin with bulletproof technology against hacks
Committed to building and developing a digital currency-based ecosystem for its growing community, ILCOIN aims to become a better Bitcoin; a high-quality cryptocurrency that can stand a 51 percent attack successfully. To perfect the security of its blockchain, ILCOIN made it quantum resistant.
First, the team analyzed former attacks against different chains. After concluding that no existing protocol is secure enough to withstand a 51 percent attack, they developed new rules and completely changed their blockchain. So-called “admiral” nodes within the CPA protocol sign every block, and if the block isn’t signed by the Master Node, it instantly becomes invalid. Regardless of the hash rate, it would be impossible to forge a block and initiate an attack on the network because the Admiral Node will not sign the block. The unique blocking mechanism prevents hackers from stealing ILC coins, as well as spending in case users lose their wallets.
Armed with a sustainable tech stack and a forward-thinking development team, ILCOIN lays ambitious plans for 2019 – to become the first project to implement smart contracts within its C2P; and potentially, be the first cryptocurrency using the SHA-256 consensus algorithm to achieve its mission of increasing security without compromising blockchain speed.
A new report on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency has been published by the Bank of Canada, the country’s central bank.
Entitled “The Economics of Cryptocurrencies—Bitcoin and Beyond,” the staff working paper details how blockchain networks achieve resilience and resistance to attack. The bigger the network, the more costly an attack, the less vulnerable a cryptocurrency becomes.
According to the report,
“Costly mining helps discourage double spending in each transaction, independent of the number of transactions. At the same time, the intensity of mining increases with the total rewards. Hence, with more transactions, it becomes easier to finance mining rewards to protect the system.”
The authors detail risk factors for small-cap cryptocurrencies such as Monacoin, Bitcoin Gold, Zencash and Litecoin Cash which have suffered 51% attacks.
“Our analysis also confirms that smaller cryptocurrencies (in terms of market value and transaction volume) can be at risk for double-spending attacks as they do not generate enough mining rewards to disincentivize such attacks. When the potential gains from a double-spending attack are small, the mining reward required to protect the system will be lower.
This would be the case for a system used only for low-value transactions. In conclusion, a cryptocurrency would work best as a retail payment system where there is a large volume of transactions that are relatively small in value. To the contrary, using a cryptocurrency for infrequent large-value payments seems to be very costly.”
[adinserter block="1"]
The authors also conclude that Bitcoin, the world’s leading cryptocurrency, could be greatly improved if it switches its consensus protocol from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake.
“For Bitcoin, we find that the cryptocurrency is not only extremely expensive in terms of its mining costs, but also inefficient in its long-run design. However, the efficiency of the Bitcoin system can be significantly improved by optimizing the rate of coin creation and minimizing transaction fees. Another potential improvement is to eliminate inefficient mining activities by changing the consensus protocol altogether…
Our analysis finds conditions under which PoS can strictly dominate PoW and even support immediate and final settlement.”
According to the report, such a switch would impact Bitcoin’s inefficiencies and make it more competitive against traditional monetary systems.
“Using the growth rate of 25 bitcoins, for every block and average transaction fees in 2015, we find that Bitcoin generates a large welfare loss that is about 500 times as large as in a monetary economy with 2% inflation.6 The reason is that, in its current form, Bitcoin spends too many resources to rule out double spending.
Reducing the growth rate to 0, but relying on sufficiently large transaction fees – like in the long-run design of Bitcoin – will reduce these costs significantly. Still, the optimal design of Bitcoin implies relatively large welfare losses. Compared to the first-best allocation, an optimally designed Bitcoin protocol would lead to a loss of about 0.19% of the consumption in the first-best allocation. This is equivalent to the welfare loss that would be generated in a monetary system with a moderate inflation rate of about 45%.”
The authors, Jonathan Chiu, a senior research advisor in the funds management and banking department at the Bank of Canada, and Thorsten V. Koeppl, an associate professor in the department of economics at Queen’s University, note that the views expressed in the report are solely their own and “may support or challenge prevailing policy orthodoxy” of the Bank of Canada.
Bitcoin Gold, a minor fork of Bitcoin, fell victim to a 51% attack last week, according to an independent report on GitHub.
Bitcoin Gold’s Low Hashrate to Blame As explained by Vertcoin maintainer James Lovejoy, the cryptocurrency suffered two deep reorganizations on Thursday, Jan. 23 and Friday, Jan. 24.
By buying out the blockchain network’s hashrate, attackers were able to steal approximately 7,000 BTG ($72,000) through double spending.
Advertisement
Bitcoin Gold appears to be an easy target due to its low hashrate. Lovejoy suggests that the attack would have cost about $1,700 based on current Nicehash prices. Similarly, Crypto51 suggests it would cost about $700 to attack the blockchain.
The attacker succeeded in moving the stolen cryptocurrency to Binance, and may have succeeded in cashing out the stolen funds. However, Binance has also increased its withdrawal times for Bitcoin Gold to prevent future thefts.
This is not the first time that Bitcoin Gold has suffered a 51% attack: it was previously hacked for $18 million in May 2018, which led several exchanges to delist the coin.
Bitcoin Gold isn’t the only blockchain that has fallen victim to an attack. Lovejoy detected a similar attack on Vertcoin in December. He also discovered attacks on Expanse and Litecoin Cash over the course of 2019.
Other blockchains that have been targeted by 51% attacks in recent years include Ethereum Classic, Verge, and Feathercoin.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Mike Dalton. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Gold and its cryptocurrency derivatives surged Thursday night as investors sought refuge in the safe haven following Israel's strikes on Iran.
What happened: Spot gold was up 1.20% to $3,427.51 per ounce as of this writing, its highest level in more than a month. Gold futures on the Commodity Exchange were up 1.63% to $3,457.70.
The latest spike extended the yellow metal's year-to-date gains past 30%.
The gains flowed down to physical gold-backed cryptocurrencies, causing similar increases in Tether Gold and PAX Gold.
The two coins also extended their year-to-date gains past 30%, becoming one of the most valuable cryptocurrency investments in 2025.
These returns contrasted with the drop in heavyweights like Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) and Ethereum (CRYPTO: ETH), which were down 3.38% and 8.91%, respectively, as of this writing.
Renowned gold bug Peter Schiff contrasted gold's rise with Bitcoin's decline, calling into question the apex cryptocurrency’s widely touted safe-haven narrative.
"How can anyone consider Bitcoin to be a digital version of gold?," he asked.
Read Next:
Trump Family-Backed Bitcoin Mining Firm Mines $23 Million Worth Of BTC, Signals More Accumulation In The Future Image via Shutterstock
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs
Updated Aug 8, 2025, 6:24 p.m. Published Aug 8, 2025, 1:26 p.m.
2 min read
Gold futures surged to record highs on Friday amid tariffs on the precious metal. (Jingming Pan/Unsplash)Summary
U.S. gold futures reached $3,534 per ounce on Friday after the government confirmed tariffs on imported bars.Higher import costs are accelerating futures price gains and attracting speculative trading.The move could have knock-on effects for bitcoin and tokenized gold markets.Gold futures surged to a record high on Friday after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on imported gold bars, a rare move sparking both safe-haven buying and fresh concerns over supply disruptions in a market unaccustomed to such trade measures.
The most actively traded U.S. gold futures contract climbed as high as $3,534 per troy ounce after U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed that one-kilogram and 100-ounce bars would face reciprocal tariffs.
Tariffs make imported gold more expensive for U.S. buyers. That cost pressure typically pushes futures prices higher than spot prices, creating arbitrage opportunities for traders. The setup can fuel speculative buying, but it also sends a geopolitical signal — gold has historically been viewed as outside trade-war crossfire, more akin to a currency than a competitive product.
The move is notable because most U.S. gold imports come from Switzerland, which received one of the highest tariff rates under the policy. A sudden increase in costs for that supply could raise the risk of a short squeeze if deliveries slow.
“Trump's tariffs on 100-ounce and 1-kilo gold bars could wreak havoc on the COMEX," bitcoin critic and gold advocate Peter Schiff said in a post on X. "Prices could soar as shorts rush to cover to avoid having to pay 39% tariffs to import bars from Switzerland if longs take delivery. Even if they don't import, all such bars will trade at premiums."
The rally comes at a time when interest rates headed lower in the West and global trade tensions are already high, factors that tend to strengthen gold’s appeal as a store of value during economic uncertainty.
Historically, strong gold rallies have often coincided with gains in bitcoin, which some traders view as an alternative “safe-haven” asset. Tokenized gold products such as PAXG$3,965.15 and Tether Gold (XAUT) were both modestly higher over the past 24 hours, while bitcoin slipped about 1%.
Tariffs on gold could also make the case for bitcoin, which is not subject to customs duties and is sometimes described as “digital gold.” While the metal remains the dominant safe-haven asset, the latest price surge shows how policy changes can push investors to reassess their options.
Both spot gold prices and gold futures fell during U.S. afternoon trading on Thursday after a White House official told Bloomberg that the President would introduce a policy clarifying that imports of gold bars should not be subject to tariffs, calling earlier news "misinformation" regarding the tariffs.
Update (Aug 8, 18:23 UTC): Adds paragraph at the end about a White House official telling Bloomberg that the President will post an executive order to exempt gold bars from tariffs.
AI Disclaimer: Parts of this article were generated with the assistance from AI tools and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and adherence to our standards. For more information, see CoinDesk's full AI Policy.
There have been a number of Bitcoin forks over the years. But how many? The total is staggering, with over 50 forks on record.
What Is a Bitcoin Fork? A Bitcoin fork is a cryptocurrency that split away from Bitcoin at a certain block height. Transaction histories are shared up until the time of the fork, with the new coin then splitting off onto its own blockchain.
There are two kinds of forks: soft forks and hard forks. A soft fork is backwards compatible, meaning it is a software update that is compatible with earlier versions of the blockchain. A hard fork is not backward compatible. Any blocks following a hard fork need to follow the new rules to be considered valid.
The Bitcoin network itself has undergone a number of soft forks, with software updates including preventing duplicate identification hashes and introducing lock times for individual transaction outputs.
Namecoin, created in 2011, was the first fork of the Bitcoin software. Bitcoin XT and Bitcoin Classic (BXC) were earlier forks of the Bitcoin network reference client, released in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
Most cryptocurrency projects that are well-known off-shoots of Bitcoin often followed contentious debates around the direction of the code. Bitcoin Cash was the first high-profile hard fork of Bitcoin and was created in mid-2017. It is regarded as a contentious fork, meaning it occurred because there were competing visions about the future development of the network.
A List of Bitcoin Forks Most hard forks of Bitcoin occurred between late 2017 and early 2018. The period was remarkable because it coincided with the ICO frenzy. The rate at which new tokens were created made it difficult to keep up with the changes.
Advertisement
Bitcoin saw its first four hard forks on the same day of Aug. 1, 2017.
The Bitcoin Cash Fork Bitcoin Cash (BCH) came into existence at block height 478,559. It was a divisive and contentious split, led by those who believed in increased block sizes. The new protocol increased block sizes to 8MB. Technically, Bitcoin Clashic and Bytether were created a block before it. Following at block height 498,888 on the same day, Oil BTC was created.
The Bitcoin Gold Fork Bitcoin Gold (BTG) was the next high-profile project to fork from Bitcoin. The coin split away at block height 491,407 on Oct. 10, 2017. The aim of Bitcoin Gold was to create a new version of Bitcoin that would “democratize” mining by changing Bitcoin’s proof-of-work algorithm.
The next month, Bitcore (BTX) and Bitcoin Diamond (BCD) were created. Bitcoin Diamond was designed to build a network more resistant to attacks and to enhance network capacity.
December 2017 Bitcoin Hard Forks In the month of December of 2017, almost 20 new coins were created through hard forks from Bitcoin:
Bitcoin Silver (BTSI) Bitcoin Nano (BTN) BitcoinX (BCX) Super Bitcoin (SBTC) Bitcoin Hot (BTH) UnitedBitcoin (UB) Bitcoin World (BTW) Bitcoin Stake (BTCS) Lightning Bitcoin (LBTC) Bitcoin Faith (BTF) Bitcoin New (BTN) Bitcoin Top (BTT) Bitcoin File (BIFI) Bitcoin God (GOD) Quantum Bitcoin (QBTC) Bitcoin SegWit2X x11 (B2X) Bitcoin Uranium (BUM) BitcoinBoy (BCB) Bitcoin Ore (BCO) Many of these late 2017 coins are no longer in circulation and some were considered a scam at the time of their creation. However, projects like Super Bitcoin remain trading on 12 active markets.
Bitcoin Forks of Early 2018 As the heat cooled on crypto markets in the beginning of 2018, forks continued. In the first few months of the 2018 bear market:
Bitcoin All (BTA) Bitcoin Private (BTCP) Bitcoin Pizza (BPA) Bitcoin Rhodium (BTR) Bitcoin Smart (BCS) BitVote (BTV) Bitcoin Interest (BCI) Bitcoin Atom (BCA) Bitcoin Lite (BTCL) were created. Bitcoin Private was forked from ZClassic and Bitcoin. It supports zk-SNARKs, masking the details of the sender and recipient of a transaction.
This list is not exhaustive. As Bitcoin is open source code, any developer can fork it and create a new cryptocurrency. According to research from BitMEX, there were a total of 44 forks in the mid-2017 to early-2018 period. Only Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Diamond, Bitcoin Gold, and Bitcoin Private saw significant trading volume.
Forks of Forks A number of Bitcoin forks have undergone another subsequent fork. The highest profile of these was Bitcoin SV (Satoshi’s Vision). BSV forked from BCH at the end of 2018, creating listings of BCHABC and BCHSV, Both sides battled in the hash wars to determine which coin would dominate.
The Bitcoin Cash split was also over the issue of block size, with the SV team favoring even larger blocks. Bitcoin SV claims to be the closest Bitcoin-named blockchain to Satoshi’s “original vision” of peer-to-peer electronic cash, or so its creators claim.
Bitcoin has forked a number of times. Sometimes it has arisen from genuine ideological or technological differences. Other times, it has been rather uncontentious, with a group of developers seeking the marketing power of the Bitcoin name.
Which Forks are Worth Claiming? All told, there have likely been over 50 Bitcoin forks. More could still be created over time. Today, there is a total of nine Bitcoin forks that see any trading volume at all. The forks worth claiming, at current prices:
Bitcoin Cash (BCH): $219 Bitcoin SV (BSV): $166 Bitcoin Gold (BTG): $7.2 Bitcoin HD (BHD): $5.1 Bitcoin Rhodium (XRC): $4.1 Of those, only Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin Gold, and Bitcoin Diamond see significant trading volume.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Paul de Havilland. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
