Don't Rush to Criticize Bitcoin—It's Becoming the 'Next Generation Gold'

比推Publicado a 2026-03-03Actualizado a 2026-03-03

Resumen

Title: Don't Rush to Condemn Bitcoin: It's Becoming the "Next Generation Gold" Despite the "digital gold" narrative, Bitcoin has consistently failed to act as a safe-haven asset during geopolitical crises, such as the 2026 Iran-Israel conflict, where gold prices surged while Bitcoin initially plummeted. The article argues that Bitcoin is not yet a true digital gold, as it lacks state adoption (central banks accumulate gold, not Bitcoin) and exhibits asymmetric investor behavior (falling with equities but not rising proportionally during recoveries). Three structural asymmetries hinder Bitcoin's safe-haven status: 1) a derivatives-heavy market structure prone to liquidations, 2) dominance by leveraged traders rather than patient capital, and 3) a lack of long-term behavioral trust compared to gold's decades-long record. However, Bitcoin has demonstrated utility as a "crisis utility asset," enabling financial transactions in extreme scenarios like Ukraine (2022) and Iran (2026) when traditional systems failed. For Bitcoin to evolve into "next-generation gold," it must narrow these asymmetries through market structure transformation (reduced leverage), participant shift (generational adoption), and behavioral accumulation (algorithmic trust). If achieved, Bitcoin could become a new asset class rather than merely replicating gold.

Source: Tiger Research

Author: Ryan Yoon

Compiled and Edited by: BitpushNews


In February 2026, as the Iran attack incident escalated, the price of gold soared, while Bitcoin suffered a sharp decline. Can we still believe that Bitcoin is "digital gold"? This article explores the conditions Bitcoin must meet to become the "next generation gold".

Key Points

  • In every geopolitical crisis, gold rises while Bitcoin falls. After six tests, the data has never confirmed the "digital gold" narrative.

  • While governments are hoarding gold, they still exclude Bitcoin from their holdings. For investors, Bitcoin exhibits asymmetry: it falls with the stock market but fails to rebound in sync with it.

  • Three structural asymmetries hinder Bitcoin from gaining safe-haven asset status: excessive derivatives (market structure), dominance by leveraged traders (participant structure), and lack of a repeated behavioral record (behavioral accumulation).

  • Although Bitcoin is not a safe-haven asset, it is a "crisis utility asset" that proves useful in extreme environments where borders are closed and banks are shut down.

  • If these three asymmetries narrow, Bitcoin may no longer be a replica of gold but evolve into a new category—the "next generation gold". Generational shift and algorithmic adoption are variables that could accelerate this process.

1. Is Bitcoin Really "Digital Gold"?

On February 28, 2026, the U.S. and Israel launched an attack on Iran. When "Operation Epic Fury" was announced, the price of gold immediately rose. In contrast, Bitcoin fell intraday to $63,000. Although it recovered within a day, its reaction was starkly different.

During geopolitical shocks like war, Bitcoin's performance completely diverges from gold. Although Bitcoin recovers quickly after the initial drop, chain liquidations by leveraged traders cause its decline to far exceed that of other assets. During the Iran-Israel conflict, its intraday drop reached -9.3%, while during the Ukraine war it was -7.6%. Meanwhile, gold was rising.

When an asset crashes first at the moment a crisis breaks out, can we really call it "digital gold"?

2. Bitcoin is Not "Digital Gold" for Nations or Investors

Bitcoin was not originally designed to be "digital gold". The title of Satoshi Nakamoto's 2008 whitepaper was "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System". Its starting point was a transmission mechanism, not a store of value.

The "digital gold" narrative became popular during the 2020 zero-interest-rate and quantitative easing era. As concerns about currency devaluation peaked, Bitcoin gained attention as a store of value. But in practice, neither nations nor investors treat it as "digital gold".

2.1 National Level: Hoarding Gold, Only "Considering" Bitcoin

Data from the World Gold Council shows that central banks are increasing their gold holdings year by year. However, no major central bank includes Bitcoin in its official reserve assets.

Some counter that the U.S. formally established a "Strategic Bitcoin Reserve" via an executive order in March 2025. The order text even mentioned that "Bitcoin is often called 'digital gold'". But the details are crucial: its scope is limited to assets obtained through criminal and civil forfeiture. The government is not buying new Bitcoin; it is choosing to hold rather than sell seized assets.

Notably, as the appeal of U.S. debt declines, Europe and China are actively buying gold, but Bitcoin does not appear on their list of alternatives.

2.2 Investor Level: Falls with Declines, Doesn't Rise with Gains

The second half of 2025 was decisive. When the Nasdaq hit a record high, Bitcoin had plummeted more than 30% from its October peak of $125,000. The two began to decouple.

The real trouble isn't the decoupling itself, but the direction. Bitcoin fell in sync with the stock market decline but failed to rise when the market rebounded. For investors, this is the worst combination. There is no reason to hold an asset in a portfolio that only shares downside risk but misses out on upside gains.

3. Why Has Bitcoin Failed to Become "Digital Gold"?

A safe-haven asset is not just one whose price rises. In academic definition, a safe-haven asset is one whose correlation with other assets drops to zero or turns negative during extreme market downturns. The key is whether its reaction in a crisis is predictable. Measured by this standard, the gap between gold and Bitcoin is evident.

Three structural asymmetries explain this gap:

  1. Market Structure Asymmetry: Gold has physical demand supporting its price floor, and futures leverage is relatively low. Bitcoin's derivatives trading volume is about 6.5 times that of spot, and it trades 24/7, making it the first asset sold off when a crisis hits.

  2. Participant Asymmetry: Gold's crisis buyers are patient capital (central banks, pension funds). The Bitcoin market is dominated by leveraged traders and hedge funds, which are the fastest to withdraw in a crisis.

  3. Behavioral Accumulation Asymmetry: "Buy gold in times of crisis" is a behavioral pattern repeated for decades, becoming a formula. Bitcoin needs time to earn the same trust.

4. Not "Safe", But Proven "Useful"

In terms of safety, it's hard to call Bitcoin digital gold. But its utility in a crisis is real.

Ukraine (2022): After the war broke out, the Ukrainian central bank restricted electronic transfers and set withdrawal limits. Citizens couldn't access their deposits. Some refugees crossed borders with Bitcoin seed phrases stored on USB drives and exchanged them for local currency via Bitcoin ATMs or P2P transactions in Poland to sustain their lives.

UNHCR: Distributed the stablecoin USDC to displaced persons, allowing them to exchange it for cash at MoneyGram outlets.


Iran (2026): After "Operation Epic Fury", fund outflows from Iran's largest crypto exchange, Nobitex, surged by 700%.

These cases show people turn to Bitcoin not because it is safe, but because it works when the financial system fails.

In finance, a "safe-haven asset" means price resilience, which is a different concept from an "asset usable in a crisis". Bitcoin provides functional value for movement and transfer in wartime but cannot defend its price.

5. Bitcoin's "Next Generation Gold" Script

Although Bitcoin currently moves opposite to gold in every crisis, the path to "next generation gold" opens if the following three asymmetries narrow:

5.1 Market Structure Transformation

Derivatives trading volume being 6.5 times spot is a trigger for chain liquidations. Recently, futures open interest has declined, and price discovery is shifting towards spot and ETFs. The real test is whether leverage will spiral out of control again in the next bull market.

5.2 Participant Shift (Generational Change)

After the spot ETF approval, institutional inflows made Bitcoin a mainstream asset. But this creates a paradox: the more institutional holdings, the more likely Bitcoin is to be sold off with the stock market in risk-aversion events.

There is an overlooked variable here: generational change. When Gen Z starts managing wealth, gold might seem like "their parents' safe haven". This generation's first investment account is often a crypto exchange. This instinctive behavioral shift could be more influential than institutional decisions.

5.3 Behavioral Accumulation Shift

Gold took about 50 years after the Nixon Shock to establish its status. Bitcoin might not need that long. Although the sixth test (Iran attack) result was again a drop followed by a rebound, the repetition of this pattern is building a belief that "it always comes back after a fall".

A more important variable is algorithms. Currently, a large amount of trading is executed by AI agents and algorithms. If a "buy Bitcoin in a crisis" strategy is embedded into algorithms, this pattern can form without the need for human psychological accumulation. Trust might be established in code before it is in humans.

Conclusion: Today's Bitcoin is not yet "digital gold". But if it can achieve transformation in market structure, participant composition, and behavioral accumulation on top of its utility, it will become the "next generation gold"—not a replica of gold, but the birth of a new category.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

Bitpush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

Bitpush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7616425

Preguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, why has Bitcoin failed to become 'digital gold' during geopolitical crises?

AThe article states that Bitcoin has failed to become 'digital gold' because in every geopolitical crisis tested, its price fell while gold's price rose. This is due to three structural asymmetries: an oversupply of derivatives (market structure), dominance by leveraged traders (participant structure), and a lack of a repeated behavioral record (behavioral accumulation).

QWhat evidence does the article provide to show that Bitcoin is not considered a reserve asset by major central banks?

AThe article cites data from the World Gold Council showing that central banks are逐年 increasing their gold holdings, while no major central bank has included Bitcoin in its official reserve assets. It also notes that even the U.S. 'Strategic Bitcoin Reserve' established by executive order in March 2025 is limited to assets obtained through criminal and civil forfeiture, not new purchases.

QHow does the article define the practical utility of Bitcoin in crisis situations, and what examples are given?

AThe article defines Bitcoin's utility as a 'crisis utility asset' that functions in extreme environments where borders are closed or banks are shut down. Examples include Ukrainian refugees using Bitcoin seed phrases on USB drives to access funds via Polish Bitcoin ATMs or P2P exchanges, and the UNHCR distributing USDC stablecoins to displaced persons for cash conversion at MoneyGram outlets.

QWhat three structural changes does the article suggest are necessary for Bitcoin to evolve into 'next-generation gold'?

AThe article suggests that three structural asymmetries must narrow for Bitcoin to become 'next-generation gold': a transformation in market structure (reducing derivative dominance), a shift in participant structure (generational change in wealth management), and a change in behavioral accumulation (establishing a reliable crisis response pattern, potentially through algorithmic adoption).

QWhat paradoxical effect does increased institutional ownership of Bitcoin have on its behavior during risk-aversion events, according to the article?

AThe article points out a paradox: as institutional ownership of Bitcoin increases through instruments like spot ETFs, it becomes more mainstream, but this also makes it more likely to be sold off alongside the stock market during risk-aversion events, rather than acting as a safe-haven asset.

Lecturas Relacionadas

My Coding Betting Dashboard is Profiting, but Polymarket is Truly Not a Good Place for 'Arbitrage'

The author built a custom monitoring dashboard for Polymarket, a prediction market platform, and tested it with $1,600, achieving over 30% returns. However, the core argument is that Polymarket is not a good venue for traditional arbitrage. The dashboard has two main sections: a "Portfolio Dashboard" for tracking active positions with key metrics like total capital, P&L, and a risk-control module using a tier system (T1, T2, T3), and an "Opportunity Watchlist" for monitoring markets. The article details a critical structural trap in binary markets: a bet with a high perceived probability of success still carries a 100% loss risk if wrong. The author's T1/T2/T3 system is designed to manage this by limiting position sizes based on conviction and time horizon, emphasizing that high confidence should not equal high concentration. A key insight is the danger of "pseudo-diversification"—betting on different markets driven by the same underlying variable. The author concludes that Polymarket offers few true low-risk, arbitrage opportunities. It is instead a high-risk environment where wins can create a false sense of mastery, leading to large losses. The platform is better viewed as a training ground for honing judgment through disciplined, framework-driven betting rather than a reliable income source. The tools help transform intuition into structured, rule-based decisions to mitigate the risk of catastrophic errors.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

My Coding Betting Dashboard is Profiting, but Polymarket is Truly Not a Good Place for 'Arbitrage'

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

WeChat AI Card Hands-On Guide: Has the AI Shopping Era Arrived?

**"WeChat AI Card" Practical Test Guide: Has the Era of AI Shopping Arrived?** WeChat has officially launched the "AI Exclusive Card," a feature integrated into its Workbuddy AI assistant. This card is designed to handle payments for AI-initiated purchases. Our hands-on test reveals it's not yet a tool for fully autonomous AI shopping, but rather a controlled payment layer for AI agents. The AI Card functions as an isolated sub-wallet within WeChat Pay. Users must bind the card and transfer funds into it from their main wallet. Crucially, every transaction requires explicit user confirmation via smartphone scan; AI cannot spend autonomously. Currently accessible through the Workbuddy agent, the card targets specific digital consumption scenarios: purchasing paid content (reports, data), calling paid APIs/tools, and subscribing to services. Its design prioritizes security and control by separating funds and mandating approval for each payment. We tested a real-world scenario: ordering bubble tea via Workbuddy using a "Meituan Life Assistant" skill. The process encountered multiple hurdles: high "skill" usage costs (exceeding daily free credits), and most importantly, while a payment was successfully initiated, the AI purchased an incorrect product (a mismatched group-buy coupon instead of the desired drink). This highlights the current limitation: the **AI Card only solves the payment step**. The broader challenge lies in the **AI agent's execution chain**—accurately understanding intent, navigating third-party platforms, selecting the right product, and ensuring proper fulfillment. The payment succeeded, but the purchase failed to meet the user's need. In conclusion, the WeChat AI Exclusive Card is a cautious, early-step experiment in AI commerce. It provides a secure, user-controlled payment method for agent interactions but is not yet capable of reliable, end-to-end complex purchases. For now, it's best used for low-value, low-risk digital services with careful user verification at each step. The vision of AI handling complete shopping tasks remains a work in progress.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

WeChat AI Card Hands-On Guide: Has the AI Shopping Era Arrived?

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Deconstructing Notion's Growth: From a Note-taking Tool to 100 Million Users—How Notion Built a Triple Growth Flywheel Through Product, Templates, and Community

Notion's growth from a niche note-taking tool to a platform with 100 million users is powered by three interconnected flywheels: Product-Led Growth (PLG), a Template Economy, and Community-Driven Growth. First, Notion's PLG strategy relies on a highly flexible, "plastic" product that users can adapt to countless personal and team workflows. Its freemium model lowers the barrier to entry, while features like page sharing and collaboration drive organic, usage-based viral growth as users naturally invite others. Second, the Template Economy solves the "blank page" problem. Templates, created by both Notion and its community, transform abstract product capabilities into concrete, copyable solutions for specific scenarios (e.g., project management, content calendars). This dramatically lowers activation costs for new users and fuels SEO-driven discovery. Third, a vibrant Community acts as a distributed growth engine. Users and official Ambassadors create tutorials, share use cases, and host local events. This community not only educates users but also fosters a sense of identity around pursuing "better ways of working," strengthening loyalty and enabling global, low-cost expansion. Together, these flywheels create a self-reinforcing ecosystem: a great product attracts users who create templates and community content, which in turn attracts more users and deepens engagement. This system allowed Notion to scale from individuals to teams and enterprises through a bottom-up adoption path. Looking ahead, AI integration promises to accelerate these flywheels further by making templates smarter and the platform a potential AI-native work operating system. Ultimately, Notion's defensible advantage is not just its features, but this deeply entrenched network of user assets, creators, and community trust.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Deconstructing Notion's Growth: From a Note-taking Tool to 100 Million Users—How Notion Built a Triple Growth Flywheel Through Product, Templates, and Community

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

$10 Billion, Qualcomm to Acquire Chip Legend Jim Keller's Company

Global mobile chip giant Qualcomm is in advanced talks to acquire AI chip startup Tenstorrent in a deal valued between $8-10 billion, according to media reports. This potential acquisition would be one of the largest in the AI chip sector in recent years. Tenstorrent, led by legendary chip architect Jim Keller, has gained prominence for its RISC-V architecture and AI accelerator designs. The move highlights Qualcomm's strategic push to diversify beyond its core smartphone chip business. As the smartphone market matures, Qualcomm is aggressively targeting growth in automotive, data center, and cloud AI. Acquiring Tenstorrent would allow Qualcomm to rapidly enter the high-end AI computing market, bypassing lengthy in-house development cycles. Tenstorrent's cost-effective system architecture, which avoids expensive HBM memory and relies on standard Ethernet for clustering, offers a potential alternative to Nvidia's costly solutions. Furthermore, Tenstorrent's high-performance RISC-V CPU technology and its focus on the automotive and edge computing segments align with Qualcomm's strategic goals, including its "Snapdragon Digital Chassis" platform. Despite the strategic rationale, the high valuation has sparked some investor caution. The successful integration of Tenstorrent's open-source culture and independent team into Qualcomm's organization, along with the commercialization of its technology, remains a key challenge.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

$10 Billion, Qualcomm to Acquire Chip Legend Jim Keller's Company

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片