A Decade Deep: The Cost Of An iPhone Over The Years, Measured In BTC & ETH

BitcoinistPublished on 2022-09-10Last updated on 2022-09-10

Abstract

The research team at CoinGecko went on a deep dive into the price archives for BTC and ETH, looking back over more than a decade, and cross-referenced crypto prices to iPhone MSRPs.

The cost of an Apple iPhone over the years has only gone up. But has the iPhone price over the past decade outpaced the price of BTC, or ETH? Not even close, according to a new report from the folks at CoinGecko. The research team at CoinGecko went on a deep dive into the price archives for BTC and ETH, looking back over more than a decade, and cross-referenced crypto prices to iPhone MSRPs.

⠀

Lets take a look at the CoinGecko report and it’s key insights.

⠀

iPhone Prices Dwindles As Decades Go On… When Measured In BTC & ETH

⠀

On the heels of the iPhone 13 release, and the announcement of the new iPhone 14, we’ve learned that the standard iPhone 14 models will start at $799 and their pre-order window has just opened up. A key perspective from CoinGecko’s insights is that the retail price of an iPhone over the past decade – from the iPhone 4S where CoinGecko’s research window begins – actually has remained somewhat stable.

⠀

The retail price of the 4S was $649.00, and with today’s 14 at $799.00, that represents an increase of roughly 25% over the past decade, with no inflation adjustment. Peak iPhone prices can be seen in 2017 and 2018 with the X and XS, respectively, with both models priced at $999.00. Take a look at how these prices have evolved with the price of Bitcoin below:

⠀

⠀

In 13 models released over the past 11 years, just 3 models saw their Bitcoin equivalent increase from the following year. Similar sentiments exist when comparing the price against Ether, as well, since it’s genesis in 2015. In just three occasions in the last nine iPhone releases was a phone more expensive in ETH than the model prior:

⠀

⠀

Callouts From The CoinGecko Report

⠀

There’s a few additional key callouts from the CoinGecko report:

⠀

The price slide in the market this year: BTC saw highs at nearly $70K earlier this year before tumbling back to earth. This led to the largest % increase from one model to the next, resulting in 13 models priced at 0.0178 BTC last year turning into 14 models priced at over 2X that, at 0.0424 BTC. Bitcoin, of course, is the primary market mover across altcoins too, so a similar sentiment can be expressed with ETH, which saw a respective increase of 0.2 ETH last year to 0.5 ETH this year.

⠀

A sound investment? Relatively speaking: Since the release of the iPhone 4S just over a decade ago, BTC and ETH have experienced nearly 500,000% and 250,000% percent gains, respectively. Compare that to iPhones 23% increase. This is to be taken with a grain of salt – it’s almost apples and oranges – but worth consideration when we think about the growth and respect that crypto assets have earned over the years.

Related Reads

XRP Reversal Setup Forms Around Harmonic Pattern And Key Support Zone

XRP is trading at a critical technical support zone, according to a June 20 TradingView analysis. This area combines multiple layers of confluence, including the 0.618 Fibonacci retracement level and the point of control for the current range. Such convergence can intensify the battle between buyers and sellers at this level. The analysis suggests this support could form the basis for a broader harmonic reversal pattern. While not a guarantee, such setups provide a structured framework for identifying potential trend changes, invalidation points, and price targets. For the reversal thesis to gain credibility, XRP needs a decisive bullish reaction from this zone—specifically, a sustained bounce with volume that reclaims nearby resistance, not just a brief wick. Failure to hold support or repeated tests of the area would weaken the bullish argument. The setup is notable but requires confirmation from market price action.

bitcoinist1h ago

XRP Reversal Setup Forms Around Harmonic Pattern And Key Support Zone

bitcoinist1h ago

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbit1h ago

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbit1h ago

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

The article posits that the global economy is transitioning into a new phase of infrastructure investment. Capital, facing slowing traditional growth engines, is flowing towards emerging foundational systems. This includes space infrastructure (exemplified by SpaceX), AI computing power, satellite networks, data centers, and global payment systems. A key driver is a potential new commodity supercycle fueled by industrial demand from these sectors. Concurrently, the role of blockchain is evolving from speculative assets to a critical settlement layer for the future economy. Digital assets like XRP and XLM, focused on payments and interoperability, are highlighted as potential rails for cross-border settlement, tokenized assets, and machine-to-machine (AI Agent) transactions. The narrative connects figures like Ripple's Jed McCaleb to space ventures, suggesting convergence. The argument emphasizes a shift from speculative narratives to utility-driven value. As AI and space commerce generate new economic activity, and regulatory clarity improves, blockchain networks may underpin real-time value transfer. The conclusion urges investors to consider which networks will form the backbone of this integrated next-generation economic infrastructure.

marsbit2h ago

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

marsbit2h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit4h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit4h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit4h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit4h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片

Hot Categoriesright-arrow

Hot Tagsright-arrow