In a recent X post, the outspoken gold advocate and long-time Bitcoin critic argued that gold’s value stems from its ancient role as a tangible store of wealth, while Bitcoin remains speculative, volatile, and devoid of intrinsic value. According to Schiff, “buying Bitcoin is essentially a bet against gold.”
He further emphasized that Bitcoin is neither a reliable store of value nor a modern preservation tool for wealth, but rather a risky speculative gamble positioned against gold itself.
In a rare moment of alignment, much of the crypto community appeared to agree with Schiff’s remarks — though for different reasons. Many investors viewed his statement as an unintended compliment, interpreting Bitcoin as a step beyond gold rather than a digital version of it.
Some commentators highlighted that Bitcoin has evolved beyond the constraints of traditional assets, recalling past moments when economists dismissed the cryptocurrency.
One user referenced a 2014 Chinese finance program where an economist rejected 100 BTC on air as “worthless,” a sum now valued in the millions, suggesting Schiff might one day reverse his stance.
Supporters argued that Bitcoin should not behave like gold, as both assets serve different purposes. Gold preserves existing wealth, while Bitcoin creates new opportunities for growth in the digital economy.
One commentator recalled how, in 2014, a Chinese economist famously rejected an offer of 100 BTC on live television, calling it worthless — an amount now worth millions. Many suggested Schiff could one day face a similar realization.
The broader sentiment echoed that Bitcoin isn’t “digital gold” at all — it’s something greater.
