The Trillion-Dollar Battle: Musk vs. Ethereum, Who Should Win?

Article by: Liam Akiba Wright

Translated by: Saoirse, Foresight News

When Elon Musk’s net worth surpasses the trillion-dollar mark, it is not just a personal achievement but also a sign that economic history is entering a new phase — one in which individual influence can rival that of sovereign nations.

As a Bitcoin holder, I see Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision of “decentralized wealth” and “financial democratization” as a blueprint for dispersing power. This philosophy can reduce reliance on a single entity within the value system. However, as capital, artificial intelligence, and policy increasingly converge around Musk’s expanding business empire, his rise also reveals how deeply we have strayed from this ideal.

The attribution of “value” is once again becoming centralized, but this time, the controllers are not governments or banks, but individuals who leverage technology as a tool for influence.

Some believe Bitcoin represents the purest form of private property: unconfiscatable, borderless, and fully controlled by individuals. From this perspective, Satoshi Nakamoto might not see the “emergence of trillionaires” as a failure of decentralization but rather as a logical (albeit unintended) outcome of its development.

Elon Musk’s Carefully Crafted “Wealth Feast”

So far, Tesla shareholders have approved a compensation plan — if certain milestones are achieved, Musk’s net worth could reach 1 trillion dollars.

At the Tesla annual shareholder meeting on November 6, over 75% of votes supported this multi-year, option-based plan. The plan’s payout hinges on Tesla surpassing a series of operational and valuation thresholds, including a nearly 8.5 trillion dollar market cap, widespread deployment of autonomous driving technology, and humanoid robots.

The numerical logic behind Tesla’s plan presents an unusual contrast: the equity exposure of a single individual could surpass the combined market caps of four major altcoins (ETH, USDT, XRP, and BNB).

How to Cross the Finish Line: The Game of Wealth, Power, and Policy

If Musk’s entire option stake vests and is exercised, and ignoring dilution and financing effects, his actual shareholding could reach about 25%.

Based on Tesla’s 85 trillion dollar market cap, just his 27% stake would be worth approximately 2.295 trillion dollars. By mid-2025, SpaceX (founded by Musk in 2002), the private aerospace manufacturer and space transportation company, is valued close to 350 billion dollars, with optimistic forecasts suggesting that by 2030, its valuation in defense and broadband sectors could surpass one trillion dollars.

There are also rumors about funding for xAI (Musk’s AI company founded in 2023), with valuations ranging from 75 billion to 200 billion dollars. Taken together, this options plan’s “return convexity” deeply ties Musk’s personal wealth to a few “either-or” outcomes, most critically the commercialization of autonomous taxis (Robotaxi) and humanoid robots.

Achieving these goals depends not only on technological breakthroughs but also on policy support. For example, in California, Tesla currently holds only a “driver-assist permit” issued by the DMV, and has not yet obtained the “driverless testing and deployment permit” necessary for commercial operation. According to California government records and Reuters, the deployment of ride-hailing services requires separate approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).

As Ars Technica previously reported, the review of NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) on “Full Self-Driving (FSD)” remains a potential risk point that could attract public scrutiny.

A Rational View of the “Trillion-Dollar Challenge” in Cryptocurrency

Currently, Musk’s net worth exceeds the market value of any single altcoin. In the crypto space, only Bitcoin (over 20 trillion dollars) has a higher market cap than his personal wealth — and I remain optimistic about Bitcoin, believing its performance will continue to outperform any individual’s investment portfolio.

Ethereum, ranked second by market cap, fluctuates between 390 billion and 600 billion dollars over recent months, currently around 400 billion, roughly 1 trillion dollars less than Musk’s wealth.

Let’s consider some basic forward-looking models:

Conservative Scenario:

If autonomous driving technology faces delays and the Optimus humanoid robot remains niche, by 2035, Tesla’s valuation could reach 30 trillion dollars. At that point, Musk’s 25% stake in Tesla would be worth about 7.5 trillion dollars, plus SpaceX’s estimated 500 billion dollars and xAI’s 50-100 billion dollars, totaling approximately 1.3-1.35 trillion dollars. After deducting option exercise costs, taxes, and loans, his net worth might fall just below 1 trillion, possibly failing to break that threshold.

In comparison, if Ethereum’s price reaches 5,000 dollars with a circulating supply of 125 million, its market cap would be about 625 billion dollars.

Baseline Scenario:

If Tesla’s market cap hits 50 trillion dollars, with the Optimus robot in factory use and energy business scaled, Musk’s Tesla holdings could be worth 1.25-1.45 trillion dollars. Coupled with SpaceX at 1 trillion and xAI at 200 billion, his net worth could surpass 1 trillion dollars — a “basic outcome.”

Even if Ethereum’s price approaches 10,000 dollars with a circulating supply of 120-125 million, its market cap would be around 1.2-1.25 trillion dollars.

Optimistic Scenario:

If Tesla’s market cap reaches 85 trillion dollars, autonomous taxis are widely adopted, humanoid robots are mass-produced, SpaceX’s valuation climbs to 2.5 trillion dollars, and xAI exceeds 500 billion dollars, Musk’s personal wealth could reach “multi-trillion dollar” levels.

This comparison is not just a contest between “individual hero” and “technological protocols,” but a competition between “equity and option returns” and “network adoption rate.”

Therefore, for Ethereum to surpass Musk (and his assets) within the next decade and reach a valuation of over 1 trillion dollars, its price would need to break 10,000 dollars, assuming Tesla’s valuation remains below 30 trillion dollars.

The Influence of Billionaires and Wealth Politics

However, I believe the social narrative surrounding these figures is equally important.

Research published by Cambridge University Press shows that admiration for super-rich individuals and the accompanying “elitism” or “system justification” attitudes can reduce support for wealth redistribution and progressive taxation — a phenomenon that also affects lower-income groups.

Long-term political science studies indicate that policy responses tend to favor the preferences of the wealthy far more than those of ordinary citizens. This means extreme wealth concentration can translate into lasting political influence.

Meanwhile, economic research (such as in the Quarterly Journal of Economics and related literature) finds that contact with wealthier groups decreases personal life satisfaction while increasing conspicuous consumption and borrowing — effects that are especially pronounced among lower-income populations.

A Harris Poll in 2024 shows that most respondents believe “billionaires do not contribute enough to society,” and similar surveys in the UK reveal public concern over “the excessive political influence of super-rich individuals.”

These are not just abstract opinions about celebrities but are tangible channels through which the “halo effect” of billionaires and media narratives influence fiscal budgets, voting behavior, and social debt.

Positioning Ethical Boundaries at Scale

According to Forbes, the number of billionaires worldwide will reach 3,028 in 2025, a record high. With a global population of approximately 8.23 billion, this means only about 1 in 270 million people is a billionaire.

Currently, there are no trillionaires. UBS estimates global household wealth at around 450 trillion dollars, with 1 trillion dollars representing just 0.22%. Reuters’ interpretation of UBS data shows that the median wealth of adults worldwide is only “a few thousand dollars,” with over 80% of adults holding less than 100,000 dollars.

A personal wealth of 1 trillion dollars roughly equals the net assets of 100 million to 130 million “middle-wealth” adults. The probability of moving from millionaire to billionaire is already extremely low, so viewing “trillion-dollar” wealth as a public goal is numerically illogical.

Policy choices are key variables influencing the “top tier” of wealth. Current rules allow top fortunes to compound endlessly, and as previously mentioned, policies tend to favor the wealthy, leaving issues like housing and healthcare affordability unresolved for longer periods.

As economist Zucman’s simulations, Oxfam’s proposals, and reports by The Washington Post suggest, imposing a targeted 2% annual wealth tax on billionaires could raise about 250 billion dollars annually. These funds could support public goods or help ease living costs, gradually narrowing the gap between the ultra-rich and the general population.

In experimental scenarios, shifting societal culture from “personal hero narratives” to “systemic progress narratives” could significantly increase support for progressive taxation — providing a more moderate check on the “billionaire halo effect.”

Policy and Public Perception in the Race for Trillions

These measures alone won’t change Tesla’s valuation logic or the demand curve for cryptocurrencies, but they can influence the external environment surrounding immense wealth.

Tesla’s internal governance issues are also worth noting: not only the board but shareholders have valued and approved the “return convexity” of options — a process that responds to some criticisms but also sparks new debates.

If regulatory agencies and safety authorities at the state level effectively control the “cash flows supporting this compensation plan,” then the current regulatory framework could serve as an “upstream gatekeeper” for the “private wealth options worth trillions.”

According to Reuters and California DMV records, Tesla still needs to obtain the “driverless testing and deployment permit” to scale autonomous taxis in key markets; meanwhile, NHTSA’s review is ongoing. The timing of these approvals, rather than press releases, will determine whether this compensation plan can be realized.

We do not need to cheer or mock Musk; we can clearly see the contrast:

Cryptocurrencies need adoption, throughput, and capital flow to reach 1-2 trillion dollars in scale; meanwhile, founders accumulate over 1 trillion dollars mainly through “few technological breakthroughs and regulatory approvals.”

People can admire Musk’s execution or innovation but should avoid “billionaire worship culture”— which diminishes support for wealth redistribution and amplifies elite influence over policy. The logic is clear: whether to worship depends on individual choice.

Ultimately, whether the first to surpass 1 trillion dollars is a person or a network, the more important question is: what kind of system do we want to empower? One built on individual ambition, or one based on collective identity and participation?