Bitcoin's "Ten Years of Sharpening the Sword": 278x Returns Outperform Gold, but the Furious Bull Market Is Now a Thing of the Past?

A century-long debate about store of value reaches a new climax at the end of 2025: data shows that since 2015, Bitcoin’s price has surged by 27,701%, while during the same period, silver and gold only increased by 405% and 283%. However, after reaching a historic high of $125,100, Bitcoin has now retraced to around $87,800, roughly a 30% decline from its peak this year. Faced with volatility, Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan presents a compelling new narrative: Bitcoin’s future will be a steady 10-year “uptrend,” rather than the past’s wild swings. This contest between “digital gold” and physical precious metals, along with Bitcoin’s own developmental phases, jointly define the core contradictions and future directions of the current market.

Data Domination: A Cross-Decade “Digital Gold” Showdown

From an investment return perspective alone, Bitcoin over the past decade has delivered a performance that can be described as a “dimensionality reduction” on traditional precious metals. Analyst Adam Livingston’s data reveals a shocking gap: since 2015, Bitcoin has achieved a +27,701% increase. This means that an initial $1,000 investment then would be worth over $270,000 today. In contrast, gold, known as the “safe haven,” and “common metal” silver, only gained 283% and 405% respectively, far below Bitcoin’s scale. Even excluding Bitcoin’s first six years (2009-2014), its relative gains remain dominantly superior.

This data naturally triggers a rebound among traditional gold advocates. Noted Bitcoin critic and gold supporter Peter Schiff quickly countered, arguing that the comparison should focus on the recent four years, claiming “the era has changed, Bitcoin’s time is over.” This viewpoint reflects the typical stance of the traditional store of value camp: they question Bitcoin’s short-term volatility, lack of intrinsic value, and long-term viability as a new asset class. However, Bitcoin supporters’ rebuttal points to more fundamental economic principles. Matt Golliher, co-founder of Bitcoin asset management firm Orange Horizon Wealth, notes that gold and silver prices tend to converge toward production costs over the long term. When prices rise, increased mining activity leads to supply expansion, which suppresses prices—“unless its supply is fixed.”

This debate is set against the backdrop of a historic surge in precious metals prices and a weakening dollar in 2025. The dollar index has fallen nearly 10% this year, marking its worst performance in a decade. Analysts like Arthur Hayes believe that the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy and dilution of dollar purchasing power are the underlying catalysts for the rise in all scarce assets—including gold, silver, and Bitcoin. In this “value flight” driven by fiat credit, Bitcoin, with its programmed absolute scarcity, verifiability, and global liquidity, is increasingly winning the votes of investors seeking long-term value preservation. The data’s dominance is simply a direct reflection of this deeper trend in price.

Core Disputes and Data Focus

• Long-term returns (2015-present):
  • Bitcoin: +27,701%
  • Silver: +405%
  • Gold: +283%
  • Conclusion: Bitcoin’s return outpaces others by two orders of magnitude.
• Current market status (end of 2025):
  • Bitcoin’s all-time high: $125,100 (October 2025)
  • Bitcoin’s current price: approximately $87,800, down about 30% from the high.
  • USD index performance this year: down about 10%, the worst in ten years.
  • Core contradiction: Long-term absolute return advantage vs. short-term deep correction and cycle top concerns.
• Future outlook disagreements:
  • “Decade of steady growth” thesis (Bitwise’s Matt Hougan): institutionalization will drive Bitcoin into a low-volatility, stable-return phase.
  • “Cycle top” warnings (e.g., Peter Brandt): Bitcoin could sharply fall to $60,000 within the next year.
  • “Pause year” view (e.g., Fidelity’s Jurrien Timmer): 2026 may see sideways consolidation, with prices approaching $65,000.

Hougan’s “Decade Blueprint”: Is Bitcoin Entering a “Steady Institutional Growth” Era?

Amid Bitcoin’s significant correction and increasing market divergence, Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan offers a framework to reshape market expectations. He believes Bitcoin is bidding farewell to its early “volatile” cycle traits and entering a potential 10-year “steady upward” channel. The core reasoning is that the composition of Bitcoin market participants has fundamentally changed.

Hougan points out that recent market weakness mainly stems from “rapidly flowing” retail funds taking profits and repositioning at year-end. However, the downside is effectively supported by “persistent, slow-moving institutional buying.” This contrasts sharply with past cycles: historically, Bitcoin often experienced 60% or deeper brutal retracements after bull market peaks, but this round’s 30% correction from the high is relatively mild. This is seen as strong evidence that long-term capital—via compliant channels like spot ETFs—is building a solid “institutional bottom.” Such buying is not aimed at short-term price swings but is based on long-term asset allocation logic, characterized by stability and stickiness.

Therefore, Hougan’s envisioned “decade of steady growth” essentially reflects Bitcoin as a nascent macro asset gradually absorbed into global balance sheets. As market depth and institutional participation increase, volatility will systematically decrease, and returns will be driven more by sustained capital inflows, adoption curves, and the deepening consensus on its status as a digitally scarce asset—rather than by wild retail sentiment cycles. Hougan even downplays short-term political cycle impacts, suggesting that policies from the Trump administration are more background noise than direct triggers for Bitcoin’s next major rally. This shifts investor focus from speculating on the four-year “halving bull market” peaks to examining Bitcoin’s penetration into traditional portfolios—a more long-term and fundamental driver.

Market Divergence: Cycle Top or Healthy Correction?

Despite the appealing “decade blueprint,” the most genuine current market sentiment is confusion and divergence. Bitcoin’s rapid fall from $125,100 to around $87,800—a 30% decline—reawakens memories of cycle peaks. ReserveOne Chief Investment Officer Sebastian Beau bluntly states that this decline painfully rekindles fundamental doubts about whether Bitcoin’s traditional four-year cycle remains valid.

The bearish logic is clear and based on historical patterns: Bitcoin hit a new high in October 2025, similar to previous cycle tops; the subsequent sharp correction aligns with a bull market ending; thus, the next year, 2026, is likely to be a “correction and bottoming” year. Veteran trader Peter Brandt even provides quantitative downside targets, warning that Bitcoin could fall to $60,000 in Q3 2026. Fidelity’s Jurrien Timmer also leans toward viewing 2026 as a “pause year,” with prices approaching $65,000.

On the bullish side, interpretations differ. They argue that this correction is driven by factors different from past cycles. XS.com analyst Linh Tran notes that recent price movements more reflect market sensitivity to Fed monetary policy expectations rather than deteriorating fundamentals or Bitcoin narrative. Strategy CEO Phong Le emphasizes that Bitcoin’s on-chain fundamentals remained strong throughout 2025. More importantly, ongoing net inflows into spot ETFs (despite occasional volatility) provide an unprecedented buffer and demand source—something absent in previous cycles. This structural positive suggests that the divergence between bulls and bears is fundamentally a contest over the validity of the “new paradigm”: whether historical cycle laws still dominate or whether institutional forces are now strong enough to smooth or reshape cycles.

Beyond Price Swings: Scarcity, Currency Devaluation, and the Asset’s Ultimate Destiny

Taking a step beyond short-term price speculation, the competition between Bitcoin and gold, and their long-term value propositions, ultimately boil down to a few core fundamental questions.

First is the fundamental difference in scarcity. Bitcoin’s scarcity is absolute, pre-programmed, and unchangeable, with a cap of 21 million coins. Gold’s scarcity is physical and relative; its supply can increase with rising prices and technological advances (such as deep-sea mining or asteroid mining concepts). As Golliher states, high prices incentivize gold production, potentially suppressing long-term prices. This supply elasticity difference is the theoretical foundation that the “digital gold” narrative seeks to surpass physical gold.

Second is the effectiveness in countering global fiat currency credit dilution. The dollar index’s weakness in 2025 is not an isolated event but part of a long-term trend of monetary expansion. In this environment, investors seek “hard assets” capable of preserving purchasing power over time. Bitcoin, with its global, censorship-resistant, and easily transferable features, offers a new option independent of any sovereign risk. Its rise is not just speculative but also a natural response of global capital seeking “value anchors” amid negative interest rates and debt oceans.

Therefore, for investors, the key may not be whether Bitcoin will hit $120,000 or fall to $60,000 next year, but whether Hougan’s described “institutionalized, low-volatility long-term growth” thesis holds. If it does, every sharp correction driven by short-term liquidity or sentiment could become an opportunity for long-term capital deployment. If not, the market will still need to go through the brutal clearing dictated by traditional cycle models.

Investment Strategy Insights: Navigating Paradigm Shifts

Faced with complex market signals and conflicting expert opinions, rational investors may need a more flexible strategic framework.

For long-term believers and allocators, Hougan’s “decade of steady growth” provides important psychological anchors and strategic guidance. It suggests adopting dollar-cost averaging or incremental buying during deep corrections, downplaying precise timing, and focusing on increasing Bitcoin’s proportion in overall assets. Key indicators should shift from short-term price swings to long-term net ETF inflows, major corporate and national balance sheet adoption, and health metrics of the Bitcoin network (hash rate, active addresses).

For cycle traders and short-term investors, vigilance against “cycle top” risks is essential. They should monitor whether prices hold key support levels (e.g., $85,000) and watch for technical signals indicating breakdowns of bullish structures. Their decisions should rely more on technical analysis, market sentiment indicators, and short-term capital flows.

In any case, a growing consensus is emerging: Bitcoin’s market is fundamentally different. It is no longer just a geek’s toy or a speculative casino; it has attracted the most sophisticated capital on Wall Street. This increased complexity presents both short-term challenges in trend prediction and long-term opportunities for value discovery. The race between Bitcoin and gold is far from over, and Bitcoin’s own evolution is opening a new chapter from “volatile outsider” to “mature asset.” In this transformation, perhaps the greatest risk is not price volatility but relying on an outdated map to navigate a fundamentally changed new ocean.