Matt Hougan, Chief Investment Officer of Bitwise Asset Management, has made a bold long-term prediction for Bitcoin, stating that every central bank in the world will hold BTC in its reserves by 2050. This forecast came as part of a heated debate on Bitcoin's fundamental value proposition, sparked by criticism from Tom Essaye, founder of Sevens Reporter and former Merrill Lynch trader.
Hougan pushed back forcefully against Essaye's characterization of Bitcoin as a "merely speculative asset" with no utility comparable to gold, calling those takes "terrible." He described Bitcoin as an emerging store of value undergoing an inevitable maturation phase, comparing its evolution from a "newborn in 2009" that started as pure speculation to a future where central banks accumulate it as naturally as they do gold today.
"The path between those two extremes requires passing through every intermediate point on the spectrum, with no shortcuts available," Hougan argued, emphasizing Bitcoin's gradual adoption trajectory.
Essaye countered that Bitcoin does not function as an effective hedge against inflation or economic turmoil, noting that better-suited assets exist for that role without Bitcoin's characteristic volatility. This debate unfolded against a market backdrop where Bitcoin has fallen roughly 40% from its all-time high of $126,000 reached in October of last year, briefly trading near $64,200 in recent sessions.
Simultaneously, Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas reignited crypto's longstanding argument about whether Bitcoin's core value has been diluted as institutional intermediaries take center stage. Balchunas framed Bitcoin's novelty as "user-run money that is both censorship and debasement-resistant," arguing that while the current U.S. administration's support might make censorship resistance seem less valuable temporarily, debasement resistance remains crucial.
Addressing concerns from long-time holders about Wall Street "co-opting" Bitcoin, Balchunas suggested: "All that really happened was the intermediaries got upgraded. You went from paying high fees to SBF only for him to 'lose' your money to Larry Fink et al, who do same thing (outsourced your btc) but in a way that's much cheaper and safer. Underlying btc hasn't changed at all the whole time."
Critics, including Oliver Renick of Chicago Future of Finance, challenged the "debasement-resistant" label, arguing that Bitcoin's extreme volatility constitutes repeated "debasement events" by practical standards. "If the dollar were down as much as btc can do on any given week, the world would go nuts," Renick wrote, suggesting Bitcoin's volatility makes it "really bad money."
Balchunas conceded Bitcoin is "too volatile rn to be widespread currency" and needs to "mature and settle down," but maintained its fundamental properties remain intact. He pointed to Bitcoin's 450% gains in 2023 and 2024 as evidence it has "banked" substantial value, contrasting this with gold's 20% rise over the same period.
The debate highlights a fundamental divide: proponents like Hougan and Balchunas view institutional adoption as validation that doesn't alter Bitcoin's core properties, with volatility being a temporary maturity issue. Critics see volatility as a fatal flaw that undermines Bitcoin's monetary narrative, potentially reducing its value proposition to censorship resistance alone.
