HodlX Guest Post  Submit Your Post

The term ‘store of value’ is often treated as static – something an asset either is or is not. But in reality, this designation is earned, not declared.

It emerges from collective behavior, infrastructure maturation and social consensus. Gold wasn’t born a store of value – it became one over centuries of trust, utility and institutionalization.

Furthermore, even assets that were once synonymous with broken dreams and vaporware can become part of the store of value narrative.

In the early 2000s, tech stocks were associated with unsustainable speculation. But here we are two decades later – tech companies account for nearly half of the S&P 500, the benchmark index for generational value.

Both gold and tech stocks went through periods when they were misunderstood or even mocked.

Yet, they endured, not because they avoided speculation and volatility, but because over time they proved structurally relevant.

Bitcoin appears to be walking the same path.

Proven value-keeping and resilience

By design, Bitcoin incorporates many store of value fundamentals, including scarcity, portability and divisibility.

However, some aspects can’t be embedded – they require time to prove. One of these is the ability to hold value across time.

A good way to assess this is through reverse pricing. For instance, if priced in gold, the US dollar and Euro have lost around 66% of their value since 2016, and these are among the most stable fiat currencies.

Adding Bitcoin to the mix makes fiat currencies appear even weaker, having lost over 99% of their value relative to Bitcoin, as it outperformed gold by nearly 80 times over the same period.

Another store of value aspect that requires time-testing is the ability to withstand crises. So far, Bitcoin has shown solid resilience during turbulent periods, sometimes outperforming traditional assets.

One illustrative example is Bitcoin’s behavior during Donald Trump’s tariff-related market turmoil.

In the week following ‘Liberation Day,’ Bitcoin outperformed the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100, as well as APAC and European equities. It later surpassed gold as well, recording a 13% monthly gain.

While some on Wall Street found this “impressive,” historical data suggests it’s more of a pattern than a coincidence.

Even after the COVID-19 outbreak, when Bitcoin lost over 30% in a single week, it managed to recover and began outperforming the broader market in less than two months.

Decreased volatility and increased liquidity

The core criticism against Bitcoin as a store of value centers on its volatility. But volatility is not fixed – it evolves with adoption and market integration.

Gold was highly volatile during the 1970s and early 1980s as it re-monetized after the end of the Bretton Woods system.

Similarly, Bitcoin has experienced volatility in its early stages while finding its place in the financial landscape. But that volatility is consistently declining.

In 2024, Fidelity noted that Bitcoin was less volatile than 33 stocks in the S&P 500, and that its volatility has been steadily decreasing as the asset class matures and its market cap grows.

In 2025, this trend continued, with lower volatility peaks being recorded.

As a result, Bitcoin now offers more stability than explosive growth, with a CAGR aligning more closely with gold and other store of value assets.

Bitcoin’s growing institutional adoption and liquidity have been key drivers behind this shift. Over the past year, Bitcoin’s two-percent market depth on spot markets increased by 60%.

Most of it came from US-based exchanges, which are increasingly focused on institutional clients. This also led to Bitcoin’s trading volume being more concentrated around US trading hours.

Another factor is the increasing dominance of long-term holders, particularly with each new four-year halving cycle.

These holders are generally indifferent to daily price movements and display relatively passive market behavior.

This means that a store of value narrative surrounding Bitcoin is gradually pushing away the one focusing on short-term speculation.

Final thoughts

Bitcoin is still widely perceived as a volatile, high-risk asset, and there are valid reasons for that. But it would be careless to ignore its ongoing evolution toward becoming a legitimate store of value.

No other asset is even attempting to secure this status, let alone getting as close.

However, Bitcoin’s journey is far from over. Investors may want to periodically reassess their perspectives.

Many views once used to define Bitcoin are becoming outdated. So instead of replaying the same old track, perhaps it’s time to take another look, with a long-term lens.

Oleksandr Lutskevych is the founder and CEO of CEX.IO.

Check Latest Headlines on HodlX

Follow Us on Twitter Facebook Telegram

Check out the Latest Industry Announcements  

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any loses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.

Generated Image: Midjourney

Bitcoin crossed the $100,000 mark this week, climbing to a peak of $104,000 on May 8, as a chart tracking the global M2 money supply, lagged by 90 days, resurfaced on social media.

The correlation between Bitcoin’s breakout and a revived upswing in the M2 liquidity curve gained renewed traction across trading forums and analyst desks, prompting a closer look at the mechanics of this market alignment.

When adjusted for a 90-day lag, global M2 has sometimes foreshadowed turning points in Bitcoin’s price over multi-month windows. The idea gained prominence during the 2021 bull cycle and has since re-emerged as an interpretive lens, especially as BTC decouples from tech equities.

Julien Bittel, Head of Macro Research at Global Macro Investor, commented that the M2 vs Bitcoin chart “still tells the same story: We’re going higher.”

CryptoSlate analysis highlighted that while real in some aspects, the correlation is elastic, aligning more with global liquidity cycles than anything else.

The chart in question, circulated widely since April, overlays the price of Bitcoin with the Global M2 Liquidity Index, which has shifted by three months.

M2, a measure of global money supply growth, began a fresh ascent in February. That rise is now materializing in markets, with Bitcoin’s price trajectory tracking the lagged M2 curve almost to the day.

CryptoSlate’s chart tracking 90-day lagged global M2 with Bitcoin and its correlation confirms the inference.

While traders continue to debate the predictive power of liquidity metrics, the breakout timing is difficult to ignore.

Bitcoin price factors outside M2

Over the past 10 weeks, Bitcoin has recovered from a sub-$80,000 consolidation phase to reclaim six figures, driven partly by consistent inflows into digital asset funds.

In the past three weeks, billions have flowed into crypto investment products, with $1.8 billion directed to Bitcoin ETFs. On May 7, a single-day net inflow of $422 million was led by BlackRock’s IBIT, the largest spot Bitcoin ETF with approximately $58 billion in assets under management.

The rolling correlation between Bitcoin and lagged M2 measures offers a more complex picture. The 180-day Pearson correlation between the two has averaged 0.65 since early 2024, though 30-day readings show volatility, oscillating between -0.9 and +0.95. This variability cautions against reading too deeply into short-term overlaps.

Beyond ETF flows and liquidity overlays, the broader macro environment adds weight to the thesis. The U.S. dollar index has slipped nearly 4% since late February, and trade-driven capital rotation has contributed to demand for decentralized alternatives. Though M2 metrics do not account for stablecoin issuance or off-balance-sheet credit, they remain a reference point for modeling system-wide liquidity pressures.

Bitcoin’s current position near $103,000 coincides with a broader wave of risk-on positioning across digital assets, but whether the M2 model retains influence over forward price discovery depends on liquidity persistence. Should central bank data continue to reflect a climbing M2 curve, attention may shift to how much of that liquidity finds its way into crypto via institutional channels.

Where Bitcoin correlation with M2 supply fails

While the 90-day lag chart remains a visually compelling narrative tool, its utility as a trading signal is bounded by noise and external catalysts. As the price climbs, the model may serve more as a sentiment anchor than a deterministic forecast.

For now, Bitcoin sits above $100,000 for the second time in 2025, reasserting its capacity to track and reflect global liquidity cycles, even as the mechanisms behind that correlation remain fluid.

Interestingly, since the start of 2025, the global M2 money supply has increased by 3.25%. However, the 90-day lagged chart has actually decreased by 0.16% over the same period, and Bitcoin is up around 8%. Thus, were Bitcoin to be following global lagged M2 precisely, it would be down on the year.

If you alter the analysis window to the last 12 months, Bitcoin is up 75%, global M2 is up 3.8%, and lagged M2 is up 7.37%, meaning that over this period, Bitcoin has massively outperformed M2.

Therefore, as stated in the previous analysis, Bitcoin’s correlation with the lagged global M2 money supply is an extremely powerful metric, except when it’s not.

It is undoubtedly fun to watch, though.