A crypto strategist known for nailing the 2022 Bitcoin bottom says that BTC may be on the verge of igniting a parabolic surge.

In a new strategy session, pseudonymous analyst DonAlt tells his 66,600 YouTube subscribers that Bitcoin may be mirroring gold’s 2024 price action, when the precious metal struggled to clear resistance at $2,100 for multiple weeks before sparking a huge upside burst.

According to the analyst, Bitcoin is likely consolidating below $110,000 to set the stage for a breakout and a parabolic rally to new all-time high prices.

“Look at the $2,000-ish level [of gold]. This is the kind of asset we are now. If you expect anything else other than this, I think you’re just wrong…

You see that breakout level that got tested four times, and you [had] false breakouts… I mean [gold] didn’t move for the longest time, and then it just went up only forever, which is kind of nuts to observe. 

But basically, I feel we’re that asset now, where you’re going to flirt with the same level like three or four times and people are going to lose all their money before it breaks out.”

At time of writing, gold is worth $3,368 while Bitcoin is trading for $102,114.

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox

Check Price Action

Surf The Daily Hodl Mix

&nbsp

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 losses 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

Investors who added 10% in Bitcoin (BTC) to their “60/40 portfolio” strategies got a 90% risk-adjusted return in the past 12 months, outperforming gold’s 51% return in the same period.

On a June 16 post via X, the profile Ecoinometrics highlighted BTC’s performance through June 13 and charted the result against total return. A 60/40 portfolio is a strategy in which investors allocate 60% of the portfolio’s assets to equities and 40% to fixed-income instruments.

A pure equities index fund earned about 12% with a risk-adjusted ratio of 0.55. Adding bonds dropped the return to roughly 8% and left the risk metric near 0.45. Reallocating 10 bond points to gold pushed the ratio to 0.62 and lifted the return to 12%.

Meanwhile, the same substitution with Bitcoin drove the ratio past 0.80 and elevated the return to 14%. The publication only counted downside deviation, setting the risk-free rate to zero.

Fidelity sees portfolios evolving

Fidelity Digital Assets researcher Chris Kuiper and Fidelity Investments macro director Jurrien Timmer also highlighted the importance of Bitcoin in modern portfolio construction during a new episode of The Value Exchange. 

Kuiper said investors now confront deglobalization, persistent inflation, and policy uncertainty that undermine old allocation playbooks.

Timmer added:

“The status quo we’ve known for decades faces a transactional world order.” 

Both argued that portfolios may need fresh stores of value that operate outside sovereign systems.

Kuiper traced bonds’ nominal compound annual growth to just 1% to 2% over the past decade and noted real drawdowns that reached 55%. Timmer recalled 2022 when treasuries “went from being the port in the storm to bringing the storm.” 

Those outcomes prompted the pair to consider which macro assets could fill the hedging role that bonds once fulfilled. Their answer pointed to scarce digital assets, with Bitcoin foremost.

Bonds’ role weakening 

Kuiper labeled Bitcoin a network asset whose volatility often works in favor of holders. He cited internal modeling that shows price expanding 6x for every 40% rise in the network’s age. 

Timmer built on that framework, arguing that global money supply growth should lift demand for non-sovereign scarcity. Both researchers observed that institutional adoption, although difficult to quantify in real-time, continues to deepen liquidity and smooth execution.

Ecoinometrics’ comparison with gold reinforces that view. An allocation identical in size and funded from the same bond sleeve delivered a markedly lower upgrade to risk-adjusted performance despite gold’s long tenure as a hedge. 

Bitcoin’s outperformance on both axes of return and downside-adjusted risk aligns with the narrative that the asset class now commands consideration alongside precious metals and inflation-protected securities when investors assemble durable multi-asset portfolios.

Mentioned in this article

Gold’s sprint to new highs and Bitcoin’s choppy start to the year might look different on the surface. However, both assets are reacting to the same macro script: eroding confidence in fiat money, volatile geopolitics, and deeply negative real yields. A closer read of market data shows that the “digital gold” narrative is firming, with the two stores of value moving in tandem more often and for the same reasons, even if Bitcoin’s price action lags.

Gold entered 2025 at nearly $2,600, adding roughly one‑third to its price and about $9 trillion to its global market cap. Bitcoin opened the year close to $92,000, slipped to an early‑April low near $83,000 on tariff‑driven risk aversion, and now trades around $88,700, roughly a 4% decline year to date.

While that gap is stark, correlation tells another story. The patterns we’ve seen in the 30-day, 90-day, and 365-day rolling correlation coefficients echo prior cycles: gold rallies first as a liquidity hedge, then Bitcoin catches up once capital starts hunting for higher‑beta expressions of the same thesis.

A combination of macroeconomic factors underpins gold’s explosive rally.

Ten‑year Treasury notes hover near 4.5 percent while core inflation sits just under 5%, locking real yields below zero. In this environment, an asset with no coupon suddenly offers relative appeal. Gold’s zero‑yield nature was once a drawback; with money losing value in real terms, that handicap evaporates. Bitcoin, which pays no income either, fits the same playbook.

The Fed’s balance sheet stands above $10 trillion, and large fiscal deficits continue on both sides of the Atlantic. Survey work from the University of Michigan shows long‑run inflation expectations at the highest level since 2013. Investors who fear and expect currency debasement look first to gold, and in turn Bitcoin, whose fixed 21 million‑coin supply echoes gold’s scarcity

War in Ukraine raised the specter of reserve confiscation, prompting central banks in China, India, and the Gulf to accelerate gold purchases. Those official flows totaled 1,136 tonnes in 2023 and another 388 tonnes in the first quarter this year. Bitcoin is not yet a formal reserve asset, but the logic resonates: an apolitical bearer instrument cannot be frozen.

Whenever sanctions or tariff headlines intensify, both assets tend to firm together, even if Bitcoin reacts with extra volatility. The Trump administration’s plans to implement a “crypto reserve” with ample Bitcoin holdings further support this.

Furthermore, swings in the world’s de facto reserve currency, the US dollar, force many investors to turn away from cash and bonds. A weaker dollar magnifies both gold and Bitcoin in dollar terms. The DXY index fell 5% from its February peak to early April as the market priced in fewer Fed hikes and fresh trade friction. Gold set daily records during that slide; Bitcoin rallied nine percent off its tariff‑panic low. Their sensitivity to the greenback is another point of convergence.

Flows into gold and spot Bitcoin ETFs further confirm this thesis. Investment flows prove that institutions group the assets within the same “sound‑money” bucket. Net inflows to gold‑backed ETFs hit $8.2 billion in the first three months, reversing two straight years of net selling.

Meanwhile, spot Bitcoin ETFs, still limited to foreign markets and futures‑based products in the US, drew about $540 million net. The dollar amount is smaller, but the directional alignment is clear: capital searching for inflation insurance is spreading across both metals, one physical and ancient, the other digital and emergent.

However, with these shared drivers, Bitcoin failed to match gold’s pace this year. This could be due to several factors. First, gold’s $13 trillion float dwarfs Bitcoin’s $1.7 trillion. Large allocators can deploy size into gold without shifting price; similar flows into Bitcoin move the tape sharply, prompting traders to stagger entries.

Second, the lack of federal regulation regarding Bitcoin could be keeping many US asset managers and investors on the sidelines, even as they buy gold. Passage of the broader crypto regulatory agenda, or its repeal, could unleash new demand in the second half of the year.

Finally, equity traders still treat Bitcoin as a high‑beta tech proxy during sell‑offs, so tax‑driven de‑risking at quarter‑end weighed harder on BTC than on bullion. Past cycles show that once macro drivers dominate, this equity beta fades.

Correlation alone does not guarantee equal returns, but it does show that investors increasingly perceive both assets through the same lens: limited supply in a world of unbridled issuance elsewhere. Every historical bout of money printing has featured a two‑stage response: gold first, then the harder‑charging alternative.

Silver played that second role in the 1970s, while Bitcoin fulfilled that role in the 2010s. The 2025 setup feels familiar. Negative real returns on cash invite continual demand for immutable stores of value. Central banks keep absorbing bullion; institutions nibble at Bitcoin products.

If gold’s new plateau above $3,000 becomes the market’s reference point, the monetary premium implied by a $9 trillion jump in its capitalization hints at what could flow into Bitcoin once more gatekeepers open.

The post Gold’s trillion‑dollar climb shows Bitcoin has room to catch up appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Jeff Park, Head of Alpha Strategies at Bitwise Asset Management, has gone on record to suggest that recent developments at the gold market might trigger a mass exodus to Bitcoin. Notably, the Bank of England is under scrutiny for extended delivery times on physical gold, fueling renewed debate about the reliability of gold-backed assets. As a reaction, Park writes via X:

“I’m counting down the days until a logistical disaster (or outright fraud) in the physical delivery of these assets shatters the faith of even the most devout gold believers, driving them straight into Bitcoin’s arms,” Park wrote via X.

Bitcoin Over Gold

Park’s statement comes amid reports that the Bank of England, which purportedly holds around 5,000 metric tonnes of gold, has delayed deliveries from what used to be a few days to four-to-eight weeks. According to a source familiar with the matter, “The wait to withdraw bullion stored in the Bank of England’s vaults has risen from a few days to between four and eight weeks,” indicating that the central bank is “struggling to keep up with demand.”

Market observers attribute these delays to an unprecedented surge in transatlantic shipments and rising gold inventories in the United States. “People can’t get their hands on gold because so much has been shipped to New York, and the rest is stuck in the queue,” an industry executive told reporters. The central bank’s backlog has coincided with growing stockpiles on the Comex commodity exchange in New York, which has seen its gold inventory rise nearly 75%—from 533 metric tonnes to 926 metric tonnes—since November’s US election.

Park further underscored the industry’s history of logistical and fraud incidents by pointing to two notable scandals. He first mentioned the Qingdao Metal Scandal. “Here’s the hilarious story called the Qingdao Metal Scandal,” Park wrote. He recounted how traders in China reportedly used the same stockpiles of copper, aluminum, and nickel as collateral multiple times, only for it to be revealed that much of the actual metal was missing.

Park highlighted another recent case with the London Metal Exchange (LME) Nickel Fiasco. “The LME found out that some of their nickel went missing! Instead of bags of the registered metals, bags of stones arrived. Even more shocking is that this is not LME’s first nickel fraud.”

More recently, Park referenced reports that global commodities giant Trafigura discovered a shortfall of $500 million worth of fuel in Mongolia. “I already posted about this, but worth refreshing that Trafigura lost $500mm of fuel in Mongolia three months ago,” Park wrote.

Such episodes, according to Park, illustrate the vulnerability of physical commodity markets. “You can take the ‘physical’ fuel out of Mongolia,” Park added, “but you can’t take spiritual fuel of Genghis Khan out of Mongolia.”

Advocates of digital assets like Park argue that Bitcoin, often touted as a ‘hardest’’ asset on earth, sidesteps the logistical complexities that plague the physical commodities sector. Yet, paradoxically, it still faces hurdles when it comes to regulatory acceptance and ETF structures.

“Meanwhile, the hardest asset on Earth [Bitcoin] can’t even be contributed in-kind to its own beloved Bitcoin ETFs, despite having near-zero logistics costs. But sure, let’s keep pretending this system makes sense,” Park remarked.

He went on to suggest that current regulatory frameworks remain a major obstacle: “Part of why people are so worried about ‘regulation’ in crypto is because they keep putting the securities lens on the asset that doesn’t actually work. Once you put the commodities lens on as the starting point, the world all of a sudden starts to make a LOT more sense.”

While the Bank of England has not issued a formal statement on the prolonged delivery times, observers see this as another potential wedge moment for traditional gold investors. If the backlogs persist, it could stoke further skepticism about the reliability of physical gold markets. Park and others in the crypto industry see this as a turning point that may pivot attention—and capital—toward Bitcoin, which does not need physical shipments or third-party vaults.

At press time, BTC traded at $95,961.

Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com