what this indicates, from both an institutional and retail asset holder's point of view; is that other than the tangible cost of the price of electricity for mining and transaction validation, the market kinematics of how its price is determined, is still largely dependent on US-based or US-backed fiscal and monetary policy >
this seems to follow the overall market dynamics of the overall crypto (including stablecoin) market.
a case in point, would be the comparative performance between bitcoin and money, under elevated institutional risk perception now increasingly being driven by fairly consistent and deterministic geopolitical trends (such as the Ukraine-Russian conflict, America's now very entrenched and strategic foothold in all 3 global conflict threatre namely the Gaza Corridor, the South China Sea basin, and the Pan-European flank) >
https://www.cmegroup.com/openmarkets/metals/2025/Gold-and-Bitcoin-Decouple-Whats-Driving-the-Divergence.html
if the practical trading desk operational coupling between bitcoin and the NASDAQ continues to persist, then this long term decoupling between gold and bitcoin will follow in a very clear lockstep dual-band emotive-driven price range where, once gold continues to find reserve accumulation demand to spillover from central bank buying and US Dollar diversification, into retail purchase of non-physical gold-linked ETFs and derivatives, kinematics between gold and bitcoin may drive some price similarity in appreciation during the impending market correction in crude oil markets around the world.
because of the large glut of LNG supply that will come onstream starting 2026-2028, OPEC's role in determination of crude pricing from production management continues to play a pivotal function for pricing global energy benchmark indices, thereby creating further entrenched floor costs for bitcoin mining.
at this point, it will be crucial to observe the energy dependence of where the bulk of bitcoin mining is conducted and when, so to speak, the dots are connected, a neutral so called "clinical perspective" can be appropriately placed on the long term prospects of bitcoin and its potential for purely capital appreciation driven upside >
the risk weightage that should be correctly given to the energy mining and transaction costs associated with 1 BTC, therefore, is firmly correlated to that of crude and the Dollar, not of gold, but perhaps somewhat dependent on NASDAQ sentiment-driven trade blocks that triggers algorithm-managed bids/offers.
the exuberence and claims that BTC has the investment value that is equivalent to that of gold, unfortunately, is largely a sentiment-driven emotive trend that can be sometimes manipulated by means of unpredictable and disorganized "market-talk".
the primary crux of this exuberence stems largely from the playbook that is deceptively appealing to some, since physical gold does have a cost component that includes the physical cost of exploration, mining and associated energy costs >
now therefore, it is evidently clear that this exuberence is debunked once the above factors are taken into account from the perspective of risk.
#gold #BTC #bitcoin #money #finance #geopolitics
Investopedia
Bitcoin Price Plummets Over $40,000 in Just Six Weeks as Market Faces Growing Uncertainty
Bitcoin extended its slide Friday as investors reassess their risk appetite amid broader volatility in financial markets.
Top 10 Bitcoin Mining Countries of 2025
The cost of leverage: Gold miners' margins matter
The cost of leverage: Gold miners' margins matter
Gold held steady in May near US$3,200 per ounce despite strong equity markets, while gold miners gained 3%, aided by solid Q1 results—even a...
