According to a recent article by BTC-ECHO, Bloomberg analyst Eric Balchunas points out that Bitcoin has already clearly outperformed gold in a long-term comparison - and could also catch up with silver in the future. If you take a sober look at the development, this assessment is easy to understand.

A key point is the supply structure. Bitcoin is limited to exactly 21 million units. This upper limit is firmly anchored in the protocol and is non-negotiable. There is no such hard limit for gold and silver. Rising prices lead to higher production in the long term, which weakens the scarcity effect.

A long-term performance comparison shows a clear difference. While gold and silver primarily deliver value preservation, Bitcoin has achieved a significantly higher real increase in value over the years. Despite interim volatility, BTC has clearly outperformed both precious metals in the long-term chart - which is precisely what Balchunas is referring to.

Another advantage is the structure of the market. Bitcoin is global, liquid and tradable around the clock. There are no storage costs, no transportation problems and no physical counterparty risk. Ownership can be held directly, independently of banks or states.

In addition, there is increasing institutional demand, particularly from spot ETFs and professional market participants. This development strengthens the market breadth and ensures a more stable capital base, which shifts Bitcoin further in the direction of an established store of value.

Conclusion:

Gold and silver remain relevant tangible assets, especially for conservative investors. However, Bitcoin goes one step further. The combination of digital scarcity, long-term outperformance and growing institutional acceptance explains why more and more market observers see Bitcoin not just as "digital gold", but as a superior store of value.

$BTC (-1.47%)
$ETH (-2.57%)
$MSTR (-0.87%)
$3350 (-5.73%)
#bitcoin
#crypto

Dear Community,

The Challenge is now in its third month and there have been some minor changes. I would like to tell you about them today.

First of all, some bad news for everyone who finds the experiment interesting, because I'm going to let it come to an end. Not because it has become a financial disaster, but because I don't have the time to look after it in a way that adds value for the community.

So here is something like a final report.

At the last update in November 2025, after the sales of $HIMS (+0.19%) and $3350 (-5.73%) and the purchase of $DEFI (-0.43%) the following stocks were still in the running:

$DEFI (-0.43%) with 245 shares

$LTMC (-1.25%) with 23 shares

$AIXA (+0.89%) with 36 shares

$CRCL (-0.49%) with 5 shares

Already on 06.01.2026 $LTMC (-1.25%) had to pack his bags as the regulatory issues had become too confusing for me.

Shortly afterwards, on 19.01.2026, I also had to $AIXA (+0.89%) had to leave the portfolio with a positive result.

This left only the two stocks $DEFI (-0.43%) and $CRCL (-0.49%) remained.

Unfortunately, both stocks were a reach for the ceramics and did not perform satisfactorily.

$DEFI (-0.43%) -62,21%

$CRCL (-0.49%) -45,95%

As a punishment, these two positions will be held until they reach € 0 or offer a surprise.

The result of this experiment is therefore sobering, but it was clear from the outset that it was a gamble and, as I wrote in the last post on this experiment, nobody who presented one of the stocks has anything to reproach themselves for!

Here is the final statement before deducting the positions that found a place in the experiment:

$HIMS (+0.19%) Buy € 546.92 Sell € 496.32 Result - € 50.60 -9.26%

$3350 (-5.73%) Purchase € 525.00 Sale € 459.00 Result - € 66.00 -12.58%

$LTMC (-1.25%) Purchase € 518.42 Sale € 522.56 Result +€ 4.14 +0.8%

$AIXA (+0.89%) Purchase € 503.64 Sale € 666.72 Result +€ 163.08 +32.38%

$DEFI (-0.43%) Purchase € 1,012.10 Current value € 382.52 Result -€ 629.58 -62.21%

$CRCL (-0.49%) Purchase € 555.00 Current value € 300.00 Result -€ 255.00 -45.95%

The bottom line is that € 2,827.12 of the € 3,661.08 invested in the course of the experiment, including the securities still in the portfolio of $DEFI (-0.43%) and $CRCL (-0.49%) have become.

This means a loss of € 833.96 or 22.78% within the three months of the experiment.

What do I take away from the experiment? That I lost money? No, that's the product, but not the insight, not what I take away.

For me, the insight is that you can be convinced of a share by an idea, but this is no guarantee that the company will perform in the same way.

The tips were not bad, but the market has its own rules. It may well be that each of these stocks will be worth many times more in 3 years' time. That's why I'm simply leaving the two remaining stocks in my portfolio - after all, they don't eat bread ;)

With any investment, you have to be aware that an investment can go either way. Therefore, in addition to a conviction in a company, a precise analysis of the fundamental data is also important. Very often, companies are presented here with an absolutely outstanding performance, including all the data. Many of these companies will certainly become multibaggers in the future with strong growth. Some will need a little more time, others a little less. But some of them may also end in a total loss.

My tips after the experiment:

Decide on stocks that are absolutely convincing to you and the figures "fit"

Set yourself limits up to which you can cope with losses

Don't forget the "safe" stocks, despite all the hope of making big gains in a short space of time

With this in mind, the rabbit wishes you a nice Sunday, even if he is looking a little sad at the moment, he is not in a bad mood and hopes that the experiment has also given you a little added value.

Your rabbit - André

$MSTR (-0.87%)

MicroStrategy is often reduced to a simple formula: "Bitcoin proxy". However, this falls short. Under Michael Saylor, the company has built up a hybrid business and capital market model that is virtually unique on the stock market.

At its core, MicroStrategy consists of two levels:

a profitable, established enterprise software business

a consistently implemented Bitcoin treasury strategy

It is precisely the combination of these two elements that makes the company interesting for many investors.

1. the operational foundation: software business as an anchor of stability

MicroStrategy is not an empty vehicle. The company has been selling business intelligence and analytics software to major customers, public authorities and corporations for decades. This business generates recurring revenue, has long-standing customer relationships and provides operating cash flow.

Even if the software business is no longer growing strongly, it still fulfills a crucial function:

It reduces the existential risk and enables MicroStrategy to implement capital market strategies that pure holding structures could not. This basis is often underestimated, but is essential for the overall model.

2. the Bitcoin strategy: not a trade, but capital allocation

Michael Saylor positions Bitcoin not as a speculation, but as a long-term store of value and strategic reserve. MicroStrategy actively uses its balance sheet to systematically accumulate Bitcoin - financed through convertible bonds, equity issues and operational funds.

Crucial here:

• Purchases are cyclical, not impulsive
• The time horizon is multi-year, not quarterly driven
• The strategy is communicated transparently and implemented consistently

This creates an effect that many investors are specifically looking for:

MicroStrategy acts like a listed Bitcoin leverage, but with a structural underpinning.

3 The leverage effect: why MicroStrategy reacts differently to Bitcoin

A central point of interest in the share is the asymmetrical price momentum. Historically, it has been shown that MicroStrategy reacts disproportionately when Bitcoin prices rise. Reasons for this include:

• the balance sheet leverage due to debt capital
• the expectation of future Bitcoin purchases
• institutional capital that cannot invest directly in Bitcoin

At the same time, setbacks often lead to stronger corrections - which in turn opens up entry opportunities for investors who take a long-term view.

4. current price level: setbacks instead of a trend break

After the last strong movements, the share has corrected noticeably. Important here:

Neither the Bitcoin strategy nor the company's direction have changed fundamentally. The decline is primarily driven by the market and sentiment.

For many investors, this is precisely the point at which MicroStrategy becomes interesting again:

• well below the highs
• with unchanged strategic orientation
• with continued clear communication from management

Those who see MicroStrategy not as a short-term trade but as a strategic position often evaluate such phases differently than the pure daily chart.

5 For whom the model makes sense - and for whom not

MicroStrategy is not a share for everyone. It is particularly suitable for investors who:

• have a clear belief in Bitcoin
• consciously accept volatility
• are looking for stock market leverage without holding coins themselves

Those looking for stability, dividends or predictable cash flows, on the other hand, are unlikely to find what they are looking for here.

Conclusion

MicroStrategy is not a traditional software company or a pure Bitcoin ETF. It is a deliberately constructed capital market model that focuses on long-term monetary trends. It is worth re-evaluating the share soberly, especially after strong setbacks.

Not because of short-term price targets - but because of the structure behind it.

$MSTR (-0.87%)
$3350 (-5.73%)
$BTC (-1.47%)
#bitcoin
#crypto
#growth

Hi I'm Steve 21 years young and I've put together a bit of something I love to play with fire but not too much I have invested 3 fat ETFs to compensate and a bit of gold and silver in the 5 things make up over 50% of my portfolio wanted to get some tips from a few professionals among you I've only been investing for just under 1 year had no plan until recently I'm currently only at $3350 (-5.73%) and wanted to ask your opinion on what I should definitely get out and what I should definitely keep apart from ETFs and gold-silver.

Well, it hurts a lot to be honest. But not because of the loss, but because the share has cost me a lot of emotion and therefore has a sentimental value.

In the meantime, I was down over 40%. 20% was therefore the limit and I'm sticking to it.

As @Multibagger has taught us. You have to stay consistent.

I'm also glad that my portfolio is no longer so dependent on the $BTC (-1.47%) apart from $IREN (-1.31%) but they are also increasingly cutting themselves off from the mining business.

So one eye is laughing because the stress is finally over, while the other is crying.

Well, that's just the way it is sometimes. Besides, my FSA is full again and there's still something left for the VVT :)

I would also like to take this opportunity to say again that I miss our friend @BamBamInvest sher very very very much. Please get in touch with us :'(

On that note, bye bye $3350 (-5.73%) maybe we will see each other again soon.

Wow,

wow, wow, wow.

After $3350 (-5.73%) was a whopping €2700 in the red at its peak, it jumped to a proud €0.52 today after just under 3 months. I'd say it's well taken care of.

Joking aside. I have done the following to ensure that this never happens to me again:

SL at €3.10. Why? So that I get +-4000€ cashed out should it go in the other direction again. If not, I'll be all the happier.

Even if the SL pulls, it's no big deal. Take the experience with me and that's that. I've also been planning to get into water for 2 weeks.

I have focused on $BMI (-0.24%) focused there. I'm currently doing some research.

Analysis, for those who are interested, will come either on Friday or in the course of next week!

Lg

Don

Something is wrong with Bitcoin $BTC (-1.47%) and Metaplanet $3350 (-5.73%) broken! I get strange prices displayed? Does anyone else have this problem?

Second tranche set. A total of 600 euros.

$3350 (-5.73%)

$3350 (-5.73%) is and remains one of the most asymmetrical investments you can currently make, IF you

• the long-term significance of $BTC (-1.47%) understands
• can withstand high volatility
• recognize the locational advantage in Japan
• recognizes the mathematics behind the aggressive accumulation of $BTC (-1.47%) and the associated leverage sees

Here are a few theses that I would like to open up for discussion:

• Metaplanet uses the Japanese carry trade as leverage. They issue preferred shares, such as MERCURY. This costs them 4.9% fixed dividend per year, paid out in yen. For the money from the prefs they buy $BTC. (-1.47%) Due to the debt-to-GDP in Japan of approx. 260% and the weakness of the yen, which is offset by the constant appreciation of $BTC (-1.47%) a kind of asymmetrical carry trade arises.
• Because the argument of the lack of income keeps coming up: $3350 (-5.73%) generated income from the sale of cash-secured puts on $BTC (-1.47%)the fees that buyers pay when trading options. As a result, they generated around USD 55 million in 2025, with significant growth from quarter to quarter. The first tranche of MERCURY issues generates around USD 7.35m / year in dividends. In Q4 alone, USD 27 million was collected. And this figure could reach USD 150m in Q4/26 if growth remains the same. This could finance USD 3 billion in prefs in just one quarter.
• Expansion into the USA via ADR program since the end of December. Better liquidity, visibility and cheaper financing.
• No exclusion from equity indices by MSCI.
• Regulatory support from Japanese Finance Minister.
• Possible TOPIX inclusion this year.
• NOVA launch. Not much is known about this yet. $3350 (-5.73%) wants to become the "Bitcoin center" in Japan, similar to Coinbase in the USA, only focused on $BTC (-1.47%)

$3350 (-5.73%) was a falling knife for a long time, but anyone who is not put off by this will be delighted. I look forward to your opinions, including critical ones!