2026-01-09 09:32:34

I recently came across a research report published by the asset management giant VanEck. They provided a rather aggressive long-term forecast for Bitcoin — by 2050, the price could soar to $2.9 million, with an annual growth rate of about 15%. This number certainly grabs attention, but what’s more worth noting is the logical chain behind their projection.

VanEck’s core assumptions are several: first, the absolute scarcity of Bitcoin — the total supply is capped at 21 million coins, and this has never changed; second, the continuous influx of institutional funds — from pension funds to central banks around the world are gradually building Bitcoin positions; finally, Bitcoin’s unique role in a portfolio — its low correlation and anti-inflation properties make it a hedge.

However, there is a key premise that needs to be honestly acknowledged: this is based on the "most optimistic assumptions." By most optimistic, it means no major technological disruptions and no revolutionary substitutes emerging. Bitcoin’s ten-year growth has indeed been astonishing, but can this growth trajectory continue linearly into the future? That’s hard to guarantee. Plus, regulatory policies could change at any moment, and these are risk factors that need to be considered.

From an investment perspective, if you go all-in now and buy one Bitcoin, based on this forecast, its value could be 29 million RMB by 2050. It sounds very tempting, but the real question is — will you still be in this world on that day? This question is more interesting than the numbers themselves.

BTC0,23%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ApeWithNoFear

· 1h ago

2.9 million USD? That's funny. Whether we'll be alive in 2050 to see that day is still up in the air, haha. --- Optimistically assuming these four words dismiss all risks, wake up everyone. --- Huh, the central bank is stockpiling Bitcoin? Then I definitely need to get on board. --- Scarcity is real, but what if substitutes really arrive? Just thinking about it is terrifying. --- Wait, do we really have to wait until 2050 to multiply this many times? I don't want to wait that long; I want to get rich now. --- A regulatory crackdown could make all predictions meaningless. That's what I fear the most. --- Low-correlation assets sound professional, but honestly, it's still betting on national fortune. --- All-in on one coin? I can't even bet a small amount, brother. --- The 2.9 million figure is definitely eye-catching; actually reaching half of that would be good enough. --- Anyway, I am optimistic about Bitcoin. Just treat it as long-term storage of value; it's idle money anyway. --- What I fear most is quantum computing suddenly cracking the blockchain, then it's really game over.

View OriginalReply0

ForkPrince

· 2h ago

2.9 million USD sounds impressive, but the real question is who will still be alive after 26 years. --- Going all-in on one coin waiting for 2050, but isn't it better to enjoy life now? --- The most optimistic assumption is opening blind boxes; if regulations come down hard, everything is pointless. --- 29 million RMB is indeed tempting, but unfortunately, I might not live to see that day. --- Who can say for sure if technological disruption will happen? Can Bitcoin really sit back and win for 26 years? --- The central bank stepping in is somewhat reliable, but everything else is just stories. --- Instead of calculating how much something will be worth in 2050, it's better to think about how to survive until then. --- The term "low correlation assets" sounds nice, but during a big crash, everyone kneels together; no one can run away. --- No matter how beautifully VanEck puts it, the fact remains—the regulatory sword is hanging over our heads.

View OriginalReply0

LootboxPhobia

· 4h ago

2050 with $2.9 million? Haha, let's talk about that when I get there. I'm tired of the scarcity narrative; the key is really how institutions are actually moving their real money. Going all-in on one coin for $29 million sounds great, but the logical flaws are pretty obvious. The most optimistic assumption means... is there actually a discount? LOL. Technological disruption is really hard to predict—who knows if Bitcoin in 2050 will be a god or just a neural network. The fact that the total supply is capped at 21 million coins is undeniable—does anyone on the regulatory side have a clear plan? Instead of focusing on price predictions, it's more reliable to watch the actual holdings of institutions. An annualized 15% return doesn't sound too exaggerated, but the prerequisite... basically leaves no room for risk. When that day comes, if I’m still alive, even if I have a lot on paper, it’s just paper wealth.

View OriginalReply0

ValidatorViking

· 01-09 10:02

$290M by 2050? sure, *if* we're living in the most battle-tested timeline where no competing protocol breaks consensus finality and every central bank actually commits long-term... ngl the real slashing risk here is believing linear extrapolation works on 26-year horizons. VanEck's optimism is built on shaky validator set assumptions tbh.

Reply0

screenshot_gains

· 01-09 10:02

It would be great to still be alive in 2050, haha. Let's focus on earning in the present first.

View OriginalReply0

MEVictim

· 01-09 10:00

$2.9 million sounds great, but I haven't really thought about how to spend it yet. Can I withdraw it later?

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeGazer

· 01-09 09:59

2.9 million USD by 2050... sounds good, but I'm more concerned about whether I can still be alive to see it in over twenty years haha --- That talk about scarcity is so overused. The key still depends on whether some black swan can wipe out Bitcoin --- Hodling one for over twenty years to turn it into 29 million RMB? I might have already given up by then. The current happiness is worth more than that number --- VanEck's report is purely a pie-in-the-sky for retail investors. The most optimistic assumptions are the least reliable ones --- A 15% annual growth rate sounds easy, but how many big predictions have we seen crash due to regulation? --- We've heard enough about inflation hedging tools. It all still depends on the central bank's stance --- Who the hell can predict what will happen in 2050? Better to focus on the returns we can get now

View OriginalReply0

Whale_Whisperer

· 01-09 09:50

2.9 million USD by 2050? Come on, I just want to know if VanEck has considered quantum computing. Living until 2050 is uncertain anyway, and you're still calculating book value. The most optimistic assumption sounds nice, but it's basically "nothing bad happens," is that even possible? Will central banks really stockpile Bitcoin on a large scale? Are the people saying this not paying attention to each country's stance? Scarcity is real, but the probability of substitutes appearing isn't zero either. Instead of waiting 30 years, it's better to see the policy trends for next year.

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanLarry

· 01-09 09:42

lol the opportunity cost of hodling til 2050... chief, that's literally negative carry on steroids. even if the thesis validates, you're leaving basis points on the table every single cycle. the scarcity narrative tracks but cmon, "no revolutionary alternatives"? protocol dynamics shift fast. vaneck's capital utilization math doesn't account for impermanent loss through regulatory backrunning tbh.

Reply0