For centuries, gold was the undisputed answer to market chaos. It is the quintessential “safe-haven” asset, an investment that reliably preserves or gains value when markets decline. Now, however, a digital challenger is set on claiming its throne.

Gold’s price hit a record high of $3,500 per ounce on April 22, 2025, driven by escalating U.S. trade-war concerns. Its would-be challenger, Bitcoin, emerged by contrast in 2009 as a volatile speculative asset from the outset.

These days labelled as “digital gold,” Bitcoin in 2025 is presented as a modern hedge against inflation. Yet, analysts observe that Bitcoin generally behaves more like a risk-on tech stock—rising dramatically in bull markets and plunging during sell-offs.

Today, we will compare Bitcoin and gold to see if Bitcoin truly qualifies as a safe-haven asset. We’ll look at key factors like their scarcity, volatility, performance during a crisis, and ability to hedge against inflation.

Will the newcomer measure up to the old guard?

Comparing Bitcoin and Gold: Scarcity, Inflation Hedge, and Value Preservation

Supply and Scarcity:

Both gold and Bitcoin have limited supplies but through different mechanisms. Gold’s scarcity stems from geological constraints and rising mining costs, while Bitcoin’s scarcity is enforced by its programming, capped at 21 million coins with rewards halving approximately every four years.

Consequently, both assets serve as “anti-fiat,” theoretically resistant to supply manipulation by governments.

Inflation Hedging:

Gold historically maintains its value in inflationary periods and crises. Bitcoin proponents argue its fixed supply similarly shields it from inflation.

However, gold’s reputation as an inflation hedge is supported by thousands of years of consistent performance, whereas Bitcoin’s inflation-protection claims remain largely theoretical, given its relatively short history.

Value Preservation:

Gold is a proven portfolio stabiliser, often rising or retaining value during market downturns. Bitcoin, though historically offering substantial long-term gains, frequently experiences sharp downturns driven by sentiment shifts.

As Julius Baer Group highlights, gold consistently serves as a hedge during market corrections, unlike Bitcoin, whose resilience in crises remains uncertain.

Bitcoin vs Gold in Macroeconomic Crises

2022 Inflation Shock: During the 2022 market downturn, gold declined approximately 7.9% yet significantly outperformed global stocks.

Bitcoin, however, fell nearly 70%, marking the worst performance among “safe-haven” assets. This episode highlighted gold’s relative stability compared to Bitcoin’s volatility.

2023 Banking Turmoil: The collapse of several U.S. banks in March 2023 triggered a flight to safety, briefly boosting Bitcoin by roughly 20% following swift regulatory interventions.

Gold and traditional safe-haven currencies also benefitted. This event demonstrated Bitcoin’s capacity to rise during financial stress but with the significant caveat of government intervention.

2024–2025 Trade Tensions: When new U.S. tariffs disrupted markets in early 2025, gold prices surged to a new peak of $3,500, reaffirming its safe-haven status. Bitcoin initially declined alongside equities but recovered strongly to around $111,000 by May 2025, illustrating its sensitivity to broader market sentiments.

In summary, gold has consistently performed better and more predictably during economic crises compared to Bitcoin, which tends to align closely with risk-on market sentiment.

Volatility and Market Behaviour

Bitcoin exhibits significantly higher volatility compared to gold. Daily fluctuations of several percent are commonplace for Bitcoin, whereas gold typically sees minimal daily movements. Studies confirm Bitcoin’s volatility is excessive relative to equities and gold, indicating heightened short-term investment risks.

Bitcoin often parallels tech stock behaviour—soaring during bull markets and plummeting in downturns. Institutional traders frequently group Bitcoin with Nasdaq-listed technology stocks, meaning tech market shifts directly impact Bitcoin.

Julius Baer notes that Bitcoin remains a risk-on asset vulnerable during periods of fear, unlike gold, which typically provides stability.

Institutional Adoption, Regulation, and Liquidity

Institutional adoption has notably enhanced Bitcoin’s credibility and liquidity. Since 2024, major asset managers launched U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, rapidly attracting substantial capital, with assets exceeding $100 billion by mid-2025. BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust alone amassed around $20 billion, indicating increased institutional confidence.

Traditional financial institutions, including BlackRock, Fidelity, Morgan Stanley, and some U.S. state pension funds, now permit modest Bitcoin allocations. Wall Street banks like JP Morgan have begun facilitating Bitcoin transactions, while the inclusion of Coinbase in the S&P 500 further legitimizes crypto assets.

Regulatory frameworks are also evolving. The U.S. SEC’s 2024 approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs marked a significant shift toward regulatory clarity, crucial for institutional adoption.

Nonetheless, gold retains a clear advantage in terms of market depth and regulatory stability.

Correlation with Tech Stocks and Risk-On Assets

Correlation analysis further illustrates Bitcoin’s risk-on nature. Gold traditionally shows minimal or negative correlation with equities, frequently appreciating when stocks decline.

Conversely, Bitcoin’s correlation with risk-on assets, particularly tech stocks, peaked at historical highs around 0.8–0.9 in 2024, reflecting its sensitivity to Nasdaq market movements.

Final Assessment: Gold 2.0 or Not Yet?

Bitcoin exhibits certain safe-haven characteristics, including limited supply, growing institutional interest, and occasional resilience. However, it currently lacks gold’s proven track record and predictable stability.

Bitcoin’s high volatility and strong correlations with tech stocks suggest it remains primarily a speculative asset rather than a reliable safe haven. As Julius Baer Group summarises, gold continues to serve as a robust hedge, whereas Bitcoin’s risk-off capabilities are yet unproven.

In conclusion, while Bitcoin is progressively maturing and demonstrating potential as a complementary asset, it is not yet a substitute for gold.

Investors should recognise Bitcoin as a high-risk diversifier rather than a stable anchor, whereas gold remains a consistently reliable asset during turbulent market conditions.