Recently, an interesting phenomenon has attracted market attention: gold, silver, platinum, and palladium are all continuously reaching new all-time highs, while Bitcoin remains relatively consolidating. This contrast is worth pondering—are the extraordinary performances of traditional hard assets truly isolated incidents?

From the data, silver's increase is particularly astonishing, with a year-to-date rise exceeding 160%. This is not minor fluctuation; it represents a systemic re-pricing of assets. Many people view precious metals and cryptocurrencies as competing assets, believing investors must choose either gold or Bitcoin. But the actual situation might be entirely the opposite.

The key lies in understanding the common logic behind both. The rise in gold fundamentally reflects a simple yet profound reality: fiat currencies are being continuously diluted. As central banks keep printing money and liquidity floods the global markets, traditional stores of value—gold and silver—naturally become safe havens. People are voting with their feet, expressing concerns about the centralized financial system through capital flows.

Bitcoin’s original purpose was precisely to be a superior inflation hedge compared to gold. With a fixed supply of 21 million coins that can never be increased, this feature surpasses gold’s flaw—gold can still be mined, and its supply theoretically can grow. From this perspective, Bitcoin is an evolved digital version of gold.

The current situation is quite interesting. The continuous new highs in gold and silver are effectively announcing to global investors: anti-inflation has become a survival necessity, no longer an option. This collective shift in perception paves the way for a reassessment of Bitcoin’s value.

Imagine a scenario: if gold and silver rise another 50%, or even double. What kind of market psychology would this trigger? It would mean more and more capital and people recognizing that protecting asset value and fighting inflation are no longer exclusive to the wealthy but are issues everyone must face. Under this narrative framework, Bitcoin, as a digital asset with a completely fixed supply and the highest transparency, would see its attractiveness grow exponentially.

From an asset allocation perspective, if traditional precious metals are already re-priced to such high levels, then the valuation ceiling for the next generation of scarce assets—like Bitcoin, with its stronger non-replicability—would no longer be limited to current heights. Every new high in gold and silver proves that truly scarce assets will eventually be rewarded with premiums.

This doesn’t mean Bitcoin will skyrocket overnight; markets are never that simple. But the performance of gold and silver has indeed changed the broader environment. It has shattered confidence in traditional valuation systems and led more people to believe that the old asset allocation logic is no longer applicable, and that new ways of wealth preservation will inevitably emerge.

In a sense, gold and silver have acted as trailblazers. Their actual gains have demonstrated the reality of inflationary pressures and the genuine demand for alternative assets. And this demand ultimately points toward assets with the most limited supply and unique characteristics—namely, Bitcoin.

So the question isn’t whether gold and silver will squeeze Bitcoin’s space, but whether their rise will serve as a catalyst for the next wave of crypto asset revaluation. Historically, whenever traditional safe-haven assets experience systemic increases, it usually signals an explosive growth in demand for alternative assets.

What do you think of this logic? Do you see this surge in precious metals as an independent phenomenon, or as a signal that the crypto market is about to enter a new phase? Feel free to share your thoughts.