Bitcoin’s recent wobble — even as gold and silver roar higher — has reignited debate over whether quantum computing, not market mechanics, is the real threat to crypto. Market snapshot - Gold and silver surged Thursday: gold rose 1.7% to a record $4,930 an ounce and silver jumped 3.7% to $96. - Bitcoin, by contrast, slipped to just above $89,000, about 30% off its early-October highs. - Since shortly after Donald Trump’s November 2024 election victory, bitcoin is down 2.6%, while silver has rallied 205%, gold 83%, the Nasdaq 24% and the S&P 500 17.6%. The argument for quantum Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter kicked off the latest round of head-turning takes, saying bitcoin’s “mysterious” underperformance is “due to quantum” and calling it “the only story that matters this year.” The suggestion: fears that future quantum computers could break the elliptic curve cryptography underpinning Bitcoin are already shaping market behavior. The pushback: classic market forces Many analysts and investors aren’t convinced. @_Checkmatey_, an on-chain analyst at Checkonchain, argued that attributing sideways price action to sci‑fi-level threats is a stretch — equivalent to blaming “market manipulation for red candles.” He sees the move as a function of supply and positioning: sovereigns buying gold over treasuries, and significant sell-side pressure from long-term bitcoin holders earlier in 2025 that would have derailed past bull runs several times over. Prominent investor-author Vijay Boyapati echoed that view, calling the more likely explanation “the unlocking of an enormous supply” once certain whale thresholds (he cites 100k) are hit — essentially a liquidity/positioning story, not sudden technological risk. Where the technical community stands Quantum computing has long been discussed as a theoretical future threat: algorithms like Shor’s could, in principle, compromise elliptic curve cryptography used by many wallets. Still, most Bitcoin developers and technical experts view that risk as extremely remote. Blockstream co-founder Adam Back has called the threat unlikely to lead to immediate, network-wide losses. Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 360 already maps out a gradual, technically feasible migration path to quantum-resistant address formats if and when a real threat emerges. Broader signals The quantum narrative has also found traction in traditional finance: Jefferies strategist Christopher Wood recently removed bitcoin from a model portfolio, citing quantum computing as a long-term concern. But as CoinDesk has noted, the crucial issue isn’t whether Bitcoin could be adapted — it’s how long an upgrade would take. That timeline is measured in years, not by market cycles, making quantum an unlikely driver of short-term price moves. Bottom line Quantum fears make for a compelling headline and can color investor sentiment, but current market participants point to more conventional drivers — sovereign allocations to gold, unlocked whale supply, and on-chain selling — as the proximate causes of bitcoin’s recent underperformance. The technical path to a quantum-resistant Bitcoin exists, but it’s a long-horizon consideration rather than an immediate market catalyst. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

#BTC #ETF