Nick Szabo — the cryptographer often linked to Satoshi Nakamoto — just dropped a powerful comparison between Bitcoin and Gold.
And this isn’t about price.
It’s about cost, custody, and control.
𝗙𝗼𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗮𝗹𝘀 👇
Szabo argues that Bitcoin is slightly cheaper than physical gold when you consider:
• Storage costs
• Security risks
• Transfer expenses
• Verification & global consensus
Moving gold requires physical logistics, insurance, verification, vaulting.
Moving Bitcoin? A digital transaction verified by the network in minutes.
𝗙𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿. 𝗟𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗙𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹.
That’s a structural advantage.
𝗙𝗼𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 👇
The story becomes more balanced.
Large entities depend on:
• Trust infrastructure
• Regulatory compliance
• Operational control systems
At that level, Bitcoin is not dramatically cheaper than gold.
Cost advantages shrink because institutional custody introduces complexity.
But here’s where it gets interesting.
𝗚𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗶𝘀 𝟲,𝟬𝟬𝟬 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀 𝗼𝗹𝗱.
Its storage and verification system is mature… and almost maxed out.
Bitcoin? Still evolving.
Szabo believes technological improvements will drastically reduce Bitcoin self-custody costs over time — for both individuals and institutions.
Right now, he calls Bitcoin’s heavy reliance on centralized custodians like Coinbase a “shameful centralization.”
But he also says this is temporary.
Gold will likely remain centralized in bank vaults.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, has the potential to become more distributed and sovereign over time.
𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲:
Gold is stable in structure.
Bitcoin is improving in structure.
One is finished technology.
The other is programmable evolution.
The debate isn’t just “store of value.”
It’s about who controls the value.
What’s your take — physical scarcity or digital sovereignty? 👇