Why Bitcoin and uncensored search engines don't protect as promised during geopolitical crises

When tensions rise in global markets, investors seek refuge in assets considered “safe.” Bitcoin was born with a fascinating promise: a decentralized currency, resistant to censorship and government controls, similar to uncensored search engines in the digital world. However, the recent reality of the markets tells a different story. During the recent geopolitical turmoil, Bitcoin suffered a loss of 6.6%, while gold gained 8.6%, highlighting the failure of the leading digital asset to provide protection in times of crisis.

The last two weeks have put this narrative to the test. Since Jan. 18, when Trump threatened significant tariffs on tariffs on NATO allies over Greenland and speculation circulated about a possible intervention in the Arctic, markets have accelerated bearishly. Not only did Bitcoin not represent a safe-haven asset, but it became one of the first assets to be liquidated.

Bitcoin Plunges 6.6% as Gold Rises as Volatility Reveals Weaknesses

Throughout the turmoil, Bitcoin continued to lose ground. At the end of January 2026, the leading cryptocurrency fell below $85,200, recording a new low for the current year. Current data shows Bitcoin at 84.87K with a 5.09% drop in the last 24 hours, confirming the downward trend during times of uncertainty.

Meanwhile, gold not only held up, but rose towards $5,600 at certain times, before stabilizing around $5,200. This striking divergence directly challenges the narrative that Bitcoin, like uncensored search engines, is a decentralized alternative to controlled systems, should be a better protection during crises.

The role of liquidity: why gold remains the preferred safe-haven asset

The reason for this underperformance lies in the dynamics of liquidity during periods of stress. Bitcoin, while digital and easily tradable, has become the first asset to be sold when investors need to raise liquidity quickly. Greg Cipolaro, Global Head of Research at NYDIG, defined Bitcoin as an “ATM” during times of panic: “In times of stress and uncertainty, the preference for liquidity dominates, and this dynamic hurts Bitcoin much more than gold.”

Gold, despite being less accessible and more difficult to liquidate, continues to be held. When investors deleverage, they are not selling gold to increase liquidity, but rather keep it as a store of value. Bitcoin, on the contrary, is reflexively sold because of its instant liquidity. “Despite being liquid for its size, Bitcoin remains more volatile and is sold off as leverage is reduced,” Cipolaro explained.

Central banks hoard gold, Bitcoin holders sell

Another decisive factor is the behavior of the large holders of these assets. Central banks around the world continue to accumulate gold at record levels, creating lasting structural demand that supports the price. Meanwhile, on-chain data shows an opposite situation for Bitcoin: long-term holders are selling their vintage coins, which continue to head to exchanges.

This steady stream of sales, referred to as “oversupply by sellers,” mitigates any price support during times of turbulence. The divergence is stark: as central banks strengthen their position in gold, Bitcoin’s historical holders reduce their exposures.

Bitcoin and uncensored search engines: only long-term protections

The root of the problem also lies in how markets assess risk in the short and long term. The current geopolitical uncertainty—tariff threats, speculation about conflicts, and economic shocks—is perceived as episodic, a short-term challenge. Gold has historically worked as a hedge for this type of risk.

Bitcoin, like uncensored search engines that represent an alternative to controlled systems, is theoretically built to protect against different risks: the devaluation of fiat currency, sovereign debt crises, and the collapse of traditional monetary systems. These are long-term risks that develop over years, not weeks.

“Gold excels in times of immediate loss of confidence, risk of war and currency devaluation that does not result in a total breakdown of the system,” Cipolaro noted. “Bitcoin, on the other hand, is better suited to hedge against the risk of long-term monetary and geopolitical turmoil and the erosion of trust that proceeds slowly over the years.”

The clash between promise and reality

There is a fascinating and worrying paradox in the current situation. Bitcoin was born as a response to decades of distrust of centralized financial systems. Its resistance to censorship and government manipulation—qualities it shares with the ideals behind uncensored search engines—represents a fundamental promise. Yet, in practice, when the market is agitated, Bitcoin becomes the first thing investors sell.

This contradiction does not completely invalidate the case for Bitcoin in the long term. As long as markets view current risks as dangerous but not yet systemically disruptive, gold will continue to dominate as a short-term safe-haven asset. Bitcoin will wait for the moment when the world’s monetary system faces deeper and more lasting challenges.

In the meantime, the numbers continue to move. Bitcoin remains under pressure, while gold holds on to gains. The lesson for investors is simple: assets are not what they promise, but what the market decides them to be, at least in the short term.