Ancient coins pressure bitcoin as gold cements its safe-haven role

In recent days, old bitcoin coins registered a mass exodus to the trading markets, a phenomenon that exposes the fragility of the digital asset in the face of true stores of value. While gold remains the preferred hedge in times of uncertainty, bitcoin has revealed itself to be more of a liquidity instrument than a digital alternative to the yellow metal.

Over the past week, in the wake of geopolitical tensions stemming from tariff threats and military speculation in the Arctic, markets experienced considerable volatility. The data was overwhelming: bitcoin gave up 6.6% of its value, while gold climbed 8.6% to all-time highs near $5,000 an ounce. Currently, bitcoin is trading at $85.25K with a 4.94% drop in the last 24 hours, reflecting the continued pressure on the asset.

The outflow of old coins amplifies bitcoin’s vulnerability to shocks

Behind this divergence in yield lies a fundamental market mechanism: the panicked behavior of investors. Old coins—those cryptocurrencies accumulated for years—are constantly migrating to exchanges, a clear sign that long-term holders abandon their positions at critical moments.

Bitcoin, thanks to its high liquidity and instant access, has become what NYDIG analysts refer to as a digital “ATM.” When uncertainty strikes, it is not sold strategically, but reflexively liquidated for immediate cash. Greg Cipolaro, NYDIG’s Global Director of Research, put it precisely: “In periods of stress, the preference for liquidity dominates. Bitcoin, despite its size and market depth, is still more volatile and sells without thinking when leverage is undone.”

This behavior contrasts radically with that of gold. Despite being less accessible on the spot market, investors tend to retain it as a safe haven. Central banks, far from selling, have been hoarding gold at record rates, generating structural demand that supports prices. Meanwhile, the flow of old bitcoin coins into exchange markets amplifies selling pressure on the asset, reducing any price cushions.

Liquidity vs store of value: why investors choose gold in crisis

The dynamic is especially clear when viewed from the perspective of the portfolio manager. In times of risk aversion, professionals use bitcoin not as a store of value but as a tool to reduce VAR (Value at Risk) and generate cash. Gold, by contrast, functions as a “liquidity sink”—it is bought and held, not traded.

This difference in use explains why gold has maintained its 5,000-year-old crown as an emergency reserve. Global gold values have nominally increased by approximately $1.6 trillion in a single day, reflecting the magnitude of defensive flows. Sentiment indicators, such as JM Bullion’s Fear and Greed Index, point to extreme optimism in precious metals, while the same indicators in cryptocurrencies remain stuck in fear.

Bitcoin and gold: different time horizons for different uncertainties

The real divergence between these assets lies not in their “hard money” narrative, but in the timeframes of the threats they cover. Gold stands out as a hedge against episodic shocks: tariffs, policy shifts, short-term devaluations, threats of conflict. Bitcoin, on the other hand, is better suited for long-term monetary uncertainties: chronic depreciation of fiat currencies, sovereign debt crisis, geopolitical disorder that unfolds over years, not weeks.

In the current context, where markets still consider risks as dangerous but not fundamental, gold maintains its advantage. Bitcoin will continue to be perceived as a high-beta risk asset as long as investors seek immediate stores of value.

Central bank accumulation vs holder selling pressure

The demand structure of the market amplifies this asymmetry. Global central banks continue to acquire gold, particularly those looking to demonetize their U.S. currency portfolios. This institutional demand creates a price floor that is impossible to penetrate.

Bitcoin faces the opposite dynamic. Old coins—those cryptocurrencies that sat in portfolios for 5 or 10 years—are now flowing into the markets, likely driven by the need for liquidity from professional investors facing pressures elsewhere. On-chain data reveals a steady movement from old addresses to exchanges, a pattern that will continue as long as volatility persists.

The lesson is clear: bitcoin has not failed in its technology or its censorship-resistant money narrative. What has failed is his role in short-term defensive allocation. For immediate uncertainties, gold remains irreplaceable. Bitcoin will find its true value when uncertainty is existential and prolonged, not when it is episodic.