In periods of economic turmoil and unpredictability, capital seeks “safe havens“ where it can wait out the turbulent times. Throughout almost all of history, gold has been an asset that guarantees safety, and in many cases even the growth of funds. This metal has been the embodiment of wealth, which has never been in doubt.
But times are changing. This has also reached the sphere of money. Digitalization and computerization have made it possible to create virtual money - cryptocurrency. And it, advertised as “virtual gold“ and the currency of the future, entered into competition with metal gold as a guarantor of capital security.
Initially, a little understood and also intangible product was treated with great skepticism, as, in fact, in the vast majority of cases, and to new products. But later, when the quotes of cryptocurrencies began to grow, the attitude towards them changed.
The reasons for the rise in the price of virtual currencies are quite simple. In general, there was only one monetary unit: the main one in the economy and in the world. Powerful advertising presented virtual money as a means of payment that is not controlled by the monetary authorities, which is why they gained popularity in circles that preferred to remain in the shadows. Accordingly, the demand for them grew, and after it the quotes (prices) of cryptocurrencies, the number of which also grew (now there are several hundred of them, modeled on the same models). But the first, available for transactions, remained the main and most popular - Bitcoin.
And then the history of cryptocurrencies - their flagship Bitcoin - followed a well-trodden scenario. Quotes were constantly growing, which made it possible to make money on these instruments if you buy cheaper, wait and sell at a higher price. Thus, a self-revolving process of expanding demand and rising prices was launched. Moreover, it developed at such a speed that it displaced gold in popularity.
If we leave aside the issue of rivalry between the two assets, then we can say that a duality has been established. Gold prices and cryptocurrency quotes changed almost in parallel, in the same direction. But in late July - early August 2025, the pattern was broken. Gold rose in price, while Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies fell in price. If on July 25 an ounce of gold cost 3316.3 USD, then on August 5 an ounce cost 3432.4 USD, adding 3.4%. Almost in the same period of time, Bitcoin quotes fell from 118,896 USD per coin (July 27) to 112,537 USD (recorded on August 2), which meant a decrease of 5.5%. The discrepancy is noticeable and most importantly - atypical.
The statistical series is not long enough to talk about a trend. And the price of gold is taking its time (although some experts predict an increase to $4,500 per ounce by the end of the year), while Bitcoin recovers and even approaches the record June level of $123,000 per unit ($122,045 on August 11). But this is certainly a reason to think about the question of how gold differs from cryptocurrency and in whose favor the scales will tip, if we take into account the guarantees of the safety of funds.
The first cryptocurrency, called “bitcoin“ (in free translation - info coin), appeared on October 31, 2008. Then a certain Satoshi Nakamoto (it is still not known for sure whether this is a real person or a pseudonym behind which a lone inventor or a group of programmers is hiding) announced the launch of a digital product on the market. According to him, it can be used as a means of payment, bypassing official financial institutions, that is, banks. The main advantage was declared to be anonymity in transactions and freedom from "bank slavery", and at the same time from all regulatory authorities, including tax authorities and those who monitor the legality of the origin of funds.
The opportunity to earn by playing on the rising price (quotation) attracted not only those who needed anonymous payments, but also investors who simply wanted to make money. The ranks of supporters and users of cryptocurrency were growing rapidly. In addition, unlike the usual games with official currencies, whose quotes fluctuated within narrow limits and were difficult to predict, with cryptocurrency it was much simpler and more reliable - the quotes only grew, and at a good pace. If in 2010 they paid half a dollar for one bitcoin, then just a year later - now 10 dollars.
But there was another feature - the ability to “mine“ cryptocurrency using a computer program. It is worth noting that at the initial stage this was done quite simply, without special requirements for computer power and with not too much electricity consumption. And all this in the absence of any control and regulation! How can you resist comparing it to gold?
It is indeed possible to find something in common. Both are “mined“. One is with a pickaxe in a mine or with a pan near a gold-bearing stream. The other is with the help of computer calculations. The creators of cryptocurrencies, not without wit, called this process “mining“, which in English means “extraction“.
Another thing that made it similar to gold was that cryptocurrency became the embodiment of wealth. How could it be otherwise? The price of the asset is growing, and rapidly. Experts' predictions (at the stages of the formation of the process) about the imminent collapse of the cryptocurrency market, apparently, are no longer coming true. Now it has swelled to $ 4 trillion, the ranks of cryptocurrency owners number over 560 million people in 2024, having increased by 142 million in one year. Such structures do not collapse. Moreover, owners of large amounts of cryptocurrency are far from poor people and therefore are not inclined to get rid of assets in a panic, so even an occasional drop in quotes does not cause an avalanche-like collapse. On the contrary, buyers of cheaper cryptocurrencies immediately find themselves, restoring the price “status quo“.
Cryptocurrencies have no independent value and their entire usefulness lies in the ability to bring profit to smart businessmen. Nothing more. There is no benefit in a material sense - this is not food, not fuel, not metal. And in general, they are based on advertising and the belief of a certain community (true, multi-million) in the advantages of virtual money compared to official monetary units. Psychology in its purest form. The foundation on which cryptocurrencies are based is unstable.
And gold? How does it differ from an ephemeral cryptocurrency in terms of utility?
At first glance, not much. More than half of the mined metal is consumed by the jewelry industry. Of course, you can see the benefits of rings and brooches, but not the most important and mainly from the point of view of a certain part of humanity. Depending on the situation in the world economy, about 15-20% goes to the vaults of central banks to replenish reserves, and only because faith in the metal is still unshakable. And only 10-15% goes to medicine, aerospace, instrument making. In general, relatively little is used “for business“, the rest is consumed because “it's gold!“. Also psychology? From the point of view of logic - “yes“, from the point of view of economics - not quite. More precisely, not at all.
Humanity got acquainted with gold quite early - it was found in the form of pieces from which something useful could be made. It is still a metal. But it quickly learned to extract copper, melt harder bronze, and later iron. Gold was significantly inferior to them in commercial qualities, but it won as an ornament.
The golden hour of the yellow metal came when trade began to develop. Something was needed that could play the role of a means of payment. This role was played, depending on the circumstances, by cattle, skins, olive oil, salt pans, etc. But gradually precious metals - gold and silver - appeared from the world of goods. And any product could be exchanged for them. Especially for the role of “universal equivalent“ gold was suitable: it was well stored (unlike, for example, oil), could be divided into parts without losing quality (unlike cattle), and contained great value in small quantities (portability). And despite its rarity, it continued to be mined, so it was possible to replenish monetary circulation with the expansion of commodity exchange and the increase in the need for payment and settlement instruments.
But that was in the past. And now? Isn't it time to give way to progressive cryptocurrency? As practice shows, it is not time. The first reason is in determining the price (quotes). Cryptocurrency quotes depend entirely on its demand, on trust in it (or rather, faith in it), without having convincing evidence of its superior qualities. The growth of quotes does not count. Today it is there - tomorrow it is gone. It is not for nothing that stablecoins appeared - a type of cryptocurrency that can be exchanged for a real asset, most often for the same gold, oil. In other words, cryptocurrency is good for everything, but when exchanged for gold, it becomes even better.
The price of gold is also irrational, based on the belief in “gold“. But still, a certain part (and stable) is consumed by industry - there is economic support. And even with jewelry it is not so simple. It seems that the value is not formalized. However, the price formation in this area is similar to the pricing of art objects - paintings, porcelain figurines, and even such intangible forms as ballet, opera and theatrical performances. It seems that it is not grain, it is not oil, but there is always demand. Moreover, the demand is for the content of the item, and not because it can then be sold at a higher price. This is the fundamental economic difference between the one and the other. Gold is connected with the real economy and has a use value, the ability to satisfy a certain human need - from material, essential to psychic, aesthetic, cultural. Cryptocurrency does not possess these properties.
So, will the “currency of the future“ replace gold, which digital technology experts are absolutely sure of? This has already happened in part. As a tool for payments and settlements, gold has been replaced by fiat money (tokens printed on paper or minted from simpler metals), which now circulate mainly in a non-cash form. It is very close to cryptocurrency - mainly in an intangible form. Even in international payments, gold is not used. However, the technical functions of virtual money should not be confused with the role of a guarantor of the safety of funds.
Thus, central banks, accumulating gold and foreign exchange reserves, keep a certain part of them in metal. And recently they have even increased them. Thus, the gold and foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank of Russia as of March 1, 2025 are represented by metal by 34.4%, and world central banks are buying over a thousand tons of gold for the third consecutive year.
Why? Maybe the main banks are led by representatives of the “old school“ who do not perceive progress? Quite the opposite. They simply, unlike individual investors, cannot risk the safety of their reserves. And in this regard, cryptocurrency is not equivalent to metal. Recent reports on the corporate sector increasing its cryptocurrency reserves cannot serve as evidence of a change in the trend. Corporations follow the logic of investors, hoping for a further increase in the asset price. But one of the economic postulates is: the higher the profit, the higher the risk.
The first requirement for reserves is that they be formed in reliable assets. Cryptocurrency is not one of them - and quotes are jumping (although they are constantly growing), and they themselves have no value. And this is the most important thing. Cryptocurrency is nothing more than a record on accounts. And in digital format, on computer accounts. You can install as many levels of protection as you want, but no one is insured against a power outage, especially during periods of climatic turbulence. True, protection against such risks is still provided: records will not be lost, but without electricity transactions will be impossible.
However, this risk is not the most serious. Something else is more dangerous - the money and those who want to appropriate it appeared simultaneously. The plot of the theft of gold from the central bank vault in real life is difficult, almost impossible.
Hacking access to accounts is also not easy. But an experienced hacker (or group) is quite capable - if it had not been reported long ago that even the Pentagon's information system had been hacked. And in a moment, instead of numbers pleasing to the eye of an accountant, the accounts will show boring zeros. Moreover, such an operation can be carried out not by amateur loners, but by professionals who have received a task from hostile countries. And this risk - quite real in these times - decides the issue in favor of the “barbaric relic of the past“. And decisively and irrevocably.