See more like this on Google
Share article
Share article
Phones were buzzing on crypto Twitter this week for the usual reasons, a sharp dip, louder conviction, and someone with a proper suit saying the quiet part out loud. Anthony Scaramucci has leaned back into his favourite trade: Bitcoin$62,574.78 as "digital gold," only with a bigger network effect and a longer runway.
On the PBD Podcast released Friday (March 13), the SkyBridge Capital founder reiterated that Bitcoin$62,574.78 could match gold's market capitalisation within 10 to 15 years.[1] He also said he bought more Bitcoin$62,574.78 during the recent correction and that Bitcoin is his "largest position by far."[2] The headline grabber is the gold comparison, because it gives us a clean back-of-the-envelope target and a very punchy implied Bitcoin price.
Enjoy articles without ads?
Register for free and get unlimited access to all articles.
What Scaramucci actually said, and why it matters
Scaramucci's framing has two parts:
- Network thesis: he echoed Michael Saylor's view that Bitcoin becomes the dominant blockchain network for financial operations over the next decade-plus.
- Valuation anchor: if that plays out, Bitcoin's market value can converge with gold's, which he cited at roughly $35 trillion today.[3]
That second point is doing most of the work, because it translates belief into a number, and markets love a number. Whether you treat it as a forecast, a sales pitch, or just a long-dated narrative trade, it forces the same question: what does "Bitcoin equals gold" mean in dollars per coin?
The implied BTC price if Bitcoin matches gold's market cap
If Bitcoin's total market capitalisation reached $35 trillion, the implied price depends on what you assume for supply.
Using Bitcoin's capped supply (21 million BTC)
- $35,000,000,000,000 / 21,000,000 Bitcoin = about $1,666,667 per Bitcoin
That is the cleanest calculation and the one most people will quote on socials.
Using a more realistic "available" supply (lost coins, dormant coins)
Not every Bitcoin is actually liquid. Coins are lost, keys disappear, and a meaningful chunk sits dormant for years. If you haircut supply to account for that, the implied price rises:
- $35 trillion / 20 million Bitcoin = $1.75 million
- $35 trillion / 19 million Bitcoin = about $1.84 million
So the "Bitcoin catches gold" framing implies roughly $1.7 million to $1.9 million per Bitcoin, depending on how strict you are about effective supply.
A quiet assumption: gold's market cap is not fixed
One caveat that rarely makes it into the viral quote card: Scaramucci referenced gold at around $35 trillion "currently." Over 10 to 15 years, gold's market cap could grow (price appreciation, increased investment demand) or shrink in real terms. If gold is larger by the time Bitcoin is meant to "catch" it, the implied Bitcoin target moves up.
Where this sits versus Scaramucci's prior numbers
The gold-parity math lines up with the broader "million-plus Bitcoin" camp. Scaramucci has previously been associated with targets around $1.5 million per Bitcoin over the long run, which is directionally consistent with the $1.67 million figure that drops out of the $35 trillion assumption.[4] Call it narrative consistency, or call it anchoring. Either way, he is not trimming.
The near-term reality check: narratives do not pay funding
A 15-year timeline is comfortingly long, but traders still have to survive next week. Scaramucci's comment that he "bought the dip" lands in a familiar spot: bullish long-term thesis meeting short-term volatility, with everyone pretending they are fine.
Because the source commentary does not provide specific price levels, funding rates, or open interest figures, it is worth being explicit about what market participants typically monitor around these "buy the dip" moments:
- Key levels: large round numbers and prior swing highs and lows tend to become the battleground because liquidity clusters there. If price is chopping, the "level" is less magic line and more an area where leveraged positions get stressed.
- Funding and basis: when perpetual funding spikes positive, it often means longs are paying up, and a flush becomes more likely. When funding cools or flips, it can signal de-risking and a healthier reset.
- Open interest: rising OI during a sell-off can imply new leverage stepping in early, which is how you get a second leg down. Falling OI alongside stabilising price suggests forced deleveraging has already done some work.
On-chain signals that matter for the "digital gold" thesis
Again, no fresh on-chain metrics were provided in the source, so consider this a practical checklist rather than a claim about today's exact readings.
For the "Bitcoin becomes gold" thesis to keep compounding, these are the on-chain behaviours that usually support it:
- Exchange balances trending down: fewer coins on exchanges can reduce immediate sell pressure (though it can also just mean coins moved to custodians or ETFs, so context matters).
- Long-term holder dominance: when long-term holders are accumulating and not distributing into strength, supply becomes tighter. That is the structural version of "diamond hands," minus the memes.
- Large holder flows: sudden spikes of Bitcoin moving to exchanges often precede volatility. The opposite, large withdrawals after dips, can indicate conviction buying.
- Liquidity concentration: if a large share of supply is illiquid, price can travel further on less volume. That works both ways, up and down.
The real risk: gold parity is a vibes target until adoption looks like plumbing
Matching gold's market cap is not purely a price story. It is also about institutional comfort, regulatory clarity, and financial infrastructure that treats Bitcoin as a core reserve-like asset rather than a high-beta punt.
Three risks deserve to be kept front and centre:
- Time risk: 15 years is a long time for narratives to change, governments to react, and technology stacks to evolve.
- Liquidity risk: Bitcoin is liquid compared with most crypto assets, but it can still gap violently when leverage builds. Gold does not typically do that.
- Thesis drift: "Bitcoin as a financial operations network" is not the same as "Bitcoin as pristine collateral." If the market cannot decide what Bitcoin is for, it may not get paid like gold.
What to watch next (checklist)
- Gold market cap trajectory: does gold expand from today's roughly $35 trillion, or does it stagnate? The target is a moving object.
- Bitcoin custody and rails: growth in institutional-grade custody, settlement, and lending markets that make Bitcoin usable as collateral at scale.
- Signs of leverage overheating: funding spikes, open interest surges, and crowded positioning that can turn "dip buying" into forced selling.
- On-chain exchange inflows: large Bitcoin transfers to exchanges during rebounds, which can hint at distribution rather than accumulation.
- Narrative confirmation: are major allocators talking about Bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset, or just a tactical trade?
Scaramucci's call is the kind of long-duration bet that reads almost boring on paper: Bitcoin slowly eats gold's lunch, one balance sheet at a time. The implied number is not boring, though. If Bitcoin truly reaches gold's current market cap, the maths points to about $1.67 million per Bitcoin, and potentially closer to $1.8 million if you account for coins that are effectively out of circulation. The path between here and there is the bit that tends to liquidate people.
