Towards a trillion dollars: Two divergent paths in extreme wealth accumulation

Written by: Liam Akiba Wright | Translation: Saoirse, Foresight News

When we talk about who will reach the first trillion dollars—Elon Musk or the Ethereum network—we are not facing a dispute between “individual heroes” and “decentralized technology,” but a competition between two entirely different mechanisms: “highly convex stock option yields” versus “gradual adoption of the crypto network.”

The financial engineering behind Elon Musk’s fortune

In November, Tesla shareholders approved a long-term compensation plan that could exponentially multiply Elon Musk’s wealth. If all operational milestones are met, his net worth could surpass one trillion dollars. Over 75% of votes supported this scheme structured around stock options, not cash bonuses.

The mechanism is clear: compensation depends on meeting specific thresholds. Tesla must reach a market capitalization close to $8.5 trillion, implement scalable autonomous driving, and mass-produce humanoid robots like Optimus. Achieving these milestones could give Musk a stake of around 25%, generating values that rival entire markets.

To put it in context: SpaceX is already valued at around $350 billion in private markets, with optimistic projections placing it near a trillion by 2030 in defense and satellite connectivity sectors. xAI, his artificial intelligence company founded in 2023, ranges between $75 billion and $200 billion.

The regulatory bottleneck no one mentioned

However, here is the crucial detail that changes everything: Elon Musk’s wealth depends directly on regulatory decisions, not just technological development. In California, Tesla currently holds only a “driver safety test permit” from the Department of Motor Vehicles. To operate robotaxis at a commercial scale, it requires independent approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) continues its review of the “fully autonomous driving” function. The timeline of these approvals, more than any press conference, will determine whether this compensation plan is actually executed.

Ethereum’s race: gradual adoption versus regulatory jumps

Ethereum presents a structural contrast. Its current market capitalization stands at $376.56 billion, well below the personal fortune Musk could accumulate even in conservative scenarios. Bitcoin, on the other hand, leads with $1.813 trillion, the only cryptocurrency that surpasses Musk’s projected trajectory.

For Ethereum to reach a valuation of one trillion dollars within the next decade—assuming Tesla does not exceed $3 trillion—its price should approach around $10,000 (considering between 120 and 125 million tokens in circulation).

But the dynamic is inversely proposed: Ethereum grows through cumulative adoption, protocol performance, and market liquidity. Musk grows through “all-or-nothing inflection points”—if Optimus works, the jump is exponential; if it fails, the collateral is enormous.

Three scenarios: how likely are they really?

Conservative scenario (2035): Autonomous driving is delayed, Optimus remains niche. Tesla reaches $3 trillion, contributing about $750 billion to Musk; SpaceX adds $500 billion; xAI between $50-100 billion. Remaining: about $1.3-1.35 trillion (before taxes and exercise costs). It may not surpass the trillion threshold. For Ethereum at a $5,000 price: market cap of about $625 billion. Ethereum loses.

Most probable baseline scenario (more likely): Tesla reaches $5 trillion, Optimus is first implemented in factories, energy expansion. Musk’s shares in Tesla generate $1.25-1.45 trillion; SpaceX adds another $1 trillion; xAI totals $200 billion. Would surpass one trillion dollars. Ethereum at $10,000 would reach about $1.2-1.25 trillion. Tied results or a marginal victory for Musk.

Optimistic scenario: Tesla hits $8.5 trillion, robotaxis are widely adopted, humanoid robots are in production. SpaceX approaches $2.5 trillion, xAI exceeds $500 billion. Musk’s wealth reaches several trillion. Ethereum has no mechanism to compete at this scale.

The real risk: how extreme power rewrites the rules

What is fascinating is that Musk’s growth does not depend solely on markets but on regulatory frameworks that can be changed. Political science research shows that policy outcomes disproportionately respond to the preferences of wealthy elites. Extreme concentration of wealth translates into lasting political influence.

Recent surveys show that most people believe billionaires do not contribute enough to society. UK studies reveal public concern over the excessive political influence of the super-rich. This is not media abstraction: it directly affects public budgets, election results, and social debt.

The numerical gap that almost no one understands

According to 2025 data, there are 3,028 billionaires worldwide. Given a global population of 8,230 million, only one in every 2.7 million people is a billionaire. There are currently no trillionaires.

Global family wealth totals $450 trillion. One trillion dollars represents only 0.22% of that total. The median adult wealth worldwide is just “a few thousand dollars.” A fortune of one trillion dollars equals the combined wealth of between 100 and 130 million middle-class adults.

The leap from millionaire to billionaire is already extraordinarily unlikely. Considering a trillion as a “public goal” makes no numerical sense.

Two mechanisms, two futures

For Ethereum to surpass Musk, the network must rely on “sustained adoption, technical performance, and market liquidity”—variables that are distributed, organic, and complex to predict. For Musk to accumulate more than a trillion, it depends on “specific technological advances and concentrated regulatory approval”—variables more controllable by a single actor but also more fragile.

One can admire Musk’s execution capacity without fostering the “culture of worshiping the rich,” which historically weakens support for progressive tax systems and amplifies the political influence of elites.

The question that really matters

In the end, regardless of who crosses the trillion-dollar line first, the fundamental question remains: what system do we want to delegate power to? One built on concentrated individual ambition, or one emerging from collective identification and participation?

The answer we give will shape not only these wealth competitions but also the political and economic structure of the next decade.