Bitcoin under supply pressure as gold approaches $23,000 – Do elliptic equation and quantum risks really have an impact?

In the current market environment, Bitcoin is facing a multi-faceted challenge: its price has dropped to $82.65K, while traditional safe-haven assets are booming. Gold continues to hit historic highs, silver surges near $96 per ounce, and the debate over whether risks from quantum computing—especially concerns about elliptic equations in modern cryptography—are the real cause continues to escalate. However, industry experts believe Bitcoin’s weakness is not due to new technological threats but rather the actual market structure.

Bitcoin Falls Behind Gold – The Gap Widens

Since Donald Trump won the November 2024 election, traditional assets have far outpaced cryptocurrencies:

• Bitcoin: −2.6%
• Gold: +83%
• Silver: +205%
• S&P 500: +17.6%
• Nasdaq: +24%

Gold prices have surpassed $4,930 per ounce, reflecting a historic shift in global capital flows. Central banks are accumulating gold at unprecedented rates, while concerns over geopolitical tensions, sovereign debt risks, and the continuous expansion of the money supply (exceeding 10% annually) are driving investors toward traditional hedging tools.

In contrast, Bitcoin is about 30% below its peak reached in October 2025—an indication of its behavior more as a high-risk asset than a safe haven amid today’s unpredictable macroeconomic landscape.

Gold Forecast to Reach $23,000: Is It Just Theory?

While gold continues to advance, optimistic analysts see no signs of stopping. Charles Edwards, founder of Capriole Investments, has made a bold prediction: gold could reach between $12,000 and $23,000 per ounce over the next three to eight years.

Supporting factors for this forecast include:

• Record gold accumulation by global central banks
• Money supply expansion rates exceeding 10% annually
• China increasing its gold reserves nearly tenfold in the past two years
• Waning confidence in government bond markets

“If this cycle reflects the historic asset expansion seen in the 20th century, then gold’s upside potential remains very high,” Edwards writes. Although the monthly RSI for gold has hit its most overbought level since the 1970s, analysts emphasize that this is driven by structural demand, not speculative quick gains.

The Quantum Debate: Elliptic Equations in the Spotlight

Bitcoin’s stagnation has reignited an age-old debate about quantum computing. Nic Carter, partner at Castle Island Ventures, recently revived these concerns, suggesting that threats related to elliptic equations in Bitcoin’s current cryptographic system are being priced into the market.

“I believe Bitcoin’s ‘mysterious’ weakness reflects the increasing market awareness of quantum risks,” Carter said. “It’s still not public knowledge, but the market is speaking—developers are not.”

These statements quickly faced strong opposition from the blockchain community.

Analysts: Market Structure, Not Quantum, Is the Key

Blockchain technology researchers immediately dismissed the idea that fears of quantum threats are the main cause. @Checkmatey from Checkonchain argues that Bitcoin’s behavior reflects supply-driven cycles, an age-old pattern, rather than immature technological threats.

“Gold is rising because governments are buying gold instead of Treasury bonds,” he explains. “Bitcoin isn’t a victim of quantum risk—it’s affected by the massive release of supply from long-term holders (HODLers) in 2025, a force strong enough to beat previous bull markets.”

Bitcoin investor Vijay Boyapati agrees but points out a specific detail: “The real explanation is simple: the massive supply release occurs when we cross a key psychological threshold for large investors—$100,000.”

Blockchain data confirms that long-term holders began distributing Bitcoin as the price approached this six-figure mark, releasing supply to absorb new demand from ETFs and institutional investors, while temporarily limiting upward momentum.

Developers: Quantum Threat Is Still Just Theory – But Solutions Exist

Although the quantum story has gained attention again, most Bitcoin developers see quantum computing as a long-term, manageable risk rather than a short-term market driver.

Theoretical quantum computers could run Shor’s algorithm—a method capable of breaking elliptic curve cryptography used by Bitcoin—but are still far from practical deployment. Adam Back, co-founder of Blockstream, repeatedly emphasizes that even in worst-case scenarios, the entire network wouldn’t be immediately harmed.

To address this risk, BIP-360—a Bitcoin improvement proposal—outlines a roadmap for transitioning to quantum-resistant address formats, allowing gradual upgrades before any real threat materializes. Developers stress that such changes would take years, not market cycles—making quantum risk unlikely to explain Bitcoin’s short-term price weakness.

Financial Analysts’ Concerns – But Time Is Still on the Horizon

While blockchain experts hold differing views, some figures from traditional finance warn about quantum risks. Christopher Wood, strategist at Jefferies, recently removed Bitcoin from his sample investment portfolio, citing concerns over long-term quantum threats.

However, industry professionals note that the real challenge isn’t whether Bitcoin can adapt but how long the upgrade process will take. The timeframe is measured in decades, not quarters—a too-long horizon to influence current market dynamics.

Bitcoin Stuck in a Macro Environment – Support Levels and Outlook

Currently, traders see Bitcoin still heavily influenced by macro factors:

• Rising global bond yields
• Prolonged trade tensions and geopolitical instability
• Shift of sovereignty from bonds to gold
• Focus on capital preservation rather than speculative growth

Instead of focusing on long-term risks like quantum computing, traders are monitoring key technical support levels. Bitcoin needs to regain the $91,000–$93,500 zone to restore upward momentum. If it cannot hold this range, the next support levels are at $85,000–$88,000.

Until monetary or geopolitical environments stabilize, Bitcoin is likely to remain reactive rather than proactive—while gold continues to benefit from the historic shift in global capital flows.