Billionaire investor Ray Dalio cautioned that Bitcoin is unlikely to be a dependable long-term store of value or safe haven, pointing to limited central bank support, shortcomings on privacy, and potential future threats from quantum computing.
Speaking on the All-In Podcast, Dalio rejected the label digital gold, saying there is only one gold. He argued that gold remains the most established form of money and is the second-largest reserve asset held by central banks, and he questioned why central banks would prefer to buy and hold Bitcoin over the long term.
Dalio has previously acknowledged some of Bitcoin’s hard-money characteristics and has noted its strong correlation with technology stocks. He warned that ownership dynamics can amplify market moves — for example, forced selling in one area can ripple across other assets and change supply-and-demand balances.
He also raised privacy concerns, noting that transactions can be monitored, and warned that advances in quantum computing could create security risks for the network.
In July, Dalio recommended investors consider roughly a 15% allocation to Bitcoin or gold as part of a portfolio designed to optimize return relative to risk amid worries about U.S. national debt and currency debasement. Between July and early October both Bitcoin and gold rose, but a broader crypto market crash wiped out nearly $20 billion in leveraged positions and the assets later diverged.
Since its October peak, Bitcoin has fallen more than 45% to around $68,420, while gold has continued to climb, rising roughly 30% to about $5,120 in the same period.
Dalio has additionally warned that the U.S.-dominated world order has eroded, urging investors to rethink how they preserve wealth amid mounting geopolitical tensions and economic disorder. He reiterated that stores of value—particularly gold—remain his preferred hedge when currencies weaken and credit systems come under strain, since debt assets become more vulnerable in uncertain times.
The original report emphasized independent, transparent reporting and encouraged readers to verify information against the publisher’s editorial policy.