Hedge Fund Star: Bitcoin Headed to Zero Despite Hype

Peter Schiff, a prominent hedge fund manager and vocal Bitcoin critic, has reiterated his prediction that the world's largest cryptocurrency will eventually plummet to zero. In a recent discussion with investor Sujal Jethwani, Schiff argued that Bitcoin's value proposition remains fundamentally flawed, regardless of its widespread adoption and trading volume.

Bitcoin has faced significant pressure lately, dipping below $63,000 last weeka sharp 50% decline from its October peak of $124,000. This volatility underscores Schiff's longstanding skepticism, as he maintains the asset lacks intrinsic worth.

Schiff acknowledges Bitcoin won't vanish immediately due to global demand but insists its trajectory points to worthlessness. 'Eventually it will be at zero,' he stated, noting that even prices like $100 or $1,000 would equate to 'a lot of value for basically nothing.'

For investors, the distinction blurs at ultra-low levels. Schiff illustrated: 'If you invest a million dollars in Bitcoin, and it's worth a hundred bucks... does it really matter if it goes to zero? It's only a hundred-dollar difference.' He predicts massive capital wipeouts, even if not within the next 5-10 years.

Bitcoin's price action reflects broader market dynamics. After surging to $124,000, it has endured some of its worst wipeouts in years, highlighting inherent volatility. Critics like Schiff point to this as evidence of fragility, arguing no underlying utility supports sustained value.

Yet, Bitcoin's resilience stems from network effects: millions hold it as a store of value or hedge against fiat currencies. Institutional interest via spot ETFs has driven adoption, though it introduces new risks like mechanical redemptions during risk-off periods.

• Base Case ($100K-$110K): Flat-to-moderate ETF inflows, stable real yields, no regulatory shocks.
• Bull Case ($150K-$180K): Renewed liquidity fuels strong ETF demand; Bitcoin re-rates as a core portfolio asset.
• Bear Case ($60K-$75K): Prolonged risk-off, tighter policy, or geopolitical tensions trigger ETF outflows.

These projections from 21Shares emphasize flows and macro factors over narrative hype, marking Bitcoin's evolution into a 'flow-driven macro asset.'

Market voices like Jeff Park of ProCap Financial highlight 2026 as pivotal, with bets on heightened volatility across risk assets. Investors may see 40% drawdowns as the 'new 80%,' driven by portfolio rotations and institutional resets.

ETFs have institutionalized Bitcoin but amplify reflexivity: risk-off triggers sell-offs, testing long-term holder absorption. Miner stress could force sales if prices hit cash costs, adding downward pressure.

Schiff's view hinges on Bitcoin's non-productive natureno cash flows, dividends, or utility beyond speculation. He contrasts it with gold, which he favors for tangible scarcity. Detractors counter that Bitcoin's fixed 21 million supply and decentralization provide digital gold-like properties, enhanced by Lightning Network scalability and growing DeFi integrations.

Historical cycles show Bitcoin rebounding from 80-90% drops, fueled by halvings and adoption waves. The 2024 halving's influence may wane by early 2026, shifting focus to ETF dynamics and global liquidity.

• ETF outflows in risk-off environments.
• Miner capitulation at low prices.
• Regulatory hurdles or geopolitical shocks.
• Macro tightening curbing liquidity.

Optimists eye institutional inflows and Bitcoin's role in portfolio optimization, potentially drawing fresh capital as older positions reset.

Schiff's warning serves as a reality check amid hype. While a zero-price scenario seems extreme, severe drawdowns remain plausible given crypto's youth. Diversification, position sizing, and understanding macro drivers are crucial.

Bitcoin enters 2026 post-halving, with ETF gravity battling macro ceilings. Sustained net inflows signal strength; outflows spell trouble. Volatility bets underscore uncertainty, but capital rotation could sustain upside.

For bears like Schiff, time favors their thesis; for bulls, adoption trumps critique. The market will decide, but history favors survivors adapting to flows over ideology.