According to Eric Balchunas, Bloomberg’s ETF expert, Bitcoin’s longevity and strength over the years make it unsuitable for comparison with the “Tulip Bubble.”
“I personally would not compare Bitcoin to tulips, no matter how severe the sell-off,” said the senior ETF analyst on Sunday.
Balchunas highlighted that while the tulip market rose and fell within a mere three years—“punched once in the face and knocked out”—Bitcoin (BTC) has “returned from like six to seven punches to achieve all-time highs and has endured for 17 years.”
“The endurance alone necessitates distancing it from tulips, especially considering it’s still up about 250% [over the] past three years and increased 122% last year.”
Some individuals simply disdain this asset and aim to provoke its supporters, a sentiment Balchunas believes will likely persist.
Earlier this month, “The Big Short” investor Michael Burry called it “the tulip bulb of our time.” In 2017, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon famously stated Bitcoin was “worse than tulip bulbs” and a “fraud.”
Tulips pumped and dumped in three years
The Dutch tulip mania was a speculative frenzy in the Netherlands during the Dutch Golden Age. Tulip bulbs, initially from Turkey, became status symbols for affluent Dutch merchants.
Price surges began in 1634, reaching peak frenzy in 1636 when certain rare tulip bulbs fetched more than a house in Amsterdam. The bubble burst suddenly in 1637, with prices crashing by over 90% in mere weeks.
Related: ‘Rich Dad, Poor Dad’ author warns Bitcoin ‘bubble’ could burst soon
The tulip mania is often referenced as one of history’s earliest documented speculative bubbles and contributed to the famous pump and dump chart pattern.
Bitcoin and Tulips: a flawed comparison
Balchunas mentioned that Bitcoin has merely relinquished the extreme excesses of the previous year.
Thus, even if 2025 ends with flat or slightly down numbers, BTC is still around 50% of its annual average. Assets often need to cool off occasionally, including stocks, and he believes people are “overanalyzing it.”
The ETF analyst also challenged claims regarding Bitcoin’s non-productive nature.
“Yes, Bitcoin and tulips are both non-productive assets. But so is gold, so is a Picasso painting, rare stamps—would you liken those to tulips? Not all assets must be productive to have value.”
Tulips were characterized by euphoria and a crash; Bitcoin represents a “different animal.”
Garry Krug, head of strategy at German Bitcoin treasury company Aifinyo, agreed, stating, “Bubbles don’t endure through multiple cycles, regulatory challenges, geopolitical pressures, halvings, exchange failures, and still return to new highs.”
Magazine: 6 reasons Jack Dorsey is definitely Satoshi… and 5 reasons he’s not
