Analyst Eric Balchunas made a clear assessment against the recent resurgence of the 'Bitcoin tulip mania' comparisons.
In a statement on social media, Balchunas argued that this comparison is historically and financially incorrect.
According to Balchunas, the tulip mania lasted only three years and collapsed with a single blow. In contrast, Bitcoin has managed to rise to new heights after countless sharp declines over 17 years. The analyst stated, 'Bitcoin has taken very severe blows 6-7 times, but it has bounced back each time. This resilience is enough to invalidate the tulip comparison.'
Balchunas pointed out Bitcoin's long-term performance, reminding that it is still over 250% in the last three years and 122% up last year. According to the analyst, the underlying motivation of some commentators is their antipathy towards the asset: 'Some people hate this asset and want to provoke those who love it. This will never change.'
Balchunas described the price correction in 2025 as a normal cooling-off period, stating that the retraction of last year's excessive rise should not be exaggerated. 'Assets cool off from time to time. This is true even for stocks. People analyze this too much,' he said.
Balchunas criticized the argument of Bitcoin being likened to tulip mania as a 'non-productive asset'. He reminded that many assets, like gold, Picasso paintings, and rare stamps, are also non-productive, saying, 'Shall we compare these assets to tulips? Bitcoin is a completely different asset.'
According to the analyst, tulip mania was just a one-time bubble consisting of 'excessive enthusiasm and sudden collapse'; Bitcoin, on the other hand, deserves this comparison as a long-lived, cyclical, and increasingly institutionalized asset class.
Stay tuned for new developments
