Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has joined the ongoing debate on the US crypto reserve. Armstrong has suggested that the US should adopt a Bitcoin-only approach when establishing a national crypto reserve, confirming his stand and support for Bitcoin over the years.
Armstrong was reacting to President Trump’s suggestion that the national crypto reserve hold several altcoins. The CEO has joined several Bitcoiners in condemning the idea of having anything other than Bitcoin in the reserve.
Most people who believe in Bitcoin have said it is the only cryptocurrency worth hosting in the crypto reserve due to its performance over time.
Armstrong’s position has received different feedback, with some users on X bashing his open love for Bitcoin at the expense of other crypto.
However, a number of comments have also supported his idea, stating that only Bitcoin can be characterized as a store of value.
Coinbase CEO champions Bitcoin as the superior reserve asset
Armstrong has openly shown his faith in Bitcoin for a long time. He holds that Bitcoin has unique properties that make it better than other cryptos. For instance, he said Bitcoin scarcity is a strength that can only be compared to Gold. Yet, its portability and divisibility outdo Gold; therefore, it’s best for reserve.
At the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, the CEO expressed optimism about Bitcoin’s ability to surpass Gold in market capitalization.
He is also confident that other countries, including the G20 members, would follow suit if the US Bitcoin were a national reserve.
However, his position contradicts Trump’s broader approach, which aims to support the entire cryptocurrency industry by including a range of digital assets in the reserve. Following Trump’s announcement, Bitcoin’s price surged past $94,000, while Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and Cardano also saw significant gains.
People hold different perspectives on a Bitcoin-only reserve
The debate on Bitcoin-only reserve is not as light as it appears. There are accusations that the government is accommodating altcoins to please institutions that advocate for them. Some people read political undertones on the decision.
Bitcoiners are adamant that there are pointers that make Bitcoin the only worthy crypto. Analysts have predicted Bitcoin to hit $300,000 in 2025, which is enough to have it as a national reserve.
Despite the justifications, people are criticizing having Bitcoin alone in reserve. They argue that having one digital asset, especially Bitcoin, is a big risk due to its volatility. They say that overlooking altcoins will mean losing a big opportunity.
One of the social media users responding to Armstrong’s comments reportedly asked whether it had been a sensible strategy to put all reserves into a single digital asset and pointed out that while Bitcoin dominates the space, diversification is always a key strategy in finance.
Another criticized the creation of a reserve with cryptocurrencies that have proven to be speculative and could jeopardize a country’s financial stability and insisted that Bitcoin is the only viable instrument to enforce monetary sovereignty.
The controversy surrounding the establishment of a US crypto reserve underlines the political economy challenges of incorporating digital assets into national policy in general.
Proponents of a total Bitcoin reserve assert its performance, security, and decentralized nature; others warn that a diversified cache would better reflect and account for digital assets’ simmering volatility and evolving utility.
With Trump’s endorsement of a multi-asset crypto reserve and Armstrong’s call to focus solely on Bitcoin, the US government must make a critical decision. Should it make one bet on Bitcoin or hedge that position with other cryptocurrencies?
Policymakers will need to weigh the long-term economic impact of their decisions as regulatory frameworks come online. Whether Bitcoin is on its own or alongside altcoins, one thing we are sure of is that the debate on crypto reserves has just begun.
* The content presented above, whether from a third party or not, is considered as general advice only. This article should not be construed as containing investment advice, investment recommendations, an offer of or solicitation for any transactions in financial instruments.
