Key takeaways

• The 2026 Iran conflict created a major geopolitical shock that triggered volatility across global markets. It pushed investors to reassess traditional safe-haven assets such as gold and emerging alternatives like Bitcoin.

• Gold initially benefited from safe-haven demand but later declined as the US dollar strengthened and bond yields rose. This showed that macroeconomic forces can override crisis-driven buying.

• Bitcoin experienced volatility but recovered quickly, reflecting its growing role as an alternative asset. However, its price movements remained closely tied to market sentiment and liquidity conditions.

• The strength of the US dollar played a key role in shaping both gold and Bitcoin’s performance, as rising demand for dollar liquidity influenced global asset flows.

Throughout history, geopolitical conflicts and periods of political instability have consistently triggered shifts in financial markets. When geopolitical tensions escalate, investors often seek to safeguard their capital by reallocating into perceived safe-haven assets that are expected to hold or increase in value during uncertain periods.

Gold has long been the benchmark safe-haven asset, prized for its scarcity, universal acceptance and track record as a store of value. In recent years, however, the rise of Bitcoin (BTC) has prompted widespread debate. Could this decentralized digital currency eventually assume a comparable role as a modern, borderless alternative?

This article explains how Bitcoin and gold responded differently to the geopolitical shock of the Iran war. It analyzes their price movements, market behavior and safe-haven roles, and examines what this divergence reveals about investor sentiment, liquidity dynamics and the evolving debate between traditional and digital stores of value.

2026 Iran conflict: A major geopolitical shock that rattled global markets

The 2026 Iran conflict offered a high-profile, real-time case study to examine whether Bitcoin behaved like a safe-haven asset. The conflict sent shockwaves through financial markets worldwide. Escalating military actions and threats to close the Strait of Hormuz sparked fears of major disruptions to energy supplies. About 20% of the world’s oil is estimated to pass through this crucial waterway, making it highly important for global energy markets.

As tensions grew, oil prices rose sharply, and financial markets turned highly volatile. Stock indexes around the world declined as investors reevaluated risks related to inflation, supply chains and future economic growth.

In times of such uncertainty, investors typically turn to assets seen as reliable stores of value. On this occasion, however, the response across different asset classes was more complex than usual.

Gold’s mixed performance as a safe-haven asset

At first, gold reacted as expected during a geopolitical crisis. Demand increased as investors sought safety amid the uncertainty.

As the conflict worsened, gold prices climbed higher while traders shifted funds into traditional safe-haven assets.

However, the upward movement in gold did not last long. Gold prices later dropped significantly when the US dollar strengthened and US Treasury yields rose. These factors often make the precious metal less attractive since it pays no interest or dividends.

At one point, gold fell more than 1% even as tensions continued to escalate. This highlighted how broader economic pressures, such as changes in interest rates or currency strength, can sometimes override safe-haven buying in the short term.

Such swings demonstrated that even a long-established crisis hedge like gold can experience temporary ups and downs when investors focus on liquidity needs or react to shifts in macroeconomic conditions.

Why investors sometimes sell gold during crises

One notable aspect of the recent Iran conflict shock was that investors temporarily sold off gold along with other assets. During periods of of extreme market uncertainty and panic, investors tend to prioritize raising cash urgently rather than holding commodities or securities.

During the early phase of the conflict, the surge in demand for US dollars and overall liquidity temporarily surpassed the appeal of gold as a safe haven. Moreover, soaring oil prices fueled inflation concerns, which drove bond yields higher and added further downward pressure on gold prices.

This pattern highlights a key insight. Gold has historically been viewed as a long-term hedge against geopolitical instability and economic turmoil. However, in the initial stages of a crisis, investors frequently favor immediate cash and liquidity to manage risks, margin calls or portfolio adjustments.

Did you know? The US holds the largest gold reserves in the world, about 8,133 metric tons. This accounts for roughly 78% of its official foreign reserves, highlighting how deeply gold remains embedded in the global monetary system.

Bitcoin’s reaction to the crisis: Volatile yet resilient

Bitcoin responded differently from gold during the conflict. In the opening phase of the geopolitical escalation, cryptocurrencies experienced sharp volatility as traders broadly reduced risk exposure and de-risked their portfolios.

That said, Bitcoin recovered after the initial volatility. Feb. 28, 2026, when the war began, Bitcoin reached a low of $63,106. By March 5, 2026, it had rebounded to $73,156 and then followed a steady trajectory to $71,226 by March 10, 2026.

Bitcoin’s price path signals renewed investor interest in alternative hedges against economic and geopolitical instability. Historically, Bitcoin’s price action has remained closely linked to overall market sentiment and prevailing liquidity conditions rather than being driven solely by geopolitical risks.

Did you know? Central banks around the world collectively hold around 36,000 metric tons of gold in their reserves, making it one of the most important reserve assets after the US dollar.

The role of US dollar strength

A key factor affecting both assets was the performance of the US dollar during the conflict. As investors scrambled for liquidity and perceived stability, the dollar strengthened significantly. Since gold is priced in dollars on global markets, a rising dollar generally exerts downward pressure on gold prices by making it more expensive for holders of other currencies.

Bitcoin is also sensitive to dollar dynamics. When capital flows toward traditional safe havens such as cash and reserve currencies during periods of uncertainty, demand for cryptocurrencies can soften temporarily, contributing to price weakness.

These interconnected factors, including dollar strength, liquidity preferences and risk-off sentiment, help explain the performance of gold and Bitcoin in this scenario. They also clarify why neither gold nor Bitcoin delivered a clean, sustained safe-haven rally during the initial phase of the conflict, despite their differing long-term characteristics.

Oil and inflation fears drove much of the market response

Energy markets were a dominant force shaping investor behavior during the conflict. The escalation drove oil prices higher, fueled by concerns over potential disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Any significant interruption in this critical chokepoint can elevate global energy and transportation costs, feeding into broader inflation pressures worldwide.

While inflation expectations tend to support gold over the longer term as a classic inflation hedge, they can produce the opposite effect in the short term. Rising inflation fears often prompt central banks or markets to anticipate tighter monetary policy, pushing interest rates and bond yields higher. Higher yields make interest-bearing assets more competitive relative to non-yielding commodities such as gold, creating downward pressure on gold prices in the near term.

Bitcoin’s link to inflation expectations is far less consistent. Bitcoin is generally viewed as a high-beta asset rather than a mature inflation hedge. As a result, its response to inflation signals tends to be more erratic and influenced by prevailing risk sentiment.

Did you know? Gold’s role as a safe-haven asset became especially visible during financial crises such as the Great Depression, when governments restricted private gold ownership to control capital flows and stabilize monetary systems.

What the divergence reveals about safe-haven status

The Iran conflict highlighted a fundamental difference between established and emerging safe-haven assets.

Gold is deeply embedded in the global financial and monetary architecture. Its centuries-long history, widespread accumulation by central banks and enduring role as a reserve asset provide strong credibility and trust during periods of geopolitical or economic stress.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, exists within a comparatively young and evolving digital financial ecosystem. Its price movements are shaped not only by geopolitical events but also by factors such as network adoption, regulatory developments, technological milestones and overall investor risk appetite across traditional and crypto markets.

This structural difference helps explain why Bitcoin and gold show distinct responses during the early stages of a crisis.

A real-world test of the “digital gold” narrative

For years, Bitcoin advocates have positioned it as “digital gold,” referring to a modern, decentralized alternative to the traditional safe-haven asset. The Iran conflict offered a real-world test of this claim.

While Bitcoin showed resilience during the war, its behavior diverged from that of a classic safe-haven instrument. Gold’s price action, however, remained anchored in familiar macroeconomic drivers such as dollar strength, inflation expectations and bond yield movements. Bitcoin’s volatility and recovery were shaped more by shifting investor sentiment, risk appetite and prevailing liquidity dynamics across broader markets.

This episode indicates that Bitcoin, while demonstrating growing credibility as a store of value under pressure, has not yet fully matured into a consistent safe-haven asset. Instead, it continues to evolve as a hybrid asset within the global financial system.

Capital rotation is becoming increasingly visible across the meme coin sector as traders reassess where the next major opportunities may emerge. Dogecoin remains far below its 2021 peak, still trading near the $0.09 level after losing more than 75% of its all-time high value. Pepe is facing similar pressure, with recent market activity highlighting that PEPE continues to trade deep below its previous highs as sentiment across meme tokens cools.

As volatility continues to shake confidence in purely momentum-driven assets, many investors are beginning to look toward projects built around real-world utility. One project drawing increasing attention is Remittix, whose RTX token is currently in the final stage of its presale. With a live PayFi platform targeting the $50 billion global remittance fee market and only $6 million remaining in the current allocation, the shift in investor focus is becoming more noticeable. Here’s how Dogecoin, Pepe, and Remittix currently compare as the market narrative begins to evolve.

Dogecoin: Bearish Structure Despite Whale Accumulation

The Dogecoin price opened 2026 around $0.118 and has since fallen to about $0.095 in an extended downtrend that began after DOGE failed to get back above $0.25 in early 2025. Technical indicators are still bearish. 19 of 28 signals are flashing red and the Fear and Greed Index for Dogecoin price movement is at 18.

There are counterpoints. Whales purchased 1.7 billion DOGE worth $285 million in early March, and analyst Javon Marks has identified a bullish reversal on the monthly chart with targets as high as $1.25. The beta launch of X Money on Elon Musk’s platform also briefly lifted the Dogecoin price. But sustained momentum has not followed.

Dogecoin price predictions range from $0.10 to $0.19 and these are conservative scenarios offering limited upside for traders accustomed to parabolic rallies. That tepid outlook is one reason former DOGE holders now buy RTX tokens instead.

Pepe News: Liquidity Drains as the Meme Fades

The news about Pepe just now proves what many dreaded. PEPE is trading at approximately $0.0000033 which is lower as compared to its highest point of $0.0000280. The market cap has been shrinking to $1.4 billion and 22 out of 30 technical indicators are bearish. Liquidity has been meager with reserved spirit extending to Q4 2025.

Optimistic Pepe news entails long term projections. Changelly is projecting a recovery to $0.0000098 by December 2026 should the conditions improve. CoinPedia expects to get between $0.0000037 and $0.0000073 this year.

But without utility or a revenue model, PEPE remains dependent on social media cycles. That fragility is why Pepe news headlines mention capital rotation into utility tokens and why traders are instead buying RTX tokens as a hedge against meme fatigue.

Remittix: The Utility Play Drawing Meme Coin Profits

While meme-coin speculation continues to dominate social feeds, a growing number of traders are quietly reallocating profits into projects with clearer utility. That shift has become particularly visible among Dogecoin and Pepe holders, many of whom are now accumulating Remittix  as the project’s presale moves toward its closing phase.

The interest is not purely speculative. Remittix is positioning itself within the rapidly emerging PayFi sector, focusing on infrastructure that allows cryptocurrencies to interact more seamlessly with traditional financial systems. Instead of relying on hype cycles, the platform is designed to enable direct crypto-to-fiat settlement, a function that addresses one of the most persistent frictions in digital asset adoption.

Five Core Remittix features explain why:

•  Crypto-to-Fiat Bridge Across 30+ Currencies. Users send payments in over 100 cryptocurrencies and recipients receive local bank deposits with same-day processing.
•  CertiK Grade A Security. Remittix ranks number one among pre-launch tokens on CertiK Skynet with full team verification.
• Zero Foreign-Exchange Fees. A flat-rate model eliminates the hidden charges that traditional remittance providers depend on.
• Staking Yields Up to 18% APY. No buy or sell tax on RTX, zero vesting for presale buyers, and tiered staking from 4% to 18%.
• Confirmed Exchange Listings. BitMart and LBank are locked in, with a third major listing expected at the $30 million milestone.

For traders watching the Dogecoin price stagnate and reading Pepe news about contracting liquidity, the chance to buy RTX tokens represents a fundamentally different proposition.

Remittix Opportunity: Where DOGE and PEPE Stand Today

Analysts have expressed optimism that Dogecoin price may recover if whale accumulation translates into buying pressure, and positive Pepe news could surface if meme sentiment cycles back. But neither asset offers the structural utility that investors increasingly demand.

Investors currently buying RTX tokens are betting on a different thesis: that a working payments platform with audited security and confirmed listings will outperform speculation over the medium term. With the presale in its final stage, a limited-time 15% affiliate bonus paid in USDT and claimable every 24 hours, gives participants an additional reason to act before the window closes.

Discover the future of PayFi with Remittix by checking out their project here:

Website: https://remittix.io/

Socials: https://linktr.ee/remittix

Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.

Bitcoin could eventually reach $1 million per coin if it captures a larger share of the global store-of-value market currently dominated by gold and government bonds, according to Bitwise Asset Management CIO Matt Hougan.

In a report earlier this week, Hougan said bitcoin’s long-term upside depends less on short-term market cycles and more on how much of the world’s wealth preservation market the cryptocurrency absorbs over time.

“One million sounds crazy,” said Hougan. “It implies bitcoin will rise 14x from today’s price.”

He pointed to several factors supporting that forecast, among them the rapid growth of the global store-of-value market, including gold, government bonds and other defensive assets, which has expanded from roughly $2.5 trillion in 2004 to nearly $40 trillion today. Bitcoin currently represents only about 4% of that market by value.

If the largest cryptocurrency were to capture roughly half of that market under current conditions, its price could approach that $1 million mark within roughly a decade, Hougan said. If the broader store-of-value market continues expanding, bitcoin would require a smaller share to reach that level.

The $1 million price fixation

The $1 million forecast has become a recurring theme across the crypto industry. President Donald Trump’s son Eric recently doubled down on his $1 million BTC call. In August, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said bitcoin could reach that price by 2030.

Jack Dorsey, who ran X (formerly Twitter) until 2021 and co-founded payments firm Block (formerly Square), said bitcoin could reach $1 million in five years. Arthur Hayes, former BitMEX CEO, believes it could come as soon as 2028. Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest projected that bitcoin could reach $3.8 million by the end of the decade. Bernstein in 2024 forecast $1 million by 2033.

So why has the $1 million target become such a widely cited benchmark for bitcoin? CoinDesk asked several market analysts.

“It’s a clean headline and shorthand for the idea that Bitcoin could rival gold as a store of value. The exact number matters less than the share of global wealth Bitcoin captures,” said Mati Greenspan, market analyst and Quantum Economics founder.

For Jason Fernandes, also a market analyst and an AdLunam co-founder, the milestone is more psychological than a precise valuation target, reflecting the belief that bitcoin could ultimately win the store-of-value debate.

However, he also believes part of the narrative is driven by marketing dynamics. “Some of the narrative is promotional because round numbers travel well and align with holder incentives,” Fernandes said, though he added that the underlying thesis is not purely hype.

“I think many investors make a ‘static denominator’ mistake, valuing bitcoin against today’s store-of-value market instead of a much larger future one,” he said.

For Fernandes, the real question is not whether $1 million bitcoin is theoretically possible, but whether institutional adoption compounds long enough to justify that price.

Analysts agree on direction, but not the timeline

Some of the analysts who shared their comments with CoinDesk said Hougan’s projection is plausible over the long term, though most frame it as a decade-scale adoption story rather than a near-term forecast.

“Geopolitical tension strengthens the Bitcoin thesis,” said Greenspan. “In uncertain times, investors look for neutral stores of value, and Bitcoin increasingly sits in that bucket alongside gold.”

Greenspan said the milestone is possible but would likely take a decade or more, requiring continued institutional adoption and broader regulatory clarity.

Fernandes said Hougan’s argument is essentially a market-share thesis. Bitcoin does not need to replace gold outright, he said; it only needs to capture a portion of a growing global store-of-value market.

“A $1 million bitcoin assumes long-term adoption and market-share gains within the global store-of-value market,” Fernandes said. “It’s a thesis about bitcoin’s end state if it matures into a major global monetary asset.”

Institutional adoption remains the key driver

Hougan has argued that bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million coins and its decentralized network give it characteristics similar to those of traditional stores of value, such as gold.

Fernandes said the long-term $1 million thesis depends largely on continued institutional adoption and growth in the global store-of-value market.

“BTC doesn’t need to replace gold or fiat; it only needs to capture about 17% of a projected $121 trillion store-of-value market over the next decade to justify a $1 million price,” Fernandes said.

Greenspan said geopolitical uncertainty could further strengthen bitcoin’s appeal as a neutral asset.

“In uncertain times, investors look for neutral stores of value, and bitcoin increasingly sits in that bucket alongside gold,” he said, though he added that reaching such a valuation would likely take years of sustained adoption.

Nima Beni, founder of Bitlease, said the timeline could accelerate if confidence in traditional financial assets weakens.

“Bitcoin reaches $1 million when confidence in traditional ‘safe’ assets breaks,” he said, pointing to potential sovereign debt crises or disruptions in the gold market as possible catalysts.

Despite the bullish projections, analysts said bitcoin’s path toward such valuations would depend more on long-term adoption and macroeconomic conditions than on short-term market cycles.

New forensic findings from the phone of crypto lobbyist Mauricio Novelli have revealed a draft document suggesting a possible $5 million agreement connected to Argentine President Javier Milei’s promotion of the Libra token, according to local media reports.

The document, recovered from Novelli’s iPhone during a judicial investigation into the Libra crypto scandal, outlines a three-part payment structure totaling $5 million. Screenshots of the note surfaced after expert materials held by prosecutor Eduardo Taiano since November were made public, Argentine outlet El Destape reported.

The draft note was reportedly written in English on Feb. 11, 2025, just three days before Milei posted about the Libra token on X. “Hello friends, this is the final agreement discussed with H,” the text begins, which is believed to refer to crypto entrepreneur Hayden Davis.

The document then details the payment structure. “$1.5M of liquid tokens or cash as an advance. $1.5M in liquid tokens or cash = Milei announces on Twitter that his advisor is Hayden Davis/Kelsier/the Davis family. $2M in tokens or cash = contract signed in person with Milei for blockchain/AI consulting for the Argentine government and/or Javier Milei and review with Javier and Karina,” the text reads.

Notably, the draft note does not specify who would receive the funds.

Related: Argentina turns up the heat in Libra scandal with sweeping asset freeze

Another note outlines crisis message after scandal

Investigators also recovered a separate note drafted on Feb. 16, 2025, two days after the Libra controversy erupted online. The message appears to outline a public statement intended to calm the situation.

“This is what I want for the tweet. This is the only thing that saves him, me, and us,” the note’s translation from Spanish reads. The draft message then states support for the Libra project while denying any financial involvement and attributing accusations of wrongdoing to political opponents.

Authorities believe the message may have been prepared for Milei to post on social media or reference in an interview, according to local media reports.

Novelli was in Dallas during the token’s launch. Call records show he communicated with Milei and his sister Karina shortly before and after the president’s social media post about the token. As the controversy spread online, Novelli also held multiple calls with presidential adviser Santiago Caputo while the government managed the crisis.

Related: Argentine exchange Ripio bets on peso stablecoins amid cautious 2026 outlook

Libra hit $4 billion after Milei post before crashing

In February last year, Milei posted on X about the Libra (LIBRA) memecoin, which briefly reached a $4 billion market capitalization before plunging 94% within hours.