Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) is widely cited as undervalued when measured against traditional stores of value like gold and the broad money supply, according to Samson Mow, the chief executive of Bitcoin technology firm Jan3. In a Saturday post on X, Mow argued that BTC sits roughly 24% to 66% below its trend relative to gold’s market cap or the level of global liquidity, while gold itself appears overextended. The claim adds a contrarian note to ongoing debates about whether crypto markets have found a bottom or are simply pausing before another leg lower or higher.

At the same time, macro price benchmarks paint a mixed picture. Gold futures for April delivery closed at $5,247.90, while tokenized gold offering PAX Gold USD was trading around $5,404.14 as of the time of writing. Against that backdrop, Mow pointed to Bitcoin’s Z-score—a metric that gauges how closely BTC’s current price tracks its long-run average relative to a benchmark, in this case the BTC-to-gold ratio. A Z-score of 0 means the price aligns with the historical average; negative values signal the asset trading below that average.

The Z-score for the BTC-to-gold ratio was around -1.24 at press time, suggesting BTC remains below its historical mean but not by the extreme margins seen in past episodes. Data from TradingView shows that the indicator has swung widely in the past, including moments when the ratio dipped far beneath the norm. In November 2022, for instance, the BTC-to-gold Z-score briefly plunged below -3, a period coinciding with the FTX collapse and a subsequent rally in BTC of more than 150% over the following 12 months.

This history of decisive rebounds after deep dislocations is echoed by earlier cycles. During the Covid crisis in March 2020, the Z-score dipped below -2 and BTC bottomed near $3,717, only to surge more than 300% in the ensuing year, culminating in a then-astronomical peak in November 2021 of around $69,000. Those patterns have led some analysts to draw parallels with today, while others caution that the macro and regulatory landscape has evolved, potentially altering how these signals play out in real time.

While Mow highlights potential upside based on valuation gaps and historical Z-score triggers, others in the market remain wary. A cross-section of analysts has projected further downside for BTC as investor sentiment wavers in the face of geopolitical tension and persistent macro uncertainty. Some believe the market could test lower levels, with discussions framing a possible move toward new lows for the current cycle. Yet even within this more cautious camp, the same data points used by Mow—value signals and on-chain momentum—are often cited as important clues for the next meaningful directional shift.

For context, the broader crypto narrative has included crosscurrents—from tailwinds such as institutional interest and macro liquidity to headwinds like regulatory risk and episodic liquidity squeezes. The focal point for many observers remains Bitcoin’s role as a potential hedge or as a risk-on asset depending on the moment, as well as how it weathers macro shocks and liquidity cycles. The weekend’s developments in the Middle East added another layer of geopolitical risk, underscoring that crypto markets, like traditional markets, are not insulated from global events.

As the debate about BTC’s trajectory evolves, the market is reminded of past cycles where valuation gaps and extreme sentiment extremes have preceded sharp reversals. The question remains whether the current price near the mid-to-high $60,000s will reflect a duration that negates those earlier patterns or whether a more persistent risk-off mood will push Bitcoin toward the lower end of the spectrum before new catalysts emerge.

In sum, while the price action continues to oscillate near current levels, the ongoing discussion about BTC’s fair value relative to gold and the money supply—augmented by Z-score analysis—provides a framework for assessing potential turning points. The next few weeks could test the resilience of the current range, particularly if the BTC-to-gold ratio reverts toward its historic mean or if macro developments reassert their dominance over market sentiment.

The Z-score framework has shown that when BTC-to-gold moves extend beyond historical norms, corrections or rallies often follow in subsequent months. The current reading around -1.24 keeps the door open to a test of higher ground if support holds and risk appetite returns.

Bitcoin to crash to $50,000?

The contrarian view presented here sits against a broader chorus of analysts who warn that more downside could be on the horizon, driven by ongoing investor caution and geopolitical tensions. Several observers have flagged the possibility of BTC tracing a path toward the $50,000 mark, arguing that price action could mirror or exceed prior bear-market patterns as macro data and regulatory signals unfold. By contrast, those who emphasize valuation and historical precedents point to the same indicators that historically preceded significant rallies following sharp declines, suggesting that a bottom could be forming even as volatility remains elevated.

The ongoing debate about BTC’s bottoming process is not just about price—it touches on liquidity dynamics, risk sentiment, and the durability of crypto-specific catalysts such as on-chain activity, mining economics, and institutional participation. As BTC hovers in a range, traders will likely scrutinize key technical levels, the pace of liquidity inflows, and how macro shocks translate into risk-on or risk-off moves across crypto markets.

Ultimately, the discussion centers on how investors interpret valuation signals in the context of a still-fragile macro environment and evolving regulatory expectations. While some forecasts call for a dramatic re-rating, others argue that a sustainable recovery could emerge as confidence builds and fundamentals align with price action. The next leg of this narrative will be shaped by the balance between speculative momentum and real-world utility that continues to define the crypto market’s longer-term trajectory.

Why it matters

Valuation-driven arguments like Mow’s underscore a broader point: crypto markets are not merely driven by narratives or hype but by measurable relationships to broader financial assets. If Bitcoin’s price starts to close the gap with gold and money supply on a sustained basis, it would alter the risk-reward calculus for both retail and institutional participants, potentially reshaping portfolio allocations and hedging strategies.

Moreover, the BTC-to-gold comparison frames how crypto assets are perceived in the context of traditional stores of value. A shift back toward historical norms in this ratio could signal renewed appetite for crypto as a non-sovereign store of value or a diversification vehicle, even as gold remains a familiar anchor for risk management. These dynamics matter not only for traders but also for developers, miners, and fund managers evaluating how crypto markets fit into broader exposure targets.

From a market structure perspective, such signals also influence liquidity flows, cross-asset correlations, and the pace at which crypto products—like ETFs and exchange-based investment vehicles—can attract new money. In an environment where macro volatility is a persistent feature, signals that imply potential volatility compression or expansion will be watched closely by participants seeking to calibrate risk and reward.

What to watch next

• Monitor BTC price action relative to the -2 and -3 Z-score thresholds for BTC-to-gold, noting whether the ratio reverts toward the mean or diverges further.
• Track the BTC-to-gold ratio on TradingView for signs of momentum shifts that align with macro liquidity trends or risk-on/off sentiment shifts.
• Watch macro indicators and regulatory updates that affect crypto liquidity and investor confidence, especially in regions with active policy debates.
• Observe major price drivers such as exchange capital flows, mining economics, and the pace of adoption in institutional and retail channels.

Sources & verification

• Samson Mow, X post discussing Bitcoin valuation relative to gold and global money supply (link provided in original coverage).
• TradingView data for the BTC-to-gold ratio (BTCXAU) used to illustrate the Z-score dynamics.
• Historical references to the FTX collapse and subsequent BTC rally from Cointelegraph coverage.
• Cointelegraph reporting on the Covid-era price dynamics and BTC’s subsequent rally to multi-year highs.
• Link to tokenized Gold price (PAX Gold USD) cited in the market context of gold price benchmarks.

Bitcoin valuation signals and potential reversal

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) sits at a crossroads flagged by valuation comparisons and a momentum metric that has historically preceded meaningful moves. Samson Mow’s main contention is that BTC is notably undervalued relative to gold’s market cap and the broader money supply—an assessment grounded in quantitative gaps rather than pure sentiment. Specifically, he points to a calibration where Bitcoin’s current level is roughly 24% to 66% below its trend line when juxtaposed with gold’s market capitalization or the extent of global liquidity. By contrast, gold, a traditional hedge, is described as overextended in this framing.

The argument leans heavily on the BTC-to-gold Z-score, a gauge of how far the price of BTC deviates from its long-run average when measured against gold. At the moment, the Z-score hovers around -1.24, indicating BTC is below its historical mean but not in territory that has inexorably presaged a parabolic rally. In the past, however, the same metric has signaled powerful reversals: during November 2022, the ratio’s Z-score dipped beneath -3, a backdrop that preceded a roughly 150% advance in BTC over the following year as traders digested the FTX collapse and the broader liquidity environment.

Historical analogies are a recurring feature of crypto markets, and the Covid-19 period is often cited in tandem with the Z-score narrative. In March 2020, the metric slipped below -2 and BTC carved a bottom near $3,717 before staging a multi-hundred percent recovery in the subsequent 12 months, culminating in the 2021 rally that took prices to the vicinity of $69,000. Those episodes illustrate how valuation gaps paired with macro stress can coincide with outsized upside if demand returns and risk appetite stabilizes.

Yet the current cycle carries its own wrinkles. Some analysts project further downside as investors absorb macro uncertainty and geopolitical tensions, with price targets that contemplate a move toward the $50,000 area. Others maintain that the combination of a reversion toward historical norms in BTC’s valuation relative to gold and a renewed willingness to allocate capital to crypto assets could spark a fresh leg higher. The truth likely lies somewhere in between, shaped by how swiftly liquidity conditions normalize, how regulation evolves, and how much on-chain activity confirms sustained network utility.

The price backdrop remains fluid, with BTC trading in the mid- to high-$60,000s and a broader market environment that still rewards resilience and clear catalysts. If the underlying relationships continue to align with past cycles—valuation gaps closing, risk sentiment shifting, and liquidity improving—the potential for a renewed price impulse cannot be discounted. Conversely, if macro headwinds intensify or regulatory constraints tighten, the path could tilt toward range-bound behavior or further corrections. Investors should remain vigilant for shifts in the balance of fear and opportunity that have historically driven crypto volatility.