Bitcoin vs the AI bubble: which one is more speculative?

What makes an asset more speculative in a Bitcoin or AI bubble?

An asset is speculative to the extent that its price rests on the expectation of a higher future price instead of on the income it produces. The more of the price that rests on that expectation, the more speculative the asset. This definition lets you compare Bitcoin and AI on one scale without taking sides in the debate.

Five tests turn the definition into measurements: the presence of cash flow, the size of price swings, the existence of an anchor in fundamentals, the identity of the holders, and the availability of evidence. Each test gives a reading from low to high, and the readings add up to a profile you can set side by side.

Does Bitcoin or the AI bubble produce cash flow?

Bitcoin carries no revenue stream of its own, so a holder earns only if the price rises. This puts it at the high end of the speculation scale on the first test. The EQOS Asia crypto study acknowledges real activity around it, such as institutional adoption and tokenisation, and that activity builds ecosystems around the asset without paying holders an income.

AI products sell services to customers, so AI companies can show revenue and earnings. The first test therefore scores AI lower. The reading is not complete, though, because the EQOS Asia AI study records about $200B a year invested and 95% of projects failing in production. Revenue exists, and the question is whether it is large enough for the valuations.

How large are the price swings of Bitcoin compared with the AI bubble?

The crypto study records Bitcoin volatility at about 30% per month and scores stability at 0.300, exactly at the critical line. A swing of that size makes any position hard to plan around. A holder who needs the money in a given month faces a wide range of outcomes, so the asset tests a treasury more than almost any other.

AI valuations also moved fast, rising ×4 in 18 months, yet the swing comes from a rise over many months, not from a monthly oscillation of 30%. Compare the two by writing the range of outcomes over your own holding period, then sizing the position to the worst reading. A long horizon softens the problem only if you can wait.

Which Bitcoin or AI bubble price has an anchor in fundamentals?

An anchor is a number that pulls price back toward value, such as earnings, book value, or sales. AI valuations can be compared with revenue per customer, and the comparison shows when a price has drifted far. Bitcoin has no such number, so its anchor is demand, which moves with sentiment.

The study measures the effect in another way. It scores Bitcoin coherence at 0.380 because the claim of decentralisation sits beside 3 exchanges handling 70% of volume. A gap between claim and structure weakens the anchor further. For AI, the equivalent gap is between the strategy that firms announce and the projects that reach production.

Who holds Bitcoin and who holds the AI bubble?

The crypto study cites the UK FCA on retail results: 80% of retail investors lose money. A holder base weighted toward individuals with limited information raises speculation, because such buyers follow price. Since January 2024, exchange traded funds approved by the SEC have added institutions, which brings rules and also brings large, correlated flows.

AI is held by large technology firms, funds, and the companies that build with it. Their research is deeper, and their positions are bigger, so their moves are more powerful. The test asks whether the holders can describe what they own. In both markets, a crowd that cannot explain the asset signals more speculation.

How much evidence supports Bitcoin and the AI bubble?

Evidence means data that anyone can check. Blockchain ledgers are public, which gives Bitcoin transparent transaction data, although the study notes that project marketing often misleads. AI evidence comes from company reports and studies, and the AI study scores explainability at 0.25 out of 1, which limits what outsiders can verify about model behaviour.

Both assets therefore show mixed evidence. The test rewards sources that are public, dated, and repeatable. A claim that comes with a source and a calculation counts for more than a claim that comes with a headline. Score each asset by how much of its story survives that standard.

Which is more speculative, Bitcoin or the AI bubble, after five tests?

On the five tests, Bitcoin scores higher on cash flow, swings, and anchors, and the two score close on holders and evidence. The reading is that Bitcoin is more speculative by structure, while the AI bubble carries speculation that comes from the speed of its price rise. Both sit in the fragile zone: 0.340 for crypto and 0.337 for enterprise AI.

Use the reading to size, not to rank winners. The EQOS Asia method page explains the scoring, the Λ simulator gives a φ(S) estimate in 10 minutes, and a 30-minute pre-diagnostic applies it to a decision in Singapore, ASEAN, or Hong Kong. This page is general information, not investment advice.

Frequently asked questions

About the author

Stéphane Jambu

President, EQOS Forecast Asia

Stéphane Jambu leads EQOS Forecast Asia and works as a consultant in e-commerce, search visibility, and AI. LinkedIn profile