Cipolaro notes skepticism from figures like Chamath Palihapitiya and Ray Dalio about central bank reserves reflects Bitcoin’s integration into the broader monetary order, not its fringe status.

Bitcoin is not currently priced as a macro hedge, contributing to frustration that it doesn’t behave like gold despite the “digital gold” label.

Recent analysis shows Bitcoin and U.S. software stocks have not structurally converged; the correlation rise reflects exposure to a macro regime of long-duration, liquidity-sensitive assets rather than a fundamental link to software.

While charts may visually resemble each other, Cipolaro cautions against assuming structural convergence or shared exposure to AI or quantum themes between Bitcoin and software equities.

Bitcoin’s rising correlations with the S&P 500 and Nasdaq are part of a broad increase in equity correlations, not a unique link to software stocks.

Traders are allocating along a risk curve rather than pursuing a distinct monetary thesis with Bitcoin, which helps explain why it hasn’t acted as a hedge or digital gold.

The narrative remains that Bitcoin is a distinct asset with its own drivers, not a conventional monetary instrument.

NYDIG argues Bitcoin can diversify portfolios despite trading more like a high-risk growth asset in macro-driven regimes, preserving diversification benefits.

Although correlations with other assets have increased, most of Bitcoin’s moves are not dictated by equities, reinforcing its potential as a diversifier.

Bitcoin remains a distinct asset class with its own set of drivers—network activity, adoption trends, and regulatory/policy developments—that support its role as a portfolio diversifier even as cross-asset correlations rise.

Even with higher correlations, Cipolaro says Bitcoin’s price action remains largely unexplained by equities and it does not function as a hedge against macro conditions or a gold-like store of value.

About 25% of Bitcoin’s price moves are explained by equity factors, with roughly 75% driven by crypto-specific factors such as network activity, adoption, fund flows, trader positioning, and policy changes.