In a new 2026 outlook from ARK Invest, Cathie Wood argues that scarcity is not simply about limited availability, but about whether supply can respond to price — and on that front, Bitcoin stands apart.
Key takeaways:
- •Cathie Wood says Bitcoin’s fixed issuance schedule makes it structurally more scarce than gold.
- •Gold supply can expand in response to higher prices, while Bitcoin supply cannot.
- •Bitcoin has delivered stronger long-term returns with slower supply growth.
- •Low correlation with traditional assets strengthens Bitcoin’s diversification appeal.
Scarcity, Supply, and Long-Term Positioning
According to Ark’s analysis, gold and Bitcoin have both produced meaningful long-term gains, but under fundamentally different supply mechanics. Gold prices rose roughly 166% over the period studied, alongside an annualized global supply increase of about 1.8%. Bitcoin, by contrast, climbed more than 360% while its supply growth averaged closer to 1.3%.
Wood emphasizes that this difference becomes critical during periods of rising prices. Higher gold prices incentivize miners to increase exploration and production, gradually expanding supply. Bitcoin’s issuance, however, is hard-coded and declines over time through scheduled halving events. As a result, Bitcoin’s annual supply growth is expected to fall below 1% and eventually approach 0.4% later this decade.
That dynamic underpins Wood’s continued long-term optimism. While she has moderated her most aggressive price forecasts — trimming her projection from $1.5 million to roughly $1.2 million by 2030 — she maintains that Bitcoin’s predictable scarcity remains unmatched by any physical commodity.
Diversification Benefits and the Gold Comparison
Beyond scarcity, Wood frames Bitcoin as a powerful diversification tool. Ark’s data shows Bitcoin maintaining low correlation with gold and bonds, giving it an unusually strong risk-adjusted profile for asset allocators seeking higher returns per unit of risk. In Wood’s view, this places Bitcoin in a unique position within multi-asset portfolios.
Still, Bitcoin’s role as “digital gold” was challenged in 2025, when gold significantly outperformed amid heightened macro uncertainty. Gold’s long-standing reputation, physical nature, and historical reliability continue to appeal to conservative investors, particularly during periods of stress.
Supporters of Bitcoin argue that short-term underperformance should not overshadow its longer-term trajectory. After a strong rally in 2024, a consolidation phase in 2025 was widely expected. While gold offers stability, Bitcoin offers asymmetric upside — a tradeoff that remains central to its appeal.
For Wood, the takeaway is not a binary choice between assets, but a structural argument. Bitcoin’s fixed supply, declining issuance, and low correlation make it increasingly difficult for long-term investors to dismiss, even as gold retains its role as a traditional hedge.