Info

Thoughts on technology, business and the search for the Ballmer Peak

After seeing claims of Bitcoin bubble or revolution trending across the web, I did some simple math to provide a rough valuation framework.  Full disclosure: I own bitcoins.

Bottom line, I get ~$3,500 per bitcoin by assuming Bitcoin receives 1% of speculative capital earmarked for similar assets (note: I’m missing a few pools of capital in this analysis, which would increase the price).  The math is fairly simple, price = $s invested / # of bitcoins in circulation, but determining the numerator and denominator is the trick.

Before diving into the details below, let’s step back to examine higher level assumptions.  The main premise is that Bitcoin’s appeal as a speculative asset is tied to its adoption as a better way to send value.  By better, I mean (i) low transaction fees which unlock use cases such as micro-payments and remittances, and (ii) a programmable script that enables the development of payment and verification applications (e.g., automated escrow, dividends, etc.) without the permission of existing bank networks.  For Bitcoin to handle additional transaction pools, for example US online retail sales of $262B, the total value of bitcoins outstanding (currently ~$10 billion) would need to increase.  So in the optimistic case, speculation (recently fueled by positive press) increases Bitcoin’s total value/market cap, which likely drives adoption through increased liquidity, which fuels further speculation.

Supply (# of bitcoins)

For the denominator of our price equation (easy part), there are roughly 12.0 million bitcoins currently outstanding.  I then added the number of bitcoins mined in the last year (~1.5mm) to arrive at ~13.5 million bitcoins so that we have a forward looking number.  I believe this to be conservative for 2014 given that mining becomes more difficult with time, implying less bitcoins will be mined in the next year.

But, per Fred Wilson, won’t the increasing number of merchants accepting bitcoins create more supply? (as merchants sell bitcoins earned to lock in dollar/other currency revenues)

I humbly disagree because a consumer and merchant transacting through bitcoin theoretically offset each other.  For example, if I hire programmers in Europe and pay them with bitcoins, my understanding is that I have to buy bitcoins before sending these bitcoins to the programmers.  The programmers can then either sell the bitcoins to lock in their wage or store the bitcoins if they wish to speculate.  Either way I had to buy bitcoins at some point before the merchant sold them (or kept them).

Demand ($s)

Some commentators define demand as a percentage of general economic quantities such as gold or GDP, which may make sense.  However, I believe a more conservative metric is the amount of speculation capital potentially allocated to Bitcoin.  Thus, I tried to conservatively estimate the value contained in the following vehicles, and the typical asset allocations these vehicles make for cash, commodities and “other” investments:

  • Five Leading US Online Brokerages: Included all customer assets because the individual investor decides, no asset allocation
  • Global Private Wealth Management: ~6.6% allocated to commodities, cash or “other” (non-private equity/VC) based on Barron’s pole
  • US/UK Endowments: 5% allocated to “other/cash” based on NACUBO study
  • Sovereign Wealth Funds: 11% allocated to “cash” using NZ/AUS numbers reported by SWF Institute as proxy (other countries behind a paywall)
  • Pension Funds: 1% allocated to cash per Towers Watson study
  • US Insurance Company Investment Assets: 4% allocated to cash based on NAIC report

If you multiply those allocations by above vehicles’ assets and sum (excel screenshot here), you get ~$4.7 trillion that is appropriate for bitcoin purchase.

Output

Bringing it all together, if 1% of Bitcoin appropriate dollars are invested in Bitcoin, then price = $3,508.59 = 1% of $4.7 trillion / 13.5 million bitcoins

Risks

Of course there are risks to the Bitcoin system and therefore its price, as outlined here (scroll down to list at the end), but I think those risks are not in excess to potential returns (and some of them are mitigated by network effects).

Comments

2 Comments

Post a comment
  1. December 26, 2013

    The only thing that actually increases the supply of bitcoins is the miners who create more of them. Whether people are transacting them or holding on to them is less relevant. I think what is actually relevant is to think of value flows. How much value needs to flow through bitcoin and how many bitcoins are there? Think of bitcoins in the following way:

    If the total amount of commerce of product X is 5bn USD in cash terms, but would be 9bn if conducted through bitcoins, then bitcoin has generated 4bn USD of additional revenue. Get to a NPV of what the incremental 4bn USD of incremental revenue is worth to that sector and you get a value to the bitcoin asset class. Apply that to other sectors/products and once you total it all up you get the true theoretical values of bitcoins, IMHO.

  2. December 26, 2013

    Thanks, jdepinho.

    Here’s how I look at commerce-driven demand for BTC and its effect on price:

    First I would figure out the value/dollar amount of commerce to be transacted in BTC. Then I would divide that by the velocity of money to get the amount of BTC needed to be sitting in people’s accounts/wallets to facilitate transactions. From there I would divide that value sitting in people’s BTC accounts by the supply of BTC to arrive at price.

    Tricky part is figuring out the portion of commerce transacted in BTC. I did not include this additional demand for bitcoins in the post above so hopefully it’s icing on the cake.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Basic HTML is allowed. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.