Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Been diving into why so many people got burned by the BTC stock to flow model, and honestly, it's a fascinating case study in how even smart-sounding frameworks can lead you astray in crypto.
So the basic idea is pretty clean—Bitcoin's scarcity is baked in, much like gold. The S2F model compares existing supply against new supply created annually, and the theory goes that as that ratio increases, price should follow. For a while it actually worked. Between 2015 and late 2021, BTC stock to flow predictions tracked pretty closely with reality. When Bitcoin hit those wild highs near 69k in November 2021, the model was still looking solid.
Then everything fell apart. The model was predicting north of 100k for 2022. Bitcoin didn't come close. We all know what happened instead—crypto hit a wall, and the stock to flow narrative just... collapsed.
What people missed is that the model doesn't account for actual market psychology or macro conditions. 2020 and 2021 were absolutely insane years for money printing and asset inflation across everything. That wasn't really about Bitcoin's supply dynamics—it was about the entire financial system getting flooded with liquidity. Once that reversed, the BTC stock to flow predictions fell apart because they were never really capturing what was actually moving the price.
Vitalik actually called it out pretty hard back in 2022, saying these models that promise "number go up" certainty are harmful. He's not wrong. Bitcoin's only 14 years old. Gold and silver have thousands of years of price history. You can't just apply commodity models to something this experimental and expect perfect predictions.
The interesting part is what came after. Some people started looking at Bitcoin through the gold market cap lens—if BTC reached gold's valuation, we're talking 540k per coin. Others pulled in Elliott Wave theory, credit market analysis, or just straight-up dismissed Bitcoin as a greater fool play.
None of these models are perfect either, but at least the newer frameworks acknowledge that Bitcoin's price is driven by way more than just supply mechanics. Volatility, adoption curves, regulatory shifts, macro conditions—all of it matters.
Looking at current BTC prices hovering around 74k, it's clear that the old stock to flow certainty is dead. What replaced it is something messier but probably more realistic—a market that actually responds to multiple variables instead of just one elegant formula. Sometimes the best model is no model at all, just watching what's actually happening.