Investment bank Jefferies’ longtime “Greed & Fear” Christopher Wood, the strategist behind his portfolio’s flagship model, has apparently removed Bitcoin. He cited growing concerns about quantum computing and its potential to undermine Bitcoin’s security in the long term.
The following is a breakdown of the. report by Bloomberg, Wood said in the latest edition of his Greed & Fear newsletter, that the 10% Bitcoin (BTC( allocation) he initially added in late 2020, has now been replaced by a divided position in gold mine stocks and physical gold.
He argued that quantum breakthroughs would weaken Bitcoin’s claim to be a dependable store of value for pension‑style investors.
Wood added to that concern over quantum risk The number of institutional and long-term investors is increasing, with some now questioning Bitcoin’s value as a currency if timescales for quantum computing compress.
He expressed his fear that “cryptographically relevant” Attackers could benefit from machines that arrive sooner than expected private keys The cryptography that underpins Bitcoin balances is weakened by the exposure of public keys. mining rewards And, at the very extreme, challenging their role as “digital gold” for pension‑style portfolios.
Quantum risk is now part of mainstream portfolios
Quantum has been a topic of discussion for many years, both amongst developers and analysts. Wood’s decision shows that it is now having a major impact on asset allocation at brokerages and research firms.
Related: Ethereum must pass ‘walkaway test’ to endure for 100 years: Buterin
Nic Carter, a Bitcoin enthusiast and partner at Castle Island Ventures, has discussed the quantum issue at lengthIn December, we warned that “capital is concerned and looking for a solution” on quantum risk, even though many developers, including Blockstream CEO Adam Back, remain skeptical that it is a near‑term problem.
Macro analyst Luke Gromen has also turned cautious on Bitcoin in recent months, citing macro and technological uncertainties, including quantum computing risk, as reasons to favor increasing gold exposure versus BTC on a multi‑cycle view.
Study by firms like EY You can also find out more about the following: PwC Quantum computing is also deemed a major emerging threat for public-key cryptography. Financial systems and those that support digital assets must prepare to migrate to alternatives resistant to quantum.
Magazine: Kevin O’Leary says quantum attacking Bitcoin would be a waste of time
Bitcoin is still a young currency, say developers
Bitcoin developers and key infrastructure builders reject the idea that quantum advances are an immediate danger.
Blockstream CEO Adam Back has repeatedly argued that breaking Bitcoin’s current signature schemes is likely 20–40 years away and that the network would have ample time to migrate to post‑quantum signature algorithms and better key management practices well before any real‑world break becomes feasible.
Other analysts including an A16z researcher have also done so conclude The probability that a “cryptographically relevant” Quantum computer that can break today’s public-key systems is unlikely to be developed in this decade.
They say that the bigger near‑term risks come from implementation bugs, governance, and “harvest now, decrypt later” Attacks that target encrypted data, rather than live signatures in the blockchain.
“This article is not financial advice.”
“Always do your own research before making any type of investment.”
“ItsDailyCrypto is not responsible for any activities you perform outside ItsDailyCrypto.”
Source: cointelegraph.com
