Jefferies Strategist Drops Bitcoin Over Quantum Risk, Backs Gold
Jefferies’ longtime “Greed & Fear” strategist Christopher Wood has removed Bitcoin from his flagship model portfolio, eliminating a 10% BTC allocation first introduced in late 2020 and reallocating the position to physical gold and gold-mining equities, citing quantum-computing risks to Bitcoin’s long-term security, Bloomberg reported.
Wood wrote in the latest Greed & Fear newsletter that continued advances in quantum computing could undermine Bitcoin’s status as a dependable store of value for pension‑style investors. He added that concerns about “quantum risk” are increasing among long-horizon institutional allocators, with some reassessing Bitcoin’s store‑of‑value case if commercialization timelines compress.
He cautioned that the earlier-than-expected arrival of “cryptographically relevant” machines could allow attackers to derive private keys from exposed public keys, threatening the cryptography that secures Bitcoin balances and mining rewards and, in a worst‑case scenario, challenging its role as “digital gold” in long-term portfolios.
Quantum risk draws mainstream asset‑allocation attention
While quantum implications have been debated among developers for years, Wood’s move indicates the issue is beginning to influence asset‑allocation decisions at major brokerages and research houses.
Castle Island Ventures partner and Bitcoin advocate Nic Carter discussed the topic in December, noting that “capital is concerned and looking for a solution” to quantum risk, even as many developers — including Blockstream CEO Adam Back — remain skeptical that it is a near‑term threat. Source: Nic Carter
Macro strategist Luke Gromen has also turned more cautious on Bitcoin in recent months, citing macro and technological uncertainties — including quantum‑computing risk — as reasons to favor higher gold exposure versus BTC on a multi‑cycle horizon.
Studies from firms such as EY and PwC likewise identify quantum computing as a significant emerging threat to traditional public‑key cryptography and recommend that financial systems, including digital‑asset infrastructure, develop migration plans to quantum‑resistant alternatives.
Developers say Bitcoin has time to adapt
Bitcoin developers and core infrastructure providers argue that quantum progress does not pose an immediate danger. Blockstream CEO Adam Back has said breaking Bitcoin’s current signature schemes is likely 20–40 years away, giving the network ample time to transition to post‑quantum signature algorithms and improved key‑management practices before any practical break becomes feasible.
Other analysts, including a researcher at a16z, similarly assess the odds of a “cryptographically relevant” quantum computer capable of compromising today’s public‑key systems emerging this decade as low. Source: a16z researcher
They add that nearer‑term vulnerabilities are more likely to arise from implementation bugs, governance challenges, and “harvest now, decrypt later” attacks on encrypted data rather than immediate attacks on live blockchain signatures.
Stay informed, read the latest news right now!
Disclaimer
The content on TrustsCrypto.com is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile, always do your own research before making decisions.
Some content may be assisted by AI and reviewed by our editorial team, but accuracy is not guaranteed. TrustsCrypto.com is not responsible for any losses resulting from the use of information provided.
