Jiuye · Trading Notes
August 17, 2026 · Reading Notes on the ARK Model Breakdown
Bitcoin will be worth $1.3 million in 2030. The first time I saw this sentence, my first reaction was: who’s this person to dare to claim that?
Over the years doing trading, I’ve seen too many numbers like this—$100,000, $500,000, $1 million. Everyone shouts something, but most of it never even leaves a trace. So at first, I also took this line as just another long-dated promise.
Until I pulled out ARK’s model and took it apart piece by piece, I realized my earlier judgment was crude. This isn’t pricing by guesswork or shouting a number—this is a math problem: first assume how big a slice of the global asset pool Bitcoin would take in 2030, then divide by 21 million coins to work backward to the unit price. Those who believe it didn’t understand it, and those who criticize it also didn’t understand it. The difference is this: one side is held hostage by the numbers, while the other is blocked by them.
This article breaks it into three layers: first, how that $1.3 million actually comes about; second, how many of the four pillars that support it have been fulfilled; third, after you understand it, I set three rules for myself.
Have you ever had this experience? You see a big influencer call out a target price, and your first reaction is, “Bold to say that.” But then you can’t help asking one more question—“why?” In today’s article, I’ll break down that “why” for you.
But when I broke it down to the second layer, I found the model’s real secret isn’t in the numbers—it’s in its premises. If the premises hold, the numbers hold. If the premises are falsified, the numbers automatically get invalidated.
That $1.3 million, actually, is two numbers
First, a question: when you say $1.3 million, what size of market cap do you think it corresponds to?
Most people simplify it too much. The $1.3 million floating around out there is mixing ARK’s base case and bull-case scenarios into one pot—the two lines have completely different strengths. When you mix them together, the flavor changes.
ARK 2030 scenario comparison (scope: Big Ideas 2026)
Baseline total market cap: $1.6T ≈ $0.76–0.8M per coin
Bull-market scenario total market cap: $2.5T ≈ $1.2M per coin (official model, after the Nov 2025 downgrade)
Wood interview bull-market target: $1.25 million (May 2026); media picked up on it and started shouting $1.3 million
Bear-market scenario $0.3M per coin is the floor
The $1.3 million being talked about in the media is just rounding up what was already said as $1.25 million in Wood’s interview. For the real ARK figures: the base line is $0.76 million (Wood publicly said $0.75 million), and the bull-market line is $1.2 million (the official model after the November 2025 downgrade). The two numbers differ by 60%, yet both get covered over by a single term: “$1.3 million.”
There’s one more thing worth saying separately. In November 2025, ARK proactively cut its bull-market target from $1.5 million to $1.2 million. An institution that dares to publicly slash its target price isn’t cutting it just a little. The very act of doing this is information—it shows this model isn’t just a slogan stuck on the wall. It has been continuously corrected by reality.
So don’t rush to trust $1.3 million, and don’t rush to laugh at $1.3 million—first figure out which line they’re talking about.
The model isn’t a prediction—it’s a math problem.
What’s the biggest difference between forecasting the market and doing math problems? Forecasting relies on intuition; math relies on premises. The method ARK uses is called the “market share method” within the industry. The logic runs backward: don’t guess the price. First guess how big a slice of the global asset pool Bitcoin can take, then divide that “cake” by a fixed supply of 21 million coins, and work backward to get the unit price.
Unit price equals the assumed market cap divided by 21 million coins. Where does the market cap come from? It’s built up by summing four pillars. So the essence of this model is: it breaks “why it’s worth this much” into a testable, checkable question—the numbers are the answers, and the premises are the question.
Take the biggest pillar as an example. In ARK’s model, gold market cap is counted at more than $24 trillion. After the 2025 gold price rally, ARK even increased that weight in its report. If by 2030 Bitcoin absorbs about 40% of gold’s market cap, that’s around $10 trillion. Spread across 21 million coins, the per-coin value comes out to nearly $0.5 million. The underlying logic is: 21 million coins lock in the upper limit—divisible, auditable, and with almost zero-cost cross-border transfers. In ARK’s view, this is “a better kind of gold.”
Behind every number is a verifiable premise. If the premise holds, the number holds. If the premise is falsified, the number automatically becomes invalid. That’s where this model is truly valuable.
The model is about whether the direction is right; the macro cycle determines when it will be fulfilled.
In November 2025, ARK downgraded its bull-market target from $1.5 million to $1.2 million. The day the news came out, I stared at the screen for a long time. Honestly, my first reaction was disappointment—did even the most bullish people concede?
But as I look deeper into the reasons, I froze for a few seconds. It wasn’t that demand collapsed. It was that the emerging-markets leg was intercepted by stablecoins—countries with malignant inflation like Argentina and Nigeria want “US dollar stablecoins” to hedge inflation, not Bitcoin with huge volatility. In that moment, I figured it out: the model cut itself down—precisely because it’s alive and falsifiable. A model that dares to change its answer is more trustworthy than one that blindly defends a number.
Four premises—these support the whole question
So what are the four pillars exactly?
First, digital gold. ARK estimates gold market cap at over $24 trillion. After gold prices surged in 2025, ARK increased that weight in its 2026 report. If in 2030 Bitcoin absorbs about 40% of gold’s market cap, that contributes about $10 trillion. This is the thickest pillar among the four and also a main source of the $1.6T total market cap.
Second, institutional allocation. Globally investable assets are about $200 trillion. ARK’s base assumption is a 2.5% allocation—about $5 trillion. In the bull case, 6.5% corresponds to $13 trillion. The logic is straightforward: spot ETFs open the compliant channel. Institutions go from “can’t buy” to “can buy.” Even if the allocation ratio only shifts by a few percentage points, supply-and-demand math tightens dramatically.
Third, emerging-market currency substitution. In countries with恶性通胀 like Argentina and Nigeria, people use BTC to hedge fiat currency depreciation and for cross-border remittances. But ARK itself has already cut this pillar—because stablecoins “intercepted” it, as mentioned earlier. No need to repeat it.
Fourth, generational wealth transfer plus national reserves. When the younger generation inherits wealth, they’re more inclined than the previous generation to treat BTC—not gold or government bonds—as a store of value. At the nation level, the narrative around sovereign reserves is also advancing. This pillar is more narrative-heavy, and it serves as the underlying support for the previous pillars.
Four premises—how many can you confirm right now? Don’t rush to answer; read on.
Behind each pillar is a verifiable premise. Fulfill a few of those premises, and the market cap becomes valid by some amount.
But in reality in 2026, only one thing was fulfilled
The question is clear now—here comes the answer.
The digital gold pillar is a red light. In 2025 gold rose by about 67%, while Bitcoin fell by about 5% (data through Dec 31, 2025; source: World Gold Council, “Gold Market Review,” released Jan 2026). In risk-off moments, money still chose gold. This is the most painful part. The model says BTC is “a better gold,” but the market voted with its feet. At least in those panic days, money still went into gold.
That institutional-allocation pillar also flashes red. JPMorgan data shows total inflows of digital assets in Q1 2026 are about $11B. Annualized, that’s roughly $44B. Compare that to about $130B in 2025—down by two-thirds. In the same period, Bitcoin spot ETF flows were net outflows overall, only turning positive for the first time in March (source: JPMorgan analysis, reported by The Block in April 2026). Compliance channels may be open, but real money hasn’t followed the script.
For the emerging-markets pillar, it’s amber. Stablecoins “intercepted” it—so the model itself admits it lost, as I explained earlier. No need to repeat.
The only parts that turn green are generational wealth transfer plus national reserves. Countries are advancing reserve bills and generational wealth transfers, but this pillar is more narrative-level, nowhere near enough to fill the market cap.
Two reds, one yellow, one green. The conclusion isn’t “the model is wrong,” but this: manage your position based on a “model not yet fulfilled” scenario—not by assuming it will be fulfilled and going heavy early.
We don’t act as predictors; we act as verifiers. Direction is left to the model, timing to signals, and position sizing to discipline.
With that said, let me flip through a page of my own old account.
In 2021, when Bitcoin surged toward $69K and the narrative was at its hottest, I almost treated “faith” as a “buying reason.” At the time, one thought kept popping into my head: with such a grand narrative, if you don’t get in, aren’t you being stupid?
As for what happened later, everyone knows it: from $69K to $15.5K, a 77% drawdown, and it only took one year. I’ve seen too many people die in the third drawdown—not losing to direction, but to volatility multiplied by time. I’m not saying I never got carried away. What’s dangerous isn’t getting carried away; what’s scary is treating “being carried away” as logic.
After you understand it, I set three rules for myself.
After reviewing the model, it comes back to you. I set three rules for myself.
First, separate facts, assumptions, and beliefs into three layers. Facts—21 million coins locked in, halving every four years, the ETF channel opened—these can be written into your cognition framework as long-term background. Assumptions—40% absorption rate, 2.5% base allocation ratio—these need to be tracked with data, and only when the green light turns on do you upgrade. Belief—Bitcoin will become a global reserve asset—this layer cannot serve as a reason to hold a position; it can only be the background tone for allocation. When most people lose, they lose because they treat belief as fact. Because they “believe in $1.3 million,” they go all-in.
Second, decouple direction and time. The long-term target price must never be used to set buy points. The direction anchor tells you “why to allocate”; the execution anchor tells you “when and how much to buy.” Keep the two anchors separate. In 2018, people also talked about “digital gold,” and then Bitcoin fell from $20K to $3.2K. When the narrative was hottest in 2021, it topped around $69K; a year later it got crushed to $15.5K. The direction was right, but the repeated rounds of drawdowns in the middle were real costs. In Q1 2026, Bitcoin fell again by about 23%. Holders of spot ETFs like ARKB still had to endure a drawdown of more than 20%. The callers could withstand it, but those who listened might not.
Third, be a verifier—not a predictor. Each assumption has reconciliation checks: digital gold—watch the market cap of BTC versus gold, and see who capital chooses in risk-off periods; institutional allocations—watch ETF fund flows and 13F increases to see whether real money actually comes in; emerging markets—watch stablecoin issuance volume relative to activity on the BTC chain to see who’s really moving volume. When the three lights turn green, then you can talk about the model starting to come true.
If a target price can never be used to set buy points, then how are the positions you hold currently determined?
These three rules are my watershed from “believing in the model” to “using the model.”
Finally, a few closing words
The model’s real value was never that number. It breaks “why to be bullish long term” into testable assumptions—layering is the premise, decoupling is the method, and verification is daily work. It manages direction by direction, signals by signals, and positions by position sizing. Don’t mix them up.
In the Daodejing, it says: the wise know others; the self-aware are clear about themselves. Applied to this trade, the first thing self-awareness does is admit you can’t predict the market. Only after admitting that are you willing to watch reconciliation statements, not slogans.
Back to the opening line: Bitcoin will be worth $1.3 million in 2030. Now look again—what matters isn’t whether it’s right. Before you believe it, have you first looked at why it could be true?
I’ll keep watching the four lights. When green comes on, I’ll say so; when red stays on, I’ll say that too.
The above content is only my personal trading notes and thoughts, and does not constitute any investment advice. Digital asset prices are highly volatile—please make independent judgments and assume your own risk.