The U.S. Electronic Money Reserve: A Strategic Move or Speculative Game?

The idea of a Bitcoin strategic reserve fund is a strong and forward-looking initiative, given Bitcoin's proven position as the best-performing financial asset of the decade. However, including altcoins in the reserve fund raises serious concerns about the true intent behind this move. While Bitcoin has established itself as digital gold—a reliable store of value—most altcoins remain highly volatile and susceptible to price manipulation. Bitcoin: The ideal choice for a reserve asset The dominance of Bitcoin in the cryptocurrency space is undeniable. Over the past decade, it has consistently outperformed traditional assets, including gold, stocks, and real estate. Unlike altcoins, Bitcoin has gained widespread acceptance by institutions, with large corporations and even governments recognizing its value as a hedge against inflation and economic instability. National Bitcoin reserves will play a powerful role in economic recovery, similar to traditional gold reserves. The fixed supply of 21 million Bitcoins ensures scarcity, making it an attractive long-term asset. However, the decision to include altcoins along with Bitcoin in the US cryptocurrency reserves is the most questionable and suspicious. Issue with Altcoin in Reserve Altcoins in history have struggled to maintain long-term value compared to Bitcoin. Many of them, including XRP, ADA, and Solana, are prone to extreme price volatility, losing over 90% of their value in bear markets. This instability makes them unreliable as reserve assets. Taking Solana as an example: After being mentioned by Donald Trump, the price of Solana surged, only to collapse shortly thereafter. This price volatility highlights why altcoins lacking stability are necessary for a national reserve fund. Unlike Bitcoin, which has endured many market cycles and become stronger, altcoins often have high speculative nature, driven more by hype than fundamental value. Another big issue is that altcoins are more susceptible to price manipulation. Due to lower liquidity compared to Bitcoin, large investors can easily pump and dump these assets, profiting from the expenses of retail investors. This raises concerns about whether adding altcoins to reserves is truly for strategic purposes or simply a tool for insiders to exploit price fluctuations. Evidence of market manipulation The timing of some trades before Trump's announcement suggests possible insider information. Just before Crypto Reserve went public, an individual leveraged a long position 50 times for both Bitcoin and Ethereum, turning a $4 million investment into a massive $200 million position. As prices surged post-announcement, they quickly exited the market, pocketing a profit of $6.8 million in just one day. This type of activity raises an important question: Is the US Cryptocurrency Reserve created to truly stabilize the economy or is it being used as a tool to manipulate the market? Evidence suggests that some people involved may be benefiting from the volatility caused by political and economic decisions. The true purpose of a strategic reserve If the US government is serious about building a solid cryptocurrency reserve, Bitcoin should be the only asset in the reserve. Unlike altcoins, Bitcoin's decentralized and censorship-resistant nature makes it an ideal store of value. Including altcoins would only increase the risk of manipulation and weaken the trustworthiness of the reserve. Until there is more transparency about how these assets are selected and managed, adding altcoins to reserves will continue to raise suspicion. If history has shown us anything, it is that altcoins are too risky and unreliable for long-term national economic strategies. On the other hand, Bitcoin has proven its value—and should still be the foundation of any cryptocurrency-based financial reserve.