Article Source: OKX

Between 2015 and 2025, the global financial market has experienced a tumultuous period. From the era of post-financial crisis quantitative easing to a historic zero interest rate environment, and then to a sharp tightening cycle in response to high inflation, the macroeconomic waves have continuously impacted various assets. Against this backdrop, crypto assets represented by BTC and ETH have outperformed traditional safe-haven assets such as gold and US Treasury bonds, undergoing a remarkable transition from a niche geek experiment to an entry on Wall Street institutional balance sheets. However, behind the excess returns lies extreme risk — crypto assets have experienced deep retracements of over 75% at times, with recovery periods often spanning years, while traditional assets have shown greater resilience.

Therefore, OKX Research Institute, with the "Performance of Five Major Assets in 10 Years" as the core, attempts to answer a key question: over a period of 10 years, how do the returns and risks of BTC and ETH compare to mainstream assets such as gold, the S&P 500 Index, and US Treasury bonds when placed side by side? Have we paid an equivalent or even excess risk price for the astonishing returns of crypto assets? To this end, we will go beyond a simple comparison of returns, striving to depict a comprehensive, objective, and cyclical asset performance chart. (Data as of August 31, 2025)

Data Source: 8MarketCap; as of the end of August 2025, Bitcoin has ranked among the top assets globally

Battle of Returns: Who Is the Asset King?

One of the most intuitive ways to evaluate an asset is to observe its long-term value growth trajectory. We assume that $10,000 was invested in these 5 assets on August 1, 2015, and track their cumulative value changes until August 1, 2025. This comparison clearly reveals the significant differences in wealth creation capabilities across different asset classes.

(1) Annual Price Snapshots: Value Benchmarks at Key Points (2015-2025, every August 1)

The table below records the closing prices of the five core assets from 2015 to 2025 on each August 1 (or the following first trading day).

Data Source: Based on Yahoo Finance and CoinGecko, the closing price for the day or the following first trading day, ETF prices are adjusted closing prices

From the price snapshot, it is clear to see that Bitcoin and Ethereum have experienced exponential growth, with their price magnitude undergoing a fundamental shift over the past decade. In contrast, the S&P 500 has shown a steady bull market trajectory, gold has exhibited fluctuations related to the macroeconomic cycle, and the price of US Treasuries has clearly reflected the changes in the interest rate environment, coming under pressure during the rate hike cycle in 2022-2023.

(II) Annual Peak Moments: Capturing the Highest Point of Each Cycle

Mere observation of price snapshots on specific dates is far from sufficient to depict the full picture of assets. Price fluctuations within a year, especially the occurrence of the highest point, reveal the potential explosiveness of assets and the "fear of missing out" (FOMO) that traders may face. The table below lists the highest prices reached by each asset during each annual cycle (from August 1 of the current year to July 31 of the following year).

Data Source: Ethereum launched on July 30, 2015, with early data having relatively low liquidity or some margin of error, other data calculated based on Yahoo Finance daily historical data

By observing the price peaks each year, we can clearly see the difference in the scale of asset growth. Bitcoin and Ethereum have shown remarkable leaps in price highs during the bull market, while the annual highs of the S&P 500 and gold are much closer to the snapshot price, reflecting their more mature and stable market characteristics.

(III) Wealth Growth Simulation: A $10,000 10-Year Fantasy Voyage

To more intuitively sense the wealth creation capabilities of different assets, we conducted a simple experiment: on August 1, 2015, $10,000 was invested in five different assets, which were held until August 1, 2025. The chart below shows the cumulative value change of this expenditure in a logarithmic coordinate system. This type of coordinate system better handles data with vast differences in magnitude, preventing the curve of high-growth assets from being too steep and overshadowing the details of other assets.

Data Source: Yahoo Finance, FRED, Macrotrends, etc.

The table shows that over the period from 2015 to 2025, the growth multipliers of different assets are as follows: BTC 402.17 times, with a 10-year cumulative return of approximately $4,020,000; ETH 1195.55 times, with a 10-year cumulative return soaring to approximately $11,950,000; gold 3.08 times, with a 10-year cumulative return of about $30,000; S&P 500 2.97 times, with a 10-year cumulative return of approximately $29,600; and US Treasuries 1.26 times, with a 10-year cumulative return of only about $12,600.

Bitcoin and Ethereum have shown astonishing wealth growth effects, with returns far exceeding traditional assets, reaching hundreds or even thousands of times in magnitude. This reflects the asymmetric return potential of emerging technology assets in high-risk environments, which is hard to imagine in the traditional financial world. In contrast, the S&P 500 tripled its investment through stable compound growth, gold mainly served as a store of value, and after experiencing low and high-interest-rate cycles, the U.S. Treasury bonds remained almost stagnant over 10 years, highlighting the constraint of interest rate risk on the long-term performance of bond assets.

Maximum Drawdown: How High Is the Risk Behind the Returns?

No asset can always be at the forefront, and the rate of return is just the beginning of the story. A mature trading user is more concerned about the quality of returns — that is, how much risk was taken to achieve these returns. Therefore, understanding the risk characteristics of different assets is equally important as understanding their potential returns. Through three core indicators of volatility, maximum drawdown, and Sharpe ratio, one can more comprehensively assess the true "risk-adjusted return" of various assets. Volatility is usually measured by standard deviation, reflecting the amplitude of asset price fluctuations. Meanwhile, the maximum drawdown measures the maximum decline from an asset's historical peak to subsequent lowest point, serving as an intuitive indicator of downside risk that directly relates to a trading user’s psychological tolerance and an asset portfolio's survival capability.

Data Source: Bloomberg, S&P Global, Yahoo Finance, etc.

The volatility of crypto assets far exceeds that of traditional assets. According to Digital One Agency data, Bitcoin's annualized standard deviation is approximately 70%-90%, while the S&P 500 Index is only 15%-20%. This substantial volatility directly results in significant maximum drawdowns: over the past 10 years, Bitcoin and Ethereum have experienced multiple deep drawdowns exceeding 70%, such as during the 2018 bear market when the BTC price plummeted from nearly $20,000 to around $3,000, with a drawdown of over 80%. The largest drawdown for the S&P 500 occurred in the early stages of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, at around -34%. During the 2008 financial crisis, drawdowns exceeded 50%. Gold has shown relatively stable performance, with a maximum drawdown of about -29% over the past 15 years. U.S. Treasury bonds, as a safe haven asset, have the smallest drawdown, but influenced by interest rate cycles, they also experienced a maximum drawdown of around -23% in the post-2020 rate-hike cycle, breaking the myth of their "risk-free" status.

This data is alarming. Bitcoin and Ethereum users must be able to withstand asset drawdowns of over 80% or even 90% and may need to wait more than two to three years to break even.

In addition, to comprehensively assess risk and return, we also introduce the Sharpe Ratio and Sortino Ratio. The Sharpe Ratio, proposed by Nobel laureate William Sharpe, is the most classic international risk-adjusted return indicator. It measures how much excess return users can achieve beyond the risk-free rate for each unit of total risk they undertake (measured by volatility). A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates that the asset's performance is better in terms of returns for the same level of risk and higher trading efficiency.

The Sortino Ratio is another important risk-adjusted return indicator, but it focuses more on measuring the asset's downside risk. It is calculated as the ratio of the annualized return to the historical maximum drawdown. A higher Sortino Ratio means that the asset's ability to "recover" or its "risk-adjusted return" is stronger during historical worst drawdowns. This indicator is particularly favored by risk-conscious users.

The radar shapes of Bitcoin and Ethereum are the most "aggressive." They exhibit unparalleled advantages in terms of annualized return and Sortino Ratio, forming two outward spikes, reflecting their astonishing wealth growth effects and strong recovery capabilities after drawdowns over the past decade. However, such high returns come at a cost. In terms of maximum drawdown and annualized volatility, their scores are the lowest among all assets, indicating severe shrinkage in these two directions, forming a clear "weakness." This clearly reveals the high-risk, high-volatility nature of crypto assets. It is worth noting that Bitcoin's Sharpe Ratio outperforms Ethereum, indicating that Bitcoin's investment efficiency is slightly better on a risk-adjusted basis.

The radar chart of the U.S. stock market (S&P 500) presents a relatively balanced pentagon with a substantial coverage area. It does not have significant weaknesses in all five dimensions nor extreme strengths. Its Sharpe Ratio performance is outstanding, second only to Bitcoin, demonstrating excellent risk-adjusted returns. At the same time, its annualized return is robust, with appropriate control of volatility and maximum drawdown, far superior to crypto assets. This outlines the typical image of a "core player": able to provide significant long-term returns while keeping risk within a relatively reasonable range, serving as a cornerstone for building portfolios.

The radar shape of gold leans towards the risk control dimension. It scores higher in annualized volatility and maximum drawdown, indicating relative price stability and strong downside protection. However, in the three return-related dimensions of annualized return, Sharpe Ratio, and Sortino Ratio, gold's performance is relatively mediocre. This aligns perfectly with gold's positioning as a traditional safe-haven asset: not pursuing high growth but providing value storage and risk hedging functions during market turmoil. Its chart area is smaller, reflecting its lower overall return efficiency.

The radar chart of US Treasuries is the smallest area among all assets, with its shape tightly squeezed at the center. It scores highest in the two risk dimensions of annualized volatility and maximum drawdown, demonstrating very strong stability. However, it ranks at the bottom in all return-related dimensions. This clearly indicates that in the macro backdrop of the past decade's interest rate decline, US Treasuries have mainly played a role in capital preservation and providing liquidity, serving as the portfolio's "ballast" rather than a return engine. Its extremely low risk and extremely low return present a stark contrast.

Asset Correlation: How to Optimize a Portfolio?

The core of portfolio diversification lies in including assets with low correlation. When one asset falls, another asset may rise or remain stable, thus smoothing the overall portfolio volatility. At the birth of Bitcoin, it had almost zero correlation with traditional financial markets, deemed a perfect "diversification tool." However, this characteristic has undergone significant changes over the past decade, especially as the institutionalization process accelerated.

The correlation coefficient measures the extent of price movements in two assets moving together, ranging from -1 (completely negatively correlated) to +1 (completely positively correlated). An effective diversified asset portfolio typically consists of assets with low or negative correlation. The table below combines data from multiple research institutions, showcasing the approximate correlation between various assets over the past decade.

Data Source: Crypto Research Report, LSEG, Newhedge

Bitcoin vs. S&P 500: From independence to synchrony. This is one of the most significant changes over the decade. Before 2020: The correlation between crypto assets and traditional assets was generally low and unstable, often fluctuating between positive and negative, showing strong independence. 2020-2021: Due to the pandemic and monetary easing, with global central banks implementing large-scale liquidity injections, the "rising tide lifts all boats" effect was significant for all risk assets. During this period, the correlation between Bitcoin and the S&P 500 (especially tech stocks) sharply increased, exceeding 0.6 at times, displaying a strong "coupling" phenomenon. This indicates that in a market primarily driven by macro liquidity, Bitcoin behaves more like a high-beta risk asset rather than a hedge.

2022-2023: Rate hikes and tightening cycle. As the Federal Reserve initiates an aggressive rate hike cycle, risk assets are generally under pressure. The correlation between Bitcoin and the S&P 500 remains at a high level, falling together. However, its significant negative correlation with the US Dollar Index (DXY) strengthens, with Bitcoin's price often under pressure when the dollar strengthens. 2024-2025: The ETF era. The approval of a US physical Bitcoin ETF is seen as a structural turning point. On one hand, it strengthens the connection between the crypto market and the traditional financial system; on the other hand, the continuous inflow of funds through ETFs may become a pricing factor independent of macro sentiment, leading to changes in correlation once again. Data shows that after the ETF approval, the correlation between Bitcoin and the S&P 500 has somewhat decreased, indicating some signs of "decoupling."

Bitcoin vs Gold: The Challenge of the "Digital Gold" Narrative. Despite being hailed as "digital gold" due to its fixed supply, data shows that Bitcoin's safe haven properties and correlation with real gold are not stable. Research from the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) indicates that there is no clear stable relationship between the two, especially during market panics. Bitcoin often falls alongside risk assets during these times of market fear, rather than providing shelter like gold.

Traditional Asset Relationships: The classic negative or low correlation among gold, US Treasuries, and the S&P 500 remains a cornerstone of traditional asset allocation, providing important stability to portfolios.

Impact of Major Events: How Did the Top Five Assets Perform?

Average numbers over long periods may mask the extreme performances during key moments. By analyzing several major events in a "sliced" manner, we can better understand the true "stress responses" of various asset classes.

(1) March 2020: COVID-19 Black Swan Event, Global Market Sell-Off

In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic triggered global financial market panic, known as "Black March." During this extreme liquidity crisis, nearly all assets experienced a mass sell-off. The S&P 500 index entered a bear market in just 16 trading days, setting a record for the fastest in history with a maximum drawdown of -34%. Bitcoin also did not escape unscathed, with its price dropping nearly 50% in a single day on March 12, from around $8,000 to below $4,000. Gold (GLD) also saw a decline due to asset liquidation for USD liquidity. Only US Treasuries remained as the ultimate safe haven, maintaining their price. This event profoundly revealed that during an extreme "risk-off" phase, correlations tend to converge towards 1, and Bitcoin's "digital safe haven" narrative crumbled in the face of liquidity drought.

(2) May & November 2022: Crypto-Native Crisis, LUNA&FTX Meltdowns Bring Devastating Blows

2022 was the "annus horribilis" for the crypto industry. In May, the collapse of the algorithmic stablecoin TerraUSD (UST) and its sister token LUNA wiped out nearly $500 billion in market value within days. In November of the same year, the abrupt bankruptcy of the world's second-largest crypto exchange FTX further exacerbated market panic. These two events were typical examples of crypto "endogenous" crises. Studies show that after the FTX meltdown, both Bitcoin and Ethereum prices dropped over 20%, with assets closely tied to the FTX ecosystem experiencing even greater declines. However, during these events, traditional financial market assets such as gold, S&P, and bonds were almost unaffected, clearly demonstrating the risk isolation between the crypto market and traditional finance. This indicates that crypto assets not only face macroeconomic risks but also unique, potentially more destructive internal protocol, platform, and trust risks.

（三）2020-2025: Macro Policy Shift Cycle, Liquidity Tides

The Federal Reserve's monetary policy serves as the "master valve" of global liquidity. Under the large-scale quantitative easing and zero interest rate policy of 2020-2021, abundant liquidity flowed into risk assets, leading to a major bull market for Bitcoin and the S&P 500. However, since the Fed initiated an aggressive rate-hiking cycle in March 2022 to combat inflation, global liquidity has tightened, causing a price decline in risk assets. Academic research has shown that Bitcoin's price sensitivity to the Fed's interest rate decisions and Monetary Policy Uncertainty (MPU) significantly increased after 2020. This once again confirms that Bitcoin is deeply integrated into the macro financial framework, and its price fluctuations are closely linked to the Fed's policy expectations.

Furthermore, research has found that the Bitcoin market exhibits significant "anticipatory trading" characteristics. Before the rate hike decision is announced, the market often has already priced in the expectation, causing downward pressure on the Bitcoin price; conversely, when expectations of a rate cut are strong, the price tends to rise in advance. On the day of the decision announcement, if the result meets expectations, the market reaction is usually not substantial. The real intense fluctuations come from "rate surprises" — when the FOMC decision deviates from the market's expectations priced in through rate futures and other instruments.

The chart below shows the average cumulative abnormal return (CAR) of Bitcoin relative to the S&P 500 during the rate hike and rate cut event windows (T-5 to T+5 days). It can be seen that during a rate cut cycle, Bitcoin exhibits a significant positive abnormal return before the decision announcement, while during a rate hike cycle, this effect is less pronounced and even negative. This indicates that the market's response to rate cuts is more positive and anticipatory.

（Four）January 2024: Bitcoin Spot ETF Approved, a Milestone Toward Mainstream

On January 10, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) officially approved the first Bitcoin spot ETF to be listed, marking a milestone event seen as the legalization and mainstreaming of crypto assets. The launch of the ETF significantly lowered the barrier for traditional users to access Bitcoin. Data shows that after the ETF approval, Bitcoin trading volume surged, and there was strong capital inflow. Chainalysis' chart shows that after the ETF launch, its daily trading volume reached close to $10 billion in March, far outpacing the performance of the first gold ETF launched in 2005 in terms of cumulative fund inflows. This event not only drove Bitcoin's price to new highs but more importantly, it is structurally changing Bitcoin's user base and market dynamics, making its connection to the traditional financial system tighter than ever before.

No Perfect Asset, Constructing a Cross-Cycle Asset Portfolio

BTC/ETH has been the undisputed "king of growth" in the past decade, providing returns that surpass any traditional asset. However, the cost of this return is extreme volatility and significant drawdowns. Its increasing correlation with the traditional market has weakened its value as a purely decentralized tool. It is suitable for users with extremely high risk tolerance and a long-term holding belief.

The S&P 500 is the "cornerstone" of a long-term asset portfolio. It offers excellent, sustainable compounded growth and, in terms of risk-adjusted performance, exhibits the best balance in terms of both Sharpe and Sortino ratios. Although it experiences periodic pullbacks, its strong recovery ability and the support of the underlying real economy make it an absolute core for constructing an asset portfolio.

Gold, as an ancient store of value, has limited absolute returns. However, in times of macro uncertainty, geopolitical risks, and questioning of the fiat currency system, it remains an indispensable "insurance policy." Its value in the portfolio lies not in offense but in defense.

U.S. Treasury bonds, the traditional "safe haven," have faced unprecedented challenges during a tightening cycle, reminding users that "risk-free" is a relative concept. Nevertheless, it remains one of the most liquid and highest credit-rated assets globally, providing stability and foundational liquidity in the portfolio that is difficult to replace in the short term.

So, this classic question also has an answer: Should you choose a dollar-cost averaging (DCA) strategy or lump sum investing?

In the long run, for high-volatility assets (BTC/ETH), the DCA strategy demonstrates significant advantages. By buying more shares at price lows, DCA effectively smooths costs, reduces timing risk, ultimately achieves a considerable return, and involves far less psychological pressure than lump-sum investing;

For steady growth assets (SPY), as the stock market trends upward in the long term, the lump sum investing strategy has historically outperformed the DCA strategy for the most time, allowing funds to enjoy market compounded growth earlier and more fully.

For low-growth assets (GLD/IEF), the final results of the two strategies are similar, failing to bring explosive returns. The conclusion is that DCA is an effective strategy to manage high-volatility assets like Bitcoin, while for long-term steady equity markets, early lump sum investing is often the superior choice. Whether you prefer a basic DCA strategy, smart arbitrage strategy, grid strategy suitable for short-term trading, or advanced signal or iceberg strategy, OKX's strategy trading can comprehensively meet your needs in one place.

The "Holy Grail" of asset allocation is not to seek a single best asset, but to deeply understand and cleverly combine the unique characteristics of different assets. A robust asset portfolio should leverage the sharpness of crypto assets to pursue alpha, rely on the thickness of equity assets to drive long-term growth, and allocate the stability of gold and bonds to hedge against unknown risks. Ten years of data tell us that the market is always evolving, with no eternal winners. The true "king of assets" may not exist in any specific asset, but rather in a rational trading framework that can deeply understand and harness the characteristics of different assets.

Disclaimer:

This article is for reference only. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of OKX. This article is not intended to provide (i) investment advice or investment recommendations; (ii) an offer or solicitation to buy, sell, or hold digital assets; or (iii) financial, accounting, legal, or tax advice. We do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of such information. Holding digital assets (including stablecoins and NFTs) involves high risks and may experience significant volatility. Past performance is not indicative of future results, and historical returns do not represent future returns. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you based on your financial situation. For your specific circumstances, please consult your legal/tax/investment professional. You are solely responsible for understanding and complying with relevant local laws and regulations.

This article is contributed content and does not represent the views of BlockBeats.

Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:

Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia