Bank of America Analyst, Francisco Blanch has attacked Bitcoin as “exceptionally volatile” and “impractical” saying it’s environmentally disastrous in a 17 March research note. He even went ahead to include that the leading cryptocurrency is a useless store of wealth or an inflation hedge.
Bank of America Analyst Francisco Blanch Attacks Bitcoin
Blanch pointed out that Bitcoin is an impractical method of payment as it can only handle 1,400 transactions per hour compared to the 236 million transactions processed by Visa.
He also dismissed the idea that Bitcoin is an inflation hedge, saying:
“Bitcoin has also become correlated to risk assets, it is not tied to inflation, and remains exceptionally volatile, making it impractical as a store of wealth or payments mechanism.”
Blanch further points that 95% of Bitcoin is owned by just 2.4% of accounts, a level of concentration that “makes this instrument impractical as a payments mechanism or even as an investment vehicle.”
According to him, the high ownership concentration leaves “the asset vulnerable to sharp price swings on account of movements in these ‘whale’ accounts.”
Looking at the societal impact of Bitcoin. Blanch thinks the social negatives outweigh the positives.
The research also criticized Bitcoin’s environmental credentials saying its network emits about 60 million tons of CO2 per year, roughly the same carbon footprint as Greece. According to the analyst, further price rises could send Bitcoin emissions soaring further.
For every $1 billion of fresh inflow into Bitcoin, Blanch estimates the cryptocurrency will generate additional CO2 levels equivalent to about 1.2 million ICE cars.
“Main Idea for Holding BTC is Increased Price Expectation”
The note further cited research by ESG tracker Reprisk that found 181 companies are at risks linked to Bitcoin around money laundering, corruption, bribery, fraud, and breaches of data privacy.
Blanch concludes that the main argument for holding Bitcoin in a portfolio is not diversification, stable returns or protection against inflation but simply of the expectation that the prices will rise.