As Schiff calls Bitcoin’s death, a Bloomberg analyst sees the S&P now mirroring its chaos

As Bitcoin falls and volatility spreads, Schiff sees the end. But with the S&P now mirroring BTC’s behavior, is Bitcoin really failing?

Bitcoin “dies” again

Peter Schiff has long been one of Bitcoin’s (BTC) most vocal critics. Over the years, he has maintained that the asset lacks intrinsic value, that its price is driven purely by speculation, and that it would collapse in the face of a real economic crisis. 

On Apr. 11, he reiterated this view on X, writing, “Bitcoin was born out of the financial crisis of 2008. Ironically, the financial crisis of 2025 will kill it.” His statement links Bitcoin’s origin directly to its potential downfall.

To evaluate that claim, it helps to revisit the conditions that led to Bitcoin’s creation. The 2008 financial crisis brought the global financial system to the brink. 

Several major banks either failed or required urgent bailouts. Credit markets seized up, and investor confidence evaporated. 

In response, central banks slashed interest rates to near zero and launched aggressive monetary interventions that defined the decade ahead.

Bitcoin emerged in the midst of this turmoil. Its release in early 2009 was rooted in a clear intent to propose an alternative monetary framework. One that removed central authorities, eliminated the possibility of bailouts, and introduced a transparent supply mechanism immune to political interference.

So if a crisis gave birth to Bitcoin, can another one eliminate it? Or has Bitcoin endured precisely because financial systems remain fragile? Let’s find out.

What’s happening in 2025?

To evaluate whether Bitcoin can withstand a future financial crisis, it’s essential to first understand the nature of the current one. 

Unlike the 2008 collapse, which stemmed from a breakdown within the banking system, the turmoil of 2025 has been driven largely by policy choices, particularly the imposition of sweeping tariffs.

On Apr. 1, President Trump announced a broad tariff hike affecting more than 75 countries, with rates ranging from 11% to 50% depending on the product and origin. 

China, the U.S’ largest trading partner, was excluded from the general policy framework and instead faced even harsher trade restrictions.

The announcement caught global markets by surprise and set off immediate volatility across equities, commodities, and currency markets. In the days that followed, the economic fallout deepened. 

U.S. stock indices lost more than $12 trillion in value across a few trading sessions, while bond markets showed signs of strain, with the yield on the 10-year Treasury briefly rising above 4.5%.

Under growing pressure, the White House revised its approach. On Apr. 9, it announced a 90-day suspension of most tariffs, although restrictions targeting China remained in place. 

The announcement helped calm markets temporarily. Bitcoin (BTC), which had dropped to around $74,500 earlier in the month, rebounded toward the $83,000 to $85,000 range after the pause. Analysts identified that level as a key area of technical resistance.

While the temporary pullback in tariffs brought some short-term relief, it has not undone the broader damage to investor sentiment or global trade momentum. 

China’s response has been back and forth. It introduced retaliatory tariffs, starting at 34%, and has increased them to 125% as of this writing, pushing the confrontation into a full-scale trade standoff.

More than 70 countries are now engaged in talks with the U.S. to renegotiate terms, but uncertainty continues to weigh heavily on markets.

Bitcoin in past crises

Although still young compared to traditional assets, Bitcoin has already weathered multiple crises, ranging from global market crashes to systemic banking failures. Each episode offers insight into how it tends to respond under stress, and why it defies easy categorization.

The COVID-19 crash in March 2020 marked its first major test in a macroeconomic crisis. As global markets unraveled, Bitcoin plunged by more than 50%, falling from around $9,000 to under $4,500 within days. 

Yet the rebound was equally sharp. Within two months, it had recovered all losses, and by year-end, it was trading above $28,000. 

The rally was fueled by a mix of retail demand, growing institutional interest, and reflation-driven trades, supported by a wave of central bank liquidity.

In 2022, the pressure came from within the crypto ecosystem. The collapse of Terra and the bankruptcy of FTX triggered a deep correction. Bitcoin fell from over $45,000 in early 2022 to below $16,000 by November. 

While these events were specific to crypto, they unfolded against a backdrop of tightening global liquidity, with the Federal Reserve aggressively raising interest rates to curb inflation. 

Perhaps the most revealing moment came in early 2023, when U.S. regional banks like Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank collapsed within days of each other. 

As questions arose around deposit security and central bank intervention, Bitcoin rallied sharply, from around $20,000 to over $28,000 in less than two weeks. For many investors, it briefly appeared to offer refuge from traditional banking risk.

These episodes reveal that Bitcoin’s behavior is not fixed. It often trades like a risk asset during periods of broad market stress, yet has also attracted capital during moments of institutional failure or monetary uncertainty. 

Rather than functioning as a conventional hedge, Bitcoin operates as an alternative asset, its role shaped by the nature and origin of each crisis.

Recent market turbulence has further blurred the lines. As Bloomberg’s Eric Balchunas observed, “The S&P 500 is as volatile as Bitcoin now.” 

The correlation between traditional and digital assets is no longer as distinct, and investors are increasingly treating them as part of the same risk universe.

This complexity is often missed in binary arguments. Schiff continues to frame downturns as existential threats to Bitcoin. Others see the asset as inherently resilient, gaining strength when conventional systems show cracks. 

So far, the truth has been more nuanced. Bitcoin is neither immune nor obsolete, it is adaptive, and its relevance depends on what breaks next.