Everyone Expected a Bitcoin Investing Boom?

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

Why It Never Came

For years, the pitch was simple: once Washington gave crypto its blessing, ordinary Americans would pile in. Spot Bitcoin ETFs launched in 2024, crypto found a place in some retirement accounts, and by late 2025 the political winds had shifted decisively in the industry’s favor. Bitcoin obliged by soaring to around $125,000. This was supposed to be the moment crypto crossed over from speculative curiosity to mainstream portfolio staple.

It didn’t happen. Roughly 9% of American adults now own cryptocurrency, according to a recent Urban Institute report—a modest figure that suggests the anticipated wave of new adoption simply never arrived. Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s price has fallen from that October 2025 peak to around $65,000 by late July 2026, nearly halving in value. The regulatory tailwinds were real. The retail stampede was not.

The Price Problem

The most obvious explanation is also the simplest: price crashes don’t inspire confidence, they destroy it. “By definition, that means people are selling,” said Caleb Silver, editor in chief of Investopedia. “And that likely means that people who may have experimented in buying it have decided that they don’t want to own it anymore because they’ve seen the price crash.”

This gets at something crypto’s boosters have long underestimated. Bitcoin’s core selling point to newcomers was never really its technology or its philosophy of decentralization—it was the prospect of rapid gains. When those gains reverse hard enough, the people who came for the upside have every reason to leave. Silver put it bluntly: “There are many investors who bought crypto over the last 15 years who were simply chasing price.” Take away the price momentum, and you take away the primary reason a lot of people were ever interested.

A Tale of Two Investor Types

The Urban Institute survey draws a useful distinction between people who still hold crypto and the roughly 8% who used to but don’t anymore. Current investors tend to frame their ownership in more durable terms: 45% cite portfolio diversification, 37% cite interest in the underlying technology, and 27% say they believe digital currencies represent the future. These are, at least nominally, thesis-driven reasons that don’t depend entirely on the next price candle.

Former investors tell a different story. They were more likely to say their original motivation was simply to make money, and they exited primarily because they were losing it. In other words, the population that treated Bitcoin as a speculative bet mostly already left the table. What remains is a smaller, more committed base—one that isn’t shrinking dramatically, but isn’t expanding into the mass-market phenomenon regulators and industry insiders once predicted, either.

The demographics reinforce this picture of a niche rather than a mainstream asset class. Crypto investors skew young and male, and the survey found Asian Americans are considerably more likely to hold crypto than other groups. Most holders have stuck with it for years, but their positions tend to be small: two-fifths of crypto investors hold less than $250 worth. This isn’t the profile of a technology going fully mainstream—it’s a profile of a persistent subculture.

The Deeper Structural Issue

Beyond the immediate price crash, crypto faces a harder problem: nobody has ever fully settled what it’s actually worth owning for. Unlike a stock, Bitcoin generates no cash flow, pays no dividend, and represents no claim on future earnings. Its value rests almost entirely on the belief that someone else will want to buy it for more later. That’s a workable premise during a bull run and a brutal one during a bust, because there’s no earnings report or dividend yield to anchor a floor under the price.

This also undermines one of the central pitches for crypto as a portfolio diversifier—the idea that it moves independently of stocks and can cushion a portfolio during downturns. In practice, Bitcoin’s price has often tended to fall alongside equities during periods of market stress rather than offsetting those losses, which weakens the case for holding it as a hedge. Morningstar’s Amy Arnott, writing in 2025, suggested a portfolio weighting of 5% or less “seems prudent,” adding that many investors may want to skip cryptocurrency altogether—hardly a ringing endorsement from a mainstream research firm, even a relatively measured one.

Regulatory Tailwinds Weren’t Enough

Perhaps the most important lesson here is that regulatory legitimacy and retail enthusiasm are not the same thing. Washington’s blessing removed some structural barriers—ETFs made buying easier, retirement account access opened new channels—but it didn’t manufacture demand from people who weren’t already interested. It turns out plenty of Americans looked at crypto once policymakers cleared the path and decided they still didn’t want in, especially once prices started falling.

The Urban Institute’s recommendation—that regulators require clearer, standardized risk disclosures from crypto exchanges and providers—suggests the report’s authors see this less as a story of missed opportunity and more as one of appropriately cautious behavior. Crypto adoption didn’t stall because the doors weren’t open. It stalled because, once people looked inside, a lot of them didn’t like what they found: an asset with no fundamental anchor, a history of brutal drawdowns, and returns that depend entirely on someone else being willing to pay more for it tomorrow than you paid today.

EDUCATION: Books

SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors1738@outlook.com -OR- http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

Like, Refer and Subscribe

HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731

CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900

ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

FINANCE:Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors

INSURANCE:Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Dictionary of Health Economics and Finance

Dictionary of Health Information Technology and Security

Dictionary of Health Insurance and Managed Care

***

Trump Accounts

By Dr. David Edward Marcinko; MBA MEd

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

Encouraging Early Investment and Financial Opportunity

Trump Accounts are a proposed form of tax-advantaged investment account designed to help American children begin building wealth from birth. Created as part of a broader effort to promote saving, investing, and financial independence, these accounts would give eligible children a financial foundation that could grow throughout childhood. Supporters view the policy as a way to expand participation in the stock market, while critics question whether it would meaningfully reduce economic inequality. The idea reflects a larger debate about how government policy can encourage long-term financial security.

Under the proposal, an account would be established for each eligible child, with the federal government providing an initial contribution for children born during a specified period. Parents, relatives, employers, charitable organizations, and others could make additional contributions, subject to annual limits. The money would generally be invested in diversified, low-cost funds that track the performance of the American stock market. Because the account would remain invested for many years, it could benefit from compound growth, in which investment earnings produce additional earnings over time.

The most important potential benefit of Trump Accounts is that they would introduce children and families to investing at an early age. Many Americans do not own stocks outside retirement plans, and some families lack access to financial guidance or investment opportunities. Giving children an account at birth could make investing feel more familiar and accessible. It might also encourage parents to discuss saving, risk, and long-term planning with their children. By the time account holders reach adulthood, they could have both financial assets and a better understanding of how investment markets work.

These accounts could also help young adults pay for major life expenses. Depending on the final rules, account holders may be able to use the money for education, job training, a first home, starting a business, or retirement. Even a modest balance could reduce dependence on high-interest loans. The policy may be especially valuable because younger generations face high housing costs, education expenses, and uncertainty about future retirement benefits. A financial resource accumulated over eighteen years could provide flexibility during the transition to adulthood.

However, Trump Accounts would not eliminate wealth inequality by themselves. Families with higher incomes would likely be able to contribute more money, allowing their children’s accounts to grow much larger. Lower-income households might struggle to make additional deposits, even if they receive the same initial government contribution. As a result, the program could expand investment ownership without substantially closing the gap between wealthy and poor families. Additional incentives or matching contributions for low-income households might be necessary to make the policy more equitable.

There are also concerns about cost, investment risk, and administrative complexity. A federal contribution for millions of children would require significant public funding. Stock investments can lose value, particularly over shorter periods, so account balances would not be guaranteed. The government would also need clear rules concerning eligibility, withdrawals, fees, taxes, and account management. Poorly designed restrictions could make the accounts difficult to use, while excessive flexibility could undermine their long-term purpose.

Overall, Trump Accounts represent an ambitious attempt to give children an early stake in the American economy. Their strongest feature is the use of time and compound growth to build assets gradually. Their success, however, would depend on fair access, low fees, effective administration, and protections for families with limited resources. If designed carefully, the accounts could become a useful tool for financial education and opportunity, although they would need to operate alongside broader policies addressing wages, housing, education, and poverty.

EDUCATION: Books

SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors1738@outlook.com -OR- http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

Like, Refer and Subscribe

HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731

CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900

ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

FINANCE:Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors

INSURANCE:Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Dictionary of Health Economics and Finance

Dictionary of Health Information Technology and Security

Dictionary of Health Insurance and Managed Care

***