Sales of Bitcoin reserves by Strategy Corporation only create temporary fluctuations in the market. The real structural threat to Bitcoin is the rapid development of private blockchain networks. This is the conclusion reached by JPMorgan analysts, and it deserves the closest attention.
Tokenization Moves to "Closed" Networks
The bank outlined a negative scenario in which asset tokenization, payments, and settlements will increasingly migrate to closed, permissioned networks. If this trend takes hold, the entire crypto ecosystem will face so-called "structural derating" — a slowdown in activity, a drop in liquidity, and a weakening of capital flows, which will ultimately hit Bitcoin as well.
According to experts, institutional adoption has so far favored blockchains with restricted access. The reason is simple: they provide a higher level of privacy, strict AML/KYC controls, direct governance, and regulatory certainty. This creates a direct competitive threat to public blockchains such as Ethereum, and indirectly to Bitcoin.
BIS Stance and the Threat to Stablecoins
Particularly noted is the position of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which consistently warns about the risks of using public blockchains in systemically important financial infrastructure. Instead, BIS promotes unified permissioned ledgers that combine central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), commercial bank deposits, and tokenized assets in a regulated environment.
If such solutions become widespread, especially in the non-transferable form preferred by regulators, the need for stablecoins for institutional payments could significantly decrease. This trend will be reinforced by SWIFT's blockchain initiatives and CBDC projects. Analysts also question the efficiency of settlements through public networks: deferred and netting operations reduce the need for liquidity and better align with funding management practices.
CLARITY Act Won't Save It
Even the possible adoption of the CLARITY Act, according to JPMorgan, will not eliminate the risks. Clearer rules for digital assets could, on the contrary, stimulate the development of bank tokenized deposits, strengthening the positions of traditional financial institutions and limiting the role of stablecoins based on public blockchains. As an alternative, analysts propose a hybrid model combining the functions of public and private protocols.
My comment: This analysis is not just a warning, but a diagnosis. While the Bitcoin community is focused on halvings and institutional demand through ETFs, the real threat comes from the "quiet expansion" of regulated blockchains. If major players and central banks build a parallel infrastructure that is more convenient for them, Bitcoin risks remaining in the role of "digital gold" without real payment applications in the institutional world. This is a structural challenge that cannot be solved by simply raising the price.