Image CC BY-SA 2.0 via Secretaría de Cultura de la Ciudad de México
Investors often ask whether one asset class is better than another.
It is an understandable question. With so many choices available, identifying one clear winner is simpler than sorting through the potential benefits, drawbacks and risks of each and every one of the 100,000+ financial products available today.
But that’s usually the wrong question.
“Better” depends on what an investor is trying to accomplish. An asset that helps pursue one financial goal may be poorly suited to another.
Even highly successful investors can overlook that distinction. Which brings us to today’s featured story…
This billionaire CEO claims bitcoin beats real estate
Consider Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas Pliego, the founder and chairman of Grupo Salinas.
Salinas is a longtime bitcoin advocate. According to CoinDesk, he has said that approximately 70% of his investment portfolio is allocated to bitcoin – and that he considers bitcoin a better long-term investment than real estate.
That is a bold position. It is also an unusually concentrated one.
Holding 70% of an investment portfolio in a single asset does not become a conventional diversification strategy simply because the remaining 30% is held elsewhere. If bitcoin declined sharply, the effect on a portfolio with that allocation could be substantial.
Salinas’s circumstances also differ considerably from those of an everyday retirement investor. Forbes estimated his and his family’s net worth at $3.7 billion as of June 23, 2026. That’s a lot!
That estimate does not tell us the size of his liquid or investable portfolio, so it would be a mistake to use it to calculate how many dollars he holds in bitcoin or other assets. It does, however, illustrate an important point: A billionaire may have financial resources, income sources and a capacity to absorb losses that most households do not.
His personal conviction therefore tells us very little about the allocation that would be appropriate for someone else.
If you are asking whether Salinas is right that bitcoin is categorically better than real estate, you may still be asking the wrong question.
Bitcoin and real estate perform different jobs
Direct real estate ownership and bitcoin have very different characteristics.
Someone might purchase a home because it provides a place to live while potentially building equity. An investor might purchase rental property to pursue income and long-term appreciation. Others gain real-estate exposure through publicly traded real estate investment trusts, or REITs, which behave differently from owning property directly.
Direct property is tangible, familiar and potentially income-producing. But it can also be illiquid, expensive to maintain and highly concentrated in one location. Rental income is not guaranteed, and financing can amplify both gains and losses.
Bitcoin does not provide a place to live or generate rent. Its appeal rests on a different set of characteristics.
Compared with direct property, bitcoin is highly divisible and generally easier to transfer or sell. It is not tied to a particular physical location, and its supply is governed by the rules of its network rather than by new construction or land development.
Those characteristics come with significant tradeoffs.
Bitcoin’s price can rise or fall dramatically over relatively short periods. It does not generate cash flow simply by being held. Investors must also evaluate custody arrangements, account fees, security practices and the possibility of substantial or permanent loss.
The SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy says we should weigh crypto’s potential benefits against its high volatility and other risks. I strongly agree! We’ve discussed volatility quite frequently, so regular readers will know my take on crypto volatility: It’s a feature, not a bug.
This does not establish that real estate is “better” or “worse.”
Bitcoin and real estate should not be evaluated as though they were interchangeable. They’re both financial assets, granted. But that’s almost the end of their similarities.
Instead of asking which asset is better…
Ask what role the asset fills in relation to other assets
A more useful question is:
Does this asset help you pursue your goals?
Answering that requires more than choosing the asset with the most compelling recent performance.
Questions worth considering include:
- Is the objective growth, income, capital preservation or some combination of the three?
- How long is the investment time horizon?
- How much volatility and potential loss could the portfolio withstand?
- Might the investor need to sell the asset quickly?
- How would the asset interact with the portfolio’s existing holdings?
- What fees, custody requirements and tax rules apply?
The answers will not be identical for every household.
An investor seeking current income may evaluate rental property differently from someone seeking exposure to a scarce digital asset. Someone who already has substantial wealth tied up in a home or investment property may also view an additional real-estate allocation differently from someone with no existing property exposure.
The point is not that every investor needs both bitcoin and real estate. They aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s like the point I made back when Michael Saylor said bitcoin is better than gold. That’s not the point! Gold, bitcoin and real estate are all different assets. They can all coexist in the same diversified savings plan. This isn’t the beginning of a Pokémon game. You don’t have to pick just one!
The point is that an asset should be evaluated according to the function it may serve, the risks it introduces and how it fits into the investor’s overall financial situation.
What Salinas’s strategy can – and cannot – teach us
Salinas’s bitcoin position demonstrates conviction. It does not demonstrate that a 70% allocation is broadly appropriate.
His example also highlights the importance of time horizon. He describes himself as a long-term bitcoin believer and has apparently maintained that position through significant market declines.
But a long holding period does not make a volatile asset safe. Bitcoin has delivered substantial gains over some long periods. But it’s also experienced severe drawdowns. Past performance does not guarantee future results, of course. Simply holding an asset longer does not eliminate the possibility of loss.
The practical lesson is not simply “take the long-term view” or “hold no matter what.”
It is to understand an investment’s risks before volatility arrives. And to consider whether its role and size are consistent with the your time horizon, liquidity needs and risk tolerance.
That is a less dramatic conclusion than declaring bitcoin better than real estate. It is also a more useful one for someone making long-term retirement decisions.
BitIRA helps investors hold eligible digital assets within self-directed Traditional and Roth IRAs. The tax treatment of contributions, growth and distributions depends on the type of account (Traditional vs. Roth) and are also subject to prohibited-transaction rules and other requirements. That’s why the Digital Currency Specialists at BitIRA are available to guide you through the process.
To learn more about how a Crypto IRA works, download our free Crypto IRA Guide. After completing your own research, you can also begin opening a BitIRA account online in less than 10 minutes.
