Mathematician Fred Krueger My NEW Prediction For The 2026 Crypto Bull Run (Prepare Now)

Can Bitcoin really hit $10 million? And

if it does, does that mean the dollar collapses, hyperinflation takes over, and everything breaks? Or is something far bigger and far more misunderstood unfolding right now? One of the most

detailed long-term Bitcoin thesis ever put forward comes from Fred Krueger, and it has nothing to do with panic, collapse, or overnight chaos. Krueger

argues that a $10 million Bitcoin is not a fantasy, not a meme, and not a short-term trade. It's a 20-year outcome

short-term trade. It's a 20-year outcome driven by global money growth, slow adoption curves, and a massive repricing of what people choose to store value in.

According to this framework, Bitcoin doesn't replace the dollar. It coexists

with it. It doesn't require hyperinflation. It requires time. While

hyperinflation. It requires time. While

stocks, bonds, and real estate struggle under stretch valuations, Bitcoin quietly absorbs a growing share of global wealth, even while remaining a small slice of the total system. That's

the part most people miss. In this

video, we're going to break down Fred Krueger's $10 million Bitcoin thesis step by step. We'll cover the timeline, the math behind a $200 trillion market cap, why the market hasn't fully frontr

run this yet, and why even at $10 million per coin, Bitcoin could still be early. And before we jump into it, just

early. And before we jump into it, just a quick reminder, only a small percentage of you watching are actually subscribed. If you're getting value from

subscribed. If you're getting value from the videos, hit that subscribe button.

It's free. It supports the channel, and you can always change your mind later.

Now let's begin.

>> Well, I think the first thing to think about is $10 million Bitcoin means roughly $200 trillion market cap for Bitcoin. And if you look at kind of uh

Bitcoin. And if you look at kind of uh world money supply right now, right? Uh

global M2 or glob sorry global M3 is 150 uh trillion dollars, right? Now that's

going to grow. So that'll grow to 300 trillion in in in a decade. And I think there were Bitcoin 10 million, we're kind of realistically looking like two

decades. So it's it's going to grow to

decades. So it's it's going to grow to about 600 trillion. So even uh even then, you know, Bitcoin will only

represent a third of global money supply.

But it will probably uh be bigger than the money than the US dollar by then, right? in terms of, you know, the size

right? in terms of, you know, the size of it and certainly relative to base money, it will probably exceed global base currency, which is all the money

that the banks have uh at their at their central banks plus all the actual cash.

Um, so I do think that, you know, we're looking at a world at which Bitcoin is going to coexist with the dollar, you know, at that right in the

United States, right? it will coexist with the dollar and I think even worldwide it'll coexist with the dollar as a means of settling international transactions. So I think you have to you

transactions. So I think you have to you have to start there that we're going to get to a point you know in 20 years

where we're going to have um you know Bitcoin will be part of the equation. I

don't think it'll be everything but I think it'll be part of the equation. And

I do think that a lot of people are gonna start to denominate things in sats. And I think that's really where

sats. And I think that's really where things get interesting.

>> The first thing that has to be understood about a $10 million Bitcoin is that it is not a price call in the traditional sense. It is a timebased

traditional sense. It is a timebased monetary outcome. Fred Krueger frames

monetary outcome. Fred Krueger frames this by anchoring Bitcoin to the scale of global money rather than to cycles, hype, or speculative mania. At $10

million per coin, Bitcoin would represent roughly a $200 trillion market capitalization. That number sounds

capitalization. That number sounds absurd until it is placed next to the size of global money itself. Today,

global broad money sits around $150 trillion. That number does not stay

trillion. That number does not stay still. Historically, global money supply

still. Historically, global money supply roughly doubles every decade as debt expands and governments finance growth, deficits, and demographic pressure. If

Bitcoin reaches $10 million in roughly 20 years, Krueger's assumption is not collapse, but continuation. In that

scenario, global money supply could approach $600 trillion. Even then,

Bitcoin would represent only about 1/3 of that total. It would not be everything. It would not erase national

everything. It would not erase national currencies. It would simply become the

currencies. It would simply become the largest monetary asset alongside them.

In relative terms, Bitcoin would likely exceed the United States dollar in size, especially when compared against base money held by central banks and physical cash. The critical point is coexistence.

cash. The critical point is coexistence.

Bitcoin does not need to replace the dollar to justify a $10 million valuation. It needs to function as a

valuation. It needs to function as a global settlement asset and a long-term store of value while fiat currencies continue to operate domestically. That

framing alone dismantles the idea that extreme price appreciation requires extreme dysfunction. It requires time,

extreme dysfunction. It requires time, scale, and adoption that compounds quietly rather than explosively. And

once you accept that Bitcoin's upside is tied to decades of monetary growth rather than short-term speculation, the rest of the thesis starts to come into focus. Now, in the next section, Fred

focus. Now, in the next section, Fred Krueger addresses the fear that always comes next. whether a $10 million

comes next. whether a $10 million Bitcoin automatically means hyperinflation.

>> Does $10 million Bitcoin mean hyperinflation?

>> No, I don't think it does. Uh I mean, it might, right? There's there's some

might, right? There's there's some chance. There's always some chance of

chance. There's always some chance of hyperinflation. I wouldn't say it's like

hyperinflation. I wouldn't say it's like a 0% chance. It's it's not on my bingo card really for what's going to happen in the next two years in America. Uh

although could we see uh sort of 1970s style inflation? Uh yeah, very possibly,

style inflation? Uh yeah, very possibly, right? We could see 10% inflation, 7 to

right? We could see 10% inflation, 7 to 10% inflation.

>> So yeah, I guess like your point overall is like, okay, Bitcoin can reach $10 million per coin over, you know, next couple decade or two. Um and that

doesn't necessarily mean hyperinflation.

>> No, I think there's some inflation. Like

I would say base case divide by three.

You know what I mean?

>> Yeah.

>> Somewhere between three and four, right?

>> So >> Bitcoin is going to go up 100x in purchasing power. It goes up 30x or 25x,

purchasing power. It goes up 30x or 25x, you know, but still it's an amazing >> amazing opportunity of purchasing power, you know, lifechanging, right? For those

who actually hold throughout the whole period.

One of the biggest mental roadblocks people hit when they hear a $10 million Bitcoin is the assumption that something catastrophic must have happened first.

Hyperinflation is usually the default explanation. Fred Krueger directly

explanation. Fred Krueger directly pushes back on that idea. In his

framework, extreme inflation is not required and it is not even the base case. There is always some probability

case. There is always some probability of runaway inflation in any fiat system.

But that is not what the $10 million thesis depends on. Instead, the

distinction that matters is between base inflation and asset inflation. This is

where the argument becomes far more grounded. Base necessities such as food,

grounded. Base necessities such as food, basic housing, and everyday services tend to inflate slowly over long periods. Even during difficult decades

periods. Even during difficult decades like the 1970s, inflation averaged high singledigits, not exponential collapse.

Over 20 years, prices more than doubled, but they did not increase five or 10 times across the board. Where inflation

becomes extreme is in scarce assets tied to status, access, or long-term leverage. Higher education is one

leverage. Higher education is one example. Tuition costs have compounded

example. Tuition costs have compounded at rates closer to 10% for decades.

Luxury goods follow a similar trajectory. Financial assets do as well.

trajectory. Financial assets do as well.

Bitcoin fits into this category far more than it fits into groceries or rent. It

is a scarce asset competing for stored value in a world that keeps producing more money. Krueger's point is that even

more money. Krueger's point is that even if Bitcoin increases 100 times in nominal terms, its real purchasing power increase could still be 25 or 30 times after accounting for inflation. That

outcome alone would be life-changing for anyone who holds through the full period. It does not require bread to

period. It does not require bread to cost $50 or the dollar to disappear. It

requires steady monetary expansion and Bitcoin continuing to absorb a share of global savings. This framing reframes

global savings. This framing reframes Bitcoin from an apocalypse hedge into a longduration compounding asset. It also

explains why the opportunity remains asymmetric rather than obvious. That

naturally leads to the next question, which is where Bitcoin pulls that value from if inflation alone is not the driver. And if you want to stay ahead of

driver. And if you want to stay ahead of these signals and know exactly when the market's heating up or when it's giving you those rare buying windows, I break it down every day in the crypto nutshell. My free 5-minute daily crypto

nutshell. My free 5-minute daily crypto newsletter is built to give you quick, actionable insights so you can make smarter decisions without spending hours buried in charts or headlines. You'll

get clear signals on when to buy, when to take profits, and the latest news that could move markets all delivered straight to your inbox. Just click the first link in the description, enter your email, and you're in. So I think

there's a case there's some case to be made that real estate might demonetize in the favor of Bitcoin as an asset class, you know, because you

know it it can only grow. Right now

we're pushing out these kind of valuation metrics like real estate to income levels.

>> Yeah.

>> Right now that's eight times.

You know, I don't think you get to 20 times. You know what I mean? like you

times. You know what I mean? like you

know people people aren't going to buy a house and they well I have to spend every dollar I make for 20 years to buy this house maybe if there was no

alternatives yeah but I think people will be uh no I'm going to buy Bitcoin rather than buy that house at 20 times earnings you know >> uh so I think we're getting to these

very stretched valuations uh in in some of these assets and I think stocks is is the same right I mean >> yep >> you know if as If you use stocks in a

portfolio, you're basically uh implicitly increasing PE ratios unless the earnings go crazy, right? But

the PE ratios are also going crazy high, right? So, you know, I think that's

right? So, you know, I think that's going to put a little bit of a cap on some of the other assets, main the two ones being, you know, real estate and

stocks. Um, and then, you know, I think

stocks. Um, and then, you know, I think bonds are just a terrible story kind of for the next couple decades. So, I, you

know, I I do think there's going to be growth away from those assets into Bitcoin. So, I think Bitcoin is going to

Bitcoin. So, I think Bitcoin is going to take a bigger and bigger bigger chunk.

>> Uh, but just given the size of the fiat system, >> it's still not going to be the majority by any means. I mean, it's still probably single digits, you know, even

20 years from now.

>> So, I think that's, you know, that just tells you how early we are that you can sit there and say, I think we're going to be a $10 million Bitcoin, and yet

Bitcoin is going to be less than 10% of of of the world's assets.

>> If Bitcoin is not rising purely because of inflation, then the obvious question becomes where that value is coming from.

Fred Krueger argues that the answer lies in the quiet saturation of traditional asset classes. Real estate, equities,

asset classes. Real estate, equities, and bonds have all benefited from decades of falling interest rates and expanding leverage. That tailwind is no

expanding leverage. That tailwind is no longer guaranteed. In some cases, it may

longer guaranteed. In some cases, it may already be exhausted. Real estate is the clearest example. In many developed

clearest example. In many developed economies, home prices have climbed to levels that require buyers to spend close to a decade of total income just to acquire shelter. That ratio has

historically been far lower. Krueger's

point is not that housing collapses overnight. It is that valuations reach a

overnight. It is that valuations reach a ceiling where future buyers simply opt out. When income multiples stretch too

out. When income multiples stretch too far, demand weakens, not because people stop needing homes, but because the asset stops functioning as a rational store of value. Bitcoin offers an

alternative at that margin. It does not require leverage. It does not impose

require leverage. It does not impose maintenance costs. It does not depend on

maintenance costs. It does not depend on local wages rising fast enough to justify its price. As valuation pressure builds in real estate, even a small reallocation of capital toward Bitcoin

can have an outsized impact because Bitcoin's supply is fixed. Stocks face a similar issue. Equity returns

similar issue. Equity returns increasingly rely on expanding price to earnings ratios rather than explosive earnings growth. Bonds present an even

earnings growth. Bonds present an even weaker case, offering low real returns in a world where debt issuance continues to accelerate. None of these assets

to accelerate. None of these assets disappear, but all of them compete for capital in a crowded landscape. Bitcoin

does not need to replace them. It only

needs to siphon a small percentage of global wealth over long periods. Even 2

or 3% rotation from these markets into Bitcoin would support massive price appreciation. That is how Bitcoin grows

appreciation. That is how Bitcoin grows while still remaining a minority of global assets. Now, the next piece of

global assets. Now, the next piece of the puzzle is why markets have not fully priced this in already despite the math already being visible. Bitcoin is a lot

harder to sell. Okay. Because I think if you say to somebody here, you can transfer this uh you can put your money in this address. Oh, it it takes 10

minutes to confirm and there's this long not really very human friendly uh you know address and uh and then you you need to store it

on a hardware wallet and you need to make multiple copies of different keys and then and then you need to like maybe engrave them on a steel plate plate and put them in a vault. I think most people

are they're like, "I'm doing this. Why?"

"Oh, yeah, but you can send it to somebody. It only takes 10 minutes per

somebody. It only takes 10 minutes per transaction at minimum. Maybe it could take an hour." They're like, "This does not seem like a technological,

you know, it's it's not a technological no-brainer like AI is or or the internet." Um, so I think you know you

internet." Um, so I think you know you real it takes a while to realize, oh, and then by the way, there's, you know, a million other cryptocurrencies that

are competing with it. So, you know, part of your brain is like, well, isn't this just like MySpace and Facebook, and there's going to be some new one that's going to take over Bitcoin. So, I think

there's a lot of reasons why Bitcoin is not as obvious as other tech changes in

the world. So while it is true

the world. So while it is true um you know it it it it's it's not it's not happening that quickly the the

adoption for Bitcoin is even slower right so the adoption for Bitcoin is growing at about 15% a year right the if

if you look at the the power trend for u for new addresses right so how many new people come to Bitcoin well it doubles every four years, three and a half, four

years. Now,

years. Now, that's, you know, if you keep tabs on it, that's pretty big, right? So, it's

maybe 50 million today, I think. You

know, the way I look at it, maybe it's a 100 million four years from now. Maybe

it's 200 million eight years from now.

But, you know, that's not like Instagram. Instagram went from zero to a

Instagram. Instagram went from zero to a billion in two years, right? Chat GPT

went from zero to a billion daily users in in in like two years. you know, so you know, we're we're dealing with a

slower adoption circle um thing than any of these other things. And I think people are are nervous, you know, look, they don't they're nervous about entrusting

their nest egg that's taken them decades to make. You know, they're nervous about

to make. You know, they're nervous about entrusting it to completely new piece of technology, right? So the pro the adoption rate is

right? So the pro the adoption rate is slower and I think you know it takes a couple years really of holding Bitcoin before you're really comfortable enough

to kind of I mean at least for me before you're comfortable enough to tell your dad to say buy it. You know what I mean?

It's a slow process. So I think doesn't mean we're not going to get there or anything. It's just you know we're going

anything. It's just you know we're going to get there slower than than all of us want it to happen. And it's still fast, right? It's still it's still really

right? It's still it's still really fast. I mean, you know, Belgi had this

fast. I mean, you know, Belgi had this statement that, you know, when history book looks at it, they're going to be like one day Bitcoin was invented and then just seems like

just next day everybody was using Bitcoin. But that period is going to be

Bitcoin. But that period is going to be like 40 years in between, right?

you know, so but you know from creation to full monetary takeover 40 years that's pretty good that is the that you know and

Bitcoin is the fastest asset ever to go to a trillion dollars in market cap you know so >> you know it is happening really really fast people are front running it so I guess the answer to you is people are

front running it that's what that's why Bitcoin is doing it it's just and what I think what the power law is is just It's just the it's the it's the statistical measure of the speed of how people are doing it.

>> Yeah.

>> They're doing it at this viral rate that is, you know, currently about 40% in terms of price and about 15% in terms of uh

in terms of addresses.

If the math works and the timeline is measured in decades, the natural question is why markets have not already frontr run a $10 million Bitcoin. Fred

Krueger frames this as a human problem rather than a financial one. Markets are

excellent at reacting to visible trends.

They struggle with slow abstract shifts that require patience, conviction, and personal responsibility. Bitcoin is not

personal responsibility. Bitcoin is not an intuitive technology for most people.

Using it feels complex. Self-custody

demands discipline. Transactions are not instant. Addresses are unfamiliar.

instant. Addresses are unfamiliar.

Security requires deliberate effort.

Compared to experiences like artificial intelligence tools or social media platforms, Bitcoin does not feel magical on first contact. It feels foreign. That

friction alone delays adoption even when the long-term benefits are clear. There

is also competition noise. Thousands of

alternative digital assets exist, creating confusion around permanence.

Many investors assume Bitcoin will eventually be replaced the same way early internet platforms were. That

assumption persists despite Bitcoin's unmatched security, decentralization, and monetary policy. It takes time and study to understand why Bitcoin is structurally different, and most people

do not invest the effort until they already own it. Adoption data reflects this reality. Bitcoin adoption grows

this reality. Bitcoin adoption grows steadily rather than explosively.

Address growth trends suggest roughly 15% annual expansion with the user base doubling every few years. That pace is slow compared to consumer applications but fast compared to monetary

revolutions. Trusting a new monetary

revolutions. Trusting a new monetary asset with lifetime savings is not a casual decision. Because of this,

casual decision. Because of this, markets partially frontr run Bitcoin but never fully price its end state. Early

adopters accumulate. Institutions move

gradually. Retail hesitates. That

staggered behavior creates repeated opportunities for repricing rather than a single explosive moment. This slow

adoption curve is not a weakness. It is

the reason Bitcoin continues to surprise people on the upside. The final piece is what this all looks like when viewed from a full multi-deade perspective.

When people hear $10 million per Bitcoin, it sounds like the end of the story. In reality, within this

story. In reality, within this framework, it represents a midpoint in a much longer monetary transition. Even at

that price, Bitcoin would still be a minority asset in a global system measured in hundreds of trillions of dollars. That perspective completely

dollars. That perspective completely reframes what late actually means. If

Bitcoin reaches a $200 trillion market capitalization over the next 20 years, it would still represent less than 10% of global assets. Stocks, real estate,

private businesses, sovereign debt, and national currencies would still dominate the financial landscape. Bitcoin would

not replace everything. It would sit alongside them as the most trusted monetary anchor in the system. That

outcome is not radical. It is

conservative given Bitcoin's properties and the trajectory of global debt. What

makes this especially important is how uneven the journey will feel. Bitcoin

will not move in a straight line. It

will experience brutal drawdowns, long consolidations, and periods where it appears broken or forgotten. But those

phases are not contradictions to the thesis. They are the mechanism that

thesis. They are the mechanism that transfers ownership from short-term participants to long-term holders. Every

major adoption wave in history has followed that pattern. The real

asymmetry lies in understanding that Bitcoin does not need universal belief to succeed. It needs incremental trust.

to succeed. It needs incremental trust.

Each cycle brings new institutions, new balance sheets, and new settlement use cases. Each wave builds on the last.

cases. Each wave builds on the last.

Over decades, that compounding trust does the work that hype never could.

From a historical lens, 40 years from invention to global monetary relevance is extremely fast. Most people alive today are witnessing the transition in real time. That is why it feels slow

real time. That is why it feels slow while it is happening and obvious only in hindsight. A $10 million Bitcoin does

in hindsight. A $10 million Bitcoin does not mark the end of opportunity. It

marks the moment the world finally realizes what was quietly forming all along. Anyway guys, that's all we have

along. Anyway guys, that's all we have for today. Thanks for watching and I'll

for today. Thanks for watching and I'll see you all in the next