Recently, I came across a good viewpoint that sparked a lot of thoughts.

Speaking of this, our understanding of crypto assets is often troubled by a misconception - thinking that the more scarce and the greater the appreciation potential of a cryptocurrency, the better choice it is. However, when we carefully dissect the actual logic of market operations, things are not that simple.

Think again about your trading experience: why do certain coins repeatedly appear in high-frequency trading, while BTC is increasingly stored in cold wallets? This is not a coincidence. From the perspective of market microstructure, assets with low circulation costs and high turnover efficiency naturally become the best "trading lubricants." They carry the real demand of the market—quick exchanges and frequent circulation. In contrast, assets like Bitcoin and gold, precisely because they are too scarce, are assigned a new role—value storage.

This is the true division of labor in the market. It is not that bad money drives out good money, but that both have found their respective ecological niches. The former is the blood, while the latter is the treasury. The vitality of money ultimately stems from "being needed," rather than just the promise of appreciation.