Nick Carter Warns of Quantum Computing Threats: What Is the Real Reason Behind Bitcoin Price Drop

As the Bitcoin market continues to stagnate, renowned investor Nick Carter has pointed out the risks of quantum computing as a factor behind the market downturn, causing ripples in the industry. Nick Carter, a partner at Castle Island Ventures, claims that this “mysterious” price stagnation is caused by “threats from quantum technology” and is “the most important topic of discussion this year.” However, this view is divided among market analysts, with increasing arguments suggesting that different economic mechanisms may be the true underlying factors.

Looking at market performance after the US presidential election in November 2024, the differences are striking. Since that period, gold has risen by 83%, silver by 205%, the Nasdaq Composite by 24%, and the S&P 500 by 17.6%. Meanwhile, Bitcoin has had to endure a 2.6% decline. This contrast has led investors like Nick Carter to see it as an “abnormal phenomenon,” shining a spotlight on the quantum risk theory.

Currently, Bitcoin is trading at approximately $88.37K, significantly below its peak in fall 2025. During the same period, gold reached $4,930 per ounce, and silver rose to around $96.

The Background of Renowned Investor Nick Carter’s “Quantum Risk Theory” Influencing Investor Sentiment

Nick Carter’s attribution of market stagnation to the threat of quantum computing stems from multiple factors. First, this theme periodically resurfaces both academically and among financial professionals.

Indeed, at the beginning of the month, Jefferies strategist Christopher Wood explicitly excluded Bitcoin from his model portfolio and mentioned quantum computing as a “long-term risk factor.” Such comments from influential financial institutions can impact market psychology and heighten caution among investors like Nick Carter.

At the same time, Bitcoin’s weaker price movements compared to gold and stocks tend to bring this discussion back to the surface. Whether quantum risk functions as a “market psychological anxiety factor” requires further examination from different perspectives.

On-Chain Analysts Point Out the Truth: Whale Sell-offs and Supply Dynamics

Meanwhile, experts from on-chain analysis platforms like Checkonchain dispute Nick Carter’s view. Anonymous on-chain analyst @_Checkmatey states, “Attributing the cause of red candles to market manipulation or sudden surges to exchange balances, and similarly blaming price stagnation on quantum risk, is excessive speculation.”

According to his analysis, the market is driven not by “sci-fi threats” but rather by classical supply and demand mechanisms and positioning. Specifically, he highlights:

Gold Price Rise Factors: Since 2008, countries have been increasingly purchasing gold instead of government bonds, and this trend has accelerated since February 2022. This indicates a mechanism where national-level asset allocation strategies are pushing up gold prices.

Selling Pressure from Whales: The selling pressure from large holders (whales) in 2025 has repeatedly weakened all previous bullish rallies. This selling is based on technical levels and profit-taking points, and is unrelated to concerns about quantum risks, according to analysts.

Vijay Boyapati, a prominent Bitcoin investor and author, points to a more straightforward cause: “The real explanation is simple — many whales, upon reaching the ‘magic number’ of around $100,000, released a massive supply of sell orders into the market.”

The Reality of Quantum Computing Threats: Gap Between Theory and Practice

It is true that quantum computing poses a theoretical threat to Bitcoin’s cryptographic foundations. Machines with advanced computational abilities, like those capable of running Shor’s algorithm, could theoretically break elliptic curve cryptography and threaten wallet security.

However, experts warn against conflating this technical threat with “current market fluctuations.” The key point is that practical quantum computers capable of this are still decades away from realization.

The Bitcoin technology community remains consistent in this view. Adam Back, co-founder of Blockstream, positions the quantum threat as “a very distant and manageable risk,” explaining that even in a worst-case scenario, it would not lead to immediate or network-wide loss of funds.

One reason for this is the existence of already conceived countermeasures.

Defensive Measures Prepared by Bitcoin Developers: BIP-360 and Gradual Transition

Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 360 (BIP-360) introduces a quantum-resistant address format. This proposal already outlines a phased migration path should the quantum threat become a reality.

In other words, there is already a technical roadmap for addressing this issue. The developer community is not defenseless against this long-term threat and is actively preparing.

Considering this technical background, it becomes apparent that explaining short-term price fluctuations as “quantum risk” is inconsistent. Market cycles move over weeks or months, whereas addressing quantum threats is a matter of years or even decades.

Nevertheless, concerns expressed by some traditional financial figures influence market psychology, increasing caution among investors like Nick Carter. In the Bitcoin market, the gap between rational analysis and market sentiment can sometimes complicate price movements.