VanEck CEO Casts Doubt on Bitcoin’s Privacy as Quantum Tech Advances

A Stark Warning for Bitcoin’s Future

Bitcoin has been here before with price crashes and regulatory scares, but this time the concern runs deeper than volatility. Jan van Eck, CEO of asset manager VanEck, has warned that Bitcoin’s long-term design may not be ready for the coming era of quantum computing, questioning whether the network still has “enough encryption” and “enough privacy” to justify its investment case.

His comments landed at a sensitive moment for the market. According to YCharts data, the btc price on November 24, 2025, hovered around $86,784, down about 18% from more than $105,900 just two weeks earlier. YCharts

Over the past six weeks, the wider crypto market has shed roughly $1.2 trillion in value, about a quarter of its capitalization, as risk assets sold off globally. In that context, a major institutional CEO questioning Bitcoin’s core cryptography hits much harder than the typical bearish headline.

What Jan van Eck Actually Said

In a recent appearance on CNBC, van Eck said the firm is scrutinizing whether Bitcoin still offers “sufficient encryption and privacy” in the face of rapid advances in quantum computing.He stressed that the issue goes beyond short-term price moves or the usual boom-and-bust cycle, arguing that there is “something else going on” inside the Bitcoin community that non-crypto audiences need to understand.

Jan van Eck speaking on the quantum computing risk. Source: CNBC

For now, VanEck still runs Bitcoin products and remains broadly positive on the asset. However, van Eck was explicit that the firm would “walk away” if it concluded that Bitcoin’s fundamental thesis had been weakened by quantum threats or unresolved privacy concerns.

Coming from a company that helped pioneer spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds and manages billions in digital-asset exposure, that warning is a big signal to institutions watching from the sidelines.

He also noted that some longtime Bitcoin “OGs” and maximalists are exploring alternatives such as Zcash, which builds stronger privacy directly into its protocol. That shift in sentiment among early adopters is one of the red flags VanEck is tracking.

Why Quantum Computing Spooks Bitcoin Investors

The heart of the concern lies in how Bitcoin secures value. Today, the network relies on elliptic-curve cryptography to protect public and private keys, the core mechanism that proves ownership of coins. Quantum computers, at least in theory, could one day run algorithms capable of breaking these schemes much faster than any classical machine.

Academic and industry estimates differ on timing, but some researchers suggest that a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer might be feasible within a few decades, while others argue it could arrive sooner if hardware progress accelerates.

If that happens before Bitcoin migrates to quantum-resistant cryptography, addresses with exposed public keys could become vulnerable, including many older wallets and dormant holdings. For everyday users who store coins in a long-term crypto wallet, this is not an immediate emergency, but it is a structural risk that needs a roadmap.

VanEck’s CEO is not claiming that Bitcoin will be broken tomorrow. Instead, he is questioning whether the community is moving fast enough to plan upgrades, coordinate consensus, and communicate timelines to investors who manage capital on multi-decade horizons.

The Privacy Question and Zcash as a Reference Point

Beyond encryption, van Eck also highlighted privacy. Bitcoin’s ledger is fully transparent, and while pseudonymous addresses offer some cover, blockchain analytics firms have become highly effective at clustering identities and tracing flows across exchanges and services. That is one reason why privacy-focused protocols like Zcash and Monero have long argued that transparency is a double-edged sword.

Recent commentary picked up by outlets such as CoinDesk and ForkLog notes that even traditional finance analysts are starting to ask whether Zcash could divert some of Bitcoin’s ideological support, especially from users who value confidentiality and censorship resistance above all else.

VanEck’s comments plug directly into that debate: if a “digital gold” asset gradually loses both its privacy edge and its cryptographic comfort margin, does its premium narrative remain justified?

Market Context: Fear, Flows, and Institutional Optics

All of this comes as Bitcoin weathers a bruising macro backdrop. The Financial Times reported that the crypto market has lost roughly 25% of its value in a six-week window as investors flee speculative assets over interest-rate uncertainty and stretched tech valuations.

Bitcoin alone has dropped nearly 30% from its recent peak, though it still commands a market capitalization of around $1.7 trillion and remains the largest digital asset by far.

For retail traders who might be tempted to buy crypto during this pullback, van Eck’s remarks serve as both a caution and a challenge. Short-term price dips are nothing new in Bitcoin’s history, but questions about long-term encryption and privacy go to the heart of why this asset was created and why institutions have embraced it as a hedge against monetary and political risk.

How Exchanges and Builders May Respond

If quantum and privacy worries continue to build momentum, they could influence how crypto infrastructure providers communicate with users. Major trading platforms will likely emphasize their progress on quantum-resistant standards, cold-storage security, and upgrade paths designed to make future network migrations easier and more reliable.

On the development side, more funding may flow into research on quantum-safe signatures, address formats that minimize exposed public keys, and interoperability solutions that let users move value into upgraded systems without losing the network effects of Bitcoin’s brand.

Some Bitcoin developers have already been exploring proposals around quantum-resistant schemes and new script types, but coordination is complex. Any significant change must preserve decentralization, avoid fragmenting the network, and maintain compatibility with existing tools and services. VanEck’s public comments may add pressure, and perhaps political cover, for pushing those discussions higher up the agenda.

What This Means for Bitcoin’s Long Game

In the near term, markets will continue to trade on familiar drivers: macro data, liquidity, regulation, ETF flows, and shifting sentiment around risk assets. Day-to-day crypto market prices will not suddenly hinge on quantum research papers or cryptography debate threads. But over longer horizons, these issues matter.

VanEck’s CEO has essentially placed Bitcoin “on watch” from the perspective of a major asset manager. If the community demonstrates credible progress on quantum safety and clearer thinking on privacy, large institutions may treat this episode as a healthy wake-up call. If it does not, some of that capital could gradually drift toward alternatives that promise stronger guarantees.

For now, Bitcoin remains the flagship of the digital-asset space, with deep liquidity, the largest developer ecosystem, and a narrative built over more than a decade. VanEck’s warning does not kill that story, but it does sharpen the question that will define Bitcoin’s next era: can the original cryptocurrency evolve fast enough to stay secure and relevant in a world where the underlying rules of computation are changing?