During his campaign, Donald Trump pledged to create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve to strengthen the U.S. position in the digital asset space. However, this plan has since expanded into a broader “Strategic Crypto Reserve”, which would include not just Bitcoin but also other, far less reliable cryptocurrencies.
Over the weekend, Trump suggested that the reserve could include XRP, Solana, and Cardano, later adding Bitcoin, Ether, and other unspecified cryptocurrencies. The stated goal is to support the U.S. crypto industry and establish the country as the global hub for digital assets.
While this may sound like a visionary move, in reality, it opens the door to conflicts of interest, market manipulation, and financial risks.
Bitcoin: The Only Legitimate Option
A Bitcoin-only strategic reserve could be somewhat justifiable. Bitcoin is often compared to digital gold due to its scarcity, decentralization, and censorship resistance. Its unique characteristics include:
✔ Fair distribution – Every Bitcoin is mined through a transparent process requiring computational power.
✔ No pre-mine – Unlike many altcoins, Bitcoin was not distributed to insiders before launch.
✔ Decentralized network – No central entity controls Bitcoin, making it resistant to manipulation.
Because of these properties, Bitcoin can function as a neutral, globally accepted store of value – making it a credible choice for a strategic reserve asset.
In contrast, most other cryptocurrencies lack these qualities and function more like corporate equity than decentralized money.
The Problem with Including Altcoins
Many of the altcoins proposed for inclusion in the Strategic Crypto Reserve are highly centralized and resemble traditional businesses more than decentralized assets.
XRP – Controlled by Ripple, which still holds over 45 billion XRP and sells tokens to finance its operations. This is not decentralized money but rather a company issuing its own form of stock.
Ethereum (ETH) – Around 60% of its total supply was pre-mined, meaning insiders had a significant advantage.
Solana & Cardano – More than 50% of their tokens were allocated to founders and insiders, effectively functioning as corporate equity rather than neutral money.
The inclusion of these assets in a government-backed reserve raises a fundamental issue:
The U.S. government would be indirectly favoring private companies by labeling their tokens as strategic assets.
This is very different from companies like MicroStrategy or Marathon Digital Holdings, which acquired Bitcoin fairly:
✔ MicroStrategy purchased Bitcoin directly from the market, taking on risk.
✔ Marathon Digital mined Bitcoin using proof-of-work, which requires real economic effort.
By contrast, projects like Ripple or Solana simply created their tokens out of thin air and sold them to investors. Allowing such assets into a government reserve blurs the line between investment and favoritism.
Political Influence & the Risk of Corruption
The biggest danger of a Strategic Crypto Reserve is the politicization of digital assets.
Trump’s campaign was financially backed by crypto companies, many of which are now lobbying to have their own tokens included in the reserve. Reports suggest that Ripple spent millions lobbying for XRP’s inclusion, effectively blocking the idea of a Bitcoin-only reserve.
This raises serious ethical concerns:
⚠ Government influence in crypto markets could lead to favoritism and corruption.
⚠ The reserve could be manipulated to benefit well-connected companies rather than the broader economy.
⚠ It creates a moral hazard where projects lobby for inclusion instead of competing on merit.
A government-backed crypto reserve should not become a playground for insiders looking to pump their own tokens.
Bitcoin vs. Altcoins: A Fundamental Difference
The core issue with including multiple cryptocurrencies in a Strategic Reserve is that only Bitcoin has the characteristics of hard money.
Gold, for example, was never pre-mined – it had to be extracted through effort.
Bitcoin mimics this model through proof-of-work, requiring real economic energy to mine new coins.
By contrast, many altcoins are fundamentally flawed as strategic assets:
❌ Ethereum – 60% of its total supply was pre-mined, giving early investors an unfair advantage.
❌ XRP – 100% of its tokens were created in advance by Ripple.
❌ Solana & Cardano – More than 50% of supply went to founders and insiders.
These are not neutral, trust-minimized reserve assets. They are closer to tech stocks, where insiders create tokens and distribute them for profit.
Ripple, for example, has more or less circumvented securities laws by marketing XRP as a “currency” rather than an “investment,” but functionally, it operates just like a company issuing shares.
Conclusion: A Dangerous Precedent
A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve could be justified based on Bitcoin’s unique monetary properties. However, expanding it into a multi-crypto reserve is a recipe for manipulation and government interference in private markets.
The U.S. government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the crypto industry.
The only truly decentralized, neutral digital asset is Bitcoin.
If the United States wants to lead in digital finance, it should focus on Bitcoin—the only cryptocurrency that functions as sound money, free from insider manipulation and corporate control.
Want to learn more? Read our free Bitcoin guide to understand why Bitcoin is the only truly decentralized digital asset.
