Bitcoin to hit $1 million by 2027 using new adoption pricing model Bitcoin to hit $1 million by 2027 using new adoption pricing model
Bitcoin modeled as a resource with fixed supply cap, raising potential for rapid price escalation amid growing demand and strategic reserves.
3 min read
Updated: Dec. 18, 2024 at 2:35 pm UTC
Cover art/illustration via CryptoSlate. Image includes combined content which may include AI-generated content.
A new supply-and-demand equilibrium model suggests Bitcoin may surpass $1 million by January 2027, following current trends in adoption, liquidity, and Bitcoin reserves.
A recent paper by Dr. Murray A. Rudd and Dennis Porter of Satoshi Action Education integrates Bitcoin’s fixed, inelastic supply schedule and dynamic demand factors, including institutional adoption and long-term holding behavior, to forecast price trajectories post-halving.
The model’s framework applies fundamental economic theory to Bitcoin’s limited supply and evaluates how incremental demand shifts or daily withdrawals into strategic reserves may affect long-term valuations.
Analyses consider multiple parameters, such as the quantity of Bitcoin removed from exchange circulation and the influence of shifting demand curves over a 12-year horizon. Results suggest that even modest daily withdrawals from Bitcoin’s liquid supply, combined with growing institutional presence, could drive the price toward seven-figure levels in less than three years.
Larger-scale removal of Bitcoin from active trading, along with accelerating demand, produces scenarios where the price could push beyond $1 million by early 2027, and more constrained liquidity points to even higher levels if adoption accelerates.
Under more aggressive assumptions about reserves and adoption, the price could reach $2 million by 2028 and advance into multimillion-dollar territory by the early 2030s if sustained demand growth continues to outpace increasingly scarce supply.
Forward-looking Bitcoin price model
This approach differs from traditional backward-looking statistical models. Instead, it employs first principles, treating Bitcoin as a commodity with a strict 21-million-coin issuance cap. Conventional models often focus on historical patterns, while this forward-looking method factors in structural demand changes and strategic accumulation by corporations, funds, and sovereign entities.
The inelasticity of Bitcoin’s supply curve means incoming demand cannot be met through additional production, potentially leading to rapidly rising prices and market conditions where small shifts in demand or supply can cause substantial volatility. This modeling approach also contrasts with energy-based or network-based models, offering a fundamental lens for examining the interplay of scarcity, adoption, and liquidity.
Practical implications include informing investors and fund managers who seek to understand the relative impacts of policy changes, credit-driven demand, and strategic treasury management on Bitcoin’s price.
The ability to experiment with various assumptions through this framework provides flexibility. Calibrations to real-world data can be repeated periodically, allowing decision-makers to incorporate emerging trends into their forward-looking asset allocation strategies.
As MicroStrategy and other institutions demonstrate methods of acquiring Bitcoin by expanding credit or restructuring corporate treasuries, and as governments consider strategic Bitcoin reserves, such modeling may prove valuable.
Other projections, such as power-law models that extrapolate from historical data, have offered targets in the seven-figure range over a similar time frame. MicroStrategy’s macro-based baseline scenario aligns with a future multi-million-dollar Bitcoin. These parallels with outside projections reinforce the credibility of using supply-and-demand equilibrium modeling as one piece of a broader analytical toolkit.
Although the model’s initial results highlight conditions that can drive rapid price growth, uncertainty remains regarding lost or permanently held coins, timing and scale of institutional adoption, and potential regulatory changes.
Model refinements may include more detailed representations of evolving demand elasticity or dynamic withdrawal rates tied to dollar-based investments rather than fixed Bitcoin quantities. Incorporating uncertainty through Monte Carlo simulations, scenario analysis, or periodic recalibration can enhance realism.
The authors’ forecasts, available in supplementary datasets, present one scenario where Bitcoin’s constrained supply meets a future marked by strategic accumulation and adoption-driven demand shifts.
Whether institutions and governments commit to persistent daily purchases or whether adoption parameters grow linearly or follow a logistic trajectory, the framework illustrates the inherent tension between fixed supply and increasing demand.
The findings suggest a long-term investment case with the potential for substantial appreciation and volatility as new market participants exert pressure on the digital asset’s finite supply.
Mentioned in this article
Author 
Liam 'Akiba' Wright
Also known as "Akiba," Liam Wright is a reporter, podcast producer, and Editor-in-Chief at CryptoSlate. He believes that decentralized technology has the potential to make widespread positive change.
Latest Bitcoin Stories
Latest Press Releases
Featured Story
Advertise Here
In this article
Bitcoin, a decentralized currency that defies the sway of central banks or administrators, transacts electronically, circumventing intermediaries via a peer-to-peer network.
Satoshi Action Fund
Satoshi Action Fund (SAF) is a 501(c)(4) non-profit educational organization dedicated to informing policymakers and regulators about Bitcoin mining’s benefits and how it can be used as a tool to support other public policy goals.
Dennis Porter is the co-founder and chairman of Satoshi Action Fund, a 501(c)(4) non-profit educational organization dedicated to informing policymakers and regulators about Bitcoin mining’s benefits and how it can be used as a tool to support other public policy goals.
