Bitcoin Did Not Reach $100,000 in 2025 According to Actual Data

On the day Bitcoin finally surpassed $100,000, many individuals did the same.

They captured screenshots.

They shared them in group chats, posted them with rocket emojis, and revisited old tweets from 2021 to celebrate the long-awaited victory laps they had been holding onto for years. It felt like a resolution, as if the market had returned to a promise made long ago.

Then a chart began to circulate, the type of chart that subtly deflates the atmosphere.

It was amplified by figures like Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy. The conclusion was straightforward, and somewhat harsh, for those who were emotionally attached to the number itself.

When adjusting Bitcoin’s price for inflation, using 2020 dollars, Bitcoin never actually exceeded $100,000. It peaked just below that, at approximately $99,848 in real terms.

Bitcoin vs inflation chart (Source: Alex Thorn)

This is not a critique of Bitcoin, nor is it a “gotcha” for those who celebrated the milestone. It serves as a reminder that the value of money shifts beneath us, even when the displayed price remains unchanged.

In this cycle, that distinction is more significant than many are willing to acknowledge.

The number that changed while we were observing

If you ask most individuals what inflation does, they will respond that it increases prices. While that is accurate, it only tells part of the story. The other aspect is that inflation alters the meaning of a dollar.

A $100 bill from 2020 and a $100 bill from late 2025 do not purchase the same assortment of goods, do not hold the same significance, and do not represent the same amount of labor, rent, groceries, or time.

Bitcoin is traded in dollars, at least in the manner most headlines portray it. Therefore, when Bitcoin reaches a significant round number, that figure is linked to the dollar’s value at that moment, not the dollar’s value in your recollection.

This may seem abstract until you apply actual calculations.

Using the US CPI for CPI-U, the average level in 2020 was approximately 258.8, while by late 2025, the index is in the mid-320s. You can also view the 2020 annual averages directly in the BLS annual CPI table. This disparity indicates that the dollar has lost a substantial portion of its purchasing power since 2020.

When converting today’s nominal prices into 2020 dollars, you multiply by roughly 0.8, depending on whether you use not seasonally adjusted CPIAUCNS or seasonally adjusted CPIAUCSL.

This implies that $100,000 in late 2025 dollars aligns more closely with about $80,000 in 2020 dollars.

The milestone that people were celebrating was genuine; it just was not the same milestone that the internet perceives it to be.

If you wish for Bitcoin to be valued at $100,000 in 2020 purchasing power today, the nominal price must be nearer to $125,000.

This is awkward, as Bitcoin’s cycle peak fell within that range. Reuters has monitored the 2025 surge in its Bitcoin 2025 price graphic, with much coverage around the peak clustering in the $125,000 vicinity.

Bitcoin price chart (Source: Reuters)

When you input the high into a simple CPI deflator, you arrive at a figure that lands right on the cusp of $100,000 in 2020 dollars. This is why the “did it or didn’t it” framing is a close call, and it can shift slightly based on methodology.

The underlying point remains valid regardless.

The measuring tool has changed, yet people continue to debate the length.

Why this is significant now, and why it will be even more so later

Typically, inflation-adjusted Bitcoin charts are an enjoyable analytical exercise. This time, however, they serve as something closer to a reality check.

This cycle has been characterized by institutions entering through spot Bitcoin ETFs, a series of macro narratives that shifted every few weeks, and a market that spent extended periods behaving as if it were tied to rate expectations.

When you express Bitcoin’s price in real terms, you direct the conversation to a realm where institutions operate consistently.

Real returns.

A pension fund does not concern itself with an asset rising 20% in nominal terms if inflation is high and the risk-free rate is appealing. A treasury desk does not earn its keep based on sentiment. If Bitcoin aspires to evolve into a genuine macro asset, it ultimately must be evaluated in the same manner as everything else, which is what did you earn after inflation, and what did you earn in comparison to alternatives.

This is the aspect that retail traders seldom consider when they are celebrating a round number, as round numbers seem like progress.

To be fair, progress is indeed present here.

Bitcoin transitioned from being declared dead at $16,000 to nearing six figures once more. That is significant. However, the inflation-adjusted perspective alters how you articulate what transpired.

It indicates that Bitcoin made a substantial nominal recovery, while also suggesting that the market has not advanced as far beyond its previous psychological barrier as the headlines might imply.

This is not bearish; it is simply truthful.

It also sets the stage for the next chapter, as the “real” version of $100,000 continues to rise each month.

The peculiar twist, CPI itself became unclear right when Bitcoin peaked

There is another reason this entire discussion has gained traction, and it is almost poetic.

The inflation benchmark became muddled this cycle.

During the 2025 lapse in appropriations, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that CPI operations were suspended for a time, and Reuters reported that the shutdown led to the cancellation of October’s CPI release, marking a first.

Thus, you have a moment where the market is attempting to determine whether Bitcoin genuinely reclaimed a historic level in real terms, while the inflation data necessary to resolve the debate became entangled in a real-world disruption.

Even when the data is accessible, there are choices to be made. Seasonally adjusted CPIAUCSL, not seasonally adjusted CPIAUCNS, annual averages versus a specific month base, headline CPI versus other variations. None of these are incorrect, but they yield slightly different outcomes, particularly when dealing with a narrow margin like $99,848 versus $100,000.

This is why it is erroneous to write a narrative that treats the inflation-adjusted claim as a straightforward binary.

The narrative is broader than that.

The narrative is that Bitcoin’s most significant milestone is no longer a fixed point; it is a moving target, and the macro environment has made the difference significant.

The market’s post-peak hangover indicates that people already sense it

The simplest method to determine whether a milestone possesses lasting significance is to observe the market’s behavior following the celebration.

In this instance, Bitcoin experienced a sharp decline after the October peak. By December, various market reports indicated that Bitcoin was down approximately 30% from the peak, and it ceased to feel as though the $100,000 era was immediately stable.

The institutional framework conveyed a similar narrative. US spot Bitcoin ETF AUM peaked at around $169.5 billion on October 6 and dropped to approximately $120.7 billion by December 4, according to CryptoSlate’s data compilation, utilizing public trackers and fund reporting; the details can be found in CryptoSlate’s AUM breakdown and cross-referenced against chart hubs like The Block’s live ETF charts.

A significant portion of that is price impact rather than mass exits, but the trend remains important.

This is where the inflation-adjusted perspective becomes useful once more.

The market approached the nominal price necessary to align with a $100,000 real level in 2020 dollars, yet it could not maintain it. Perhaps that was due to leverage being washed out, perhaps it was macro uncertainty, or perhaps it was simple fatigue following a substantial run.

Regardless, the outcome is a market that accomplished the challenging part, breaking into six figures, and then struggled to convert the emotional victory into a stable new baseline.

This is how you end up with a cycle that feels transformative, yet also feels as though it left something unresolved.

On-chain data indicates the foundation is stronger than the sentiment

Here is the aspect that prevents this from becoming a discouraging narrative.

Underneath the surface, Bitcoin’s cost basis landscape appears more robust than the price movements suggest.

This year, Bitcoin’s realized cap reached a record of approximately $1.125 trillion, which indicates that more coins are held at higher cost bases than ever before. Realized cap is not a definitive indicator, but it does reflect something tangible about adoption and long-term holders. It implies that the network is absorbing capital at elevated levels over time.

Thus, you have a market that, in real purchasing power terms, is still debating whether it genuinely crossed a historic threshold, while also having a market where the underlying “average paid” is increasing and setting new records.

Both of these statements can be accurate.

It is one reason Bitcoin continues to endure these emotional whiplash cycles. The price is volatile, yet the foundation steadily strengthens.

What lies ahead, three paths that hold more significance than the next candle

If you take the inflation-adjusted perspective seriously, the inquiry shifts from “did Bitcoin reach $100,000” to “what must occur for Bitcoin to achieve meaningfully new real highs.”

There are three broad scenarios that could unfold over the next year, and none of them rely on sentiment.

1) Disinflation and easing make nominal highs significant again

If inflation subsides as policymakers have projected, and the Fed begins cutting rates more decisively, the nominal threshold for real milestones will rise more gradually. In that scenario, a return to the previous nominal peak carries greater real significance. The market retains more of what it earns.

If you wish to anchor that in official forecasts, the Fed’s Summary of Economic Projections outlines inflation expectations through 2028.

2) Inflation remains persistent and the market records nominal highs that feel insubstantial

If inflation runs higher than anticipated, or data uncertainty keeps markets unsettled, you could find yourself in a cycle where Bitcoin achieves new nominal highs yet still appears unimpressive in purchasing power terms.

This is also a scenario where elevated real yields continue to act as a headwind. When real yields are attractive, holding any volatile asset incurs a higher opportunity cost. You can monitor that macro pressure through metrics like the 10-year TIPS real yield.

3) ETF demand re-accelerates and forces a genuine breakout

Citi’s framework for 2026 includes a base case around $143,000, a bull case above $189,000, and a bear case around $78,500, with ETF flows and adoption positioned at the center of the narrative. MarketWatch summarized that forecast here, Citi’s $143,000 call.

You do not need to regard those figures as fate to take the structure seriously.

If ETF demand re-accelerates, the market can surpass the inflation-adjusted barriers even if the macro environment is tumultuous. The key to observe is not just the price, but whether ETF assets and flows transition into a new regime rather than fluctuating with the same momentum cycles we have already witnessed.

The human aspect, this is what inflation does to every aspiration measured in dollars

People do not become emotional about CPI indices. They become emotional about milestones.

A first home. A six-figure salary. A retirement figure. A Bitcoin price target.

Inflation is the subtle force that causes you to reach the goal yet still feel as though you are falling short, because the goal shifted while you were racing toward it.

This is what makes this chart impactful. It does not indicate that Bitcoin failed; it signifies that the world has changed.

Bitcoin is frequently marketed as a hedge against that type of change, a means to escape the gradual erosion of fiat purchasing power. Thus, it is fitting, in a darkly humorous way, that the most notable fiat milestone in Bitcoin history is also the one that inflation has quietly rewritten.

If you seek one more macro connection for that backdrop, Reuters noted the dollar’s challenging year in late 2025, including a sharp annual decline linked to looser policy expectations.

If you desire a clear takeaway, it is this.

Six figures was a significant moment; it still is, and the next genuine milestone is already higher than most people realize. If Bitcoin aims to feel as though it is entering a new era, it will need to surpass levels that may sound somewhat absurd today, partly because Bitcoin is Bitcoin, and partly because the dollar continues to diminish in real terms.

This is the aspect that makes this narrative larger than a chart.

The next time Bitcoin reaches a round number, the first question worth asking is not whether the number is genuine, but what the number can purchase.

The post Fact check: Bitcoin never really hit $100,000 in 2025 when you apply real world data appeared first on CryptoSlate.