Crypto is a highly volatile asset, and is as recently shown correlated to traditional equities as it is as vulnerable to risk as any other speculative trade.
It's hedging properties were founded on hope, and not logical thinking.
The technology is being adopted, particularly distributed ledgers within and between banks and smart contracts, which may support some value.
This mostly true for Ethereum however, as that is where the utility is.
I do not believe Bitcoin will appreciate to $100K however, as that is only vestigial and hopeful speculation and not grounded in any reality other than a distrust of fiat currency and the Federal Reserve.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb has thoughts on it that I find interesting, having been a proponent in the past only to re-examine his own views as more data became available.
Keep in mind Bitcoin was never designed to even be a highly valued asset, but just a way to easily move money and avoid the double-spend problem by using a immutable distributed ledger.
MIT OpenCourseware has Gary Gensler's entire graduate lecture series available on line and is a good reminder of where this all started, perhaps giving some insight to where it may ultimately go.
This course is for students wishing to explore blockchain technology's potential use—by entrepreneurs and incumbents—to change the world of money and finance. The course begins with a review of Bitcoin and an understanding of the commercial, technical, and public policy fundamentals of...
ocw.mit.edu