Research Institution Etherealize: Long-term ETH Fully Monetized Could Correspond to $250,000 Pricing
In a recent report, crypto research institution Etherealize provided a set of calculations for the "long-term implied price of ETH": if Ethereum fully absorbs the current monetary premium of approximately $31 trillion from gold and Bitcoin combined, and is calculated based on a circulating supply of about 121 million ETH, the implied price of a single ETH would exceed $250,000. The report emphasizes that this figure is based on theoretical deductions regarding the redistribution of monetary premiums, rather than a definitive price prediction for a specific point in time, with the time frame potentially spanning several years or even decades.
Etherealize's core argument is that the current market still views ETH as a "technology growth stock-like asset," rather than a composite asset with monetary premium and cash flow attributes: on one hand, ETH is seen as a value storage tool, while on the other hand, it possesses characteristics of a "productive asset" under staking and protocol income distribution. The report cites Menger's framework on "marketability" and Buffett's framework on "productive assets," arguing that if ETH simultaneously outperforms gold and Bitcoin in terms of liquidity, censorship resistance, and yield, the long-term result should be a concentration of monetary premiums towards ETH, with gold and Bitcoin retaining only a residual value similar to that of silver.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
This report is essentially not a traditional "target price," but rather a thought experiment on "monetary premium repricing": viewing the monetary value of gold and Bitcoin as a transferable pool, and then asking "if the market recognizes ETH as a superior currency + asset combination, how would this pool be redistributed?" This differs from typical price predictions based on on-chain data, fees, or macro cycles, and is closer to a structural hypothesis about the future monetary hierarchy—specifically, the potential path for ETH to transition from a "risk asset" to a "global reserve and settlement layer."
From a global financial structure perspective, Etherealize's logic rests on two key levers: first, the competitiveness of "currency layer assets," and second, the valuation premium of "productive currency." The monetary premium of gold and Bitcoin primarily stems from scarcity and consensus, while ETH adds protocol cash flow and staking yield on top of scarcity, making it more akin to a hybrid of "equity + currency" within traditional financial frameworks. If the market ultimately opts to price ETH using cash flow discounting methods, the valuation multiples it receives could be entirely different from those of purely "non-productive reserve assets," which is the revaluation space the report seeks to emphasize for "productive currency."
However, from a historical and institutional constraint perspective, achieving such repricing implies a significant shift in monetary power structures: certain sovereign currency systems, gold reserves, and Bitcoin holders would need to acknowledge ETH's status as a "final asset" at the allocation level. This involves not only technical and financial efficiency issues but also regulatory acceptability, governance risks (protocol upgrades, client diversity), censorship resistance, and Ethereum's own balance in long-term scalability and security costs. Any systemic issue in any of these areas could limit ETH's transition from an "innovative asset" to a "global currency layer."
A more realistic perspective is to view $250,000 as a boundary condition for an "extreme upper limit scenario," rather than a tradable mid-term price target: it helps market participants understand the potential scale of market capitalization in an extreme situation where monetary premiums are fully liquid and ETH is widely accepted on both technical and institutional levels. For observers like you, the value of such reports lies not in whether the "numbers themselves will be realized," but in compelling us to re-examine from the perspectives of monetary history and asset pricing where ETH truly stands in the structural hierarchy of either "technology stock logic," "high β risk assets," or "new currency base."