…an increase in the demand of gold to keep up with the growth of the aggregate demand will not increase the value of each ounce of gold in the long run, so it does not make it inherently volatile in that scenario.~https://gist.github.com/fernandonm/81cb21bdce0910055de32b98ee4119e1
The argument here is that an equal demand for bitcoin versus gold will push the market valuation of bitcoin up correspondingly while for gold it will increase the supply in some correspondence.
Ergo the author concludes bitcoin is to be more volatile as the price swing to the upside will be greater.
(One could also argue that the downside would also be greater since gold has non-monetary use cases.)
But if we are allowed to use a mature and deep bitcoin market as a premise we could argue that the (comparable) cost to use bitcoin as a settlement option would create a floor for its market valuation.
Furthermore, the higher its market cap the higher the value of transactions that could be made without worrying about the volatility associated with moving in and out of the system. It is this use case that sets the floor for bitcoin above that of gold in this context as gold is far more costly to transport.
If we are allowed to imagine types of transactions that bitcoin could replace as a cheaper alternative then it can be argued that bitcoin should have less volatility than gold, since increases in gold’s demand adds units to the total supply of it.
If bitcoin is to be used for transacting by the highest value transactions in the global economy, why should we expect major market crashes for it?
Then speculators are justified as they help push the market cap into a sphere which benefits those that would use it for a cheaper alternative to high value transactions.