December 7th, Bloomberg's Senior ETF Analyst Eric Balchunas wrote that, despite Bitcoin's recent sharp correction, comparing it to the 17th-century "Tulip Mania" is not appropriate. He pointed out that the tulip mania lasted only about three years, was completely eliminated after a collapse, whereas Bitcoin has experienced 6-7 rounds of sharp declines, set multiple historical highs, and has survived for the past 17 years.Bitcoin has continued to rise by about 250% in the past three years and surged 122% last year. The current decline is more like a "retracement of last year's excessive rise." Even if it remains flat or slightly falls for the whole year in 2025, its long-term average annualized return is still around 50%.Eric emphasized that the only common point between Bitcoin and tulips is "non-productive assets." However, gold, Picasso paintings, rare stamps, and other non-productive assets have long been seen as valuable assets. The tulip mania was a typical "one-time frenzy + collapse" structure, while Bitcoin is clearly in a completely different asset category.