I have another thought: It could be regarded as a digital asset which is very secure and can hedge against inflation, since it is not issued by any government, the risk of default is zero. But first the exchange should be well regulated and accepted by pension funds
The risk of default may be 0, but the risk that there is a flaw that will reder bitcoins worthless is non-zero. There is also the risk that people will stop using bitcoins, which would drive down the value, which to the hoder works out to about the same thing as a default.
As a high end investment target, people will not use BTC at all, it will only be operated by institutions. Buying and selling them in the exchange is their daily work, and why people buy? Since it hedges against inflation, better than a USD saving account
But why wouldn't individuals invest directly in bitcoins? Getting bitcoins is easier than (or at least as easy as) investing in an institutional account. Large institutional investors might want to buy some bitocins as a hedge against inflation, but that doesn't stop individuals from doing the same thing. The beauty of bitcoins is that it serves so many roles at the same time. Bitcoins can be used by large investors, small savers, day traders, people transferring money across the globe (to do large investments in other countries, or as a way to send small amounts to family members) or by people buying things online, or by people donating money anonymously, or for micropayments. The more people use bitcoin, the stronger it becomes, and the better it serves for all the other functions. For instance, as more people use bitcoin as savings, the price will go up, and the total market cap will go up, which will make it easier to use bitcoins for larger transfers.
