The ETH / BTC ratio has consistently been making lower highs. There are reasons for this. Reflections on ETH vis-a-vis BTC.

This is a development (see e.g. https://twitter.com/mitchellhodl/status/1651751482000130054?s=46&t=O2D2wDzq2vNkB3X0rtz2XA) that I believe I significant and signals underlying sentiment toward the crypto space. Many factors play a role. I wouldn't say it's because NFT's have (or have not yet) failed, because that tech is so young. Also wouldn't say it's because DeFi is complicated and clunky. Eth has its own value propositions, but it is fundamentally different from BTC. I believe the ratio is shifting because of the immutability of BTC as a protocol, that I believe goes hand in hand with it being a commodity, which is very important for investors.

Too often I see people underestimating the qualities of bitcoin, calling it 'ancient' tech, but that quality - it's consistency and robustness - is why I believe it will outperform all coins that follow it. Let me explain.

When banks crashed we consistently see BTC rise. Now, by now we know a rising tide lifts all boats, but BTC makes the most significant gains in those moments. Why?

Because you can trust that out of all crypto, your 1 BTC will always be 1 BTC. It's the longest existing chain temporally, with no downtime, with no adaptations to its chain, an ever increasing hashrate, international use on a scale incomparable to others. You want to have the least 'risk' of an asset in all kinds of ways, you don't want that asset to fundamentally change. Like a house's exterior as the 'quality' of an asset, the climate the house is in, the neighborhood, the tax on it, or (in the crypto sphere) whether your house or crypto will still be fundamentally the same in a few years. If you have gold you know the underlying chemistry won't change, the same is true for BTC. You cannot say that for eth that fundamentally changed its protocol based on political, social, environmental and other factors. Like PoW to PoS. If you die and wake up in 10 years what ideology has shaped your asset by then? This is NOT insignificant. And the underlying nature of BTC without a DAO, institute, active founders or company is essential here, and makes BTC different. This is part of the appeal of BTC over everything in the crypto space, and its nature as a commodity I shortly address next.

Interim summary: Gold is gold, 1 BTC is 1 BTC. You cannot say that of another crypto. Reflect on this.

Some words on BTC being a commodity and how significant that is. If you see the 'structure' of eth it mimics traditional companies on a stock exchange. There you have a stock offering, company owners own a lot of stock and sell it for profit or to fund operations. If you buy eth as a token you often buy it from the initial coin offering (stock offering) that the eth foundation / Co-founders (company owners) have. Eth as tokens are the stock to fund operations and profit. This was not an open ICO. It only gave friends, family and other privileged investors the right to participate. On the other hand, Satoshi had to mine the first block with his own hardware and electricity, the rules everyone else (miners) had to play by. From the beginning, it has been egalitarian and equal for the world to participate in bitcoin, mine or buy it. Like oil, gold etc. The same is not true for eth, and many other coins. Again, a very significant quality of a chain. Buy a token that funds operations and that had closed / privileged access, eth? Or one that was egalitarian from the start, BTC? You want to bet on something being a store of value when that 'something' does not even store it's ideology over time? That sounds like a lack of integrity. Consider this, how it limits institutional investment.

I have no problem with Eth, it has its own value propositions, but in light of the eth / BTC ratio, some things just need to be said. And I hope it inspires some.

TLDR: In sum, 1 BTC is 1 BTC and it is egalitarian and it has integrity. An asset like this, I believe, will continue to grow. Especially vis-a-vis chains that do not have that.

Edit: some people find 1 BTC is 1 BTC an odd statement. Indeed, if 1 BTC is 1 BTC is quantitatively the same as 1 anything is 1 anything then saying 1 BTC is 1 BTC means nothing. As the context implies, the qualities of that 'something' determine what it 'is', what its value is and so on. If you have a house (1 house is 1 house) but don't maintain the house, the analogy falls apart over time. Your house will be trash. '1 pocket of air is 1 pocket of air' is different underwater, in space or in your bedroom. 1 ETH now will look much different in 10 years when it comes to the fundamental tech and other aspects of ETH. As such, 1 BTC is 1 BTC. And 1 house is not 1 house, and 1 eth is not 1 eth.