CZ Slams Peter Schiff’s Tokenized Gold, Calling It a “Trust-Me-Bro” Asset as Debate Over Real On-Chain Value Heats Up

Crypto Pioneer Says Tokenized Gold Fails the Blockchain Test, Points to Trust Dependency and Weak Market Adoption

TL;DR:

• Changpeng Zhao (CZ) labels Peter Schiff’s gold-backed token a “trust-me-bro” asset, arguing it isn’t truly on-chain.
• CZ claims reliance on custodians kills decentralization, which explains why tokenized gold hasn’t gained traction.
• Schiff predicts gold above $4,000 per ounce and calls Bitcoin “worth zero,” reigniting a clash of philosophies between traditional and digital assets.

CZ reignited the long-standing feud between crypto purists and gold advocates this week after calling Peter Schiff’s new gold-backed token a “trust-me-bro” asset. His remarks, published on October 23, 2025, questioned the authenticity of tokenized gold and its place within a decentralized ecosystem. He wrote that tokenizing gold does not make it “on-chain,” but instead represents a promise that “some third party will give you gold at some later date, even after their management changes, maybe decades later, during a war.” CZ argued that this reliance on human intermediaries directly contradicts the blockchain ethos of trustless verification.

Peter Schiff, a vocal Bitcoin skeptic known for forecasting global debt crises and championing precious metals, had recently announced his plan for a blockchain-based gold token. The product, designed to let investors buy vaulted gold and transfer ownership digitally, would also integrate a debit card and mobile app to spend gold-backed balances in real time. Schiff framed his project as a way to blend gold’s intrinsic stability with the transactional ease of crypto networks, insisting, “The one thing that makes sense to put on a blockchain is gold because it will work and will do all the things that Bitcoin promises but can never do.” Despite his pitch, CZ countered that if users must rely on a custodian to hold their wealth, “you don’t own it; they do.”

CZ’s criticism highlights the ongoing friction between traditional asset tokenization and native crypto ideals. He said tokenized gold hasn’t taken off because investors ultimately depend on custodians, vault operators, and regulatory entities to back each token—undermining the trustless foundation that makes blockchain valuable. That dependency, he argued, transforms tokenized gold into digital IOUs rather than real on-chain ownership. Analysts echoed his view, noting that tokenized gold’s coin market cap remains modest at around $2.4 billion, with only PAX Gold and Tether Gold ever surpassing $1 billion. The scale, CZ implied, pales next to the broader crypto price index, where native cryptocurrencies dominate in volume and liquidity.

Schiff’s counter-narrative doubles down on macroeconomic fear. He warned that fiat systems face collapse amid sovereign-debt turmoil and predicted a return to gold as the world’s reserve asset. His projection of gold “well beyond $4,000 per ounce” came as the metal saw a $2.5 trillion wipeout in market capitalization after an 8% plunge—its sharpest decline since 2013. Data from the period placed spot gold under $4,100 per ounce, extending a 45-year average return of 3.6%. Schiff used that volatility to argue for real-asset backing, while still dismissing Bitcoin’s rally-driven appeal. “I still think it’s going to zero,” he said, adding that he underestimated “the gullibility of the public and the marketing savvy of those promoting it.”

The exchange reflects more than a personality clash—it underscores crypto’s identity crisis as it courts mainstream finance. Schiff’s attempt to merge physical bullion with blockchain technology sits uneasily beside CZ’s purist definition of decentralization. Tokenized gold may promise liquidity and transparency, but to CZ, its off-chain custodianship and legal dependencies leave it outside crypto’s true domain. His “trust-me-bro” jab distilled a core tension haunting the digital-asset market: whether blockchain innovation should reform legacy systems or replace them entirely. That question continues to ripple across investor sentiment and the broader crypto price landscape, where debates over what qualifies as real on-chain value remain as volatile as the markets themselves.

This article has been refined and enhanced by ChatGPT.