Peter Schiff Urges Bitcoin Holders To Buy Silver Now

In a week marked by bold predictions and shifting investor behavior, the financial world is once again abuzz over the long-standing debate between traditional precious metals and digital assets. On January 19, 2026, Peter Schiff, the veteran economist and notorious Bitcoin critic, reignited controversy by urging investors to sell their Bitcoin holdings and pivot toward silver. According to Coinfomania, Schiff predicted that Bitcoin would soon collapse, while silver would soar to the $100 per ounce mark, a forecast that quickly stirred heated discussion across crypto and commodities circles.

Schiff’s warning came as silver’s price climbed above $95 per ounce and gold breached $4,700 per ounce on January 20, 2026. In a post that caught the attention of both skeptics and supporters alike, Schiff declared, “People should SELL their Bitcoin to BUY silver.” He argued that rising inflation, a weakening U.S. dollar, and ongoing economic instability were driving investors to seek refuge in tangible assets like silver and gold. This, he claimed, would leave Bitcoin exposed to a sharp downturn.

Schiff is no stranger to such bold calls. For over a decade, he has consistently criticized Bitcoin, claiming that digital assets lack intrinsic value and are ultimately destined for failure. Instead, he has championed physical assets, particularly gold and silver, as the only true safe havens for wealth preservation. His latest remarks, according to Coinfomania, simply reinforce his well-established stance.

But does the data support Schiff’s dire warning? Market figures tell a more nuanced story. While silver’s recent rally is undeniable—posting a 280% gain over the past five years, per Kitco data—it still falls short of the $100 per ounce target that Schiff has been touting. Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s performance has been nothing short of remarkable. In the same five-year window, Bitcoin surged nearly 1,200%, and as of January 20, 2026, continues to trade above $95,000, defying repeated predictions of imminent collapse. The digital currency’s resilience, even amid volatility, highlights the growing divide between advocates of digital and traditional assets.

This schism is more than just a clash of investment philosophies—it reflects a broader shift in how investors perceive safety, value, and opportunity. Some, like Schiff, remain steadfast in their faith in precious metals, drawn by their tangible nature and centuries-long track record as stores of value. Others are increasingly turning to digital assets such as Bitcoin, attracted by their limited supply, global accessibility, and the promise of technological innovation.

Notably, the debate is playing out against a backdrop of rapid innovation in the crypto sector. According to ChainCatcher, the use of crypto debit cards has exploded. Daily transactions for these cards soared 22-fold compared to December 2024, reaching nearly 60,000 transactions per day by mid-January 2026. The total daily transaction value approached $4 million, signaling a significant uptick in real-world crypto adoption.

Etherfi currently leads this burgeoning market, accounting for about half of all crypto debit card transactions. Other notable players include Gnosis, Metamask, and Solayer, each vying for a share of this fast-growing segment. Many of these card providers are leveraging decentralized finance (DeFi) lending protocols, allowing users to not only spend their crypto flexibly but also earn returns on their balances—a feature that sets them apart from traditional debit cards.

However, as ChainCatcher points out, the economic models underpinning these cards are still evolving. Card issuers are experimenting with various incentive structures and fee schedules, seeking the right balance between profitability and user appeal. The result is a landscape marked by significant differentiation, as providers race to optimize their offerings and capture a loyal customer base.

For investors and consumers alike, these trends underscore the complexity of today’s financial marketplace. On one hand, the appeal of silver and gold is being amplified by concerns over inflation and the perceived fragility of fiat currencies. Schiff’s argument hinges on these very fears, suggesting that as confidence in traditional money wanes, tangible assets will inevitably take center stage. He has stated, “Bitcoin will collapse while silver will reach $100 per oz by tomorrow,” a claim that, while dramatic, reflects the anxieties of many who have lived through recent economic turbulence.

Yet, Bitcoin’s continued strength complicates this narrative. Despite Schiff’s long history of bearish forecasts—dating back to 2011—the cryptocurrency has not only survived but thrived, even as critics have sounded alarms. Its meteoric rise over the past several years, coupled with growing institutional adoption, suggests that digital assets are carving out a permanent place in the investment landscape.

At the same time, the surge in crypto debit card usage hints at a future where digital assets are not just speculative vehicles, but part of everyday financial life. The ability to spend crypto at point-of-sale and earn yield through DeFi protocols is a game-changer for many, blurring the lines between traditional banking and the new digital economy. However, as the sector matures, questions remain about regulatory oversight, security, and the sustainability of current business models.

In the end, Schiff’s latest warning serves as a reminder that the debate between physical and digital assets is far from settled. Both camps can point to compelling evidence: silver’s impressive rally and Bitcoin’s staggering growth. Each asset offers unique advantages, and each carries its own set of risks. For now, investors are faced with a familiar choice—one that may ultimately come down to personal convictions about the future of money, technology, and the global economy.

As markets continue to evolve and new innovations emerge, one thing is clear: the contest between silver and Bitcoin, between the old and the new, is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. Investors, as always, will have to weigh the facts, consider the risks, and decide for themselves where to place their bets.