With reference to gold, lets go back to early 2017 when Bitcoin...

With reference to gold, lets go back to early 2017 when Bitcoin had a market cap of twenty billion and gold at the level of five trillion. Bitcoin was at the time consistently doubling the numbers of active users and wallets every few months, the number of exchanges were increasing exponentially meanwhile gold is an established asset class. The asset itself is bound by rules that reflect a more optimized form of gold. The supply of gold for example unlike Bitcoin for example is technically not fixed but variable. Apply your logic here to see if it makes sense. Do you think that as Bitcoin was doubling userbase every few months in 2017 that the price should have tracked the gold price? Of course not, its absurd. As the number of holders institutional and retail grow, you'd of course expect the price growth to level off and approach something closer to gold which has had functional markets for many many years.

The problem with both of these questions is they're both reflecting a lack of understanding of the dynamics of Bitcoin as a financial product and how they link (and more important distinguish themselves) with price in fiat currency. Price is a function of market dynamics, as an asset that isn't fully established and still growing in terms of network (the network effect as a general factor for value) the price isn't going to function the same as an asset like gold where that market is already mature and the *userbase* roughly fixed.