Well-known trader Peter Brandt has been outspoken in criticizing Ethereum (ETH), the second-largest cryptocurrency by market cap, calling it a “shitcoin” and emphasizing his doubts about Ethereum’s long-term success.

Ethereum faces criticism

Peter Brandt, who is known for his insights into financial markets, has been vocal in criticizing Ethereum, arguing that it lacks the fundamental features needed for long-term success.

Brandt’s criticism highlights Ethereum’s weaknesses as a store of value, as well as its challenges with second-layer solutions and high gas fees, factors he believes put Ethereum at a disadvantage compared to Bitcoin.

To support his point, Brandt posted an Ethereum/Bitcoin price chart, noting that Ethereum’s value has continued to decline relative to Bitcoin over the past year.

Despite Bubrandt’s criticism of ETH, there are other voices that offer opposing views to Ethereum’s outlook. JPMorgan’s Global Market Strategy team recently made the case that Ethereum should not be classified as a security, emphasizing the shift toward greater decentralization in the network’s staking ecosystem. This shift, evidenced by the decline in the share of ETH staked on Lido, is seen as a positive development that could ease regulatory concerns and “strengthen” Ethereum’s case against being classified as a security.

Community reaction to Brandt's criticism

Interestingly, Brandt’s criticism of ETH has sparked mixed reactions within the community. Some have supported Brandt’s assessment, while others have fiercely disagreed and defended Ethereum. Blockstream CEO Adam Back is one of those who have supported Brandt’s criticism. Back highlighted Ethereum’s vulnerability to major hacks, scams, and rug-pulls, which have accumulated over $1 billion every quarter. He highlighted the growing complexity of Ethereum scripts, noting that complexity often leads to security vulnerabilities.

Meanwhile, another X user, Collin, offered an opposing view. Collin noted that Brandt’s criticism seemed “biased” and did not “recognize ETH’s unique capabilities beyond Bitcoin.” He argued that Ethereum’s programmability makes it unique, allowing for features and functions that Bitcoin cannot replicate.

Collin added:

“Yes, Ethereum transaction fees are high. However, Ethereum processes more transactions per block than Bitcoin. Also, Bitcoin transaction fees have been ridiculously high in the past, over $50 per transaction, and given Bitcoin’s design, these fees will rise again in the future. So, if you are complaining about high fees, you may want to do some more research on Bitcoin’s future security planning. It is important to understand that high fees are an inherent part of Bitcoin’s design. Peter, you should continue your research in this area.” #以太坊声誉  #加密货币