Why PlanB Is the Most Dangerous Crypto Influencer (And Why You Need to Wake Up)

Is PlanB's Stock-to-Flow model reliable? We break down why predictive models failed in 2021, the danger of relying on crypto influencers, and why reactive trading is the safer strategy for 2025.

Hello everyone, this episode was curated from CTA Larsson. If you’ve been in the crypto space for more than a single cycle, you know the name PlanB. You’ve seen the Stock-to-Flow (S2F) model—that colorful chart with the rainbow lines predicting Bitcoin’s inevitable march to infinity. For years, this model was treated like gospel. But today, I need to have a serious conversation with you. I’ve waited four years to write this, not to settle a score or to win a debate, but to save you from making the same financial mistakes that wiped out thousands of investors in the last cycle. We need to settle the debate between predictive models (like PlanB’s) and reactive models (what successful traders actually use). Because right now, we are watching history repeat itself, and if you aren’t careful, your portfolio is the one that will suffer.

The Ghost of 2021: A $100k Promise Broken

Let’s rewind to November 2021. Do you remember the euphoria? The Stock-to-Flow model had famously predicted an average Bitcoin price of $100,000 for that halving cycle. In fact, for the math to work out to a $100k average, Bitcoin actually needed to shoot much higher—somewhere between $150k and $200k by the end of the cycle. PlanB gained massive momentum during this period. The narrative was so strong that people felt $100k was a "given." It wasn't a possibility; it was a mathematical certainty.

Because of this "certainty," I received messages from people who did unthinkable things. They mortgaged their houses. They took out high-interest short-term loans. They leveraged their life savings because the model said, "You can't lose." We know what happened next. November 2021 wasn't the launchpad to $100k; it was the pico top—the absolute peak. Bitcoin didn't go to $100,000. It crashed to $49,000, then $30,000, then $20,000, eventually bottoming out near $15,000. That specific, time-based prediction cost retail investors more money than FTX, Celsius, Luna, and 3AC combined. Why? Because when you get liquidated chasing a prediction that never happens, you don't get a bankruptcy payout. You get zero. You are finished. The Flaw of "Predictive" Models So, why did the model fail? And why is it dangerous to rely on it now? The issue lies in how these models are built. The Stock-to-Flow model relies on linear regression fitted to historical data.

Here is the hard truth about regression analysis: It always works backwards. By definition, the math is designed to fit the history perfectly. But just because a line fits the past 10 years of data does not mean it has any power to predict the next 10 months. In 2021, I tried to have a conversation with PlanB about this. I wanted to discuss the dangers of presenting a predictive model as a certainty versus using a reactive model (where you move with the market trend). The result? I was blocked. And that brings us to today. It is November 2025 (in the context of the cycle), exactly four years later. And guess what? The goalposts are moving again.

The Shifting Goalposts of 2025

If we look at the S2F predictions for the current cycle (2024–2028), the numbers have quietly changed. originally, the model suggested an average of roughly $1.2 million for this cycle. But recently, that line has been adjusted down to $500,000. The Logic: Since we started the cycle below the average, Bitcoin needs to skyrocket to nearly $1 million to drag the average up to $500k. The Reality: The model is being refitted with new data to make sense of the fact that the price isn't doing what the original model said it would. Adjusting your view based on new data is actually a good thing—it’s what smart people do. But if you are selling a prediction as a roadmap to the future, you can't just change the map every time the road turns and claim the map was right all along.

Plato, Ego, and the Trap of "Winning"

You might be wondering why I’m bringing this up now. Am I trying to dunk on PlanB? Absolutely not. I have no ill will toward him. In fact, he expresses himself much more carefully these days, which is great to see. I am bringing this up because of something I learned from Plato. Plato believed that debates were dangerous. He argued that debates are rarely about the truth; they are about ego and winning. The winner of a debate is simply the person best at arguing, not necessarily the person who is right. In the crypto social media sphere, the person with 2 million followers and a confident prediction often "wins" the argument against the guy with 170k followers saying, "Hey, maybe we should be careful." But the market doesn't care about followers. The market cares about truth. If you base your financial future on who has the most convincing narrative or the coolest cartoon avatar, you are gambling, not investing.

Anonymity vs. Accountability

There is another layer to this danger: Anonymity. I stand here with my real face and my real name. My reputation is on the line. If I lead you off a cliff, my career is over. However, the crypto space is filled with anonymous accounts. If an anonymous influencer with a cartoon profile picture loses credibility, they can simply delete the account, fire up an AI voice cloner, generate a new animal GIF, and respawn as a "new" guru next cycle. You would never know it was the same person who wrecked your portfolio four years ago. The Solution: Be Reactive, Not Predictive So, if PlanB is "off the hook" because he’s just sharing a theory, who is to blame if you lose money this cycle? You are. In 2021, maybe you didn't know better. But now, you have the data. You have seen that these predictive models don't work forward. The winning strategy for the last decade hasn't been guessing where the price will be on a specific date. It has been a reactive approach. Predictive: "Bitcoin will be $100k by December." (If it fails, you hold the bag). Reactive: "Bitcoin is showing strength and breaking resistance; I will buy. Bitcoin is losing support and breaking trend; I will sell." Reactive trading means you don't need a crystal ball. You simply follow the money. We dodged the massive crash in 2022 not because we predicted the macro-economy, but because the trend lines flipped blue to red, and we reacted.

Final Thoughts

We are halfway through another cycle. The narratives are heating up. The predictions of $500k, $1 million, and beyond are flying around. Can those prices happen? Yes, absolutely. Can we predict when they will happen with a linear line? No, absolutely not. Don't let the charisma of an influencer or the beauty of a chart override your risk management. Steer your own ship. Stop looking for a prophet to tell you the future, and start looking at the market to tell you what to do today. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zv6LQULe34