CZ and Peter Schiff Clash Over What Should Back Digital Money at Binance Week
What Sparked the CZ–Schiff Face-Off in Dubai?
Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao and gold advocate Peter Schiff went head-to-head on Thursday during a headline debate at Binance Blockchain Week in Dubai. The discussion was billed as a showdown between two long-running rivals, and it rapidly delivered on that expectation. While the pair have traded jabs on Twitter for years, the session opened with an unexpected point of agreement: tokenized gold may outperform physical bars as a form of money.
Schiff introduced his new TGold platform, which trades vaulted, allocated metal and will later offer withdrawal of either physical gold or a token representing ownership. “Because the token is divisible, you can transfer any portion of it to someone else, and that transfer gives them ownership of the gold without moving the physical metal,” he said. CZ agreed, saying “Tokenized gold is actually almost better than the gold itself … divisible, transferable, transportable.”
That brief alignment ended once the debate turned to BTC’s purpose, its value, and the question of what should back digital money.
Investor Takeaway
Why Schiff Says BTC Lags as Money
Schiff argued that BTC behaves like fiat money because “it’s backed by nothing,” claiming it lacks inherent value. He said tokenized gold has a clear source of worth, while BTC “doesn’t have a utility beyond the fact that I can transfer it to you and you can transfer it to somebody else.”
He also questioned BTC’s usefulness in commerce. “Nothing is priced in BTC,” Schiff said, adding that merchants ultimately receive fiat currency. “You’re tradeing your BTC and then you’re paying with currency,” he said. Using BTC at checkout, in his view, amounts to tradeing an asset rather than spending money.
Schiff framed as proof of cooling demand, pointing out it “purchases 40% fewer ounces of gold today than it did four years ago.” He said BTC ETFs, corporate purchases and intense hype have not changed what he views as its core fragileness. “All BTC does is enable a transfer of wealth from the people who purchase … to the people who trade,” Schiff said.
How CZ Defended BTC’s Value and Utility
CZ pushed back on the idea that BTC’s digital nature fragileens its value. “BTC actually doesn’t exist anywhere … but it doesn’t mean that because it’s virtual, it has no value,” he said, pointing to platforms like X and Google as examples of virtual products that are widely accepted as valuable. He described as “a new technology for money” supported by a global network.
Utility was a central point in CZ’s replies. He highlighted real-world spending via crypto-linked cards. Holding up a Binance card, he said users are indeed paying in crypto: “From the user perspective, he just swiped his card and crypto gets deducted.” The conversion behind the scenes, he argued, does not change the fact that BTC is being used in daily life.
CZ also countered Schiff’s appeal to gold’s durability. Schiff said the metal “doesn’t go away,” with ancient gold still circulating today. CZ replied that gold’s true supply is uncertain, while BTC’s is exact. “With BTC, we know exactly how much there will be, and we know exactly where they are,” he said.
He disputed Schiff’s claim that BTC mainly enriches tradeers. “How many people made money on BTC?” CZ asked, noting its climb from fractions of a cent to tens of thousands of dollars. He referenced a user in Africa who used crypto to cut bill payment times from three days to three minutes, enabling him to save his first $1,000.
Investor Takeaway
Where the Debate Ultimately Landed
The session closed with each speaker holding his ground. CZ predicted that “BTC will do even better” than over time. Schiff, meanwhile, said growing interest in precious metals will eventually outweigh crypto demand.
The platform showed how far the conversation around digital money has moved. Tokenized commodities now appeal to veteran gold advocates, while BTC’s backers continue to point to on-chain payments and a base as proof of lasting demand. The divide between the two sides remains sharp, but the overlap — especially around tokenization — is wider than it has ever been.
