Recently, I noticed an interesting thing—Ray Dalio criticized Bitcoin at the most inopportune moment.

On the All-In podcast, Bridgewater Associates founder Ray Dalio made a set of remarks. The core point was that we should stop comparing Bitcoin to gold. He believes this thing called Bitcoin lacks central bank endorsement, its privacy protections are essentially meaningless, and we also need to watch out for the sword of quantum computing hanging over our heads. He even said, “There is only one kind of gold,” meaning that gold is the true safe-haven asset, and that the second-largest reserve held by central banks in each country is it.

But the awkward part of this argument is that—on the day he said it, gold fell 3%, dropping from $5,128 back down; meanwhile, Bitcoin only fell 0.7%, staying around $68,700. Keep in mind this was just a few days after the outbreak of the U.S.-Iran conflict, when it’s exactly when safe-haven assets should be doing their job. As a result, the gold Dalio favors—gold that he claimed should provide protection—got hit even harder by the very crisis he said was a threat.

This decoupling phenomenon has actually been going on for a while. From July to early October, Bitcoin and gold’s performance was still somewhat synchronized, until the crypto market crash in October wiped out $20 billion worth of leveraged positions. After that, the two went their separate ways—Bitcoin fell more than 45% from its October peak, while gold rose 30% over the same period, breaking above $5,100.

The escalation of conflict on Saturday once sent gold surging, but as the situation worsened and oil supply became the focus, gold gave back its gains. On Bitcoin’s side, there was a sell-off on Saturday, then it rebounded after Iran’s Supreme Leader passed away on Sunday. On Tuesday, it ran into resistance around $70,000, and finally stabilized in the mid-$67,000 range. Overall, neither of the two assets fully played the role of a safe haven this week, and both showed clear volatility.

Dalio’s specific criticisms aren’t exactly new topics. He emphasized that Bitcoin’s transparency is a problem—any transaction can be monitored, and it could even be directly controlled. He also doubts whether central banks would really accumulate an asset that runs on a public ledger. As for the threat of quantum computing, he hasn’t mentioned that for the first time either.

However, he isn’t completely bearish. In Dalio’s own investment portfolio, he still allocated 1% to Bitcoin as part of diversification. Back in July last year, he also suggested allocating 15% of assets to Bitcoin or gold, saying it was the “best return for risk,” aka meaning a balancing choice amid the increasingly serious backdrop of U.S. debt issues.

Last month, he warned that the U.S.-led “world order” has already fallen apart, and that investors need to rethink how to protect their wealth. Now it seems that discussions about whether gold is still the only answer are growing, but this week’s price action doesn’t appear to have provided a clear answer yet.