Risk Warning — For Information Only

This tool is an interactive companion to Show Me The Model: Bitcoin to $1,000,000 by Paul Faulkner (The Rogue Protocol, 2026). All outputs are illustrative conditional models based on user-assigned probabilities. Nothing produced by this tool constitutes financial advice, investment advice, or a personal recommendation under FSMA 2000. The Rogue Protocol is not authorised or regulated by the FCA. All scenario probabilities and expected values are model outputs only — not forecasts or price targets. Cryptocurrency markets carry substantial risk including total loss of capital.

BTC / USD
Loading…
Market Cap
—
Distance to $1M
—
Distance to EV
—
The Rogue Protocol · Bitcoin Conditional Framework

Show Me
The Model

Every Bitcoin price target since 2016 has been a number without a model. This tool is the model. Thirteen conditions. Five serial dependency layers. Four probability-weighted scenarios. One honest expected value. Adjust every assumption. Watch the EV move. That is what a conditional framework is for.

Based on Show Me The Model: Bitcoin to $1,000,000 — A Forensic Conditional Framework (Paul Faulkner, The Rogue Protocol, 2026). The framework assigns a 10–15% probability to the full $1M thesis and a probability-weighted EV of approximately $260,000. The gap between those two numbers is the cost of honesty.

Probability-Weighted EV
$260,000
Updates as you adjust scenarios
Full Thesis Probability
12.5%
Scenario A: above $500,000
Most Likely Scenario
C
$100K–$200K — 37.5%
Break Scenario Risk
22.5%
Scenario D: below $100,000
The Binding Constraint
The Eligibility layer is the current bottleneck.
Volatility compression below 35% (currently ~48%) and regulatory clarity for pension/insurance mandates are both unmet. The Activation layer — multi-pool institutional allocation at 1–2% of AUM — cannot engage at scale until Eligibility clears. The Foundation and Infrastructure layers are largely met. That does not compensate for Eligibility being blocked.
Scenario Probability Model

Adjust the probability assigned to each scenario. The EV recalculates live. Probabilities must sum to 100% — the tool will warn if they don't. The book's base case assignments are shown as defaults.

Scenario A — Full Thesis
All dependency layers functional
Price above $500,000 · Multi-pool allocation at 1–2%+ · No major break conditions fire
12.5%
Weighted contribution: $93,750
Midpoint $
Scenario B — Institutional Adoption
ETF adoption continues, partial pension entry
Price $200,000–$500,000 · Some break conditions fire · Diminishing returns persist
27.5%
Weighted contribution: $96,250
Midpoint $
Scenario C — Current Trajectory
ETF-only demand, no major institutional breakthrough
Price $100,000–$200,000 · Bitcoin remains niche alternative asset
37.5%
Weighted contribution: $56,250
Midpoint $
Scenario D — Break Scenario
Major break condition fires
Price below $100,000 · MSTR debt wall, Tether failure, regulatory reversal, macro shock
22.5%
Weighted contribution: $13,500
Midpoint $
Probabilities sum to 100% — must equal 100% for a valid model. Adjust the sliders.
The 13-Condition Dependency Stack

The system is serial, not parallel. Foundation must hold before Infrastructure. Infrastructure before Eligibility. Eligibility before Activation. A strong Foundation does not compensate for a blocked Eligibility layer. Click any layer to expand.

∗ Status as of May 2026, sourced from primary data in the book. Conditions will evolve — the framework is designed to accommodate updated assessments.

Layer 1 Foundation
Block probability: 85% ▶
C1
Protocol security and network integrity
17-year track record. No credible near-term threat. Quantum upgrade path exists. Assessed independently of other conditions. Probability: 97%.
MET ✓
C2
No G7 regulatory prohibition
ETFs approved in US. MiCA implemented EU. FCA UK framework live Oct 2027. Political cost of outright ban is high. Assessed independently. Probability: 90%.
MET ✓
Layer 2 Infrastructure
Block probability: 85% ▶
C3
ETF infrastructure continues to scale
$96B+ AUM. $65B cumulative inflows. BlackRock IBIT: 785,000 BTC. Product category established and profitable. Near-certain given regulatory permissibility. Probability: 90% (95% conditional on Foundation).
MET ✓
C4
Institutional custody scales to multi-trillion
Current infrastructure handles ~$100B. $1T+ requires insurance development and regulatory clarity. Operationally mature but untested at the required scale. Probability: 75% (80% conditional on Foundation).
PARTIAL ⚠
Layer 3 — Bottleneck Eligibility
Layer probability: 40% ▶
C5
36-month ETF track record met and acted upon
January 2027 threshold is mechanical — the calendar will reach it. The probability reflects acting upon it, not merely reaching it. Many IPS frameworks require 36 months of audited performance history. Probability: 85% (90% conditional on prior layers).
PENDING ⏳
C6
Volatility compresses below 35% annualised
Current annualised volatility: ~48%. Threshold for institutional inclusion in most risk frameworks: ~35%. Compression requires sustained adoption not yet occurring. The single most sensitive condition in the model — every 10pp shift moves the output ~4%. Probability: 45%.
FAILING ✗
C7
Regulatory clarity reaches pensions and insurance
US advancing. UK partial (FCA framework Oct 2027). EU fragmented. Slight upward conditional adjustment as ETF track record supports the regulatory case. Probability: 50% (55% conditional on prior layers).
PARTIAL ⚠
Layer 4 Activation
Layer probability: 35% ▶
C8
Multi-pool allocation reaches 1–2% of AUM
Family offices begun. Pension mandates gated on Eligibility. Conditional probability rises materially once eligibility gates open — the primary barrier to allocation has been removed. Probability: 35% unconditional (60% conditional on Eligibility). Highest sensitivity condition in the model.
NASCENT ⏳
C9
Sovereign adoption — 3+ G20 nations
US Executive Order signed but no acquisition mandate. No other G20 nation has announced formal BTC reserve. Conditional on institutional legitimacy cascade. Probability: 30% unconditional (50% conditional on Eligibility).
NASCENT ⏳
Layer 5 Stability & Amplification
Layer probability: 55% ▶
C10
No MSTR forced liquidation across window
ATM capacity provides runway. Four preferred share classes and convertible debt create vulnerability. Negative correlation with macro stress: the scenario most likely to drive Bitcoin toward $1M is also the scenario most likely to stress MSTR's capital structure. Probability: 70% unconditional (65% conditional on Activation — negative correlation applied).
WATCH ⚠
C11
No stablecoin systemic failure across window
Tether lacks Big Four audit. USDC growing. A USDT depeg is survivable long-term but resets the timeline by 12–24 months. Probability: 70% unconditional (65% conditional on Activation).
WATCH ⚠
C12
Macro debasement corridor holds without crisis
US fiscal trajectory supports the corridor. Geopolitical shocks and Federal Reserve policy errors could push outside it. Negatively correlated with Stability conditions — the best macro environment for Bitcoin price is also the highest stress environment for leveraged infrastructure. Probability: 50%.
UNCERTAIN ⏳
C13
Reflexive loop sustained without derivatives ceiling breach
Price → flows → supply compression → price. Documented in the book's Section 1.9 and 3.6a. ETF spot displacement of perpetuals is the resolution pathway — not achieved at current ETF scale. Probability: 45% (50% conditional on Activation).
THEORETICAL
Why Serial Dependency Changes Everything
The naive joint probability of 13 independent conditions is 0.67%. The layered model produces 6.6% — ten times higher.
The difference is not optimism. It is structure. Independent multiplication compounds failure probability at every step — it assumes that if the Foundation fails, you still multiply in the probability of Eligibility failing separately. The serial model recognises that early-layer failure forecloses later-layer testing entirely. If the Foundation layer fails, the question of whether Eligibility clears does not arise. The dependency structure eliminates the double-counting. The 6.6% mechanical figure is then adjusted to 10–15% to account for partial-clearing scenarios where conditions are substantially but not fully met.
Reverse Calculator

What does your target EV require? Enter a target expected value and see what Scenario A probability is needed to reach it — given the current assignments for B, C and D.

Enter the EV you want the model to produce. The calculator derives the Scenario A probability required — holding B, C and D at their current slider values.

The book's base case EV: $260,000.
The $1M thesis as EV would require Scenario A to be near-certain.
The $500K by 2030 question: what probability does Scenario A need?

Scenario A Probability Required
—
—
What That Requires
Adjust the target EV to see the conditions analysis.
Sensitivity Analysis — From the Book (Section 4.3a)
Layer Base Probability Low Estimate High Estimate Sensitivity
Foundation + Infrastructure0.850.75 → ~11%0.95 → ~14%Low. High base limits variance.
Eligibility0.400.35 → ~10%0.55 → ~15%Moderate. Volatility is the key variable.
Activation0.350.25 → ~9%0.45 → ~16%Highest. Multi-pool deployment is the primary driver.
Stability / Amplification0.550.45 → ~10%0.65 → ~15%Moderate. Break condition risk is the main variable.
The Denomination Barrier

A $1M Bitcoin is not just a price. It implies a world. What does that world look like in terms of the purchasing power of the dollar you hold the gain in?

At $1M per BTC, Bitcoin's market cap is ~$20T. The question is whether that $20T represents real wealth creation or nominal price inflation in a debased currency. The answer changes whether the gain is real.

The $100 Can of Coke Problem
If $1M Bitcoin requires the dollar to lose 90% of its purchasing power to get there, the gain is 10× in real terms — not 13×.
The Maxi bull case and the debasement thesis are often presented as the same argument. They are not. A Bitcoin denominated in a severely debased dollar is not the same return as a Bitcoin denominated in today's dollar. The scenario that produces nominal $1M Bitcoin — sustained macro debasement, the Amplification layer clearing — is also the scenario that most inflates the price of everything else. The real return depends entirely on the dollar's purchasing power at the exit point. The tool cannot model the future dollar. It can make the question impossible to ignore.