Got $1,500? Is It Better to Buy Bitcoin, or Viking Therapeutics?

Every now and then, two investments land in front of you that look nothing alike but pose the same underlying questions: How much uncertainty are you willing to tolerate, and in what form? In that vein, Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) and Viking Therapeutics (NASDAQ: VKTX) sit at opposite ends of the asset spectrum, with one being a cryptocurrency, and the other a pre-revenue biotech with some valuable intellectual property that's chasing a seat at the anti-obesity drug table. Both are genuinely compelling, but both carry real ways to lose money.

So what makes more sense for someone who doesn't own either yet? Let's see which asset is the better pick for a $1,500 investment.

Image source: Getty Images.

Viking's pitch is real, but so is the gauntlet ahead

Viking's lead candidate, VK2735, uses the same mechanism of action as Eli Lilly's blockbuster drug Zepbound.

The program's phase 2 clinical trial results showed meaningful weight reduction, with a tolerable side effect profile, and the company has since kicked off a pair of phase 3 studies. It's being tested in two formulations: one that's injected, and one that's taken orally; the oral formulation heads to its phase 3 trials in the third quarter of 2026.

The biotech has $706 million in cash, equivalents, and short-term investments, which should cover its costs until it has more data in hand, given that its trailing-12-month operating expenses are $393 million. If the data are consistent with the positive findings in the earlier trials, the stock will jump a lot, and VK2735 will be on its way toward submission to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for evaluation and potential approval and commercialization thereafter. And that's the reason someone might want to buy the stock; anti-obesity medicines are the single hottest area of the biopharma and biotech stock world right now.

The problem is that Viking is, at best, going to be entering a crowded and very competitive market if it manages to commercialize its lead candidate. Novo Nordisk's oral formulation of its weight loss drug Wegovy received FDA approval in late December and launched commercially earlier this year, whereas Eli Lilly's oral candidate for the same indication may be approved later this year. Those incumbents may impede what any newcomer can accomplish for their shareholders.

At worst, Viking's weight-loss treatment won't produce the clinical results it needs to get its candidates approved, which would severely hammer its stock price.

Bitcoin's thesis doesn't need a single catalyst

To grow, Bitcoin doesn't need phase 3 data, nor any partnership announcements, drug pricing deals, or a regulatory green light of any kind. Nor can its competitors block its growth, as its value is driven mainly by its supply constraints. It only needs to continue its new supply growth to slow, and to experience some level of demand, the former of which is encoded in its protocol.

Regarding demand, U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) had $614 million in capital inflows on March 4 alone, and there's currently about $57 billion in cumulative inflows into those ETFs. The asset issuers who offer the ETFs are thus net buyers of the coin, as they pass through exposure to investors who buy the ETFs. And that's only one channel enabling Bitcoin to grow; investors can also buy it directly, though no matter how they procure it they will face a tightening supply environment over time due to the coin's halvings, which occur every four years and cut the rate at which new coins are issued in half.

But Bitcoin is in no way riskless. It's quite volatile, and it's also very exposed to market sentiment as well as to global liquidity, not to mention macroeconomic factors. The most important factor is that over the very long run, the downside risks tend to get overwhelmed by the upward price pressure exerted by a limited supply clashing with whatever demand there is.

So which asset is the better one to buy with $1,500?

Viking could outperform dramatically if its phase 3 trial succeeds and it carves out commercial space. But it requires a chain of things to go right.

Bitcoin's path higher is messier in the short term and probably is less explosive in the best case, but it needs to overcome fewer obstacles to thrive, and it's done that many times before. Thus, Bitcoin is the better pick for most investors, especially if they haven't diversified their portfolios with some crypto yet.

Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin. The Motley Fool recommends Novo Nordisk and Viking Therapeutics. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.