Long term nominal price appreciation vs. real growth

Say Bitcoin price has an average annual growth rate of 12% for the next 100 years - you might say that’s not super impressive compared to the tens of thousands of % it has already earned.

But still let’s say between now and Sept 2123 the average is only 12% compounded annually. A $12k investment today becomes $1B in 100 years. And that’s with zero additional contributions, just the upfront amount.

So nominally, on paper you did incredible but real growth is what really matters - how well did you do relative to all other investments in the economy. If real estate and S&P also compounded 12%, did you just break even?

With real estate you can leverage 5 to 1 so you can do even better with RE putting only 20%. Yet I’ve listened to Jeff Booth talk about how everything will fall in price against Bitcoin.

I’m trying to get my head around the case of Bitcoin winning in real terms going forward from today after the biggest pumps are already behind us.