I do think ETH will be fine, I just struggle with the case for owning it vs BTC/SOL, and haven’t heard a good case for why it’s bullish *against* those assets. 

We saw like a week post-election where it outperformed, and then ETHBTC got sent back down to new lows. Would be keen to hear a material case for ETHBTC or ETHSOL being green over the next 1y

BTC still has no solution for electronic waste. People in my proximity care about that.

ETH ultrasound narrative hasn't caught on in mainstream or even near mainstream audience.

Base is a prime example how well everything works and how easy it is to move funds, buy and use stuff.

Eth is not considered decentralized and as such not a unit safe of exchange for the digital 21 century. Why would I exchange my BTC for Eth then? We already have the Dollar and Euro that could theoretically do the same thing as the digital euro is coming in 2026.

Proud DAO-Member of the 2nd Renaissance Society https://2ndrensoc.net/ & Mutant Cats DAO https://mutantverse.io/

#1 
I try to unwind:
1) ETFs do not threaten the decentralization of BTC, under 5% is in ETFs and thus controlled by centralized entities. Which is ok and in line with the protocol
2) Mining does not threaten the decentralization, the protocol is not governed by the miners, but by the nodes.

#3
5) BTC is incentivitzing saving money in a new digital asset class. This means the world will consume less in the future, make less wars (states cannot inflate their currency to buy weapons), and renewables will even become more profitable compared to e.g. coal energy. So no, you are wron in my world. BTC is not the problem, its the solution to destryoing our planet! It will change the way we live to a more sustainable society.

pewpew, take this degen! :-)

#2
3) Eth is not a solution to POW and up to now there is no decentralized protocol that can be compared to BTC. Eth being a custodial staking protocol is prone to become more and more centralized, see eg. stEth and rEth. => Eth staking must change to noncustodial staking mechanism, but that will not happen any more would be my guess since this would increase decentralization and thus would make it less governable and less controllable by the fiat system.
4) If that is true, which I do not believe right now, that 1 x tx equals 1 IPhone, then I would still believe this is worth it. If centralized entities transact billions worth in $ with one tx, 1 Iphone not a problem in my world.

ETFs and costs of mining farms threaten decentralisation of BTC. ETH being able to change requirements for nodes offer a solution that BTC/POW couldn't.

Also:
Because I know you care about the environment and like efficiency.

Destroying 1 iPhone per transaction is not in line with that and at one point you'll ask yourself: 

We are destroying our planet for that?