Bitcoin at $785,000 by 2030? The Math Behind OMEGA60

On 17 August 2026 JAN3, Samson Mow's company, published a Bitcoin price model called OMEGA60. Mow had built it in 2022 for El Salvador's planned Bitcoin bond. The rule fits in one sentence: 60 percent growth a year, starting from $318 in 2014.

On 14 August 2030 the line reaches $784,537. At that price Bitcoin would be worth half of all the gold in the world. By February 2031 it would be a million.

JAN3 publishes a table with it. At the end of December 2025 the model line stood at $86,100 and Bitcoin at $87,900. Two percent apart, eleven years after the starting point. If the story ended there, the model would have earned its reputation.

It does not end there. Where is the line today?

Since January the line has been running away from the price

The line rises 60 percent every year, whatever the price does. From JAN3's table, with 29 September added:

The value for 29 September is JAN3's December value carried forward at 60 percent a year. Bitcoin now sits almost a third below the line.

To still reach $784,537 by 14 August 2030, Bitcoin would have to grow 78 percent a year from here, for almost four years. That is more than the 60 percent the model itself assumes.

A line that rises 60 percent every year only meets the price at the moment the price passes by.

That leaves the question of whether 60 percent is the right rate at all.

The 60 percent describes the typical year, not the growth

OMEGA60 deliberately does not use the compound annual growth rate, CAGR. It uses the median of annual returns, which JAN3 calls MAGR.

The reasoning sounds good. CAGR depends heavily on where you measure. From 2014 to 2022 it is 39.9 percent, from 2018 to 2022 only 3.6 percent. The median of annual returns is 59.7 percent in both windows. So, the argument goes, it is the more stable measure.

Stable it is. But a model that projects forward needs the rate that connects the starting price with the ending price. By definition that is the geometric mean, which is what CAGR is. The median describes a typical year, not the path over many years.

The check takes one line, on JAN3's own window. Bitcoin closed 2013 at $805.90 and 2022 at $16,537.40. That is 20.5 times in nine years. Nine years compounded at 59.7 percent give 67.4 times.

The rate is 3.3 times too high, on exactly the window it was taken from.

The reason is in the same table. Three of the nine years came in at −60.5, −73.2 and −64.2 percent. The median drops those three years from the growth estimate. A holder still had to sit through them.

The median is stable. It is not built for projecting.

So why was the line so close to the price at the end of 2025?

The line starts almost a year early

JAN3 writes "$318 in 2014". Its own table, however, shows two values for December 2014: Bitcoin at $318, OMEGA60 at $489. At its starting point the line is already 54 percent above the price it is supposed to start from.

Mathematically the line passes $318 at the beginning of 2014. At the start of that year Bitcoin cost $805.90. It only reached $318 at the end of the year. The line therefore runs almost a year ahead of the price, and at 60 percent a year that means every point on the line is about 54 percent higher than it would be from $318 at the end of 2014.

Put the $318 on the day Bitcoin actually cost that, and the picture changes:

With the right date, the 60 percent line sits 5 percent below the price today. The reason has little to do with the model. From the end of 2014 to 29 September 2026, Bitcoin really did grow 60.7 percent a year. The rate fits that period, but not because the median derived it correctly. Since the end of 2013 the figure is 43.9 percent a year.

The 2030 date rests on a starting point the price never had.

And how reliable would the rate have been if someone had calculated it earlier?

Depending on the year it was run, anywhere from $47,000 to $19 million

The test: apply the same method again each year, using only the annual returns that existed at the time. Anchor and target date stay as in JAN3's model; the figure is the line's value on 14 August 2030. Only completed years from 2014 count.

For the same date the range runs from $47,393 to $19.3 million, a factor of 407. The median, the measure presented as stable, jumps between 35.1 and 94.0 percent, because a single additional year moves it to a different value.

JAN3 uses the years up to 2022 and arrives at 59.7 percent. With the years up to 2025 it would have been 76.8 percent and a target of $4.1 million.

A price target that swings 400-fold with the year it was calculated depends on that year, not on Bitcoin.

The question is not unique to OMEGA60. The Power Law and the Rainbow Chart are also usually drawn with the whole known history and laid back across the chart. What the lines look like when computed only with what was known at the time is on the page Valuation Models: Hindsight vs. Real Time. It uses daily prices instead of JAN3's annual table, so the amounts differ; the pattern does not.

The obvious objection

"60 percent is cautious. Bitcoin has grown much faster over its history."

That depends on the starting year. Since the end of 2014, the low of that bear market, it was 60.7 percent a year. Since the end of 2013, the high before it, 43.9 percent. The 2030 target needs 78 percent from today. Whether a rate is cautious depends on the starting point, not on the rate.

How to check any price target in a minute

Four questions for any multi-year return figure:

1. Is the rate a median, an arithmetic mean or a geometric mean?
2. Applied to the stated starting price, does it lead to today's actual price?
3. Is the starting point a high or a low, and is its date right?
4. What rate does the target require from today's price?

The fourth question is the fastest. For OMEGA60 the answer is 78 percent a year, and it rises with every month Bitcoin stays below the line.

A price target only says something once you know what rate it requires from today.

What remains open is whether the price finds its way back to the line or the line keeps running away. One number measures it: the rate the 2030 target requires from whatever the price is at the time.

FAQ

What is the difference between MAGR and CAGR? MAGR is the median of annual returns and describes the typical year. CAGR is the geometric mean and describes the path from starting to ending price. Only CAGR carries a starting price to the actual ending price. For the question of what a typical year looked like, the median is the better number.

Why does JAN3's table show a Bitcoin price of $63,600 for August 2026? JAN3 gives 12 August 2026 as the snapshot date for its chart. The August month-end close was considerably higher. For today's comparison the text uses the Binance close of 29 September.

Does this disprove OMEGA60? The model does not say when the price will be on the line, only where the line goes. What is documented: the rate comes from a measure that compounds 3.3 times too high on JAN3's own window, the line starts almost a year before its starting price, and the same method would earlier have produced targets between $47,000 and $19 million.

Why does the table use JAN3's anchor rather than the corrected one? So that it tests only one thing: how much the rate swings when it is determined at different times. With the corrected anchor every value is about a third lower; the range stays at a factor of 407.

---

Not investment advice, not a recommendation, not a forecast — historical patterns are no guarantee.

Sources: JAN3, "OMEGA60", 17 August 2026 (jan3.com/blog/omega60-bitcoin-price-model), including the annual returns table and model table · Binance BTCUSDT daily closes 31 Dec 2023–29 Sep 2026 · own recalculation

Study the Past — Improve your Future 🥋