Use one calendar rather than five perfect entry dates
Looking back at the pandemic, it is tempting to choose each asset's lowest price. That compares five hindsight-selected opportunities rather than a decision made on one date. Here all rows use the 23 March 2020 close and the 24 February 2025 close. The article does not claim that the starting date was also the low for Bitcoin, Tesla, Apple or gold. It measures a price change over one common, reproducible window.
Each row is an independent hypothetical $1,000 investment. The budget is not split into fifths: implementing all five would require $5,000 at the start. These are not portfolio recommendations or personal account statements. Yahoo Finance closing observations were captured on 14 September 2026, while the valuation endpoint remains fixed at 24 February 2025. A question about today's value requires a different ending observation and should not be confused with this fixed-window comparison.
Recorded prices and calculated values
The table uses the provider's quote.close field. Calculations preserve source precision; displayed prices use four decimals and ending values two. Every row follows 1,000 × ending price / starting price. Historical share prices reflect the provider's split treatment, while cash dividends are not added. The S&P 500 row is a price index. GC=F is a gold-futures price proxy, not a physical-gold investment, and its additional limitations are discussed below.
| Series | 2020-03-23 | 2025-02-24 | $1,000 ending value |
|---|---|---|---|
| BTC-USD | 6,416.3149 | 91,418.1719 | 14,247.77 |
| TSLA | 28.9527 | 330.5300 | 11,416.22 |
| AAPL | 56.0925 | 247.1000 | 4,405.22 |
| ^GSPC | 2,237.3999 | 5,983.2500 | 2,674.20 |
| GC=F | 1,567.0000 | 2,947.8999 | 1,881.24 |
For example, the S&P 500 starts at 2,237.3999 and ends at 5,983.2500. Applying the ratio to $1,000 gives $2,674.20. This does not imply that fractional index units can actually be purchased without cost. It scales the index's price movement to a common budget. A tracking fund introduces expenses, tracking differences and distribution treatment that can change the investor's result.
What does the ranking establish?
Over these two observations, Bitcoin's price ratio produces a higher final value than Tesla's. The earlier article called Tesla the best result despite a larger Bitcoin figure in its own table. That contradictory claim has been removed in favor of explicit calculated rows. A single-window ranking is not a universal performance ranking. Changing either endpoint can change ratios and potentially the order. This article has not searched every possible start and end date.
The five series are not the entire universe an investor could choose in 2020. Selecting prominent survivors and subsequently discussed assets introduces a selection effect. Failed companies and omitted sectors are not represented. The table therefore cannot establish that everyone who invested during the pandemic made money. Its narrower finding is the price ratio for five selected series across two specified closes. Keeping the scope narrow makes the evidence auditable rather than meaningless.
Keep stock splits separate from dividends
A stock split changes share count and unit price without itself creating wealth. Comparing an old nominal share price with a later split-adjusted price can invent a gain or loss. Both endpoints here come from the same provider series and field rather than combining a newspaper quote with a differently adjusted database. That consistency matters before discussing the size of the return. The saved source record allows the inputs to be checked independently.
A dividend is a separate cash flow. Excluding it from a price ratio means the table does not measure every component of a shareholder's return. Conversely, adding it again to a series that already incorporates distributions double counts it. This is deliberately a price-ratio table, not a total-return table. Using a dividend-reinvested S&P 500 series would require a new data selection and an explicit statement of distribution treatment across the comparison.
Why the gold row needs a stronger qualification
The ratio of two GC=F observations provides a price indicator. A futures investment also involves contract size, expiry and rolling, margin and cash management. None of those operations is reconstructed here. Calling the row the final value of a real $1,000 futures account would therefore be wrong. Likewise, physical gold involves its own dealing spread and product costs. The word gold does not make these instruments interchangeable.
To study a particular physical-gold product or fund, use that product's own series. Attaching one product's expense to another product's price does not reconstruct every difference. Rather than hiding the proxy, this article names it clearly so the row can be read as a market-price comparison. Similar-looking final numbers do not establish equivalent investments. A practical transaction analysis requires more information than the two prices needed for this limited illustration.
A crisis-day purchase is not investing throughout the crisis
Investing the entire budget at one close differs from making monthly purchases through the period. Each later contribution uses its own price. Already possessing the full budget also differs from saving it from future income. Do not apply the table's full-period return to money deposited later. A DCA analysis needs its own contribution calendar and accumulated quantities; this single-purchase table cannot stand in for that calculation.
You can explore a similar question with the Bitcoin versus S&P 500 comparison, but read its valuation date. A live tool using today's price will not reproduce this fixed 2025 endpoint. Changing only the starting date can help expose dependence on a particular entry. A favorable historical result does not show that choosing the eventual low was easy while events were unfolding. Hindsight and decision-time uncertainty are different conditions.
Finally, the rows do not identify a future winner. They demonstrate how to audit a price-ratio calculation. Costs remain excluded; Bitcoin trades continuously, while the other series have different market closing times. A common calendar date does not mean a common second across markets. A more precise simultaneous-price study needs different data. These daily observations support an educational comparison with the stated boundaries, not a complete reconstruction of every executable investment outcome.
