Gold has intrinsic value. Bitcoin are just... bits.
Gold's perceived value may be higher, but that's only because it's perceived, incorrectly, to have "intrinsic" value.
As far as I understand, Bitcoin is backed by energy and scarcity, much like gold: it requires significant energy to "mine" a Bitcoin, and it can't be easily duplicated, if at all. That's its intrinsic value, unlike fiat currencies that can be printed easily (correct me if I'm wrong).
I also believe that even gold has little intrinsic value, perhaps even less than steel. Ultimately, it's really a question of how valuable something is as a medium of exchange. Bitcoin is durable, portable, divisible, scarce, verifiable, and decentralized, which makes it a valuable form of currency. I suppose that's its exchange value.
If that is good or bad is an open question.
So yes, whether Bitcoin is money or a security remains an open question.
Uh that energy is spent though, transformed into heat , you can't reverse all that hashing and have the computer emit electricity.
I think for it to be a currency it has to be accepted for real world products? A currency is also useless if it fluctuates this much because you cannot set prices for anything.
By your logic stocks would be a currency?
A security is what it is at this point