A panel of economists and investors agreed on Thursday that bitcoin was not a successful currency substitute, but admitted that cryptocurrency development was still in its infancy and would have useful applications.
"Bitcoin is a lousy currency - it's not disrupting money or payments," said Jennifer Zhu Scott, principal at Radian Partners, speaking at a debate on the Crypto-Asset Bubble at Davos.
She added, however, that it was a useful investment and that so-called cryptocurrencies were being further developed to offer safe and stable alternatives to money.
Robert J Shiller, professor of economics at Yale University, admitted that bitcoin was a clever idea using incredible technology, but agreed it still lacked stability.
"The introduction of futures trading may help stabilise the assets in the longer term," he conceded.
Cecilia Skingsley, deputy governor at Sweden's Riksbank said that for money to be efficient it had to be a safe store of value - it must have price stability and there must be a majority of people that accept this.
"Bitcoin doesn't meet this criteria as it too volatile - it is an asset, not a currency," she said.
All the panel agreed, however, that the technology that lies behind the cryptocurrencies was an exciting prospect.
Neil Rimer, general partner and co-founder Index Futures, said: "The reason I'm for bitcoin is because I'm an advocate of technology and innovation.
"We're just nine years into this experiment, but it's accomplished some remarkable things."
Shiller agreed: "Bitcoin is a really clever idea with incredible technology - but while the currency has gone viral, it's not stable - the more interesting proposition is in blockchain, which will have other applications and real value."
Commenting on the recent crackdowns on cryptocurrency exchanges in China and South Korea, most of the panel agreed that further regulation of bitcoin and its rivals appeared likely.
Rimer said: "It needs to be regulated like any mainstream asset needs to be regulated.
"All fintech innovations have done things that extend past current regulatory reach, but they work in concert with the regulators to find solutions rather than just introduce bans."
Skingsley added: "If you see it as an asset, there are already certain regulations in place. If you're using it for illegal activities there are laws in place to contravene this."
But is it a bubble?
There were few who thought the vast array of crypto-assets currently available would survive longer than a couple of years, but most thought bitcoin and its larger rivals would persist.
"Currencies have collapsed many times," said Rimer, adding that they bounce back.
"Sure bitcoin is volatile and its uses are limited, but we're only nine years in and it's still largely trusted."
Shiller added: "The enthusiasm I see is more speculative than investment led and to that extent it is a bubble."
But none of the panel were concerned that a bubble in cryptocurrencies had the potential to spark a financial crisis.
Scott remained the most vocal advocate of bitcoin on the panel. "I want some of my investments to have zero correlation to currency markets and crypto-assets are very good for this reason."