Bank of Ghana's GH₵94bn hole: Should the central bank buy Bitcoin to fix its balance sheet?

The Bank of Ghana (BoG) is sitting on a GH₵94 billion (US$7.97 billion) negative equity hole, and one economist is asking whether Bitcoin could help fill it.

The hole comes mainly from the Domestic Debt Exchange Programme (DDEP), monetary policy operations, and exchange rate losses. While central banks can technically operate with negative equity, doing so indefinitely risks losing credibility and market confidence.

Enter the proposal: invest GH₵10 billion (US$846 million) in Bitcoin or a diversified digital asset portfolio for 10 to 15 years. At 20% annual growth, that becomes about GH₵62 billion in a decade. At 25%, it hits roughly GH₵93 billion in a decade. At 30% — which Bitcoin has historically averaged over long periods — it climbs to around GH₵138 billion in about nine years.

That's enough to wipe out most of the negative equity. But there's a catch: central banks aren't sovereign wealth funds.

"The strong objection isn't that such returns are impossible. It's that central banks aren't sovereign wealth funds," the source notes. Their primary jobs are price stability, financial stability, reserve preservation, and credibility. They typically stick to low-risk, highly liquid assets.

Still, the idea isn't coming from nowhere. In 2025, the United States established a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile under an executive order. The U.S. Treasury is now building infrastructure to manage seized and sovereign digital assets. That move has shifted Bitcoin from a speculative retail instrument to a recognised matter of national economic strategy.

For an emerging market central bank like the BoG, the U.S. example offers a proof of concept for what some call "digital gold." Proponents argue that Bitcoin's absolute mathematical scarcity — capped at 21 million units — and global decentralisation make it a hedge against inflation and fiat currency devaluation. For countries dealing with forex volatility, a small, controlled exposure could work like a modern version of gold accumulation.

Volatility is the usual objection, but the source argues it's overstated for a long-term, limited allocation. "Volatility is principally a short-term phenomenon, whereas recapitalization is inherently a medium to long-term objective," the source says. Bitcoin has seen multiple corrections above 50% since 2009, but its long-term trend has been sharply upward.

The BoG already manages complex portfolios through its Financial Markets Department. Adding digital assets wouldn't be a stretch in operational terms. But the question remains: should a central bank take on the risk of a volatile asset to fix its balance sheet?

The source doesn't give a final answer — it lays out the math and the arguments and leaves it open. For now, the BoG hasn't commented on any plans to invest in digital assets.