In any economic system, something is considered a zero-sum game, where there are those who benefit and those who lose.
But in this case, if we simplify it and the pattern is implemented correctly, both buyers and sellers benefit. So I call it a different thing, but it's up to each person to see the correlation based on their own perspective.
If there were no financial markets that could benefit both buyers and sellers, I'm not so sure this sector would have grown so rapidly.
Unless we're talking about the short term, there's little resemblance to a zero-sum relationship because there's no new value creation, which is why I don't attribute a zero-sum relationship to Bitcoin.
If you talk about long term, you are not wrong. But bitcoin is not unique, speculative markets like stocks or the gold market are not zero-sum games in the long run.
But if compare all three, bitcoin is the market is most similar to a zero-sum game because the value of bitcoin is based on its expectation and scarcity. The investor's profit comes from other people paying higher prices. Unlike stocks, profits come from the intrinsic value of the company, stock prices increase due to the growth of technology and the company.
The Bitcoin market needs to be adopted more widely, needs to be applied more practically in life, instead of just being used for speculation. Only then is it truly a positive-sum like stocks. But in the short run, it's all a zero-sum.