Number 59 based simply on the amount of Bitcoin owned, or the rate of real world transactions (as opposed to mere speculation) conducted in it? I would argue that the latter is a more valid way to measure a currency, and I seriously doubt Bitcoin would crack the top 100 by that measure. The Bitcoin "economy" is almost entirely made up of currency trading.

Ranked by value. I don't get how "mere speculation" is considered a bad thing, or makes bitcoin irrelevant. IF it's digital gold right now, fine. Its gold that costs nothing to store, and very little to transport, unlike actual gold.

Gold has a market cap of $8T. If that's the use case bitcoin ever has, it will still ultimately be worth $380k each if it grows to bitcoins size... and it has several advantages over gold.

Is gold worthless because its "merely speculative"??

I didn't say Bitcoin was worthless, it clearly is not. But it is not a viable currency yet. Gold is also not much used as currency anymore, though it once was.