It might have been arguably the strongest ship in the war firepower wise, but as an asset in the long term and in a strategic sense? It was not that great of a ship. While powerful, it was the right ship for the wrong war. The Bismarck represents the overall flaws of the Germans during World War 2: heavily armored, up gunned, technologically“superior”, but an overall drain in resources and a strategic and operational failure.

It’s overall goal was to disrupt Allied shipping by getting out into the Atlantic after trying to move stealthily as possible through either the North Sea or The English Channel. With only one escort vessel the cruiser Prinz Eugene, which matched its profile to try and confuse gunners, it had a tough job ahead of itself. While it was expecting more ships to escort it, much of the German surface fleet was either sunk, damaged and being repaired, or being built. When the British caught up with the Bismarck they engaged the ships. But the British HMS Hood was sunk, the pride of the British Fleet, and the other ship Prince of Wales was heavily damaged. But while they were defeated and let the Bismarck get away, the Bismarck had also got damaged in some ways. One was its “state of the art” fire control system which helped it aim its guns were knocked out ironically by its own guns’ recoil. A round from Prince of Wales went into the ship and caused it to leak oil, giving aircraft a way to find it. And then it was engaged by Swordfish biplanes armed with torpedos later on. These wooden biplanes only got one hit on the Bismarck but caused its rudder to be jammed. This meant it was dead in the water and when the British caught up to it they sunk her.

While in the end it did sink HMS Hood and caused the Royal Navy a bit of headache, it didn’t really accomplish anything else. When it died a lot fuel, men, and resources to build the ship went to the bottom of the Atlantic. Not even accomplishing its goal of sinking merchant shipping, it was just a huge waste of nothing. Many people argue the Bismarck could take on any ship in World War 2, but this ignores the fact of how fleets move together and how they are composed. These fleets had destroyers, cruisers, battlecruisers, battleships, subs, and the most importantly aircraft carriers. These can hit you from miles away, out ranging even the biggest battleship guns. They also can scout even farther than your ship can with its air power. They can strike anywhere and swarm you, while you do have anti aircraft guns, this can’t shoot down every plane and some will get through. The Bismarck may have been the most technological and advance battleship at the time, it was clear it wasn’t ready for such a monumental task. It could not fight the entire Royal Navy by itself or even the limited support it got.

Now compare this to what the U-Boats did: they accomplished sinking millions of tons of Allied shipping, caused a lot of resources to be devoted by the Allies to deal with this problem, and the ability to stealthily move into the Atlantic. This in the strategic sense was a much better plan and may have caused the Allies to postpone invasions or other operations.

The Bismarck needed a lot of help to even accomplish its goals, but for this to happen a lot more resources that Germany doesn’t have to spare, that must be devoted to ship building. And every ton of steel used for ships is a ton of steel not used for tanks, heavy weapons, or even subs. This would also take years or possibly a decade of ship building to accomplish. And the British would not like that at all and probably either build up her forces earlier or even challenge Germany for breaking a term in the Versailles treaty. Overall the Bismarck was a powerful ship that could win a battle or two, but it can’t win a war by itself.

Sources:

Ferris, John Robert, et al. The Cambridge History of the Second World War. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Milner, Marc. Battle of the Atlantic. History Press, 2011.

I'd actually argue (and this is a fairly common opinion among naval historians) that the Bismarck was honestly fairly archaic for the final generation of battleships. It was certainly not the most powerful battleship of the war, (that would go to one of the Yamato-class or Iowa-class most likely and Bismarck and Tirpitz certainly wouldn't make the top ten,) and had a twenty year out of date armor scheme, that honestly didn't compare particularly well to even the Hood's armor (including placing essential equipment above the main armored deck.) She was also designed for short ranged brawling instead of a longer ranged fight like her contemporaries were, and suffered dearly for it when faced with superior opponents as was seen when HMS Rodney and King George V were able to deal significant damage at range in Bismarck's final engagement.

As for technological advancement, it did have a relatively advanced fire control system when the radar did work for that first salvo. Which was not an issue that the Yamato's radars had, or any of the sets installed on American battleships by the end of the war. It was also relatively fast for a battleship of the time, being capable of thirty knots in trials when most designs of battleship built before 1942 were notionally only capable of 28kn, and exceptionally stable as a gun platform to boot.

Realistically, it wasn't that much of a waste, despite being more or less a World War I design built in the late thirties. As a fleet in being Tirpitz and the other capital ships of the Kreigsmarine did a good job of presenting a threat which had to be actively accounted for by the Royal Navy, and soaked up bombing raids that could've been targeted at actually important facilities. Bismarck could've done that, but instead she was sent off onto a death ride in the North Atlantic as a Commerce Raider and wasted as a result.

Sources:

NavWeaps - navweaps.com, 2019 generally. (in general one of the best assets for post-1880 naval history out there, and really the best reference online for naval gunnery.)

Jurens, William J. "The Loss of HMS Hood A Re-Examination" Warship International No. 2, 1987 as transcribed for NavWeaps http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood.php

Garzke Jr., William H., et al. "Bismarck's Final Battle" Warship International No. 2, 1994 as transcribed for NavWeaps http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood.php