Old question, but since then several new developments have been found concerning Bitlocker and drive encryption (used either alone or in combination), so I will turn couple of my comments on the page to an answer. Maybe it is of use to someone doing a search in 2018 and later.
Bitlocker (alone):
There have been several ways to breach Bitlocker in it's history, luckily most of them have already been patched / mitigated in 2018. What remains (known) include, for example, the "Cold Boot Attack" - the newest version of which really isn't Bitlocker specific (you need physical access to a running computer and steal the encryption keys, and anything else, straight from the memory).
SSD drive hardware encryption and Bitlocker:
A new vulnerability has surfaced in 2018; if a SSD disk has hardware encryption, which most SSDs have, Bitlocker defaults to using only that. Which means that if that encryption itself has been cracked, the user essentially has no protection at all.
Drives that are known to be suffering from this vulnerability include (but are probably not limited to):
Crucial MX100, MX200, MX300 series
Samgung 840 EVO, 850 EVO, T3, T5
More information about the SSD encryption problem here:
https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/1059435094421712896
And the actual paper (as PDF) delving deeper into the problem here:
t.co/UGTsvnFv9Y?amp=1
So the answer really is; since Bitlocker uses the disks hardware encryption, and has it's own vulnerabilities on top of that , you're better off using the hardware encryption if your SSD is not on the list of cracked SSDs.
If your disk is on the list, you're better off using something else entirely since Bitlocker would use the drive encryption anyway. What is the question; on Linux I would recommend LUKS, for example.
Best Answer
Windows detects the type based on the benchmarks results. Run
winsat formalfrom a cmd.exe, started as admin to bench the drive again.Now Windows should detect the drive again as SSD and should only TRIM it and don't do a fully defrag.