저자: TomLee · 외국인
요약 보기
이더리움은 스테이킹으로 연 약 3% 수익이 나고 월가 결제 레이어로 자리잡는 중이라 비트코인보다 우위에 있다고 주장. 비트마인은 이더리움 최대 보유사(약 578만 ETH)이며 자본구조가 단순해 스테이킹 수익으로 우선주 배당을 충분히 감당한다고 설명. AI 사이클은 닷컴 시기 시스코와 비슷하게 아직 투기 버블 후기가 아니며, 헤지펀드 레버리지 축소가 이미 진행돼 바닥 근처라고 봄. 엔비디아는 반복 매출 구조로 성장주 밸류에이션 재평가 대상이라고 언급. 메모리·반도체장비는 채찍효과로 사이클 변동성이 크지만 이익 상향 조정 여지가 크다고 봄.
다듬은 글
Bitcoin is a means of saving, and the ecosystem around it seeks to, quote, “ preserve” Bitcoin. That is, do not make any changes so that it always remains a means of savings, like digital gold. Instead, Ethereum is an asset that generates income of approximately 3% per annum, and this is thanks to the proof-of-stake mechanism.
So, the security work is done by those who stake ETH, and in return they receive income. The ecosystem is growing, and it is the largest ecosystem in the crypto world, even larger than Bitcoin. They are trying to position Ethereum, and so far successfully, as the financial settlement level for Wall Street.
So it is likely that the entire financial infrastructure will run on stablecoins that operate on the ETH, Ethereum network. The second difference is that MicroStrategy has a somewhat passive approach to Bitcoin. While Tom Lee is known as one of the most authoritative Bitcoin bulls on Wall Street, his latest market forecast indicates that the future of cryptocurrencies could include much more than just Bitcoin.
According to Lee, the global financial system could undergo transformation through a combination of digital assets, blockchain technology, artificial intelligence, and institutional adoption. He believes that understanding how these powerful trends are changing the economy will provide the next big opportunity, instead of short-term speculation.
His latest predictions on Ethereum, Bitcoin, artificial intelligence, and the future of investing may change your perspective on the next wave of financial innovation . To receive . Bitmain is the largest Ethereum vault, you know, and the largest Ethereum holder in the world in general, with almost 5.78 million ETH coins.
But in fact, this is not the first Ethereum treasury. Probably around the fourth or fifth. But we became the biggest, and we just crossed the 1-year mark , because we had a very simple strategy. We kept the capital structure very simple and wanted to accumulate Ethereum. That's how we've managed to grow so quickly, and I think we're five times bigger than the next Ethereum treasury.
And comparing us to MicroStrategy, you know, I'm still pretty optimistic about MicroStrategy. We actually own it in Granny funds because I am bullish on Bitcoin. But we take a completely different approach. Well, there are two biggest differences, maybe three. But the first is a native asset. Bitcoin is a means of saving, and the ecosystem around it seeks to, quote, “ preserve” Bitcoin.
You know, don't make changes, make it always a store of value, like digital gold. Instead, Ethereum is an asset that yields approximately 3% per annum. And that's because it works on the proof-of-stake algorithm. So, the security work is done by those who stake ETH and receive income in return . The ecosystem is growing, and it is the largest ecosystem in the crypto world, even bigger than Bitcoin.
And they are trying to position, and so far successfully, Ethereum as a financial settlement layer for Wall Street. So all financial rails will likely run on stablecoins that run on ETH. Ethereum. The second difference is that MicroStrategy has perhaps a somewhat passive approach to Bitcoin. This means they own it and want to create digital credit.
Bitmain is very active in the ecosystem. We acted as a lead investor in three spin-offs from the Ethereum Foundation, each of which aims to strengthen Ethereum and develop the ecosystem. And that's not all. So, we are truly helping to shape the future of Ethereum. And the third is the complexity of the balance.
MicroStrategy is designed to have a complex balance. They have convertible bonds, four classes of preferred stock, and common stock. In some cases, these components of the balance compete with each other. And since Bitcoin does not generate income, they have to sell shares to pay dividends. Bitmain has a very simple capital structure.
This is common stock, and we just issued perpetual preferred stock. The staking revenue we are generating today at the current Ethereum price is around $6 million per week. Approximately 300 million per year. If Ethereum reaches 5000, that would be almost a billion a year. And that would be almost 20 million a week.
But our perpetual preferred stock has a dividend obligation of 30 million per year. So we can easily cover our preferred shares with staking income. So I think we have a simple capital structure. We are betting on the future of Ethereum as a settlement layer not only for Wall Street, but also for robot communication.
And we are part of this ecosystem. So I think you should view Bitmain as a very deeply integrated Ethereum company. Yes, I mean, if someone owns Ethereum, can buy the coin and stake it, then they will be fine. But there are two types of investors who cannot do this. The first are institutional investors.
You know, big asset management companies that manage huge funds can't buy ETH, the native token, because they would have to maintain a crypto wallet. But they can buy shares. Bitmain is included in the Russell 1000 large-cap index and is traded on the New York Stock Exchange. So, this is the only large- cap Ethereum stock they can buy today.
So if you're a big manager in Boston and you want access to Ethereum, you'll have to buy Bitmain. By the way, the Russell 1000 is the largest and most common benchmark index. The second type of investor is someone who wants to use options and derivatives or simply wants to get a larger share of ETH.
Bitmain outperforms Ethereum during market growth. Bitmain has a whole set of options that are traded on the market. In fact, they are also traded in perpetual markets. So this is probably the best way for active equity investors to gain access to Bitmain. And it's actually a much larger universe, as the universe of equity investors is 240 trillion.
The universe of native crypto investors is only a few hundred billion. So I think it's better to bet on what the stock market will do and they will eventually buy Bitmain. First, trying to guess the timing of the market is never worth it. So if someone is holding these assets, they should continue to hold them.
If they sold everything , exited, and are waiting for a signal to enter, they will eventually catch up with the market that has already taken off. No one ever guesses the bottom correctly. However, what is important to see is that massive debt reduction has already taken place. If you look at data from prime brokers of US investment banks , hedge funds have dumped positions, meaning they have already sold their long positions in technology stocks at the fastest pace in almost 3 years.
In fact, if you look deeper, it was the fastest pace in almost 10 years. So , they have already carried out a large-scale reduction in leverage. And we are already seeing very high-profile stories about massive deleveraging in Korea. So, if people were forced to sell, it's called "weak hands." They have already been knocked off the market.
I would say we should be pretty close to the bottom. But again , I think the mistake people make is that they chase trends, trying to guess the peak or the bottom, and the most successful are those who stay invested. In fact, as Peter Lynch famously said, “ Selling a stock that’s growing is like cutting flowers and watering weeds, you know?” And maybe even better —I think when there's a global trend, like AI, that requires more chips and memory per unit of GDP.
Charlie Munger said it best. He says: " Money is not made by buying and selling. " "Money is made by expectation, you know?" "So if there's a structural trend, you should just own it and then forget about it." Many investors immediately began to claim that the AI boom was ending as markets began to fall recently.
Tom Lee, however, argues that such a reaction may actually indicate that we are not yet in a true speculative bubble. Because they believe prices will only rise, investors typically view every downturn in previous market bubbles as a buying opportunity. However, there is still a lot of uncertainty and anxiety surrounding AI investments today, indicating that the market is not yet fully engulfed by over-optimism .
Furthermore, Lee highlights how this AI cycle differs from previous speculative moves. Some of the world's largest and most respected IT corporations are driving today's leading investments in AI, unlike past bubbles where many companies had poor business plans and irrational promis before we move on.
Now let's move on to his powerful predictions. Nvidia has proven that it has somewhat of a recurring revenue business because they have the CUDA platform and there is an almost guaranteed upgrade plan for people to buy. So , uh, it should be revalued as a growth stock. Uh, so I think the ratio should be closer to 25-30.
Now, memory and semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and what I call " two steps away from the customer," have what's called the risk of a "bullwhip effect." Er, so these industries can be more cyclical because they don't have clear visibility of orders. So, let's assume that the end market is indeed a consumer using the AI lab's service, right?
ChatGPT, OpenAI or DeepSeek. Uh, but then they sign up through a lab, and that lab uses a hyperscaler, and then that hyperscaler buys chips from Nvidia, but then Nvidia orders chips from suppliers, and so on. Then the suppliers are distant from the customer. And in the midst of this, there's a lot of double- booking going on, right?
People are placing orders because if they think memory and chip prices are going to go up, hyperscalers can double their orders. They are ordering now, expecting prices to rise. And then memory companies can eventually build too much capacity. In fact, this has always happened in every cycle. And, of course, there is a risk that it could happen this time.
Therefore, more cyclical groups typically have the lowest P/E ratios at the peak of the cycle. So, a decrease in the multiplier should be expected, but this is not a bearish signal. It just means you still want to bet on earnings preview. So I think there will be a lot more earnings revisions . I mean, in the future, in a world of machine interaction, these systems will need a lot more memory and storage than a human, right?
Because a person eats food and has a nervous system. I mean, work requires memory and storage. So I think the economy will become increasingly dependent on memory and semiconductors. Therefore, the earnings revision should be on the upside. But I would n't compare, you know, the memory multiplier to Nvidia.
But I do n't think we're in the late stages of this AI bubble. The reason I don't believe in the late stage is that as soon as the Korean stock market crashed, most announced that it had peaked. If this was a bubble, people would say this is the bottom, and they should have actively invested in the Korean market and semiconductors, but they didn't.
They sold massively. So if I look at Cisco, let's take, let's say, a short period from 1993 to 2000, okay? A 7- year period, but it was actually one cycle—the development of the Internet. Cisco started with 80 cents. And in 1997 it reached $9, understand? So, there was a 10- fold increase. And then in 1997 there was a 40% correction.
Back then, in '97, it was the time of the Asian crisis, you know? So people might say, "Well, that's it, the Cisco story is over." But the stock went from $5 to $18 by 1998, you see? that is, twice as high as the previous maximum. And then in '98 we had, you know, Greenspan's "irrational behavior" and some other stuff.
For example, default in Russia. And, you know, long-term capital. And Cisco fell from $18 to $9. So, it fell by 42%. And many said that this was the peak of technology. In fact, I remember that period, a lot of people were dancing on the graves of technology, saying that this trend was over. Cisco rose from $9 to $ 80 by 2000 .
So it increased 100 times from 1993 to 2000. And that was a fivefold increase from the highest peak in 1998. And it only took another 18 months. So that's when Cisco really peaked because, as you correctly noted, the last orders came in. Keep in mind, in 2000, when I was a technical analyst and researcher, the peak was right there because no one believed in valuations anymore.
Cisco was worth 200 times its earnings. At the heart of all this was the laying of fiber optics throughout the United States. This CLEC needed a 10-year DCF with an exit factor of 30 and a cost of money of about 6% to justify its valuation. Unrealistic assumptions. And they, these were real buyers of Cisco equipment, right?
They were real customers . It was a farce. So, if someone says: is this today's story, it's not true. I mean, the number of people using AI is still quite small. This already shows that he is quite productive. The companies that buy this equipment, hyperscalers, they are very, very serious companies.
These aren't hipsters trying to dig up land and sell fiber rights . These are companies that actually buy and install racks, receiving large orders. So I don't think it's a bubble anymore. What we already know today: AI is actually extremely capital-intensive to maintain, because the equipment wears out.
And there are still tokens burned, right? To make it all work. And open source models are cheaper, but partly because they are like generics. Because they didn't have any R&D costs, you know? And many of them are distillation models. Yes, these models are open source, but they can't be truly free because someone has to pay for them , as they say.
So the only question we don't know the answer to is: how are these models ultimately financed? But the second thing is that, as Elon Musk says, we're, you know, kind of rapidly approaching the singularity, where AI and robots can create so much productivity that everything will essentially become free.
I mean, it destroys even capitalism. Despite recent market declines that have many investors saying the peak has been reached, Tom Lee believes the AI bubble is far from over. In his opinion, investors usually become overly optimistic during a real bubble and buy every drop because they believe that prices can only go up.
The market doesn't seem to have reached that level of enthusiasm yet, given the current anxiety and mistrust surrounding artificial intelligence. Tom Lee compares the current AI cycle to the Internet boom of the 90s, when companies like Cisco experienced significant corrections before soaring even higher.
He believes the difference now is that AI investments are being led by some of the world's strongest technology companies, rather than companies with weak foundations. Furthermore, he believes that AI is still in its infancy, despite growing adoption and increasingly evident increases in productivity.
Lee is convinced that artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, and blockchain are important long-term trends that can fundamentally change the economy, despite the fact that these technologies require significant investment. Tom Lee remains optimistic about the markets, expecting inflation to slow, allowing the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates.
As institutions begin to adopt blockchain technology, he believes cryptocurrency has great potential, particularly through Ethereum, stablecoins, and tokenized assets. Don't forge if you find his perspective helpful so you don't miss any updates. We want to know what you think about the future of cryptocurrency markets, so please share your thoughts in the comments section. We appreciate your time and hope to see you in the next video.
Comments 0