저자: CathieWood · 외국인
요약 보기
캐시 우드는 AI·로봇·블록체인·바이오 등 기술이 결합된 역사상 최대 혁신 사이클이 진행 중이며 비트코인이 그 중심이라고 주장. 기관 자금이 아직 관망 중이나 곧 본격 유입될 것으로 봄. 양자컴퓨팅의 비트코인 위협은 중반세기 이후로 실제 위험은 제한적이라 봄. 진행자(Finance Insider)는 재정적자 비율 2026년 5% 하회 확률이 전쟁으로 낮아졌지만 2027년 재도전 가능성, 달러 강세 압력(DXY 상승 가능성), 자본 유입 증가 등을 언급.
다듬은 글
think with the stimulative fiscal policy, especially that tax package, that the US economy is going to boom relative to other economies. So, we're going to be importing more than we export. Now, the other side of this, which makes which which takes away the sting that I think President Trump thinks exists, is a capital surplus.
It means more investment dollars coming into the United States relative to our dollars going elsewhere in the world. So, a capital surplus. Cathie Wood of ARK Invest makes the big and bold claim that we are on the verge of historic investment super cycle with Bitcoin at its center. She says that even though Bitcoin ETFs have been approved by regulators in the US, most institutional capital has stayed cautiously on the sidelines studying the well-known four-year cycle and waiting for more certainty before making big commitments.
However, Wood says that this hesitation is likely about to end as institutions realize that Bitcoin works by fundamentally different rules than traditional assets, making a unique and necessary addition to their portfolios instead of just an afterthought. Her view is especially strong because she sees a larger convergence happening at the same time.
She thinks that crypto and blockchain are not developing in isolation, but are colliding with AI, robotics, and other transformative technologies to create what she thinks could be the most important and wealth-generating innovation cycle in human history. This cycle will change markets, industries, and economies in ways that most investors are still too cautious or too traditional to fully appreciate.
For Wood, this isn't just about the next move in Bitcoin's price. She sees it as a rare structural inflection point where those who understand the underlying forces, monetary, technological, and institutional, stand to gain a lot from what she sees as the very early stages of a change that will define the next 10 years of global markets.
Yeah, pretty exciting. So, innovation in the financial world. Love it. We're going to go through some of these charts. We'll do a lot of our normal In the Know drill, but we've got some Cal-C Cal-C charts to accompany some some of the charts we normally show you. So, here we go. Okay, so let's let's start with our first Cal-C slide.
And here you can see in the prediction markets, one of the questions we put in is will the US federal deficit to GDP ratio drop below 5% for fiscal year 2026. Now, fiscal year means through the end of September, so the year through September of 26. And as you can see here, as the war in the Middle East has has extended, the odds that the GDP the debt deficit to GDP ratio drops below 5%, those have dropped understandably.
So, let's take a look at where we are. So, here is the deficit to GDP. It's at about 5.1 2%. And you can see it was moving in the right direction before the war, and we really thought it was going to drop below 5% and head for that 3%, which is Treasury Secretary Bessant's goal for the end of 28. In fact, we thought that it was going to drop below that 3% well before before the end of 28.
Well, the war has changed that. Now, the defense budget is going up, and it was already at about a trillion dollars. And just to put this in in perspective, the deficit is is at about well, the total government spending is at about 7 trillion dollars. And so, one of that is defense. Two of that is health care.
And one of the downward pressures on the budget is health care. We've heard about Medicare actually cutting prices dramatically in in terms of some of the most heavily used drugs out there. We're also seeing DOD continue to cut back on federal employment. And yet we do have this war. So, the odds have gone down, certainly have in the short term.
But if we if we get past this period into fiscal 27, we think we'll have another shot at getting below 5% and heading actually very quickly to 3%. And the reason for that is we see GDP growing so much more quickly than many economists expect. But very short term, the odds the odds have dropped. Here's another reason the odds have dropped, but this is a good news reason.
I've mentioned on on past In the Know's, the accelerated depreciation that was in the tax package last year. And you can see the impact already that it's having. So, corporate tax receipts are going to be I think because of the accelerated depreciation, roughly 150 billion dollars lower. Now, obviously that's good news for the economy.
It's one reason that we expect GDP growth to accelerate fairly dramatically in in the not-too-distant future. And here and we've presented these deficits together. Deficit The I just showed you the federal deficit as a percent of GDP. Here's the other deficit that bothers well, especially President Trump.
I don't think it bothers too many other people, but his objective is to move us into surplus. And you can see we have spent um many, many years in a deficit position. And from our point of view, we'll probably continue to spend more years in deficit. Why is that? It is because we think with the stimulative fiscal policy, especially that tax package, that the US economy is going to boom relative to other economies.
So, we're going to be importing more than we export. Now, the other side of this, which makes which which takes away the sting that I think President Trump thinks exists, is a capital surplus. It means more investment dollars coming into the United States relative to our dollars going elsewhere in the world.
So, a capital surplus. Cathie Wood talks about the growing worries that quantum computing could threaten Bitcoin's encryption. She says that the worries are technically valid, but the alarmist headlines greatly shorten the actual timeline. According to ARK Invest research, quantum systems strong enough to seriously threaten Bitcoin's encryption probably won't appear until the middle of the 21st century.
This gives the Bitcoin development community decades to plan and build quantum-resistant encryption and wallet infrastructure, which is already happening. This careful reframing is important because it changes the conversation from existential panic to practical planning. It sees quantum risk as a known and manageable engineering problem instead of an impending disaster.
Wood's more important point, though, is that quantum computing isn't even the most important technology happening right now. That honor goes to artificial intelligence, which is developing at a speed and with an immediacy that quantum development can't match right now. AI is creating transformative opportunities across industries and could reshape the investment landscape much sooner than any quantum threat can materialize.
This begs the question of whether Bitcoin and the broader crypto ecosystem can strategically integrate with and benefit from AI's explosive trajectory instead of being overshadowed by it. Here is another take, and I'm going to credit Don Luskin from TrendMacro for this chart. And what he does, trying to help people understand the the debt and the deficit situation, is he says, you know, when you compare debt to GDP, what you're comparing is a balance sheet item to an income statement item, the equivalent of.
Really, you should be comparing debt to equity. So, equity is the the black line. Debt is the purple, and GDP is the red. And if we go to the next chart, you will see that while debt to GDP is above one here, the one ratio, you can see debt to equity is at 0.5 and actually it's very low by historical standards.
Uh the other thing I will say is if you look at debt to assets, another balance sheet item, um the asset side of the US balance sheet is really at cost. What did the land cost? What did the gold cost when it went down to the federal balance sheet? Uh well, some of these costs were 50 to 75 years ago.
And so, if we if we really thought about this, we could sell some of our land and I forget how much land the government owns. It's a substan- I think it's over a quarter of all the land in the United States. Uh so, we could defray the debt that way. Now, I'm not recommending it and we do want uh uh discipline.
So, I'm very happy that there is a concern about the deficit and the debt uh because if you think about government spending, which is the problem, um every incremental uh dollar in government spending uh is effectively an incremental tax dollar. We've either got to pay for it today uh in taxes, tomorrow in taxes, or the most regressive tax uh of all is inflated away, which we don't think that's going to happen.
Uh but that is what happened during the '70s. So, back to Calchi. Another uh hotly debated issue is the dollar. Uh DXY is the trade weighted dollar. Um it's only six countries. It's not the 26 countries in the Fed's measure. Um it doesn't include China uh the the yuan, for example. Uh but uh how high will the dollar get?
Uh last year the narrative was the US exceptionalism is dead, the dollar is in decline, and uh it's uh inexorable. It's it's going to continue. And you can see here um many uh people um believe that the dollar will uh end the year as measured by the DXY at 103.6. Now, that is very interesting to us because you can see on the next page where we are in the context of history.
Uh we are just below 99. So, what Calchi is suggesting is uh the the people who are um willing to trade or make a prediction, uh they actually think the dollar's going to go up. Uh and that goes against conventional uh wisdom. Now, we agree that uh it is going to go up uh mostly because of what I just mentioned about foreign direct investment and our capital friendly, business friendly tax policies, also deregulation is um we think going to increase the return on investment in the United States relative to that in the rest of the world.
That is dollar positive and we take this chart all the way back into the early '80s. Why? Uh it is uh because we like to illustrate what happened during Reaganomics and we think Trump-onomics uh resembles greatly actually uh Reaganomics and look what happened to the dollar back then. Now, it was coming from the depths of despair in the late '70s, but it really went into overdrive to the point where all the treasury and monetary ministers around the world got together and said, "This is becoming a deflationary risk to the rest of the world uh because a lot of dollar uh a lot of debt is denominated, was and still is uh denominated in dollars.
So, the dollar the debt service was getting more and more expensive back then. Uh we think we're not going to see a surge like we did in the early '80s, but we think the pressure is to the upside and it if you look at this chart in in the context of history, you will see that we are closer, if you take out that that boom in the early '80s, we're closer to the higher end of uh the dollar's range uh than we are to the lower end.
And again, I think that goes against con- conventional thinking right now. In Cathie Wood's mind, artificial intelligence is not just one technology. It is a star one of the biggest and most important innovation cycles in human history. AI is not just making progress on its own. It is also speeding up breakthroughs in robotics, energy storage, blockchain, and biotechnology at the same time.
This created powerful feedback loop in which each technology amplifies the others, shortening timelines and expanding the scope of change in ways that are hard to fully understand within the cycle itself. This convergence is already shaking up well-established industries. One early and telling example is workplace software, where rigid legacy systems are quickly being replaced by flexible, data-driven, AI-integrated solutions that change how businesses work and compete in a fundamental way.
For Wood, the most important thing to understand is not just that these technologies are getting better, but that they are getting better together in a way that makes them better at each other. This will change productivity, capital allocation, and whole economic sectors at speed that most institutional investors and policy makers are not yet ready for.
Those who developed the intellectual framework to recognize and act on these early signals, rather than waiting for everyone to agree, will be in the best position to take advantage of the generational wealth-building opportunity this technological revolution represents.
Comments 0