저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 비트코인은 리스크 헤지 자산으로서 포트폴리오에 소액 편입할 가치가 있다고 주장하며, 버핏·멍거·빌 게이츠의 부정적 평가는 능력 범위 밖의 견해라고 반박. 버핏·멍거 비판 반박 버핏 등은 기술주를 능력 범위(circle of competence) 밖으로 보고 있으며, 비트코인도 생산성 없는 자산으로 금과 유사하게 취급하는 것으로 해석됨. 비트코인의 헤지 역할 포트폴리오를 위험자산 99%, 위험회피 1%로 구성하고, 그 1% 중 일부로 비트코인을 보유하는 것이 적절하다고 주장. 비트코인은 전통 시장과 상관성이 낮아 보험 성격의 자산이라고 설명. 2007년 금융위기 때 전통 헤지 자산들이 붕괴한 사례를 들어, 비상 상황에 대비한 비상관 자산 필요성 강조. 상관성 vs 유동성 논쟁 비트코인 상승의 원인을 시장 전반의 유동성 확대로 보는 견해에 대해, 유동성과 상관성은 다른 개념이라며 일부 동의하되 전통 금융자산은 위기 시 상관된다고 주장. 금과의 비교 금은 수천 년의 가치저장 기록이 있으나, 젊은 투자자층은 디지털이고 가치를 더 잘 반영하는 자산을 선호한다는 주장. 출연자 전망 비트코인 관련 발언에서 단기 가격 방향에 대한 구체적 예측은 없음. 장기적으로 가치 인식이 확산될 것이라는 취지. 리스크·조건 위기 시 상관성 증가 가능성, 그리고 투자자 세대별 인식 차이를 언급하며 장기 전망의 불확실성도 인정.
다듬은 글
you have been a big bull on bitcoin yeah um we had some folks some people know on our show earlier this week becky was out in omaha i want to show you what they had to say if we could roll the tape on bitcoin from mr munger and mr buffett the asset itself is creating nothing i think it's a scumball activity i would short it if there was an easy way to do it so there you have it you have bill gates warren buffett charlie munger one of them was calling it a scumball activity the other saying bill gates saying he would short this thing if he could and you're saying they're all wrong yeah explain um well look not everybody is right all the time and i think we have to acknowledge that we all have biases and look i'm a disciple of buffett and monger and one of the things that they have said for years which i believe is you define a circle of competence and you stay within it and i think it's been clear in his entire investing career that technology is not in his circle of competence and so the only technology name that he's owned is apple i mean he you could claim that ibm was a technology company that's borderline it's out of that that didn't work anyway right and apple i was thinking that if he got in bitcoin if he eventually got in bitcoin when he got in eventually got into apple it'd already be at a million dollars probably probably but jamaat just going back to this i don't think he looks at as a technology i think he looks at it as an asset class that he would put in the same a similar class with gold just it's a non-productive asset it's an asset that is only worth more if other people agree to pay more for it that that's the type of issue which i also agree with i think i think it is exactly that i think it is a replacement to gold but again but you like gold you're saying you like non-productive assets i like in a portfolio again my portfolio is 99 risk on one percent risk off and in that one percent risk off bucket i think that something like bitcoin is really important why because it is not correlated to the rest of the market and the biggest thing that's changed although you do not believe that the success of bitcoin over the past several years has been correlated to the market i would say not directly correlated but clearly so the idea that there's as much liquidity and cash sloshing around the world has allowed people to buy into bitcoin in a way that they wouldn't have frankly if they're different than being correlated to a strong company or earnings but they're still interesting that's a liquidity argument that's not yeah i've been in the liquid i've been in the bitcoin market since 2012.
and i feel like i'm in two different universes i need a passport to go between the bitcoin world and my regular world these are not the same people um and what i would tell you is the people that owned bitcoin in 2012 all the way up to now the majority of those people view it as a hedge to the traditional financial infrastructure whether that's true or not is unclear but that's how we've all viewed it separately what joe says is absolutely right there's a big difference between correlation and liquidity and the reality is all of these financial assets in the traditional markets are fundamentally correlated we saw that in 2007.
everything broke down things that we thought were hedges went away and so i think it's really important to not forget what happened there so in 2018 or 19 heaven forbid we go through another cataclysmic financial event we are going to see the same fundamental correlation and so again i ask why would it not make sense to have a non-correlated hedge for a small amount this is about buying insurance it was the same reason why in 2007 and eight the folks that bought simple simple insurance bought some cvs buy gold i mean at least gold's got a 3 000 year 10 000 year record of of being a store of value i mean i think that's the other thing buffett's saying there's no reason to think this is a story i think that's a fair point but i think these are not exclusive decisions and uh you know for for this younger class of entrant into the market they probably don't want to buy gold in fact they don't want to buy gold and they want to buy something that's much more digital and reflective of their value about the idea that that that charlie sort of suggested that there's something sort of scummy about that or that there's a lot of scum in the crypto world right now and and that there's a lot of people who have been sort of sucked into this world that have bought into this world by by by some folks who may not be as um look i think it's really unfair to not understand something and then to disparage it again i think he's exceptional i think warren buffett is exceptional i think bill gates is exceptional at what they do and i think it's fair to say that in 30 or 40 years if i'm you know a vibrant successful investor and if i'm back on this show the idea that i know what's happening 30 or 40 years from now as well as some other new 40 year old or 30 year old entrant into the market it's just not true the reality is things change you
Comments 0