저자: TomLee · 외국인
요약 보기
글로벌 유동성 확대와 달러 약세가 조건이 되어야 비트코인·주식 상승이 본격화된다는 주장. 현재 달러 강세·금리 상승·이란 전쟁으로 유동성이 제한적이라 '관망' 국면. 유동성 지표(협의 미국 유동성 근처 0, 글로벌 유동성 약 7.5%)를 근거로 제시. 제도권 자산 토큰화 확산이 규제를 무력화할 것이라 봄. 가격 전망은 명시적으로 거부.
다듬은 글
The best-case scenario is when all central banks allow the money supply to grow and the banking sector to lend. This is a great background. You know, the rate of depreciation of money was 8% per year. Sometimes it speeds up and sometimes it slows down . Now in the US it is about 4 or 5%. So, it's a little below trend.
And if you look at the narrow indicators, they are now near zero, which is why Bitcoin has not moved anywhere for a long time . Global liquidity is better, at around 7.5%. So, it all depends on the circumstances. You want to see all of these metrics moving up. This is becoming increasingly difficult to stop.
The more Nasdaq, DTCC, and traditional players, not just Robinhood, start tokenizing assets, the harder it will be for the government to stop it. We know that banks and asset management firms are already on the way. So, Wall Street is coming to use blockchain technology , and that makes it almost unstoppable.
What if the next big move in the cryptosphere was driven not by hype, headlines, or even Bitcoin’s traditional 4- year cycle , but by something much more powerful —global liquidity? According to macro investor Raul Pal, this is the factor that investors should monitor most closely. Pal's argument is relatively simple, but the implications are enormous.
Cryptocurrencies can exhibit explosive movements when liquidity begins to flood the financial system. But when liquidity is constrained by a strong dollar, rising bond yields, and tight financial conditions, even the strongest cryptocurrency narratives can falter. . The background is relatively positive.
The market is deeply oversold against everything: Nasdaq, gold, and itself . So, you know, the rebound is expected. The question is , do we have the liquidity conditions to sustain this movement until next year? Currently, bond yields continue to rise. The dollar is still too strong. Well, the war in Iran is still going on.
So, liquidity is not flowing freely. So what liquidity there was was mostly directed into the artificial intelligence sector. But, if you noticed, as soon as the AI trend slowed down, cryptocurrencies went up. You see that there is some rotation of available liquidity happening now, which means that it is not yet excessive.
So it all depends on how events develop. In fact, a simple signal for viewers at home: watch what the dollar is doing. If the dollar starts to weaken, as Scott Bessent, the Japanese and everyone else threaten, if they manage to lower the dollar exchange rate, then we will get the green light for further crypto movement.
But now we are in a kind of limbo . So I don't want to get too excited, but, you know, we can still catch up with the market to get in line with where we need to be in terms of liquidity and things like that. And so this is not a real problem . You know, liquidity is at historic highs, but Bitcoin is not.
You know, that's different . So there is potential for movement in this, but I don't want to get too excited. So I don't have a complete green light for everything. How much better do you think crypto will feel if the AI bubble bursts? Well, nobody wants a crash, because if it's a crash , it means liquidity is being sucked out of the system.
Everything is not destroyed, Yes. if there is enough liquidity. So if that happens, we will have much more serious problems. Um, so I'd rather that didn't happen. You know, the best case scenario is if they can get the dollar down, get the yield curve steep, get the banks to start expanding the money supply, and for the Fed, together with the Treasury, to loosen the long end of the market.
That would be the best scenario. If this does not happen, then a sideways AI move is the second best scenario, as it allows liquidity to flow into the next most efficient asset, i.e. crypto. So, you know, don't forget that Bitcoin has been outperforming the Nasdaq since the 2022 lows. So it's still, you know, people forget about it because everyone in this space is too focused on the short term.
He showed himself well. Yes, we had big ups and downs and significant fluctuations, but if you're in crypto, you should be used to that . If not, then there's nothing for you to do here . Do you also think that if everyone understands that liquidity is what drives crypto, that might reduce the opportunities a bit, or is it still an obvious strategy?
Good luck with your liquidity forecasting. This requires a lot of work. You know, that's easy to say, M-hmm. but it needs to be predicted. And, you know, predicting this, and I've shown this, is difficult because everything is constantly changing. There are different leads, lags, and different types of liquidity.
In 2017, the US was raising rates and generally withdrawing liquidity, but China was massively printing liquidity , and at the time, with a weaker dollar, this spread to global markets. This time China is easing its policy, but it has not yielded any results because China is currently experiencing an acute shortage of dollars due to the dollar being too strong.
So, liquidity in the US is key, and there are different liquidity metrics. There is narrow US liquidity that uses a certain part of the banking system, i.e. the Treasury bonds that it holds. So, the Ministry of Finance sells bonds to banks. This is what Bitcoin is tracking. There is broader liquidity tracked by Nasdaq, which includes all loans and leasing that banks also provide.
So you have different types of liquidity. You have to understand what the driving force is, what the financial conditions are, driven by the dollar, rates, the price of oil. So there are a lot of moving parts here. It's not easy to just say, "Yes, liquidity will increase." What is liquidity, where and how?
2020 was a very good year for crypto. How do you see this happening again when we see this kind of capital inflow into crypto again? Look, in 2017 we had better movement in crypto than in 2020. People simply tend to overestimate recent events. 2017, 2013—those were incredible years. And it was still driven by liquidity cycles.
So it's not necessarily a pure amount of gross liquidity, like central bank balance sheets . The only question is , is liquidity flowing? Where does it flow from? You know what you really want, the best case scenario is when all central banks allow their money supplies to grow and their banking sectors to lend .
This is a great background. You know, the depreciation rate was 8 % per year. Sometimes it speeds up and sometimes it slows down . Now in the US it is about 4-5%. So this is slightly below trend. And if you look at the narrow indicators, it's now close to zero , so Bitcoin has n't moved anywhere for a while .
Global liquidity is better. This is approximately 7.5%. So it all depends on the circumstances. You just want to see how all these metrics move. So, that's enough, because Bitcoin isn't growing by 8%. It has a huge multiplier because it is a technology with implementation effects. And this is causing a lot of speculation.
So, this has a huge multiplier once liquidity comes in. So, how high do you think Bitcoin will go this year? Do you think he will get back to 100? I won't give price forecasts anymore, because everyone will just start pestering you for it. People make videos, put them on the internet, make you look like a complete idiot when you're wrong, and everyone says, "I hate you.
You're an idiot." There is simply zero benefit from this . Therefore, no. Last week we also had a setback with the Clarity Act. I would like to hear your thoughts on this and how you think it has affected the overall sentiment of investors towards crypto. I think it was very smart, because the SEC and CFTC came out with new guidelines the very next day.
This gave everyone the green light to move forward, even though it wasn't enshrined in law like it would be with a clarity law. But now there is such momentum and such big players behind it that it is becoming increasingly difficult to stop it . The more Nasdaq, DTCC, and traditional players, not just Robinhood, start tokenizing assets, the harder it will be for the government to stop it.
Because the banking lobby is all-powerful, as we know, that's why the Clarity Act didn't pass on the issue of stablecoins . And here everyone continues to work without clarity on certain things. So I don't think that's stopping anything. I guess we just keep working on it. I think everything will be tokenized.
Do you agree with Arthur Hayes who says crypto will be fine with or without the Clarity Act ? Everything was always fine with her . How much has she grown ? By several million percent from the beginning, despite the fact that we only received attacks from the public sector. So, you know, I don't care.
This is good because we want more implementation, but we know that banks are leaving, and asset management firms are leaving too. So, Wall Street is going to use blockchain technology, and that makes it virtually unstoppable . If you looked at everything right now and all the narratives, what annoys you the most about the crypto industry?
God, this is the most annoying industry in the world. First, the short-term thinking of people in this area. Um, I understand why, because, you know, when it brings in profits, it can be super high and it gives opportunities that people don't usually have. I understand, but then everything goes up in value because of leverage, everyone gets liquidated, and it's a shame to watch it happen, when in reality people make the most money by simply buying the right assets, holding them, and doing nothing .
But people can't do that. So this, this is the most annoying thing. Furthermore, profiteering in certain areas within this is not good. But crypto is very good at abusing hyperspeculation, destroying what blockchain was used for , and thanks to this we got proven things in practice. So, like meme coins out of all this, of course you can tokenize attention, all that, but really it's the ability to instantly generate capital for anything.
Isn't that right ? This is actually what is being tested here. And in the future, you will have agents creating tokens to fund projects or businesses, and this period of opportunity could last a week, a month, a year. And it can simply raise funds from the market, do it, and make a profit. You know, this is very, very interesting.
People don't see what it really is, but it's frustrating how much money is being pulled here. Another thing is the number of hacker attacks. You know, the industry still hasn't figured out how to make everything less cumbersome and simpler. The exchanges actually did a good job. Remember, they always said to keep money away from the stock markets.
And now it seems like it's actually safer to keep your money on Coinbase than to put it in a MetaMask wallet or something else where you can get hacked. If someone is thinking about the next few years and asking whether they should invest in Bitcoin or AI stocks, Pal's answer is surprisingly simple.
Why choose? Have both . Its simplest distribution is essentially Nasdaq plus Bitcoin. For investors willing to take more risk, he sees opportunities in major tier-one networks along with technology stocks. The principle is to diversify between two major technological revolutions. AI represents one major transformation .
Blockchain represents another. If someone is looking, say, at 2030 and wants to know whether to invest in Bitcoin or AI stocks, and which will yield a better return. What do you, what do you say to that? Just buy both . Why complicate things? Just buy NASDAQ and Bitcoin. This is the simplest division that can be made.
And if you want something hotter, buy NASDAQ and first-level blockchains. If you want a little more risk, buy a basket of technology stocks, such as semiconductors and a few others . And first-level blockchains. I mean, you don't have to do much, but then again , everyone wants to make things complicated.
They definitely need to find the next project that took them from 100 thousand to 100 million, not just... You don't need to do any of this. You have to ask...People have to ask themselves why you're doing this. Yes. To make money, are you confident that you will outperform the outcome of simply holding the asset?
99% of people won't be able to. It's like 99% of all fund managers can't beat the S&P 500 or NASDAQ. Yes. So why worry? Do you think meme coins are a net positive or a net negative for the industry in terms of adoption? From an implementation perspective, it's a net positive, because it attracts people who want to speculate, get involved, people from gaming culture.
Don't forget that Generation Z is a true gaming culture, so they understand and perceive it in these terms. But it's negative because of how it destroys people because they take excessive risks in foolish things. Um, you know what memes have proven to be enduring? Dogecoin survived, but it doesn't seem to be getting much attention.
There's just a lot of capital in it. Shiba Inu, but that's about it. Everything else went to zero. Of course, this doesn't mean that another meme won't emerge and gain huge momentum. I am not claiming that at all. I...I don't have any problems with memes at all. I just don't think it's an easy path.
So the easier way is what I call the “don’t miss” thesis, which is if you hold 90% of your portfolio, or even 80% if you want, in the first- level blockchains—Bitcoin, ETH, Solana, or maybe you choose Hyperliquid, Sui, Zcash, or something else, but quality and smart. And then you can speculate on the rest.
And I promise you , I promise, 99% of you will lose all the money allocated to this direction. But you will save yourself and have fun. You can tell your friends that you bought some stupid coin with a ridiculous name that went up 100 times, and then you missed it, it crashed, you got busted—in short, you had a lot of “ fun,” but you protect yourself by keeping 80 or 90% of your assets elsewhere.
Do you think Trump has a positive or negative impact on the crypto world in general? He did some terrible things, like the Trump and Melania coins. And he made, like, a billion dollars or so from them . This is outrageous, the president should not be doing this. And all these scams around him. But on the other hand, he allowed technology to evolve.
He cleared the way. So, in short, it's a positive, but with certain downsides. The Clarity Act would have been passed if not for his actions. So do you think that under a different president, say, if Kamala were in power, the Clarity Act would still have been passed? No, because the Democrats hated him.
Mhm. So, you know, overall it's a positive. Don't forget that before Trump came along, everyone was supposed to be in prison. Everyone was taken to court. It was complete chaos. People forget how terrible the previous administration was for cryptocurrencies. Gary Gensler was just like Voldemort. Is this possible?
Of course. But the economic density of a user in Ethereum is around $200,000. This is TVL per active user. In Solana, it is approximately 2.5 thousand. If you attract more users to Ethereum, the value of this network will increase tremendously. This is a very economically rich and important first- level blockchain.
And Solana does n't have that. The main activity in Solana is speculation. There's nothing wrong with that either. There are simply fewer transactions there. And this is important. Bitcoin has enormous economic density, even though you don't do anything with it other than buy, sell, and hold. But it is big because it has big players.
So I would be cautious: even if activity on Solana increases 10x, it probably still won't be more significant than Ethereum. So I'm not sure. It is possible . I don't...Yes. I love Ethereum. I love...Yes, they are all good. I love first-level blockchains. I think they are wonderful. The major key first-level blockchains have their place, and they will all evolve over time.
I am only focused on tier-one blockchains, and for me there are three: Ethereum, Solana, and Sui, which I believe occupy different parts of the risk curve. Ethereum is less risky, Solana is also less risky, and then there is Sui, which is riskier because it is in the early stages of development. I believe that together they address most of the technological needs in the blockchain space at the moment.
So that's how I see it. The rest of my time is spent on digital art and NFTs, which I collect on Ethereum; I created a huge collection because I believe that people don't understand this field and it has huge asymmetrical potential. Yes, definitely. Besides, you've been a Sui fan for quite some time now.
So, what is Sui? I'm in the fund, that's one of the reasons, but you know, I invest my own capital, a significant part of it, in Sui, because I believe that fundamentally this blockchain is super fast. Mhm. You can conduct 1024 transactions in one block. So it is incredibly effective. They also added privacy to quantum levels and all that .
The team is just incredibly smart, and what they've built is truly impressive. The economic density there is even higher than in Solana, so each user has great value. But it is obviously much smaller. For me, it's made for agents. It is perfect for this, and it is also perfect for the financial system because of its level of privacy, speed, and low cost.
You know, don't forget, Sui has zero fees for stablecoins. Mhm. It's hard for people to understand this because everyone predicts and analyzes the market based on how much commission the blockchain earns. But in technology, commissions are friction. Mhm. What you need is implementation. How many uses there are and how much economic activity occurs at your level, not how much it accumulates.
These are not businesses, these are infrastructure levels. And that is precisely where their true value lies. If you take Ethereum, it's worth as much as it is today—300 billion, or whatever. What is its economic value? If you were to take Ethereum off today, it would be 75% of all stablecoins, 75% of DeFi, the entire digital art market, most of the real asset market, Mhm.
most of the tokenization market is conducted by banks and all levels of the second tier. There's probably a trillion dollars, maybe two trillion dollars of economic activity, if you look at it five years ahead, that you would destroy in that one day. So, is ETH undervalued compared to what it should be?
Yes. But that's exactly how I think about blockchains. Raul Pal's message is ultimately much broader than just a Bitcoin price forecast. His main argument is that investors should pay attention to the flow of liquidity. Watch the dollar. Keep an eye on bond yields. Keep an eye on bank lending. Keep an eye on the world's money supply.
Keep an eye on where capital is flowing. And don't confuse a temporary rebound with the start of a full-fledged " bull" market driven by liquidity. The most optimistic scenario, according to Pal, involves a weaker dollar, easier financial conditions, a steeper yield curve, an expansion of the bank money supply, and central banks allowing liquidity to grow .
Comments 0