저자: TomLee/JackMallers · 외국인
요약 보기
Tom Lee는 2026년 말 비트코인 15만~25만 달러, 이더리움 9천~1.2만 달러를 전망하며 2026년 중 10~20% 조정 가능성을 언급했다. Jack Mallers는 전 세계 자산 약 900조 달러 중 절반이 화폐적 용도로 쓰이며 비트코인이 이를 흡수할 것이라 주장하고, 분쟁·부채 확대 등 거시 환경이 비트코인에 유리하다고 말했다. 자막은 영상 내 발언 일부이며 제목·설명란이 비어 있어 출연자 소속은 발언 맥락상 추정.
다듬은 글
Tom Lee is predicting Bitcoin will hit $150,000 by the end of the year and Ethereum could explode to $12,000 in the same run. Right now, some of the most aggressive and high-conviction predictions in crypto are coming straight from Wall Street and the front lines of Bitcoin adoption. Tom Lee, a market veteran with over 30 years of experience, believes Bitcoin is heading well beyond its all-time highs, potentially landing somewhere between $150,000 and $250,000 by the end of 2026.
But, that's not even the most explosive part of his outlook. According to him, Ethereum could outperform even harder with a potential move into the $9,000 to $12,000 range as crypto enters what he calls an exponential phase tied to AI and the future of finance. At the same time, Jack Mallers is making an even bigger claim.
He says Bitcoin isn't just going up, it's absorbing global wealth. In his view, this is the largest monetary shift in human history, where hundreds of trillions of dollars stored in real estate, gold, and financial assets begin rotating into Bitcoin as the superior form of money. In this video, we're going to break down Tom Lee's price targets for Bitcoin and Ethereum, the real risks that could shake the market along the way, and why Jack Mallers believes we are witnessing a once-in-a-generation wealth transfer into Bitcoin happening in real tim; Bitcoin price end of 2026?
I think it's well past all-time highs. So, I think somewhere between 150,000 and 250,000. Ethereum price end of 2026? Uh even better. So, I think Ethereum, because I do think crypto winter's over somewhere between maybe 9,000 to 12,000. I'm not worried. You know, I've covered markets for 30 years. Stocks never go up in a straight line.
I think the most important ideas, especially if they're thematic and exponential, they don't progress linearly. So to me, Ethereum is consolidating, but unless crypto is a bad experiment, which I don't expect it to be. I mean, it's the future of Wall Street. Tom Lee is putting a number on where this is going and it is not conservative.
He sees Bitcoin pushing past its previous highs and landing somewhere between 150,000 and 250,000 by the end of 2026. That already changes how the market has to think about Bitcoin. It is no longer a speculative asset fighting for relevance. It starts to look like a core holding at a global scale. But what stands out more is how he talks about Ethereum.
He is not framing it as a secondary move behind Bitcoin. He is saying Ethereum could deliver even stronger upside with a path toward 9,000 to 12,000. That shift in tone matters because it reflects what is happening underneath the surface. Ethereum is still where most of the financial activity in crypto actually happens.
Stablecoins, tokenized assets, on-chain settlement. This is where the volume is building. Recent data backs that up. Stablecoin supply has been expanding again and a large portion of that activity continues to settle on Ethereum and its scaling layers. At the same time, major financial players are no longer sitting on the sidelines.
They are testing tokenization, issuing assets, and building infrastructure directly on these networks. That is not a future idea anymore. It is already happening. Tom Lee's argument comes down to how big ideas play out in markets. They do not move in a straight path. They stall, they reset, and then they accelerate once the market understands what is actually being built.
Ethereum has spent time consolidating while other narratives took attention, but the usage never disappeared. It kept growing quietly. Now, the setup starts to change because if the fundamentals are strengthening while prices are still catching up, then the next phase is not about recovery, it is about expansion.
And once that shift begins, the move tends to happen faster than most expect. I think it when we look back at the end of this year, I think 2026 will look like a continuation of the bull market that started in 2022. But, and and really a period when economic resilience is much more visible. But, at the same time there's two, I think, substantial transitions that the market has to grapple with.
Maybe three, you know, one is, of course, the new Fed. And uh you know, the market always tests the new Fed, and that process of identifying and then confirmation plus the market test can create a correction. And I think that in 2026, our view is that White House The White House is going to be more deliberate in picking winners and losers.
In 2025, that caused a lot of disruption for technology cons- IT consulting and for health care. And this year there's a lot more industries and sectors and even countries in the bull's eye, and I think that that creates uncertainty. You can tell by gold's rally. And so, I think those two factors can cause a drawdown in 2026.
Those two factors you said maybe a third. Yeah, so the third is that the market is still trying to understand how much is priced into AI. And so, as in you know, our view is still a strong narrative. Uh but as you know, um there's questions about the longevity, how much energy we really need, uh data center capacity.
And so, until the market is comfortable that there's other stronger narratives, which I think there's plenty like the ISM is turning up. I think housing could recover as rates are cut. But that transition again would cause uncertainty. So I I'm guessing that the three collectively could cause a drawdown that feels like a bear market.
So so implicit in that is what like a 20% peak to trough pullback or or more or less? Yeah, it it could be 10. I mean, if it's 10 by the way, it's going to feel like a bear market. But it it could be 15, it could be 20. But something that maybe brings us to a round trip from the start of the year cuz we've started off strong.
Maybe we'll be down year-to-date at some point, but then I think we really finish the year strong. Tom Lee is not calling for a smooth ride into those price targets. He is very clear that 2026 is going to test the market first. The bull trend that started in 2022 is still intact in his view, but the path forward includes disruptions that can feel like the cycle is breaking even when it is not.
One of the biggest variables is the shift in monetary leadership. A new Federal Reserve leadership cycle always gets challenged by markets. Traders try to figure out where the limits are, how policy will react, and how far risk assets can stretch before something snaps. That process alone can trigger a meaningful pullback, not because the trend is over, but because uncertainty forces positioning to reset.
At the same time, government policy is becoming more selective. Instead of broad support across industries, capital is being directed towards specific sectors while others get squeezed. That creates uneven performance across markets. You can already see early signs of this shift in how capital rotates quickly between themes.
It does not take much for that kind of environment to spill into crypto, especially when leverage builds up during strong rallies. Then there is the artificial intelligence narrative. It remains one of the strongest drivers of capital flows today, but the market is still trying to price how big it really is.
Questions around energy demand, infrastructure build-out, and long-term returns are starting to surface. That does not kill the trend, but it creates moments where expectations get reset sharply. Put those factors together and you get a setup where a 10 to 20% drawdown becomes very realistic. It could even erase gains from the start of the year and make it feel like the market has turned.
But that is exactly where most people get it wrong. Because if the underlying economy continues to show resilience and liquidity conditions begin to ease, those pullbacks stop being the end of the move. They become the setup for the next leg high; Bitcoin is a wealth transfer. It's arguably the greatest wealth transfer in human history.
We are actively monetizing a new thing. And what I mean by monetizing is, you know, the world is the total ownership of uh assets of things by humans today is about 900 trillion dollars. Half of that is we're using it as a money. So, you know, 900 trillion dollars is made up of currency and government debt and real estate and equities and precious metals like gold and Bitcoin and fine art and all the stuff that we have, okay?
And about half of it, so 400 to 500 trillion dollars worth, we're monetizing. So, people are owning real estate not cuz they sleep in it, not cuz they live in it, but because they're trying to save money. People own art not because it's hanging on the kitchen wall where their toddler can throw spaghetti at it and ruin it, but it's in a vault.
So, like Ken Griffin's art is in a vault, and he's storing it cuz he paid $10 million for a painting and he thinks it'll be worth at least $10 million in the future. And so, these are we are Humans are actively trying to monetize things that perform best for them in a monetary sense. And Bitcoin is competing for that.
It's actively being monetized, but what that implies is that where wealth exists today will transfer into where wealth is going tomorrow, and in our opinion collectively, it's Bitcoin. Jack Mallers is looking at this from a completely different angle. He is not focused on short-term price targets. He is focused on where global wealth sits today and where it is going next.
His claim is simple but massive in implication. Bitcoin is not just rising in price. It is absorbing value from every other asset class that people use to store wealth. He breaks it down by looking at the total pool of global assets which sits in the hundreds of trillions. A large portion of that is not being used for its original purpose.
Real estate is not just for living. Art is not just for display. Even government debt is not just for funding operations. These have become tools people use to preserve purchasing power over time. That is what money does, and people have been forced to use whatever holds value the best. Now, that competition is changing.
Bitcoin enters that system as a form of money that does not depend on physical storage, political stability, or centralized control. It is digital, scarce, and globally accessible. That combination shifts the decision-making process for capital. If something can hold value more efficiently, capital starts moving toward it.
You can already see early signs of the shift. More institutions are holding Bitcoin directly on balance sheets, payment platforms are integrating Bitcoin rails, even sovereign-level discussions around reserve diversification have started to include digital asset. These are not isolated events. They point to a broader reallocation that is still in its early stages.
Malers frames this as a monetization process. Assets that were once used to store value begin losing that role as Bitcoin takes share. That does not happen overnight, but it does not need to. Even a small percentage shift from global assets into Bitcoin represents trillions of dollars in potential demand.
And that is where this moves beyond speculation, because if Bitcoin is competing for a slice of hundreds of trillions, then the upside is not capped by previous cycles. It is tied to how much of that global wealth it can capture over time. Everything's good for Bitcoin. Uh I I think Bitcoin can change the world because the world can't change Bitcoin.
So, it's all good for Bitcoin uh in my opinion. Um when the US government prints money, it's good for Bitcoin. When the US government tries not to print money and things collapse, it's good for Bitcoin. When people are at peace, it's good for Bitcoin. When people are at war, somehow it's good for Bitcoin um because Bitcoin is good for the world because the world can't change Bitcoin.
You know, some of the greatest innovations in human history are innovations that protect us humans from the worst versions of ourselves. And Bitcoin is one of those. It's engineered in a way that it can't bend to accommodate the worst versions of ourselves cuz we're not perfect. Ultimately, at the end of the day, we all have flaws and us as a species collectively have flaws.
If we were perfect, we wouldn't be murdering each other while we disagree. But Bitcoin somehow was engineered in such a way that it can't bend to accommodate our flaws. We have to become better to accommodate Bitcoin. And so, everything's good for Bitcoin, and Bitcoin can change the world cuz we can't change it.
So, again, it's it's a a really like beautiful ride. It's volatile, it's bumpy, it's vulnerable, it's scary, it's euphoric, but like I said earlier, these are all useful emotion. Um but I've come to peace with it, and uh just hope to contribute positively to it. Um so, everything's good for Bitcoin.
But yeah, and I mean, as far as I don't know if you actually want to talk in detail about the macro stuff. As far as the macro stuff, I mean, um I've I've been very consistent. I don't think this conflict's ending anytime soon. I don't think the strait is opening anytime soon. Uh to me, this is an accelerator towards this inevitable, which is you know, a lot of currency debasement, monetizing of the debt, things like yield curve control.
Uh ultimately, the United States has been short real things, producing real stuff, and long credit, debt, and paper. And uh there's a repricing of what that means. Uh you know, you cannot build AI infrastructure with pit silver futures contracts. You need the actual silver, right? Um you cannot finance the military with infinite amounts of US Treasuries.
Like at the end of the day, you need actual productive humans. People will stop lending you money. They say, "Okay, if you want me to finance the next $2 trillion of US shenanigans, you're going to have to pay me 10%, 20% 10-year yield, not 4%, and you know, that's where you get yield curve control and the Fed printing money and monetizing that debt.
So, I think this is all an accelerant. The notion that the strait is about to open or the conflict's about to close, I mean, what? It's been, you know, over 2 months at this point. That doesn't seem very likely. And uh it it feels to me that uh a chapter of fiat has has reached its inevitable conclusion.
Jack Mallers takes it one step further. He is not just saying Bitcoin benefits from growth. He is saying Bitcoin benefits from everything, even when the system starts to crack. That sounds extreme until you look at how the current financial system operate. When governments expand spending beyond what they can support, they issue more debt.
When that debt becomes harder to sustain, central banks step in to keep yields under control. That usually leads to more money creation. It does not show up overnight, but over time it erodes purchasing power. That environment has been building for years and it is not slowing down. Recent developments are pointing in the same direction.
Global debt levels continue to climb while economies are being pushed to support large-scale spending on infrastructure, defense, and artificial intelligence. At the same time, energy demand is rising as data centers expand, which puts additional pressure on resources and costs. These are not small forces that can be easily reversed.
They build on each other. Mallers' argument is that Bitcoin was designed for exactly this kind of environment. It does not adjust based on policy decisions. It does not expand supply when demand increases. It remains fixed and that forces everything else to adjust around it. When confidence in traditional systems weakens, capital looks for something that cannot be altered.
That is why he says both extremes point in the same direction. If the economy grows and liquidity expands, Bitcoin absorbs that excess capital. If the system tightens and something breaks, the response usually leads back to easing and more liquidity. Either path feeds into the same outcome over time.
This is not about short-term comfort. The volatility stays. The corrections remain sharp, but the direction becomes harder to ignore as the system keeps leaning on the same solutions. And once you see that pattern, the final piece starts to come into focus. Put everything together and the picture becomes clearer.
You have Tom Lee laying out aggressive price targets based on adoption and market structure. You have Jack Mallers explaining why capital has no choice but to move toward a harder form of money over time. Then you have a macro backdrop that continues to push liquidity into the system whenever pressure builds.
What changes now is the speed. In previous cycles, crypto moved largely on its own. Retail drove momentum, narratives took time to spread, and infrastructure was still being built. That is no longer the case. Today, access is easier, capital moves faster, and large players can deploy billions without friction.
When flows start building, they do not take months to show up in price. They hit the market almost immediately. Even on the macro side, conditions are starting to shift. Rate pressure has begun to ease compared to prior peaks, and liquidity expectations are improving as governments look for ways to sustain growth.
Manufacturing data has shown signs of recovery recently, pointing to an economy that is stabilizing rather than breaking. That matters because crypto tends to move hardest when liquidity and confidence begin rising together. So, when the next expansion phase fully kicks in, it is not entering an empty market.
It is entering a system that is already primed. That is why the biggest risk right now is not volatility. It is under exposure. Because if this cycle plays out the way these signals suggest, the move will not wait for confirmation. It will already be underway while most people are still trying to decide if it is real. .
Comments 0