For what it’s worth — which is either nothing at all or quite a lot, depending on your penchant for name brand worship — at least one famous billionaire is bullish on equities for the rest of the year.

I tend to think the billionaire investor class, many of whom make quarterly or even monthly cameos on CNBC’s daytime programming, are inclined to feign bearishness for the sake of it.

This is purely anecdotal, but it sometimes feels like the Jeff Gundlachs and Stan Druckenmillers of the world worry that the investing public will be disappointed if they don’t issue some manner of stark warning. It doesn’t necessarily matter what that warning is, but a cautious cadence seems obligatory — as though being concerned is everywhere and always evidence of acuity.

Druckenmiller almost said as much last week. “It’s just naive not to be open-minded to something really, really bad happening,” he told Sohn.

When I hear things like that I can’t help but think of Warren Buffett, a man who amassed what, until the dawn of the modern tech mogul, was the world’s largest fortune by plowing premiums received from people seeking protection against “something really, really bad happening” into equities.

The traders among you will dispute this, but you’ll be wrong: When it comes to risk management, Buffett has forgotten more in the last two days than Druckenmiller ever knew, and not just because Buffett is 115 years old. Buffett’s business model effectively entails being perpetually short “something really, really bad happening” and perpetually long the notion that outcomes will generally be really, really good over time.

Anyway, Paul Tudor Jones is bullish. Cautiously so, but bullish nevertheless.

“I definitely think they are done,” he told CNBC Monday, of the Fed’s hiking cycle. Jones went so far as to suggest that because headline inflation has fallen for nearly a year straight (measured on a YoY basis, of course), Jerome Powell “could probably declare victory now.” Inflation, he suggested, has been “wrung out of the market.” I’d call that a highly contentious assessment, but who am I, right?

Also contentious was the idea that, as Jones put it, “equity prices I think [are] going to continue to go up this year.” He said it’d be a “slow grind,” but expects gains all the same.

This is, you’re reminded, an equity market that’s fully valued at 18-19x (on some pretty rosy assumptions for earnings I might add), and not everyone is convinced that profits and margins have troughed.

The only way multiples aren’t high is by 21st century standards, which assumes a benign macro backdrop that might’ve ceased to exist three years ago. Of course, there’s all manner of variation within sectors. The tables above from Goldman give you some context.

Speaking of context, there was some nuance in Jones’s assessment. He compared rate hikes to chemotherapy, and said “We’re probably at levels” consistent with recession because of the “tax on the economy” from policy tightening.

Asked by Andrew Ross Sorkin whether he thought this month’s final hike was a mistake, Jones said it would’ve been “a jump ball” if he had a vote. “The only reason why I probably would, maybe, have gone along with it is because I think equity prices are gonna continue to go up this year,” he told Sorkin. “The financial cycle drives so much of the business cycle…”

Jones trailed off, and then Sorkin interrupted to hone in on the stock prediction, but Jones’s point was clear enough.