Bitcoin hit a new record high on Tuesday. Maybe you noticed.
I’m supposed to have something intelligent to say about that — some profound observation to mark the occasion. Unfortunately, there’s not a lot that’s intelligent or profound about Bitcoin. As I put it last week, Bitcoin’s a singularly spectacular example of the greater fool theory at work and little else.
If you’re like me, you think that’s the best reason to own it: The suspicion that someone will pay more for it, and quite possibly a lot more, than you did. A very (very) small part of me likes having Bitcoin (and to a lesser extent Ether and a couple of alt-coins) just in case the end of the world ends up being more technological dystopia than Cormac McCarthy’s The Road. Other than those two considerations, there’s no reason to own Bitcoin or any other crypto token.
That said, I did want to call attention to a couple of key points about the run higher. First, it’s obviously predicated in part on ETF flows. I went into some detail on that in the latest Weekly. I’m compelled to recapitulate given Tuesday’s “milestone” (note the scare quotes). The figures below, from BofA’s Michael Hartnett, give you a sense of the new, post-ETF approval landscape.
Crypto funds took in $2.4 billion over the last weekly reporting period, double the prior week’s haul. Annualizing YTD flows, crypto products are on track to take in nearly $45 billion in 2024.
The near $8 billion of inflows so far this year already eclipse the total “bubble inflow” (as Hartnett put it last week) from 2021.
The rapidity of the token’s summit push is remarkable. Indeed, it’s more aggressive than 2021’s rally on one simple rolling window, shown below.
One concern is that the rally might stall if the fund inflows ebb, if for no other reason than outflows could send the “wrong” message about the durability of new demand.
That brings me to the second quick point: There’s some potential for a domino effect on any sizable correction, as discussed across a couple of terminal blog posts by Bloomberg’s David Pan. I won’t spend an inordinate amount of time on the specifics, but suffice to say there are a lot of leveraged longs out there, and in the event the market gets spooked, those positions would be at risk of liquidation on any meaningful downdraft in prices. That could become self-fulfilling.
Fittingly, Bitcoin plunged ~$5,000 in the hours after exceeding its previous record high on Tuesday. By the time you read this, it could be $10,000 higher or $10,000 lower. To me anyway, that’s a reason not to take it especially seriously.
One pleasing thing about bitcoin, it took the shine off of gold. Split a certain human mindset into two camps.
H: Perhaps this is out of line, as I don’t know if you take requests, and we the readers are merely along for the ride to your thoughts and writing. However, being that a key attraction to your writing is the unique and high-quality insight to current events and market moves, I’d love to read more of your insight into books, movies, etc. You regularly mix culture into your articles whether it be books (such as above) or the occasional movie reference such as Miller’s Crossing, The Big Lebowski, Pulp Fiction, etc. I would find it very interesting if you did a top ten favorite books (and why). Same with movies. Or, even once a month or every other month a piece on a book or a movie. Your insight influences how I see markets and the world. Why not entertainment also?
It might be fun. Especially if the usual cadre of readers provide additional thoughts in the commentary. Just a thought.
Hmm … that would be interesting, if not entirely apropos. I’m guessing H might have some Bukowski tucked away on a shelf somewhere
Patrick you’re more right than you know. As I think is pretty clear to everyone who’s on the Plus subscription tier, the Monthly Letters are easily the most valuable part of the site, and God knows I’d do more of that kind of writing if I could. To your point, yes, I think it’s obvious that about ~1/4 of the subscriber base would vastly prefer it if the site was “75% me and 25% news,” so to speak, as opposed to the other way around. I’d much prefer that too. I think a culture section would be great, I want to get back to the shirts now that I finally found a good, US-based manufacturer (the people who did the Newsroom tees), and just on and on. That kind of push — into a more comprehensive vision for the site, community, etc. — is something I’d implement overnight (literally) if there were a way to communicate the rationale to what I’ll call “casual” readers.
But here’s the thing: There are thousands of people who are conditioned after years of reading the site to come here every day and skim the macro data updates, the quick summaries of sell-side highlights, etc. etc. and then go on about their business. I think they’d generally all see the value in another editorial approach, but it’s not like I can sit them all down and explain it to them. They really need to read one or two of the Monthly Letters in order to understand what I’m holding back over here in terms of insight, stories and so on.
I’ve thought about sending everybody who doesn’t have access a “good for one day only” pass to a Monthly Letter to get casual readers to “wake up” to what’s possible here if everyone was on board, but ultimately it’s hard to know how to communicate that message. How do you say to people: “Listen, I’m a profound individual! It’s time everyone wakes up to that!” ? Ha.
For what it’s worth, I was having this exact same conversation with a senior editor at one of the world’s top mainstream financial media outlets just last night after she read “Sinners And Saviors.”
H: That’s great to hear. As an inaugural member of the Plus club, I do very much hope the Culture section comes to fruition.
“That kind of push — into a more comprehensive vision for the site, community, etc. — is something I’d implement overnight (literally) if there were a way to communicate the rationale to what I’ll call “casual” readers.” If you build it, they will
come.
Thanks for all that you do. I’ve told you before, the subscription is, by far, the best media money I spend every month.
Please don’t take this as criticism. This is a reflection entirely on me, not you. But I cancelled the Plus because I found, for me, the additional content was often over my head. I’m pretty new to finance and investing, just been in it a few years, and part of what I value about your writing is you make your topics easily comprehensible to newbs. I just felt like a lot of the extra content was above my level.
I don’t know if it’s even possible to be have the greater depth and insight that you want to provide in the premium-tier subscription, but also keep it comprehensible and of value to the slow kids like me—and lord knows I’ve long railed against systems that lost the advanced users/students/etc because they were too busy making sure the slower ones kept up, that’s never a good idea. So, I’m not criticizing what I saw, just, sharing a perspective.
Also I’ve been out of work close to a year and watching expenses like a hawk, otherwise I’d probably keep up the plus subscription anyway, just to see what I could glean from it, and, because, well, worthwhile commentators are very few and far between and I’d like to support you and contribute to encouraging you to continue. But, speaking only for myself, until I have more disposable income again, I felt like I was lacking a few years’ needed education and experience to really get the value from the stuff the plus subscription was making available to me.
Also, to cast a vote-by-comment, while I find your style and personality very entertaining and enjoyably relatable, if you were to spend more time writing, I myself would prefer more insights on finance and current events. I already know why Pulp Fiction is cool; Roger Ebert told me.
While we are waiting for H’s culture edition, check out Godzilla Minus One and The Holdovers, both are fantastic stories told on the screen.