LIKE narxLIKE

Matt Hougan, chief investment officer at asset management firm Bitwise, used his March 17 memo to explain why bitcoin tends to drop in moments of financial stress—even though it’s considered a hedge. Drawing from research by his colleague Juan Leon, Hougan noted that when the S&P 500 falls by more than 2% in a single day, bitcoin tends to perform even worse, declining about 2.6% on average. “But Juan’s research showed something else: If you had stayed invested—or bought more after the pullback—you would have done very well. On average, in the year following these sharp pullbacks, bitcoin rose a shocking 190%, dramatically outperforming every other asset,” Hougan said. Describing the trend, he stated: I call this pattern ‘Dip Then Rip,’ and historically it’s one of the most consistent patterns in crypto. Hougan suggested this behavior stems from how investors determine asset values using future expectations and risk assumptions—principles borrowed from discounted cash flow analysis. While bitcoin lacks cash flows, he applied a similar model based on projected value and discount rates. He explained: At Bitwise, for instance, we think bitcoin will be worth $1 million in 2029. “So, you might ask, what do we think it’s worth today? It depends on the discount factor—that is, the risk you assign it. If you discount back at 50% a year, the net present value is $218,604. If you use a 75% discount rate, the net present value is $122,633,” the executive detailed. Hougan emphasized that geopolitical disruptions like tariffs can temporarily elevate risk perception, raising the discount rate and lowering bitcoin’s near-term valuation—even if the long-term forecast improves. To illustrate the latest drop in prices triggered by tariff fears, Hougan cited a comment from crypto services firm NYDIG: “What does bitcoin have to do with tariff wars? Nothing, other than it’s a highly liquid, globally available asset that trades 24/7. If anything, bitcoin stands to benefit from the rise in global entropy, the political and economic disorder created by the administration.” For Hougan, such market turbulence may present a strategic opening. He concluded: If you’re a long-term investor, these short-term spikes in the discount factor are a chance to get in at a discount. From where I sit, I’ve never been more bullish. 免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。

$BTC 81.1K Looks Like a Magnet Area 🧲

n the fast-moving world of crypto and Web3, new financial products are launching every week—but few are as groundbreaking as the PENGU ETF. This isn’t your typical crypto fund or NFT-themed ETF that plays it safe. No, this is a bold attempt to package real NFTs inside a regulated exchange-traded fund, something that’s never been done before. Let’s break down what the PENGU ETF is, why it matters, and whether it has the potential to reshape how we invest in digital collectibles. The introduction of the PENGU ETF marks a turning point in how investors and regulators perceive the value of digital collectibles. Its success hinges not only on regulatory approval but also on market acceptance. If institutional and retail investors embrace the fund, it could validate NFTs as a legitimate asset class within traditional portfolios. The ETF structure also solves major pain points around custody, valuation, and liquidity that have long plagued the NFT market. By wrapping NFTs in a regulated product, Canary Capital may create a blueprint that other firms can replicate, opening the door for a wave of new ETF filings backed by digital art, metaverse assets, or tokenized intellectual property. For early investors, potential ROI could be significant if PENGU NFTs surge in value or if the ETF attracts institutional capital—but this is contingent on the ETF’s ability to scale and maintain liquidity in a volatile NFT market. Looking ahead, if the PENGU ETF gains traction post-approval, we could see a ripple effect throughout both traditional and decentralized finance sectors. Financial institutions may begin exploring hybrid portfolios containing NFTs, fungible tokens, and RWAs (real-world assets), ultimately pushing more on-chain assets into mainstream trading platforms. Furthermore, success could encourage blue-chip NFT projects like Bored Ape Yacht Club or CryptoPunks to structure similar funds, fueling demand for oracle-driven NFT pricing solutions and regulated custody platforms. However, risk factors remain high: the illiquid nature of NFTs, challenges in accurate valuation, and regulatory hurdles may lead to price discrepancies, redemption issues, or underperformance compared to traditional ETFs. In the long term, PENGU ETF could be remembered not just as a novelty but as a foundational shift in how we invest in culture, community, and digital ownership—provided it can navigate the complex balance of innovation and compliance. At its core, the PENGU ETF is an exchange-traded fund that holds two key assets: Unlike traditional NFT-themed ETFs that only hold stocks of NFT-related companies or market-tracking tokens, the PENGU ETF directly integrates real, on-chain assets. This makes it the first ETF to cross over from simply referencing NFTs to actually owning them. The fund is spearheaded by Canary Capital, a digital asset investment firm known for taking crypto and NFT products into regulated finance. With PENGU ETF, their goal is clear: become the first to embed actual NFTs inside an ETF structure, offering traditional investors exposure to Web3 assets without the hassle of wallets, gas fees, or private key management. The fund’s structure is unique—and carefully engineered: This hybrid model gives the fund a dual advantage—exposure to a native token with active utility and community traction, plus direct ownership of high-profile NFTs with potential long-term value. NFT ETFs aren’t new—but most don’t actually hold NFTs. Instead, they track companies like Coinbase or marketplaces like OpenSea, or hold tokens that represent the NFT market in a broad sense. The PENGU ETF flips the script, offering: Still, not everyone’s convinced. Skeptics argue there may not be enough demand for an NFT-backed ETF. But believers point out: a regulated product adds trust and transparency to a space often plagued by scams and volatility. Since this is a first-of-its-kind fund, its mechanics are speculative—but here’s a likely setup: Investors wouldn’t be buying NFTs directly. Instead, they’d own shares in the ETF, which represent fractional ownership of the fund’s combined PENGU token and NFT holdings. While the filing is exciting, regulatory approval is far from guaranteed. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has never approved an ETF that holds NFTs directly. The challenges are clear: That said, the approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs in 2024 marked a major shift in regulatory openness. If Canary Capital can provide a robust framework for valuation, liquidity, and compliance, PENGU ETF might just stand a chance. To understand the PENGU ETF's innovation, it helps to compare it to traditional art investment funds like: These firms offer exposure to famous artworks (think Banksy, Picasso), but they’re slow, illiquid, and often inaccessible to smaller investors. Selling a stake in an art fund can take months or even years. By contrast, the PENGU ETF brings digital art into the liquid, accessible world of public markets. ETF shares can be traded easily, while NFTs are securely stored on-chain. Whether or not the PENGU ETF gets the green light, it’s clear this is just the beginning. We’re likely entering an era where NFT-backed ETFs and tokenized asset funds become a regular feature of the investing world. If PENGU succeeds, we might see: Canary Capital might be the first, but they won’t be the last. The PENGU ETF is more than a finance experiment—it’s a bold move to redefine how we think about NFTs as investable assets. If it works, it could bridge the chasm between Web3 and Wall Street. If it fails, it’ll still be remembered as a trailblazer. One thing is for sure: NFTs are growing up, and the financial world is starting to pay attention.

Wtf even is this, and why does it make @JoshMandell6's $444,000 Bitcoin prediction look less crazy? It's been widely observed that Bitcoin's price growth over the last 15 years follows a power curve--something like y=ax^b--which differs from other common functions, such as linear (y=ax) or exponential (y=ab^x). When the relationship between variables is fundamental (e.g., gravitational force F=Gm₁m₂/r²), we often call it a "power law." I'll leave it up to you to decide if this long-term trend qualifies as a "law," but regardless, I find value in the fit due to its longevity. Long-term fits in U.S. dollars are skewed by the changing value of the dollar—see "inflation." One way to adjust for this is to measure an asset’s value relative to an inflation-resistant asset, like the price of an ounce of gold. The idea is that gold’s price should rise to offset the dollar’s decreasing value. Here, I’m measuring the value of the Bitcoin network (market cap) in gold ounces and fitting that value to a power curve. On a log-log plot, a power curve appears as a straight line—see the top left subplot. My preference is to fit the lower values using a 0.05 quantile regression and treat that as a "support" trendline. The white line (upper left plot) is the power curve fit of Bitcoin’s market cap in gold ounces. Today’s fit value is 557,039,533 gold ounces. Since we typically value assets in U.S. dollars, it’s convenient to convert that figure. Knowing the current Bitcoin supply and the current price of gold, we can translate those 557M ounces into dollars: 557,039,533 (gold ounces) × $3,040 (dollar value of an ounce of gold) ÷ 19,839,907 (Bitcoin supply) = $85,353 (BTC-USD fit value). If you repeat this process for all past days, you get the squiggly white support line in the subplot on the right. It’s not smooth because gold’s price isn’t smooth. The blue band represents a time shift of the white support line. Simply slide the white support line left by five years. Each white line in the blue band represents a one-year shift. Doing this, we see that the peak at the end of 2017 (~$20,000) touches the "five years ahead" line. Five years later (end of 2022), the white support line equals ~$20,000. Not every peak reaches five years ahead, but we did once, so maybe we could again. So, what’s the connection to Josh? Coincidentally—if you believe in such things—Josh predicted Bitcoin would hit $84,000 a few days ago (which it did) and followed up with a price prediction of $444,000. That sounds crazy, and it is, but it’s also surprisingly close to the "five years ahead" value shown here ($462,557). Since this fit is relative to gold’s price, gold’s rise from $2,000 (2023) to $3,000 (2025) is pushing the values in the right subplot higher. If Bitcoin’s network value measured in gold continues to follow a power curve, and gold holds its current value, and Bitcoin’s price returns to "five years ahead of support," we could hit Josh’s $444K this year. That’s a lot of "ifs," but it’s fun, and I want to believe.

Hour 5 of back testing... feels like nothing!