Home Blog Page 80

Crypto due diligence has changed: three questions advisors should revisit

0
Crypto due diligence has changed: three questions advisors should revisit


In today’s newsletter, Beth Haddock reviews the three due diligence questions advisors should be asking in 2026: how client cash is managed, how regulatory assumptions should be disclosed and how to manage liability when AI executes crypto trades.

Then, in “Ask an Expert,” Aaron Brogan reviews the GENIUS Act implementation timeline, how things will change once it’s here and what to do in the meantime.

Sarah Morton


Crypto due diligence has changed: three questions advisors should revisit

As digital money, shifting regulatory requirements and AI-enabled infrastructure mature, advisors need to revisit what legal and regulatory diligence covers. The objective is practical: meet fiduciary duties, protect client trust and adapt as the market changes. Three questions deserve more attention: how client cash is managed, how regulatory assumptions are disclosed and how AI-driven crypto infrastructure is validated.

Prepared with Claude (Anthropic) as a drafting tool; content, direction, and review by author

Diligence Question

Which clients would benefit most from evaluating digital cash management alternatives?

Institutional and cross-border payment clients are a natural place to start.

1. Cash Management Innovation

How should client cash management be reviewed? The GENIUS Act and the growth of stablecoins have opened a new chapter for cash management. Stablecoin lending markets, made accessible via platforms like Axal, offer yields with increased transparency. Tokenized money market funds and other short-term assets from issuers including BlackRock, Fidelity and J.P. Morgan now hold billions in assets, with on-chain settlement and daily liquidity.

For advisors, the question is not whether digital alternatives should replace traditional cash sweeps or money market funds. It is also whether the documented analysis reflects that the advisor considered the client’s best interests, including fees, conflicts and suitability. The SEC’s recent cash sweep enforcement actions against Wells Fargo Advisors and Merrill Lynch make the point: cash management is not a neutral decision. Stablecoins and tokenized short-term assets are not generic cash products, but that is the point: their structure may offer meaningful advantages for the right client, particularly where settlement speed, transparency, yield or cross-border movement matter. Advisors should understand the product terms, provider controls and client use case before making a recommendation.

Diligence Question

What would change a recommendation of legislation, agency leadership or enforcement posture shifts?

2. Connecting Political Risk and Client Trust

How should regulatory dependency be explained? Political support for and opposition to crypto growth remains contentious. The GENIUS Act and proposed CLARITY Act represent progress from regulation by enforcement toward more predictable frameworks. But implementation regulations, market conduct, consumer protection and global coordination remain unsettled. Stablecoin yield and ethics debates, including bank opposition and CLARITY legislative hurdles, show the sector still faces scrutiny from incumbents, private litigants and state attorneys general.

The enforcement shift under SEC Chairman Atkins illustrates why client communication matters. A platform under active enforcement one year can be cleared the next, and the reverse is possible under a future administration. Advisors should not overpromise certainty. Advisors should disclose regulatory assumptions and risks behind portfolio recommendations and update those assumptions as legislation and enforcement posture evolve.

Diligence question

Who is accountable when an agentic workflow touches client data or transaction execution?

3. The Convergence of AI and Crypto

Who is accountable when AI touches crypto execution? AI agents are beginning to settle transactions on crypto rails, while the IMF and others have flagged gaps in operational resilience and governance. Research on agentic commerce suggests validation, liability and programmable compliance remain unsettled.

This convergence should push advisors to cover four priorities. Security: do product sponsors have a credible view on quantum readiness? Substance over hype: the SEC’s AI-washing cases remind us that claims about AI capabilities must be verifiable. Validation and controls: how are AI outputs tested, supervised and authenticated before they are used in advice, trading or client communications? Are platforms that prepare transactions for users transparent user interfaces or opaque in their operations? Privacy: amended Reg S-P and the recent Fidelity data breach settlement show why client data governance matters when AI tools touch client and confidential information, including prompts, outputs and data used for training.

These trends will keep evolving. Advisors who deliver trustworthy crypto recommendations will be the ones whose diligence accounts for AI innovation, political risk and the best cash management options for their clients. Where is your practice least prepared?

Beth Haddock, managing partner and founder, Warburton Advisers


Ask an Expert

When interacting with stablecoins, is it important to evaluate whether they are the GENIUS-compliant type, or the old MTL-only type?

The GENIUS Act was signed into law on July 18, 2025. Despite this, to date, stablecoins remain regulated under the old regime. While GENIUS will introduce cross-agency federal oversight, as well as many requirements including limiting reserve composition, current stablecoins are still issued using state money transmitter licenses (MTLs) without dedicated federal oversight.

The GENIUS Act will change the risk profile of legal stablecoins in the United States, but when will it take effect?

This will all change when GENIUS takes effect. The statute becomes effective on the earlier of January 18, 2027, or 120 days after the primary federal payment stablecoin regulators issue final implementing regulations. It separately directs the federal payment stablecoin regulators, state payment stablecoin regulators and the Secretary of the Treasury to coordinate to promulgate rulemaking by July 18, 2026. Those rulemakings are currently in progress. The rules governing foreign payment stablecoin issuers will become operative on the same effective-date timeline.

Aaron Brogan, founder and managing attorney, Brogan Law


Keep Reading

Looking for more? Receive the latest crypto news from coindesk.com and market updates from coindesk.com/institutions.



Source link

What Makes Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSM) Brown Advisory Global Leaders Strategy’s Leading Contributor

0
What Makes Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSM) Brown Advisory Global Leaders Strategy’s Leading Contributor


Brown Advisory, an investment management company, released its “Brown Advisory Global Leaders Strategy” for the first quarter of 2026 investor letter. A copy of the letter can be downloaded here. The strategy focused on delivering strong long-term performance by investing in a focused portfolio of companies that solve customer problems and provide good returns for shareholders. The first quarter of 2026 saw intensified challenges in capital markets, marked by a general weakness in risk assets and negative perceptions around the “AI loser” narrative, significantly impacting the portfolio’s concentrated holdings. Additionally, not being invested in the Energy sector contributed to the underperformance, accounting for about 20% of the Strategy’s relative decline year-to-date. Overall, the Strategy experienced an absolute correction of about 8.3% in the quarter, underperforming relative to the MSCI ACWI Net Return Index’s -3.2% return. In addition, please check the fund’s top five holdings to know its best picks in 2026.

In its first-quarter 2026 investor letter, Brown Advisory Global Leaders Strategy highlighted Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) as a notable contributor. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) is the world’s leading contract chip manufacturer, producing advanced semiconductors for major global technology companies. On June 2, 2026, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) closed at $446.69 per share. One-month return of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) was 6.48%, and its shares gained 120.70% over the past 52 weeks. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) has a market capitalization of $2.317 trillion.

Brown Advisory Global Leaders Strategy stated the following regarding Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) in its Q1 2026 investor letter:

“Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM): Manufactures, distributes and tests integrated circuits, silicon wafers, diodes and related semiconductor components. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing benefits from its leadership in leading node manufacturing which allows it to take market share and benefit from the strong demand environment for high-performance computing and AI infrastructure.”

Is TSM a good stock to buy?

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) is in 6th position on our list of 40 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds Heading Into 2026. According to our database, 234 hedge fund portfolios held Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) at the end of the first quarter, up from 224 in the previous quarter. In Q1 2026, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited’s (NYSE:TSM) revenue increased 6.4% (in U.S. dollar terms) sequentially to $35.9 billion, modestly exceeding the first quarter guidance. While we acknowledge the potential of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (NYSE:TSM) as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you’re looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.



Source link

SIREN breaks higher as volume spikes 258%: Is a move to $2 next?

0
SIREN breaks higher as volume spikes 258%: Is a move to $2 next?


SIREN delivered one of the strongest performances in the market after its price climbed 26.72% over the past 24 hours. The rally pushed the token to around $0.73 while its market capitalization expanded to $529.94 million. 

Trading volume soared 258.53% to approximately $50.9 million, showing that fresh activity accompanied the price advance. This combination suggested that buyers returned aggressively after an extended consolidation period. 

Earlier rallies had struggled to attract sustained participation. However, the latest move attracted significantly higher turnover, indicating stronger conviction among traders. 

As a result, SIREN established itself among the session’s standout performers and shifted attention back toward its broader recovery structure.

SIREN traders pile in as leverage grows

Speculative activity also accelerated across derivatives markets. Open Interest increased 53.19% to $48.76 million, reflecting a substantial rise in active positions. 

Such growth indicated that traders had increased exposure instead of merely rotating existing capital. The expansion occurred alongside the price rally, which suggested that market participants anticipated additional upside. 

Historically, rapid Open Interest growth amplified volatility because leveraged positions created larger liquidation risks. Nevertheless, the increase also highlighted growing confidence in the ongoing recovery. 

Rather than showing hesitation, derivatives traders continued adding exposure as SIREN advanced. This behavior strengthened the bullish narrative, although it also raised the probability of sharp price swings should sentiment shift unexpectedly.

Source: CoinGlass

Can bulls turn recovery into reversal?

Price action painted a much broader recovery story than a simple daily rally. SIREN had defended the major support zone between $0.435 and $0.458 after months of weakness. 

Following that defense, buyers pushed the token toward $0.73 and established a higher low structure. 

The Parabolic SAR had already flipped beneath price, indicating that trend conditions had improved considerably compared to previous weeks. RSI also climbed to 58.52 after spending much of May near depressed levels. 

The recovery showed strengthening buying pressure without entering overbought territory. Meanwhile, the first major resistance remained at $1.136. A successful move beyond that barrier would strengthen the case for an extended recovery. 

Under that scenario, attention would likely shift toward the larger resistance zone near $2.00.

SIREN price actionSIREN price action
Source: TradingView

Where is liquidity waiting next?

The liquidation heatmap highlighted several areas where volatility could intensify. Dense liquidity clusters emerged around the $0.77 to $0.80 region, directly above the current market price. 

These zones often attract price action because large concentrations of leveraged positions accumulate there. Therefore, SIREN appeared positioned to challenge nearby liquidity if buying pressure remained intact. 

Additional clusters also formed around the $0.69 to $0.70 region, creating a short-term support area beneath current levels. Market participants frequently targeted these pockets during periods of heightened activity. 

Consequently, traders would likely monitor these zones closely for potential squeezes. The concentration of liquidity above price slightly favored further upside exploration in the near term.

Source: CoinGlass

Final Summary

  • SIREN attracted fresh buying interest as volume and participation expanded sharply.
  • Rising Open Interest and stronger structure supported a potential recovery continuation.



Source link

McKinsey: Why global companies still need a China strategy

0
McKinsey: Why global companies still need a China strategy


When Joe Ngai, McKinsey’s Greater China chair, first began to test-drive his point that “the next China is still China” on social media, the world’s second-largest economy was in a post-COVID slump. Sluggish consumption and a property market crash were still dragging down the country’s economy, while foreign companies were rethinking their investment in China as both a consumer market and a manufacturing hub—and asking where the “next China” might be.

“You heard all these things. We’re trying to diversify away from China. We’re trying to de-risk from China,” Ngai tells Fortune in McKinsey’s Hong Kong office. “You can’t find another China. There’s no other China out there now.”

Ngai’s observation is now a book, The Next China is Still China: An Insider’s Playbook for Winning in the New Era, coauthored with Nick Leung, director of the McKinsey Global Institute and Ngai’s predecessor as Greater China chair.

The narrative on China’s economy is shifting. New advances in AI have reset the conversation about China’s capacity to innovate, and Chinese products are now winning converts in overseas markets. The U.S.-China relationship is no longer in free fall following U.S. President Donald Trump’s state visit to Beijing in May, the first by a U.S. leader since Trump’s last trip in 2017.

But for global multinationals, Ngai and Leung argue that China remains a “hard, competitive, and oversupplied” market that requires a shift in corporate strategy. Once-dominant brands like Nike, Starbucks, and Volkswagen are now struggling amid fierce competition from hungry Chinese companies. Yet China possesses both a massive consumer market and a deep manufacturing sector, which economies like Vietnam or India still can’t wholly replace.

“As a board, as a CEO, you can’t just ignore China or find something else,” Ngai says. “You need a Chinese strategy.”

The world’s ‘toughest gym’

In their attempts to describe the success of Chinese companies like BYD, Western governments and commentators often blame government subsidies. The argument is that China deliberately manufactures more than it can absorb and dumps the surplus overseas, either to demolish local competition or just because it needs to offload the goods somewhere. That “overcapacity” argument has motivated trade protectionism in the U.S., Europe, and even some developing markets like Vietnam and Indonesia.

Ngai and Leung push back against that framing. First, they point to the initial period of reform starting in the 1980s and how it incubated dynamic entrepreneurs like Alibaba founder Jack Ma and Xiaomi founder Lei Jun. Second, they note that China’s financial system and competition between provincial governments offered cheap credit to local businesses, allowing the growth of (perhaps too many) local champions.

More recently, Chinese consumers have proved quick to switch to whatever delivers the best product at the lowest price. “In China, they always give you a shot,” Ngai says. “If you have a better thing, the market will respond.”

Ngai ultimately describes China as “the world’s toughest gym,” training hyper-competitive companies. 

“This is exactly the argument Europeans used to deploy when they were looking at America,” Leung says. “They would call it cowboy capitalism. China is just an even more intense version of that extreme entrepreneurism.”

Courtesy of McKinsey

One symptom of that intensity is a near-endless series of price wars. BYD, the world’s largest EV manufacturer, has repeatedly slashed prices to capture more market share from its rivals, leading to a 55% drop in net profit in the first quarter of the year. Another example is food delivery, where JD.com’s decision to break into a market dominated by Meituan and Alibaba led to all three devoting over 100 billion yuan ($14 billion) to subsidies and discounts over just two quarters. Meituan, the market leader, has now posted three straight quarters of net losses. 

Beijing has complained about what has been termed neijuan, or “involution,” where relentless competition erodes profits for an entire industry. “The entire ​industry has ⁠fallen into a vicious cycle of losing money ​in an attempt to ​grab ⁠market share, ultimately dragging down the broader trend of consumption recovery,” state media outlet Economic Daily wrote in March, referring to the food delivery price war. 

“The competition is at 11 right now,” Ngai says. “If you can get it to an eight, or a seven, there’ll be less wastage and less capital being destroyed.” Still, China’s capital controls mean that investors are forced to bear lower returns, because money has nowhere else to go. “It can be at ten-and-a-half for a very long time,” he admits.

Multinationals in China

For two decades, foreign brands enjoyed a structural advantage in China: Consumers were willing to pay a premium for global products that were better than what domestic producers could make.

That’s not the case now. Apple contends with Huawei and Xiaomi. Nike is losing share to Li Ning and Anta Sports. General Motors, Honda, and Volkswagen are scrambling against BYD and Geely. 

“The German car companies made more money in China than they made anywhere else in the world, put together, for years,” he adds. “When you have an entitlement and you take it away? People get very upset.”

“Multinational companies felt they had a right to print money in China forever,” he adds. “And what happened? Competition happened.”

Ngai points out that Chinese entrepreneurs can make market decisions immediately while global multinationals must work through approval chains stretching back to Tokyo, Stuttgart, or New York. “When you have corporate executives fighting against local entrepreneurs who have nothing to lose,” he says, “it’s a very tough battle.”

A few Western brands, like Coach and Logitech, are managing to turn things around by giving autonomy to local executives and designers in a “China for China” strategy. Other multinationals, like Volkswagen and Stellantis, are choosing to partner with Chinese companies to adopt their manufacturing and design practices. Others still, like Starbucks and General Mills, are instead selling their China businesses to local investors. 

“Those companies that manage to reimagine their China business as a business in itself—all the way from capital, ownership, management structure, and be as responsive to Chinese consumers as Chinese companies are —maintain their competitiveness,” Leung says. “Those that remain global multinationals find it hard to keep up.”

Going global, and getting stuck

China’s “gym” might have better prepared its companies to win overseas. Chinese firms are already taking market share in Europe, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, competing on both quality and price. BYD, for example, sold more than one million cars overseas in 2025.

However, Chinese companies still struggle to figure out how to appeal to foreign consumers. In China, companies sell their goods by focusing on features, but a global approach requires building an emotionally compelling brand. “Chinese companies produce fantastic products, but don’t position them correctly,” Leung says. He invokes Coca-Cola, whose value is almost entirely its brand. “Drinking Coke makes you cool,” he says. “It’s the emotional connection between the person drinking Coca-Cola and the drink itself.”

Christian Monterrosa—Bloomberg via Getty Images

Some Chinese companies are starting to tentatively explore how to build a brand premium. MiHoYo, the Shanghai-based game developer behind Genshin Impact and Zenless Zone Zero, has broken into the notoriously difficult Japanese and U.S. gaming markets. More recently, Luckin Coffee has opened outlets in New York City and used viral social media campaigns and localized products to muscle into the city’s coffee scene. Li Ning, the Chinese sportswear brand, recently signed an endorsement deal with basketball star Steph Curry.

The next frontier may be AI. Chinese AI companies like DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax have released open-source models whose flexibility and top-tier performance are winning converts across the world, including in Silicon Valley. 

“The next export from China that the U.S. hasn’t figured out how to tariff is actually tokens,” Ngai says, referring to the units of data processed by AI models. Chinese AI tokens have already overtaken U.S. tokens on some global marketplaces.

McKinsey’s own China test

McKinsey’s history in China starts in 1993, when the U.S. consulting company put four partners in Beijing and Shanghai, years before its competitors did. It had to explain to Chinese clients what consulting actually was and its slide decks were sometimes photographed and sold outside the building for as little as 10 renminbi.

Leung, who has Swiss and Chinese heritage, joined McKinsey’s Zurich office in 1993 before transferring to Hong Kong in 1997. He served as McKinsey’s Greater China chair for more than a decade before turning to lead the McKinsey Global Institute, the firm’s economic research arm, in 2011. Ngai, who took over as Greater China chair that same year, has run the region since then.

McKinsey has had its own problems in China. In October 2024, the Wall Street Journal reported that McKinsey had cut approximately 500 jobs in Greater China, roughly a third of its regional workforce, after scaling back its client base. Partners reportedly debated whether the firm should continue to do business in China at all, given the deteriorating state of U.S.-China relations.

The firm has pulled back from serving state-owned enterprises, a sector that had become both politically fraught for a U.S. company and simply harder to serve well. “Is that growth the same as what we were thinking about in the early 2010s?” Ngai asks. “It’s probably more mature.”

“Our addressable market has become narrower,” Leung adds, “but we’re addressing a fast-growing market even within that narrow band.”

A ‘cold peace’

China’s economy, while improving, still hasn’t returned to the heady days of the 2000s and 2010s. Retail sales grew just 0.2% in April, the slowest rate since December 2022, the depths of the COVID pandemic. Industrial output rose 4.1%, below expectations. 

“We’re in a longer-term 4% or 5% growth scenario, and we’re trending lower,” Ngai says. Yet he sees the shift as “healthy,” setting more realistic expectations about the country’s economy.

“We’re still mid-reset,” Leung adds. “It’s not a structural slowdown or structural demise. It’s not the next Japan.”

Trump’s May visit to Beijing, the first such visit in nearly a decade, ended without major trade breakthroughs. The biggest success was a deal for China to buy 200 Boeing planes, fewer than an expected 500-jet order. 

Yan Yan—Xinhua via Getty Images

“Business conditions aren’t contingent on the two presidents meeting,” Ngai admits. “Geopolitical calm is good, but if I’m a multinational, the China market remains freaking hard. That’s not going away anytime soon.”

Still, even just setting a floor under the U.S.-China relationship is better than nothing, even if corporate and trade developments will take longer to arrive. 

“A cold peace is better than no peace,” Leung says. 

In Fortune’s “Asia Agenda” column, released twice a month, we speak with Asia’s top business leaders about how they are building for the future and the lessons they’ve drawn from leading companies in one of the world’s fastest growing and most dynamic regions. Explore all of our profiles here.

Fortune is hosting the Fortune Leaders Forum on September 8 in Macau, China, on the theme “Leadership in the Age of Convergence and Complexity.” Join business leaders as they discuss how today’s world demands decisive leadership and a balance of strategic imagination with operational agility. Register here!



Source link

Nouriel Roubini’s business partner sees bitcoin crashing 70% before rallying to $500,000

0
Nouriel Roubini's business partner sees bitcoin crashing 70% before rallying to $500,000

Reza Bundy, chief executive of Atlas Capital and business partner of longtime bitcoin critic Nouriel Roubini, expects bitcoin to fall as much as 70% over the next six months before eventually climbing as high as $500,000 in the years ahead.

Speaking to CoinDesk at the Proof of Talk conference in Paris, Reza Bundy, CEO of investment advisory firm Atlas Capital, issued his grim macroeconomic warning that runs contrary to typical industry optimism.

“We think there’s going to be a massive drawdown in bitcoin in the next six months,” Bundy said, echoing Roubini’s long-held thesis. “It [drawdown] could be up to 70%. We think $26,000 to $30,000 was the number we came up with. If there’s a drawdown in the stock market that’s even half of what happened in 2008, Bitcoin will double that debt loss.”

Bitcoin was trading around $63,000, down nearly 28% this year, while the equity markets have rallied sharply on the back of AI hype and momentum chasing. The S&P 500 rose 10%, and the Nasdaq climbed about 19%, outpacing bitcoin over the same period.

‘Dr. Doom’

Bundy said that his bearish forecast is built directly on data and analysis developed alongside his Chief Economist, and Co-founder, Dr. Nouriel Roubini, known as “Dr. Doom” for accurately predicting the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis.

Roubini is also an anti-bitcoin advocate whose skepticism of bitcoin stretches back to the historic 2017 bull run. While bitcoin rose roughly 850% from its level when Roubini first called it a bubble, Dr. Doom has maintained his bearish stance on the digital asset.

In recent market assessments published on Bloomberg, Roubini reiterated his conviction that bitcoin is a “pseudo-asset class” and a pure “speculative asset” that lacks fundamental value or real-world utility, making it distinct from real economic hedges like gold.

Bundy has somewhat echoed that doom-and-gloom prediction for bitcoin, at least in the short term. He claimed that bitcoin has failed as an inflation hedge, as many bulls have said, and is now just a highly volatile risk asset moving in lockstep with tech stocks.

While bitcoin advocates are likely to dispute that characterization, pointing to the asset’s long-term returns and fixed supply, Bundy’s criticism echoes comments made by billionaire investor Mark Cuban, who recently said he sold most of his bitcoin after it had failed to behave like a hedge during periods of geopolitical stress and dollar weakness.

Bitcoin’s original promise

On the flip side, Bundy isn’t a perma-bear on bitcoin.

He still believes in bitcoin’s ‘store of value’ thesis and is bullish in the long term. Bundy’s longer-term prediction is a price range of $150,000 to $500,000, which puts him at odds with his Atlas partner, Roubini.

His optimism dates back to bitcoin’s original promise as an alternative currency that counters global political and monetary chaos. Bundy argued that bitcoin’s long-term growth will be driven by rising government debt, central bank arbitrary money printing and dropping trust in traditional currencies (as Satoshi Nakamoto originally envisioned).

And Bundy has reasons for his bullishness. He mapped out bitcoin’s longer-term price using four economic paths:

  • First, under “Controlled Expansion” (40% chance), the world sees steady growth and stable inflation. This keeps markets moving up and pushes bitcoin to a range of $150,000 to $250,000.
  • Second, if “Fiscal Dominance” prevails (25% chance), governments will print money to cover their massive debts, leading to high inflation. This environment favors scarce assets, driving bitcoin between $250,000 and $500,000.
  • Third, a “Global Conflict” path (20% chance) involves major security shocks in places like Taiwan or the Middle East. This would trigger a quick market panic and initial price drops, but would ultimately prove bitcoin’s value as a safe, neutral asset.
  • Fourth, a “Deflationary Recession” (15% chance) means a harsh credit freeze that leaves bitcoin weak until central banks step in to pump liquidity back into the system.

‘Techno-dollar’ shift

In the short term, though, Bundy continues to see a global financial crisis on the horizon. He warns that the traditional stock market is a bubble waiting to pop like 1929, and this thesis also informs Atlas Capital’s investment strategy, called the “techno-dollar,” Bundy said.

Instead of pegging digital tokens to a single depreciating government currency, he claimed that the strategy uses AI-driven allocation models to shift exposure among assets, including gold, food, real estate and defense technology. Atlas currently runs this asset allocation strategy through a traditional ETF vehicle with ticker “USAF” on the Nasdaq. The fund currently has about $18 million in net assets, and returned 8.7% since inception, according to TradingView data. Bundy also plans to tokenize it on public blockchains later this month.

When asked why bitcoin isn’t part of the fund, even though he is bullish on the long term, Bundy said he is waiting for the short-term market crash he predicted to pass first.

“We believe there will be a major stock market correction, and we don’t want to be part of the bitcoin drawdown. Once the correction happens, we will make our final decision to include or not.”



Source link

Investors Are Fleeing to South Korean and Taiwan ETFs for Diversification. If You Do That, You’re Still Just Chasing AI Chip Stocks.

0
Investors Are Fleeing to South Korean and Taiwan ETFs for Diversification. If You Do That, You’re Still Just Chasing AI Chip Stocks.


Whenever the U.S. stock market gets top-heavy, Wall Street’s marketing machine gets cranking. The cycle turns back to a favorite narrative: geographical diversification.

Retail investors are urged to dump their concentrated domestic shares and buy single-country ETFs to capture untapped, uncorrelated growth cycles abroad.

More News from Barchart

There’s no crystal ball in investing. At least there shouldn’t be, and we should run from anyone who promises they have one. But through five months of 2026, the global scoreboard displays some eye-popping performance numbers.

The question I ask myself about any ETF or market segment that is not tied to one of the benchmark indexes is am I buying true diversification, or am I just riding the coattails of the S&P 500 Index ($SPX) and Nasdaq-100 Index ($IUXX) up moves in a different package? That is, a different ticker.

So before we swap our SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) or Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) exposure for foreign tickers, we need to understand the realities driving these returns in non-U.S. stocks, particularly when we view them by country instead of in a catch-all international or global ETF.

More often than not, a single-country ETF isn’t actually a bet on a country — it’s just a highly concentrated, expensive bet on a single sector or industry in disguise. That’s because while the U.S. has a bit of everything and a ton of technology stocks, the rest of the world’s national stock markets tend to be narrow by comparison.

That does not mean I ignore them. But it does mean I use them as proxies for whatever their equivalent might be in the U.S. market. I track scores of single-country, regional, and specialized international ETFs. Based on year-to-date performance through last Friday, May 29, here are the leaders. I’ll discuss those and then move on to the laggards.

www.barchart.com

The single-country equity landscape this year is defined by two massive, tech-driven spikes and a spectacular regulatory crash.

The absolute king of global equities this year is South Korea (EWY). The index has more than doubled in 2026, driven by a violent, multi-month short squeeze and unprecedented global demand for high-bandwidth memory chips. Taiwan (EWT) is up 67%. Riding the same hardware wave, Taiwan’s equity index has surged as hyperscalers continue to stockpile advanced chip architectures.



Source link

Bitcoin enters extreme fear at 11 – Is recovery possible post SpaceX IPO?

0
Bitcoin enters extreme fear at 11 – Is recovery possible post SpaceX IPO?


Bitcoin has dropped nearly 15% in June, an accelerated plunge following the reports of Strategy’s BTC sell-off. 

And market fears intensified as the community speculated that the recent Strategy’s dump could be just the beginning of a much bigger sell-off. As of writing, Strategy founder Michael Saylor had not confirmed or dispelled these fears. 

On this backdrop, the Crypto Fear and Greed Index reading dropped to an ‘extreme fear’ level of 11 as BTC dipped to $61.2K. 

Bitcoin fear
Source: Alternative

When will the Bitcoin price recover?

Interestingly, the current market fear levels also marked the local bottoms in February and March.  But analysts projected that a sharp rebound may not happen instantly. 

Bitcoin fearBitcoin fear
Source: BTC

Following the extended drop to its February low, analyst Peter Brandt said the next bottom may happen in October. 

As I see it, Bitcoin has met its initial target at the Feb low. This does not mean that BTC cannot work lower or have a terminal wash-out. I do not see a tradable low until October.

Worth pointing out that as BTC slipped lower and deepened year-to-date (YTD) losses to 25%, the stock market rallied.

On when the crypto asset could front a true recovery, Wintermute’s head of OTC trading, Jake Ostrovskis, said, 

What we need to get people interested in crypto and Bitcoin again is probably some of the air coming out of the AI trade.

Another analyst, Benjamin Cowen, echoed a similar sentiment, noting that such rotation could mark the true beginning of BTC’s next four-year cycle run. 

So far, Elon Musk’s SpaceX is expected to go public (initial public offering, IPO) on the 12th of June. For Anthropic (parent firm behind Claude), its public debut is expected in September, while OpenAI could also follow suit later in 2026. 

Bitcoin fear Bitcoin fear
Source: X

Sophisticated investors were also actively hedging for such an AI trade and its impact on BTC. 

According to Deribit, Options traders, mostly institutional investors, were increasingly hedging against a potential dip to the $50K and $45K area. In the past 24 hours, these levels were the most traded put contracts for the end of June expiry. 

Bitcoin fearBitcoin fear
Source; Deribit

Final SummaryThe The

  • Bitcoin fear index is at levels last seen in February and March lows
  • However, analysts cautioned that BTC’s recovery could remain elusive until expected AI IPOs are over

 



Source link