JUST IN: $15 BILLION BITWISE CIO JUST WARNED HOLDING 0% #BITCOIN IS ABSOLUTELY IRRATIONAL “THERE’S ABOUT $150 TRILLION OF STOCKS, AND BTC IS $1.5 TRILLION” “IF YOU DON’T HAVE 1%, YOU’RE SHORT IT” “I NO LONGER THINK THAT 0 IS RATIONAL” WALL STREET IS GETTING OFF ZERO. TRILLIONS INCOMING 🚀

who decided irrational was the word and not just underweight

When $150T in global equities realizes zero allocation is an active short against currency debasement, the supply shock hits fast.

it’s a measured hedge against monetary and portfolio concentration risk

Wall Street is clearly taking Bitcoin more seriously. A 1% allocation may sound small, but across institutional portfolios, that demand could become significant.

WATCH:@Matt_Hougan explaining why the Bitcoin bottom is in and why he believes Wall Street's Bitcoin flood starts now⚡️

You made the magnitude of the situation much easier to grasp.

yeah but 1% is still barely a hedge tbh

I learned to add context to the next reaction by noting how often price returned to a zone.

Moon clown

Wrong. Bitcoin is a scam.

The “0% is irrational” argument is pretty powerful. Even a 1% allocation from massive pools of capital would be meaningful for Bitcoin.

when a $15B CIO frames it as being short if you hold 0%, the conversation shifts from should I add some exposure to why haven't I yet. that is a meaningful change in how institutional allocators think about the default position.

I began describing a reaction without calling it manipulation so the review would have more context.

Zero exposure deserves serious reconsideration

Wild how institutional math is finally catching up to basic scarcity principles. Hard to ignore a 1% allocation when the asset is scaling like this.

DUH,,, DOM,,TA DUH,,BLAH,,DE BLAH DUDE YOU TALK SUCH BULLSHIT... LIES!!! ALL FABRICATION.. WISHFUL THEORY!!!! #PROPAGANDA TO HYPE $BTC

How many coin is 1%

0% btc is starting to look like the contrarian bet

The 1% framing makes the allocation conversation much harder for institutions to postpone

The $150T vs $1.5T framing skips the part that actually matters for sizing: volatility. Bitcoin's realized vol runs 4-5x the S&P's, so a 1% position by market cap isn't a 1% position by risk contributed to the portfolio. The market-cap argument works, the risk-parity math behind it doesn't get mentioned.

Zero BTC? That’s like ignoring the secret sauce 🚀💸

The most practical change I made here was keeping the reason for an indicator setting in my notes.

Having all your wealth in Bitcoin is a risk, but having zero exposure to Bitcoin is a far greater risk.🤷

hmm...