During this week's Davos Forum in the UTC+8 time zone, CZ clearly stated that he will transition from being the "founder at the forefront" to "an investor in the background," no longer personally launching new projects but instead focusing more on supporting others in entrepreneurship. This statement sharply contrasts with his image over the past few years of frequently appearing and actively expanding. Concurrently, the regulatory attitude in the United States has noticeably tightened, while places like the UAE have released friendlier signals regarding cryptocurrency policies, indicating a global reshuffling of the regulatory landscape. The industry is moving from wild growth to compliance games, quietly entering the "post-entrepreneurship era": with regulatory pressure, institutional waves, and retail risk education intertwining, the real question becomes—when the old expansion model is put on pause, who will take over the growth space and narrative dominance in the cryptocurrency industry, and how will it be rewritten?
From Leading the Charge to Stepping Back: The Implications of CZ's Identity Shift
● Role Statement Scene: At the Davos-related events, CZ candidly stated that he will no longer initiate new entrepreneurial projects but will turn to being an investor, emphasizing the provision of funding and experience support for the new generation of projects rather than personally managing a large business empire. This stands in stark contrast to his proactive stance in announcing new businesses and personally endorsing products over the past few years, effectively signaling to the market that the founder known for high risk and rapid speed is actively slowing down and accepting a more "behind-the-scenes" position.
● The Chain Reaction with Compliance Pressure: This shift is not an isolated choice but is closely related to the global compliance pressure in recent years and the amplification of personal risk exposure. Compliance accountability for large platforms in jurisdictions like the United States has led to founders and institutions being viewed as "overall risk bearers." CZ's retreat from being the primary responsible person to an investor resembles a reconstruction of his risk boundaries and legal exposure, as well as a redefinition of the identity transition from "entrepreneur" to "capital provider."
● "Proactive Deceleration" Under Giant Platforms: Against the backdrop of widespread belief that Binance's trading volume is sufficient to rival or even surpass some traditional exchanges, the founder's choice to "decelerate" rather than continue aggressive expansion sends a rare signal in mature markets: when a platform's size is large enough to attract systemic attention, further reckless expansion can quickly amplify regulatory and political costs. CZ's turn is both a personal choice and a necessary response for a giant platform under global scrutiny to seek a more stable posture.
The Shift in the U.S. Attitude: Regulatory Winds Affecting Global Games
● U.S. Regulation and Market Confidence: CZ has repeatedly mentioned in public speeches that the U.S. regulatory attitude towards cryptocurrency has clearly "turned", moving from ambiguity to more actionable measures, from leniency to a greater emphasis on enforcement and compliance details. This tightening creates short-term pressure on market sentiment, but in his view, it also "calibrates expectations" to some extent, forcing project parties and platforms to take compliance construction more seriously, leading to a marginal repair of long-term confidence—because no matter how strict the rules, they are at least more predictable than complete uncertainty.
● Regulatory Competition and Friendly Windows: As the U.S. tightens its stance, places like the UAE and Japan have released more positive signals regarding cryptocurrency, forming a policy differentiation akin to "regulatory competition." According to briefings, multiple sources indicate that the UAE's overall attitude is relatively positive, while Japan is re-evaluating the relationship between cryptocurrency and its local currency amid macro-financial fluctuations. This combination of tightening and loosening allows project parties and capital to begin rethinking their layouts with a "global site selection" mindset, treating the regulatory environment as a core variable rather than merely revolving around a single market.
● The Challenge of a Global Unified Framework: CZ also acknowledges that a globally unified cryptocurrency regulatory framework is almost unrealistic, as countries have vastly different demands regarding financial security, capital flow, and technological competition. The same type of cryptocurrency business faces entirely different qualifications and compliance paths in different jurisdictions, thus solidifying a multipolar regulatory landscape: the U.S. focuses on enforcement deterrence, some emerging markets emphasize friendly investment attraction, while traditional financial centers waver between cautious openness and risk control. This fragmentation will persist long-term, becoming a structural constraint that all industry participants cannot bypass.
Retail Investors Jumping into Deep Waters: Risk Warnings and Educational Costs of the New Cycle
● The Warning of the Deep Water Metaphor: CZ describes the current market risk state as "many retail investors jumping into deep waters without knowing how to swim"—with small capital volumes and weak risk awareness, yet favoring high-leverage, high-volatility assets, hoping to get rich overnight. The implication of this metaphor is clear: in a market where professional institutions and complex derivatives coexist, information and tools are severely asymmetric, and retail investors recklessly entering the market are not "learning to swim," but rather experimenting with their lives.
● Mismatches Under Volatility and Leverage: Coupled with recent significant market volatility and the widespread presence of high leverage, the common asset-cognition mismatch and risk-tolerance mismatch among retail investors are magnified. Many only see high-yield samples, ignoring real cases of margin calls, liquidation, and liquidity exhaustion; driven by emotions, they chase highs and cut losses, using short-term funds to bet on long-term trends, and employing unfamiliar derivatives to amplify losses they cannot bear, ultimately treating the entire market as a casino rather than a trading arena that requires strategy and discipline.
● Risk Control Reconstruction in the New Cycle: Against the backdrop of tightening regulation and accelerated institutional capital entry, if retail investors do not rebuild their risk control awareness, they will gradually become "liquidity providers" and "emotional fuel." This means: on one hand, they must reduce leverage, control individual positions and overall exposure; on the other hand, they need to learn to understand the interlinked effects of compliance risk, platform risk, and macro volatility. In the new cycle, the key to survival is no longer how many market opportunities one can seize, but rather learning to protect oneself amidst complex rules and asymmetric information.
Targeting Banks Rather Than AI: The Discourse Power Struggle Over Financial Risks
● The Root of the Problem is Not AI: In the debate over whether AI will exacerbate financial risks, CZ points the finger at the traditional banking system's fractional reserve requirement rather than the AI technology itself. His view is that what truly accumulates systemic risk and leads to concentrated explosions during crises is the long-standing ability of banks to amplify credit and expand balance sheets with relatively little real reserves, rather than the emergence of any new technological tool.
● The Contrast Between Fractional Reserves and Cryptocurrency Transparency: The fractional reserve system inherently amplifies credit and liquidity risks—when trust is abundant, the economy is rapidly leveraged; once trust reverses, bank runs and liquidity drying up are similarly amplified. In contrast, the balances, transfers, and settlement processes of on-chain assets are technically closer to "real-time verifiable," and the transparency and auditability of cryptocurrency assets provide a different risk control logic at least on the surface. This does not mean there are no risks on-chain, but rather that the exposure methods and rhythms of risks are more straightforward and traceable.
● Fighting for Narrative Space for Cryptocurrency: By shifting the focus from "Is AI dangerous?" to "How do traditional financial systems create risks?", CZ is effectively fighting for narrative dominance for the cryptocurrency industry amid the new technological wave. If mainstream society begins to acknowledge that the real reflection should be on the institutional structure of the old financial system rather than simply demonizing new tools, then cryptocurrency has the opportunity to participate in discussions as a "more transparent and verifiable" alternative rather than being perpetually placed in a passive position as a "regulated entity."
Industry Leaders Step Back: Power Restructuring in the Post-Entrepreneurship Era
● Founders Gradually Stepping Back from Daily Operations: From CZ to other leading platforms and protocol founders, gradually stepping back from frontline operations and transitioning to roles as investors and advisors is becoming an implicit trend. Whether due to compliance considerations, personal reputation risks, or the redistribution of wealth and energy, industry leaders are shifting from "the ones holding the steering wheel" to "the ones sitting in the backseat observing," preferring to influence the landscape through capital and connections rather than personally battling under the regulatory spotlight.
● The Game Between Giant Platforms and Sovereign Regulation: The interplay between giant platforms, sovereign regulation, and multinational capital is reshaping the power structure of the cryptocurrency industry. Platforms are no longer merely technical or trading infrastructures but are viewed by various countries as key nodes that could influence capital flows, monetary sovereignty, and even social stability; regulatory agencies are reshaping the boundaries of platforms through licenses, enforcement, and policy guidance; multinational capital seeks arbitrage opportunities and discourse power within this dynamic, making it difficult for any single founder to push for global expansion "based solely on personal will."
● The Takeover Methods of New Generation Projects and Traditional Finance: In the reality of non-unified regulation and regional competition, new generation project parties are more likely to choose "coexistence rather than disruption" with traditional finance. On one hand, more projects will actively connect with banks, brokerages, and custodians, positioning themselves as infrastructure or supplementary layers rather than replacements; on the other hand, traditional finance is gradually taking over the previous generation of cryptocurrency dividends through investment, cooperation, and technology introduction. The future power center will not only reside in a single platform nor revert to the monopoly of traditional finance, but will resemble a multi-centered, cross-jurisdictional network of collaboration and competition.
The Regulatory Fog Has Not Cleared: Looking at the Industry's Next Steps Through CZ's Turn
CZ's statement during Davos about "transitioning from founder to investor" symbolizes the cryptocurrency industry moving from a rough entrepreneurial phase to a stage of compliance and institutionalization: personal heroes are gradually exiting the stage, and capital and regulation are becoming the main decision-making forces. His choice is both a response to the past high-pressure regulation and a realistic acceptance of the industry's maturity. Meanwhile, the global regulatory fragmentation and the serious lag in retail risk awareness are becoming the two core variables for the next stage: the former determines the flow of funds and projects, while the latter determines the educational costs of this game.
In a future where AI and traditional finance are deeply intertwined, the cryptocurrency narrative faces unprecedented opportunities as well as structural risks. The data processing and risk control capabilities brought by AI may make on-chain finance more efficient and intelligent; however, without a clear institutional framework and risk-sharing mechanisms, new technologies may also be swept into the cyclical crises of the old system. The post-entrepreneurship era has arrived, and the real key is no longer who can tell a more radical story, but who can stabilize their position amidst regulatory fog, technological waves, and global capital migration, and strive for greater survival and development space for the entire industry.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
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。
