Compiled & Edited by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Guest: Arthur Hayes, Co-Founder of BitMEX

Host: Natalie Brunell

Podcast Source: Natalie Brunell

Original Title: Arthur Hayes: The Fed Will Print Again — That’s When Bitcoin Explodes

Broadcast Date: March 10, 2026

Key Takeaways

Arthur Hayes, Co-Founder of BitMEX and Chief Investment Officer of Maelstrom, appeared on "Coin Stories" to share his unique insights on Bitcoin, macroeconomics, the disruptive impact of AI, and the global liquidity cycle.

The main topics we discussed include:

• Why Bitcoin is referred to as the "liquidity alarm" for the global market
• How AI-triggered employment shocks may become the fuse for the next financial crisis
• Why central banks may need to print more money in the future than during the pandemic
• Whether institutional investors are changing the market landscape for Bitcoin
• Arthur Hayes' investment advice: Why to wait for central banks to start printing before buying Bitcoin

Highlights of Insights

“Fired by Citigroup and entered the crypto industry”

• Being fired by Citigroup in 2013 was probably the luckiest thing in my life.
• I was very disappointed by the mainstream financial industry at the time, especially after the 2008 financial crisis; people could no longer earn the same money as when I was in college.
• I realized two things: First, I wasn't that smart; second, it’s hard to be consistently profitable in trading over the long term. If someone without a technical background like me could make such money, that opportunity certainly wouldn't last long.

On “Institutionalization” and the Original Intent of Bitcoin

• Some might have forgotten the original intent behind entering this industry. Bitcoin was not created to win recognition from large financial institutions.
• Why are we now striving tirelessly for acceptance from institutions that don’t care about our interests?
• If cryptocurrency turns into just another ordinary fintech product, what’s its appeal? Isn’t it easier to buy stocks directly in a brokerage account?

On “Liquidity Alarm” and the Macro Situation

• Bitcoin is actually a “liquidity alarm.” Its performance indicates that there isn't enough dollar liquidity in the market to meet various liquidity demands. This explains why Bitcoin has performed poorly over the past 6 to 9 months.
• The rise in gold prices isn’t due to “currency devaluation trades” but because sovereign nations are gradually realizing the risks of holding dollar assets are increasing.
• Holding gold is obviously much safer. This trend became even more pronounced in 2022 when the US and EU froze Russian assets.

On AI-triggered “Minsky Moments”

• The speed of AI advancement is far faster than the speed at which production line workers were laid off.
• Just 10% to 20% of white-collar jobs being replaced could trigger leveraged effects in the banking system, resulting in a chain reaction. This situation resembles a “Minsky Moment”: when the market suddenly realizes that certain asset values are zero, panic selling ensues.

On Strategies of “War and Printing Money”

• If you hear someone say “war is beneficial for Bitcoin,” what they really mean is “war means printing money, and printing money is beneficial for Bitcoin.” So my advice is to wait for the arrival of money printing, don’t try to predict the market.
• If I only had $1 to invest right now, I would choose to remain inactive temporarily.
• The longer the war drags on, the more likely the Federal Reserve will adopt a money printing policy to stabilize the situation. When central banks start printing, that’s when I would choose to buy Bitcoin.

On Privacy and the Threat of AI De-anonymization

• I believe the real threat will come from AI tools that can de-anonymize your transactions; this is the true “game changer.”
• By simply entering a specific address and a particular person into a large language model, it can produce a high-probability match.
• If you truly need a completely anonymous electronic cash system, Bitcoin may not be suitable for you.
• This is also why I have high hopes for Zcash.

Psychological Massage for Investors

• The nature of the market isn't to help you make money; its essence is actually to take your money from you.
• If you expect the market or some asset to bring you “life-changing” returns in just six months, that expectation isn’t realistic.
• You may see some people getting rich overnight due to luck, but I bet they will likely lose all the money they made in the next six months because they will continue to believe they can make the same fortune with risky trading strategies.

Who is Arthur Hayes? His Legendary Story

Natalie Brunell: Hello everyone, welcome back to the show. This week, we have Arthur Hayes with us, the Chief Investment Officer of Maelstrom and also an OG.

I want to start with your background story. Your journey is very interesting; I remember reading that you grew up in Michigan and then entered the financial field. You founded BitMEX, got involved with Bitcoin early on, and then embarked on a very exciting journey.Can you share your story with us?

Arthur Hayes:

Sure. I was born in Buffalo, New York, and spent most of my childhood in Detroit. I studied at the University of Pennsylvania and took undergraduate business courses at Wharton from 2004 to 2008.At that time, I developed a strong interest in China and studied Chinese and business courses at school. In 2006, I went to Hong Kong as an exchange student, loved it there, and found a summer internship at Deutsche Bank in Hong Kong. Eventually, in 2008, I got a full-time job opportunity and moved to Asia, where I have lived ever since.

I’ve spent half my life in Hong Kong, Singapore, and other parts of Asia, never working in the US and rarely going back. I worked in the financial services industry for five years, three of which I spent at Deutsche Bank as the head of the ETF market-making desk, when ETFs were still a new thing in Asia.

Later, I left Deutsche Bank for Citigroup, doing the same job. Looking back, getting fired from Citigroup in 2013 was probably the luckiest thing in my life. I was very disappointed with the mainstream financial industry, especially after the 2008 financial crisis; people could no longer earn the same money as when I was in college.

So, I felt there might not be much room for growth in this industry for me, so I decided to try something different. At that time, I saw a post about Bitcoin on Zero Hedge and then read the Bitcoin white paper, and was deeply attracted by the philosophy behind it. Even though I didn’t have a technical background and was a trader, I still wanted to know “how to trade Bitcoin,” so I started searching forums for information and researched all the exchanges available at the time to find out how to go long, how to go short, and whether there were derivatives trading.

Eventually, I found a small derivatives exchange run by two Russians in the Caribbean. At that time, I discovered a great arbitrage opportunity: you could sell their futures contracts while buying spot Bitcoin, with an annualized return of up to 200%. So, I bought my first Bitcoin on Mt. Gox and sold some futures contracts. A month later, I realized I had made the expected amount of Bitcoin, and began trading like that for several months.

By the fall of 2013, Mt. Gox had some issues, like inability to withdraw dollars. I tried to withdraw dollars to my bank account but had to wait for weeks. So, I started following discussions on the forums, finding others facing similar issues. Although dollars couldn't be withdrawn at that time, you could always withdraw Bitcoin from Mt. Gox, and in the fall of 2013, the Bitcoin premium in China soared to as high as 40%, 50%, or even 60%.

So, I decided to buy Bitcoin with those non-withdrawable dollars on Mt. Gox and then transfer the Bitcoin to exchanges in China to settle with RMB. I would take a bus to China to open a bank account, withdraw RMB, and then take the bus back to Hong Kong, continually arbitraging the price difference between Bitcoin in China and Hong Kong.

This way, I made some money, but as a trader, I realized two things: first, I wasn’t that smart; second, trading is difficult to profit from sustainably over the long term. If someone without a technical background like me could earn this money, such opportunities wouldn’t last long. So, I started thinking about how to create something more lasting to stay in the cryptocurrency space.

So, I thought of derivatives. Even though I didn’t have technical expertise or coding skills, I decided to build my own Bitcoin derivatives exchange. I looked for people in my circle in Hong Kong who could help me and proposed the idea of building a Bitcoin derivatives exchange. In 2014, we began developing BitMEX and launched the first futures contracts in November of the same year.

Of course, our most well-known product is the perpetual swap launched in May 2016, which as your audience may know, is possibly the highest traded crypto financial product to date. We made a lot of money from it and once became the industry leader until being surpassed by Binance in 2020. After that, I began transitioning to manage my family office, focusing on early cryptocurrency investments and doing some directional trading. Now we are launching a private equity fund focusing on acquiring cryptocurrency companies and optimizing their operations.

What does the future hold for Bitcoin: Bullish or Bearish?

Natalie Brunell: You have been in the cryptocurrency field for many years and have witnessed the changes in this industry firsthand. From the early block size wars to the gradual involvement of institutions today, has your attitude towards Bitcoin become more bullish over time? Some early OGs have cashed out, while others are increasingly enthusiastic and predict Bitcoin will reach a million dollars. What are your thoughts?

Arthur Hayes:

I personally really love this space and enjoy the people here; they are some of the most interesting individuals I’ve ever met in my life. While there might be times when I am bearish or bullish on Bitcoin, I still believe, the demand for stateless money is stronger now than it was when the Genesis Block was released in 2009. Therefore, whether it is Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies, I am excited to be part of this journey.

Even though at certain points I might have a short-term bearish attitude towards Bitcoin or other assets, in the long term, I am very optimistic about Bitcoin and the entire cryptocurrency space. In fact, aside from other matters, a majority of my career that isn't related to fitness has been invested in the cryptocurrency industry.

Are institutions dominating the Bitcoin market?

Natalie Brunell: Many viewers who follow my show feel confused and disappointed with the last Bitcoin bull market because they did not see Bitcoin's price reaching the expected heights. Retail participation in the last bull market was very low, and the market was mainly driven by institutions. What are your thoughts?

Arthur Hayes:

I think, some people may have forgotten the original intent of us entering this industry. Bitcoin's birth was not to gain recognition from large financial institutions. Throughout Bitcoin's rise from zero to $66,000, it never relied on government support and had no clear regulatory framework; it was even hindered by a hostile banking system and regulatory bodies. So, why are we now striving tirelessly for acceptance from institutions that are indifferent to our interests?

Our focus should be on cultivating talent that seeks to build a new financial system for a new era of human civilization, rather than trying to cater to the demands of the traditional financial system. Of course, I’m not saying institutional investors shouldn't hold cryptocurrencies, but we shouldn't change the essence and original intent of the entire crypto ecosystem to appease these institutions.

The true value of crypto lies in its potential as a transformative technology. If we continuously cater to the needs of traditional financial institutions, then cryptocurrencies may ultimately regress into just another ordinary financial tool. By then, people might question why they should still hold cryptocurrencies; isn't it simpler to buy stocks directly in a brokerage account? Even from some perspective, trading stocks might be safer. If cryptocurrencies turn into just an ordinary fintech product, what would be its appeal?

Is Bitcoin's price manipulated?

Natalie Brunell: Recently, there has been a lot of discussion on X about some institutions manipulating and lowering Bitcoin prices, like Jane Street, which has made headlines. You have rich experience in derivatives trading, trading firms, and traditional finance. What are your views on these concerns and theories?

Arthur Hayes:

I do not agree with these views. I feel that often, someone posts on X saying “Oh, I lost money, it must be someone else's fault.” This is usually a sign of a bad trader. They’ll say, “I made a trade, it didn’t turn out well, and then I saw a news item about a certain company doing something shady, so it’s definitely their fault.” In reality, it may not be like that; the issue could be with the trader themselves — perhaps their trading strategy was immature, or they might have chosen the wrong timing, or even underestimated the market's complexities.

I don’t believe in some so-called “evil conspiracy” where Jane Street or other market makers intentionally collude to depress Bitcoin prices. The market has its own operating rules, and different institutions participate in their own ways. Indeed, liquidity in the derivatives market plays an important role in short-term price volatility, but that doesn't mean the market is manipulated.

I want to remind you that if you are not a professional cryptocurrency trader, you need to remain vigilant; the cryptocurrency market is open 24 hours, which means you may need your phone to be on all the time and set up various alerts. If a violent market move happens at 2 AM, and your phone rings, you have to get up immediately to deal with it. If you are not mentally prepared and just want to try trading after work, I suggest you don’t use leverage in the cryptocurrency market and don’t have a mentality of seeking short-term profits.

If you just want to buy Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies and hold them long term, then these short-term price fluctuations are actually not important to you.

What are the obstacles to Bitcoin's development?

Natalie Brunell: What factors do you think are currently hindering the development of Bitcoin, especially given that "currency devaluation trades" are gradually being recognized by more people? It seems that now all assets have entered a bull market for gold, while we originally hoped that Bitcoin could stand out, but it has proven unable to escape this fate.

Arthur Hayes:

My view is Bitcoin is actually a “liquidity alarm.” Currently, the US, especially, faces a giant deflation time bomb, closely related to the disruptive impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the labor market. Bitcoin and certain tech stocks are signaling to us: in a highly leveraged Federal Reserve system, a large-scale credit collapse might occur, especially when high-income jobs are replaced by AI as companies cut costs.

Bitcoin's performance tells us that there isn't enough dollar liquidity in the market to meet various liquidity demands, particularly those related to capital expenditures (capex) for hyperscalers. This is also why Bitcoin has performed poorly over the past 6 to 9 months. If you observe the market, the Nasdaq index has performed relatively stable, but Bitcoin's price has fallen by about 50%. Meanwhile, the price of gold has been steadily increasing.

I believe the rise in gold is not due to “currency devaluation trades,” but because sovereign countries are gradually realizing the risks of holding dollar assets are increasing. It has been proven many times that these dollar assets do not actually belong entirely to the countries holding them. When you hold dollar assets, your economic sovereignty is actually in the hands of people like the US Treasury Secretary. They can dilute your asset value by issuing massive amounts of bonds, or even freeze or seize your assets through sanctions. In this situation, why would a country want to hold such assets with its reserves?

In contrast, holding gold is obviously much safer. This is also why central banks around the world have been steadily increasing their gold reserves since 2008. Especially in 2022, after the US and EU froze Russian assets, this trend became even more pronounced.

How will AI's disruptive impact change the market?

Natalie Brunell: Referring back to your previous comments about AI, you published a fantastic article discussing the deflationary shocks triggered by AI and the risks facing white-collar jobs. Additionally, you mentioned that private credit and the overall credit market will contract at some point, which will act as a catalyst for the Federal Reserve to massively print money, thus driving Bitcoin prices up.

Do you think this situation is imminent, or do you believe this is a slow and gradual process that will ultimately push Bitcoin upwards?

Arthur Hayes:

I’m not sure, but I believe this could happen faster than most people expect, mainly because the pace of AI advancement is exponential. If we look back at the 2008 subprime crisis case, it gradually brewed for about seven years after China joined the WTO. At that time, China's accession led to the loss of about 35% of manufacturing jobs in the US. Those workers who lost their jobs fell into poverty and turned to subprime loans, which they could not repay. Although the default rate only slightly rose to single digits, the leverage effect ultimately triggered a financial crisis.

The pace of AI advancement is far faster than the speed at which production line workers were fired back then. We see companies like The Block laying off 40% of their employees overnight. Meanwhile, in the US, many companies are discussing similar layoff plans based on flexible labor agreements, such as “at-will employment.” Once these companies realize AI can perform jobs more efficiently, they might rapidly lay off 10%, 20%, or even 30% of employees.

My point isn’t that all white-collar jobs will disappear, but that just a 10% to 20% replacement of white-collar jobs could trigger leveraged effects in the banking system, leading to a chain reaction. This situation resembles a “Minsky Moment,” where the market suddenly realizes the value of certain assets is zero, triggering panic selling. Although the entire process may take two to three years to fully manifest, market reactions may be nearly instantaneous.

We cannot accurately predict when all this will happen, but once the market reaches a certain “collective consensus,” like “the disruption of AI has arrived, a large number of white collars have been laid off,” people may start questioning the value of financial stocks. At that time, bank stocks could plummet 60% to 70% in just a few days, and depositors would transfer their deposits from small and medium banks to large banks like JP Morgan and Citibank, forcing the Federal Reserve to act quickly.

Therefore, while this impact may take two to three years to fully manifest, the market's awareness of this change could be very swift. Just the formation of some “collective consensus,” like “AI disruption has significantly impacted the economy,” could trigger large-scale market reactions.

Social Unrest and Economic Pressure on the Crypto Market

Natalie Brunell: Are you worried about the social impacts that these things may bring?

The societal division in America is worsening; we see widespread public discontent and escalating social unrest. Politically, people are becoming more tribal and oppositional to each other. Moreover, as more people lose their jobs, some seem to think the solution is to elect candidates promising “free benefits.” This core sense of frustration seems to create a chain reaction, while many are unaware that they need to own and accumulate hard assets like Bitcoin.

Arthur Hayes:

Indeed, different countries have varying social contracts between labor and capital. In the US, this contract appears very fragile, as capital clearly dominates and the rights of laborers are relatively neglected. In other places, the balance is somewhat better. Thus, I do believe we will face a highly divisive era ahead.

Many people who once considered themselves wealthy may find themselves becoming those they looked down on in the past — dependent on government relief after losing their jobs. What impact will this have on their self-esteem? How will they express their discontent? Through political means, or in more direct ways, like taking up arms and protesting in the streets? Some may oppose the construction of data centers or direct their anger towards tech giants like Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Mark Zuckerberg, seeing them as profit-driven entities destroying ordinary jobs and depriving them of what they once believed was their American dream.

I can't predict how things will ultimately evolve, but it is certain that the future social evolution will not be linear, but fraught with uncertainty and waves; this will inevitably be a period of division, as the existing social contract in America needs to be redefined. As for how such a contract will change, I can't provide a clear answer, but there is no doubt it will be a challenging and painful process.

Can Bitcoin Solve Global Affordability Issues?

Natalie Brunell: Many people feel very frustrated with the current state of affairs because they feel they can't afford housing and are unable to participate in the capital and wealth accumulation of the past few decades. I feel like Bitcoin seems an obvious solution because people can accumulate it little by little. However, there are still many who have aversions to Bitcoin. Even though we've made substantial progress, a lot of people still oppose Bitcoin, which surprises me.

Arthur Hayes:

I feel buying some Bitcoin doesn’t really solve your problems. If you earn $250,000 a year but suddenly become unemployed and can’t pay off a $750,000 mortgage and $50,000 monthly credit card bills, then Bitcoin can’t help you. Of course, for those who accumulate Bitcoin over a long term, it is indeed a great asset, and I believe Bitcoin's price will continue to rise in the long term. But for those who once felt wealthy but now find themselves in trouble, Bitcoin won’t suddenly fix their financial problems. They may realize they have been spending too much money to maintain their so-called “ideal lifestyle” each month.

I believe Bitcoin is more suitable for those with idle capital who can recognize it might be a solution. If you belong to those who might be replaced by AI or economic changes, you need to rethink your lifestyle and spending structure. For example, reassess whether you really need those expensive consumer electronics or if you need to live in high-cost cities or communities. As the saying goes, “The early seller does the best.” When people start realizing they need to cut back on spending, who will take over these expensive properties? If your income drops from $250,000 to $75,000, you may find yourself having to make significant adjustments to your lifestyle.

Natalie Brunell: Even so, among all possible solutions or “lifebuoys,” don’t you think people's choices are very limited? If someone is living paycheck to paycheck, and their job stability is deteriorating with no assets and facing the risk of being eliminated, what could possibly help them in such circumstances?

Arthur Hayes:

To be honest, I have never been in such a situation myself, so I can only try to analyze it from the outside. But I believe the most important thing is to examine your living costs and try to minimize unnecessary expenses. For instance, think about what things you truly don’t need. In the past, you might have been used to shop around casually on Amazon, but now you may need to lean towards more economical options. The key is to swiftly adjust your financial situation so that when a crisis truly arises, you are prepared and can better find new paths.

What do Bitcoin investors expect from the market?

Natalie Brunell: I’ve encountered some investors who only got involved with Bitcoin at the peak of the last bull market. They entered when Bitcoin prices reached $50,000 or even $60,000. Now they feel very frustrated as they experienced substantial price fluctuations, even crashes, compounded by the overall collapse of the crypto market. They feel their investments haven’t delivered any life-changing returns.

These people often say, “This hasn’t changed anything for me.” Sometimes I wonder, what can I say to them to uplift them and encourage them to continue accumulating Bitcoin through dollar-cost averaging? After all, for them, this investment hasn’t brought about any substantial change in their wealth. They may feel that all opportunities have passed, and those who entered early, such as those who bought Bitcoin or participated in mining before 2017, managed to accumulate a significant amount of Bitcoin through ordinary income. Now, this opportunity seems nonexistent. They might wonder, what can they still accumulate now?

Arthur Hayes:

I think the first thing is to adjust your expectations. Whether you buy Bitcoin, stocks, or real estate, the nature of the market is not to help you make money; its essence is actually to take your money. If your investment duration is too short while your expectations are too high, then you’ll take risks or even use leverage because you are eager to profit quickly. You may think, “I need to leverage up to make money faster because this is a transformative asset.”

But have you ever thought about how those you see on TikTok making money off Bitcoin survived in the beginning? How did they feel when Bitcoin fell from $250 to $70 in 2013? How did they hold on when Bitcoin dropped from $1,300 to $135 in 2014? Many only see how much those people make today but fail to realize that Bitcoin's volatility was three to four times higher in its early days than it is now. If you bought $10,000 worth of Bitcoin at $100, you might have sold it when it reached $200 or panicked and sold at $99 due to disappointment because it didn't meet your short-term price expectations.

So, what I want to say is, Bitcoin will not immediately rescue your financial situation; its value lies more in long-term accumulation. As people say, “Stocks are the best choice for long-term investment,” this saying also applies to Bitcoin. Compounding and time are the most powerful forces in capital accumulation, but the key is time. If you can persist over the long term and continue investing, Bitcoin may help you accumulate wealth exponentially.

However, if you expect the market or some asset to bring “life-changing” returns in just six months, that expectation isn’t realistic. Certainly, you might see some people get rich overnight due to luck, but I bet they will likely lose all the money they earned in the following six months because they will continue to believe they can achieve the same fortune through risky trading strategies.

Bitcoin in China: Current Situation and Future

Natalie Brunell: What is the adoption and investment attitude towards Bitcoin like in your area, or in places like China? Because I've heard varying reports.

Arthur Hayes:

In fact, the Chinese government and some local governments are still engaged in Bitcoin mining. If you look at the IP data of the Bitcoin network, you will find that China's hash rate contribution still accounts for 20% to 30% of the global total. As for why China shut down most non-government-related mines, it’s primarily due to adjustments in energy policy. Particularly in the context of the ongoing war between the US, Israel, and Iran, China does not want to depend on imported oil or other hydrocarbon energy sources. The government wants to allocate energy resources to endeavors more aligned with national long-term development goals, such as producing electric vehicles (EVs), batteries, humanoid robots, etc., rather than for mining Bitcoin.

This is one of the important reasons why the Communist Party of China is pushing for the exit of Bitcoin mining, as they believe mining consumes a massive amount of energy without directly contributing to the country's economic goals. That said, there’s still a lot of idle energy resources within China, allowing some smaller local governments to “quietly” continue Bitcoin mining under the central government's scrutiny. Thus, there are still many large mining farms operating in China, which are usually linked to local or central government entities.

So overall, while China nominally bans Bitcoin mining, the situation is not entirely straightforward.

How do governments view Bitcoin?

Natalie Brunell: I suspect the Chinese government has likely accumulated a considerable amount of Bitcoin at the national level, which might also be one reason the US is reluctant to disclose how much Bitcoin we actually hold. Perhaps this relates to our confrontational relationship with China. What impact would it have if China held more Bitcoin than the US?

Arthur Hayes:

Maybe, but I’m not sure. However, I think focusing on how much Bitcoin a sovereign nation holds is not particularly meaningful. Even if we assume that China holds 200,000 Bitcoins, the value of those Bitcoins might be worth billions, but compared to the gold market, this scale is still relatively small. The gold market itself remains small compared to the dollar stock market or the real estate market. Thus, I don’t think either the US or Chinese government would lose sleep over how much Bitcoin they hold; from the perspective of national wealth's overall scale, Bitcoin's impact is far from significant.

Natalie Brunell: So do you disagree with Max Keiser, who argues there may be a so-called “hash war” in the future, where governments will compete for Bitcoin mining power and try to accumulate as much Bitcoin as possible?

Arthur Hayes:

I do not agree with this view. I believe sove

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。