Organized & Compiled: Shenchao TechFlow

Guest: Dan Matuszewski (Co-founder of CMS Holdings, former head of Circle Trade)

Host: The Rollup Team (Robbie and co-host)

Podcast Source: The Rollup

Broadcast Date: September 15, 2026

Duration: About 41 minutes

Assets: Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Zcash (ZEC), Gold, Hyperliquid (HYPE), NEAR, Monad, Chainlink (LINK), Robinhood Chain (tokenized stocks), etc.

Disclosure: Dan Matuszewski is the co-founder of CMS Holdings, and CMS holds positions or investments in multiple assets mentioned in this episode including BTC, ETH, ZEC, HYPE, Monad, Chainlink, etc.; all opinions in this episode are his personal judgments and do not constitute investment advice. Please verify any specific multiples, target prices, and figures back to the original show.

Key Points Summary

• The barbell strategy is the winning approach this round: One end consists of value storage assets highly correlated with macro factors (BTC, ZEC, Gold, ETH), which are highly sensitive to events like CPI (hot CPI → BTC rises about 10%, ZEC surges); the other end consists of on-chain businesses that can continue to print money and return it to holders through buybacks/dividends (like HYPE, etc.). Build positions in only these two buckets in the spot market, consider reducing positions during speculative phases.
• But crowding is the biggest risk: This "hard currency + on-chain cash flow" narrative has been repeated by everyone into the same tune. Once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage is squeezed out; analogous to 2021 when everyone heavily invested in "that basket" and then violently deleveraged, Solana returned but 2/3 of the other positions dropped to zero. The crypto market is a pool of funds, without a structural continuous inflow like the stock market’s retirement funds, the most crowded assets plunge the hardest during overall contraction.
• The next marginal buyer: Crypto-native/liquidity funds have completed about half of their positions, followed by high-net-worth individuals allocated through ETFs, larger Wall Street institutions, and retail traders driven by FOMO + social trading. Institutions placing these types of assets on balance sheets is currently "mostly a joke," but this represents a huge tailwind for the coming years.
• The value of L1 comes from "monetary quality": Native assets become useful within the system, resulting in value accumulation: BNB (IEO), ETH (ICO→DeFi), Solana (reserve currency for memes). Monad's only risk is running out of money before completing iterations; ETH, due to its decentralized belief, is reluctant to pick winners and may suffer in the long run.
• Tokenized stocks will outperform stablecoins: Many people in the world simply cannot buy US stocks, and tokenization = non-nominal assets, extends "exporting US wealth creation." Early beneficiaries may not be obvious, but the L1, oracle, and issuers carrying them will reap dividends first.
• Social trading is encroaching on gambling: FOMO/Pump.fun replaces sports betting, casinos, and perpetual contract trading, it's not investment; if you enter, you should expect to lose money.

Notable Insights Summary

• On the barbell: “My bull market approach is the barbell: one end is hard currency highly correlated with macro trends, the other end is on-chain businesses that can keep printing money and returning it to holders.”
• On crowding: “This has already been repeated by everyone into the same narrative. It doesn't mean it's wrong, but once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage is squeezed out.”
• On institutions: “Saying any large institutions are really putting this kind of asset on their balance sheets is basically still a joke. Other than IBIT, there’s hardly any.”
• On tokenized stocks: “Tokenized stocks will head north for many years, and I believe they will be bigger than stablecoins.”
• On ETH: “Oh, this makes me extremely bullish on ETH; there's a reason they have value.”
• On social trading: “Social trading is essentially encroaching on existing forms of gambling elsewhere. You should expect to lose money when you get involved.”

Main Text

1. CPI and Macro: Noise Dominates the Period, Don’t Be Driven by Fearful Trading

The CPI data was released on the day of the show. Dan mentioned that the data was basically in line with expectations: “Hot, but not as hot as imagined,” and the market breathed a sigh of relief.

Host: It now feels like external forces are dominating the market, and we seem to have no advantage.

Dan: This kind of macro data vacuum is the hardest; you are being led by a pile of information where you don't have an advantage, and the market is highly tense for no good reason. The upcoming election cycle will continue to dominate headlines, and this external drive will take over for a while. Interestingly, it used to be "buy the expectation, sell the facts," but now it’s more like reverse fear marketing: bad news is pre-loaded, and when the event actually occurs, it's often not as bad as originally feared, and prices go up. Only fear holds the market down before the event drops.

Host: It used to feel like funding rates were a good emotional indicator, but now it seems to have malfunctioned.

Dan: Yes. When BitMEX dominated, negative funding rates meant you mindlessly went long, and annualized over 30% meant you mindlessly went short, it was a "mindless signal." But now looking at the overall open interest, once the total open interest of altcoins exceeds that of Bitcoin, it means the speculative environment has switched, and money begins to seek excess returns in high beta. This is more suitable than the funding rate for now.

2. Where to Find Signals: Winner Baskets, Stock Market, DAT, and the "10 Day Rule"

Dan: I look at two proxy indicators. One is the outperforming basket (HYPE, NEAR, ZEC, Fartcoin, etc.); as long as they are still being bought on dips, and the intensity is still there, it indicates that money is still flowing in. The second is the stock market, as the short-term crypto market is still driven by the stock market.

Host: Why can't the crypto market sustain itself?

Dan: Because there isn't enough independent cash flow within the crypto market. Without large-scale fundraising for new funds, without a lot of new money continuously coming in, retail investors come and go quickly, and there hasn’t been sustained net inflow for a long time. Therefore, the market can’t “self-sustain”: if the stock market drops 10%, relying entirely on the crypto market's inflow can’t hold it up.

Another tail worth noting is DAT (Digital Asset Treasury Companies). If the market stabilizes, they should have beta as the market rises; but the problem is they also have beta in downtrends, so a real good signal is: they stabilize first, and then start trading at a premium while continuously raising funds to buy underlying assets.

Host: Speaking of DAT, Tom Lee's "10 Day Rule" is interesting: since 2014, the best performing 10 days each year have accounted for 162% of the market's returns, while the remaining 355 days have averaged a 14% decline per year.

Dan: I completely agree with this framework. The conclusion is: you should be present (hold assets). Don't be obsessed with catching the precise bottom. Most of the market's returns come from those few days, and many people fall apart mentally due to not participating. In the long run, just holding onto your assets is far more important than attempting to trade every independent fluctuation.

3. Barbell Strategy: Hard Currency + On-Chain Printer

Host: We reduced our positions early last year, taking about a 20% drawdown, but avoided the worst period. Later, we slowly developed a combination theory: the winning combination for this bull market is the "barbell."

Dan: Right, I agree with this framework, there's nothing wrong with it.

Host: One end of the barbell is value storage assets highly correlated with macro factors (BTC, ZEC, Gold), ETH can also be included. On the day CPI was hot, BTC rose about 10% and ZEC surged, which represents the depreciation side of your fiat currency. The other end consists of those on-chain businesses that continuously print money and return it to holders (or do buybacks), like HYPE. We started building positions in HYPE, ZEC, and Venice early on, many of which we still hold today. Build positions in these two buckets in the spot market, consider reducing positions during speculative phases.

Dan: My addition is: beware of "crowding." This narrative has already been repeated by everyone. It's not wrong, and it's moved forward, but once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage starts to get squeezed out. That's the only thing to be cautious about.

4. Crowding Risks: When Everyone Repeats the Same Narrative, the Advantage is Gone

Host: Is this crowding in the mid-cycle or late-cycle?

Dan: That's where the money is, but you’re asking about the fund manager question; I’m just a podcaster (laughs). However, looking back at history, in 2021 everyone treated "that basket" as the future, and the result was violent deleveraging; Solana came back later, but 2/3 of the other positions practically went to zero. The crypto market doesn't have structural continuous inflows like the stock market (which depends on money flowing into it through a whole suite of retirement products). This asset class in crypto will expand or contract with inflows/outflows; it’s a "trapped pool of funds." So once everyone crowds into the same thing and then the overall shrinks, those most crowded assets will plunge the hardest.

Host: Does that mean we should go buy “second-tier” assets that have not risen?

Dan: That’s very risky. Logically, when the first tier rises too much, funds will overflow into those which have not run (for example, Lighter, Hyperliquid, etc.). But that’s not the game to play, essentially you are betting on where the next marginal funds will go. I suggest not doing that. Moreover, as this rotation becomes more frequent, it in itself is a signal that the cycle is getting later.

5. The Next Marginal Buyer: From Crypto-Native to Institutions

Host: I think the next wave of marginal buyers is more likely FOMO and social trading, rather than dinosaur coins. First, about "the next marginal buyer": how much off-exchange capital do crypto-native and liquidity funds have left?

Dan: It's hard to gauge accurately. Crypto Twitter is loud; some people do have large positions, but there’s still a huge amount of capital that is not participating there. Having done off-exchange trading for 4 to 5 years (having experienced the most intense bull market in 2017), I know that the amounts being moved by people you don't even recognize far exceed the "visible" trading volumes you see daily. So don't be fooled by the traffic on Twitter into thinking that’s the real flow of funds.

Host: What about institutional adoption?

Dan: Saying there are any large institutions really putting this kind of asset on their balance sheets is still largely a joke. Other than IBIT, there’s hardly any. Traditional large fund players have yet to enter. The only one that has truly broken through that barrier is BTC. But this also means there’s still a long tailwind ahead, and the inflow is a slow variable over many years.

Host: So what does the profile of marginal buyers look like?

Dan: My ranking is: crypto-native/liquidity funds are still constructing positions through FOMO (I think about half is complete); then smart high-net-worth individuals allocate through ETFs; down further are larger Wall Street institutional fund players; finally, retail investors come in through FOMO and social trading, rather than dinosaur coins.

6. ETH, Solana, and the "Monetary Quality" of L1

Host: You said to include ETH and Solana in the barbell, but these two areas we haven't quite sorted out before. Additionally, people's opinions change very quickly: two years ago, everyone said “only hold Solana.”

Dan: Yes, opinions shift quickly. But your mention of "not finding investment logic" actually suggests it is not crowded; if no one can clearly explain "why it should be held," it often tends to be worth watching. Let me break it down: these L1 native assets become "useful" within the system, thus gaining value accumulation. BNB relies on IEO (you have to use BNB), ETH relies on ICO to DeFi (you are the base asset within the system), and Solana relies on becoming a meme trading reserve currency with a lot of assets locked in pools. These L1s have a large "surface area" that makes native assets extremely useful, and what you are essentially buying is that.

Host: Oh, this makes me extremely bullish on ETH; there's a reason for its value.

Dan: I completely agree, I just couldn't articulate it before. As for Monad, I'm optimistic because the team will continue to iterate until they establish a value capture mechanism for the token, and they will keep iterating. The only risk is running out of money before accomplishing that. Other L1/L2 follow the same logic: the risks are either that the founders get tired and stop, or they really run out of money. The long-term value proposition of Solana largely depends on Toly (Anatoly Yakovenko, co-founder and CEO of Solana) still tirelessly iterating.

Host: ETH seems to be overly focused on decentralization and unwilling to pick winners?

Dan: Yes, this has backfired on it. In contrast, the market is increasingly able to accept centralization; for example, Hyperliquid has only 24 nodes, and people seem to accept that well. ETH's "identity crisis" lies in the fact that it originally built everything, but no one is truly using it, thus shifting towards stablecoins, tokenized assets, perpetual contracts, and prediction markets, most of which were born from that "identity crisis." Whether infrastructure layers (cross-chain bridges, ZK, intents, with market caps of 50 million to 1.5 billion dollars and not profitable) can survive depends on the team's willingness to keep transforming, such as Ondo switching overnight from impermanent loss hedging to doing RWA.

7. Tokenized Stocks: A Narrative Bigger than Stablecoins

Host: Pairing memes with stocks on Robinhood is a terrible idea: just as we enter traditional finance, we act like children, ruining our reputation.

Dan: Right, don’t do that. But tokenized stocks will "head north for many years." The reason isn’t just trading convenience (you and I can directly open a brokerage account to buy), but because there are many people globally who simply cannot buy US stocks; just like Tether, you might look at its nominal value and think “I can just use Venmo,” but there are a lot of people in the world who want dollars but can’t hold them; similarly, there are far more people wanting to buy Nvidia for various reasons than you might think. Tokenizing it and turning it into a non-nominal asset has tremendous power, and the same goes for American companies; it opens up a whole capital base without having to give governance rights.

Host: So this is "exporting wealth creation"?

Dan: Exactly. The US exports dollars, and now it’s turning the financial market into an export product. Look at the Chinese version of the S&P 500, which has basically been flat for the past 20 years; holding American companies is the compound growth machine. Tokenized stocks will open up the global capital base for American companies, and their scale will surpass that of stablecoins. However, after Robinhood chains went online, trading volume has stagnated, and sustainability is in question.

Host: So from the 35 billion dollars in on-chain tokenized assets, who benefits?

Dan: That’s a good question and the big money's destination, but the answer isn’t clear early on. The L1 that carries them will benefit, oracles (like Chainlink) will also have value, and some issuers have already gone public and can be invested in. Currently, those truly benefitting from "legalization" are companies that have been in the CFTC Innovation Advisory Committee and were mentioned by Trump (like Hyperliquid). L1 may also benefit again from trillions of assets going on-chain (stablecoins, short-term government bonds, money market funds, stocks), leading to increased activity, TVL, fees, profitability, and buybacks. But the question always remains: who can outperform?

8. Social Trading and Meme: What's Being Encroached is Gambling, Not Investment

Host: I gave a few friend gamblers $400–500 each in memes, and some accounts have already quadrupled. I set rules for them: don’t add capital, always sell, leave one waiting position for growth, rotate small cap profits to build a base in large caps, treat it as a portfolio rather than a one-off.

Dan: Social trading is essentially encroaching on existing forms of gambling elsewhere: sports betting, casinos, and even many perpetual contracts trading are gambling themselves. It is a substitute for these games. FOMO/Pump.fun extracts more from users, and the odds of winning are slightly higher than sports betting, resembling lotteries/mutual betting more. You should expect to lose money in both, the only difference being which one takes less.