Author: NextGen Digital Venture

Manlin, the host of Tiger Securities' "Little Tiger Interview," converses with Jason Huang, founding partner of NDV. The discussion ranges from changes in investment experience and methods to digital assets, global macroeconomics, AI research tools, and personal feelings about managing funds. Below, we summarize the themes, with viewpoints and examples organized based on this interview.

This interview focuses on how Jason forms investment judgments and how he changes them when new evidence emerges. Throughout the discussion of GBTC, agricultural products, MSTR, and AI, he repeatedly questions three issues: is there support behind the price, do I understand it deeply enough, and can I bear the time it takes for the judgment to materialize.

1. Expanding from Bitcoin to Global Macro

Initially engaged in primary market investments, Jason later managed family office funds and established NDV in 2023. Discussing the changes after managing funds, he first mentions a gradual shift from buying and holding to considering both long and short positions; secondly, from Bitcoin-related assets to expanding into commodities like gold and oil.

This change has two layers of reasoning. On one hand, he believes that different assets do not have synchronized cycles, and a broader research scope can increase options and help smooth volatility. On the other hand, as Bitcoin scales up, expecting the same multiple returns as before might take longer. His long-term view on Bitcoin hasn't changed, but he has begun to compare other opportunities more seriously.

Reflecting on early investments, he admits that a significant portion of the gains came from the market itself rising. Tool selection and active judgment contributed, but he cannot attribute all the results in favorable conditions to personal ability. What he cares more about is whether the original methods can still work when the market is unfriendly.

2. The Discount on GBTC Leads Him to Look for Support Beyond Price

After the FTX turmoil, Jason noticed that trusts like GBTC, which hold Bitcoin, had a significant discount between their trading price and the underlying asset value. Manlin's key question is: does the cheapness stem from panic, or has the market already sensed uncovered risks?

Jason recalls that, at the time, factors that helped build his confidence included third-party audits and the team's verification of the on-chain wallets associated with Grayscale. He attempted to determine the existence of the underlying assets, how much could be verified, and then measured whether the price left room for residual uncertainty. The focus here is on finding verifiable support rather than simply defining cheap based on price drops.

This also shaped his understanding of “non-consensus”: when the market is extremely pessimistic, one must find clear bases to justify a differing viewpoint. A direction being unpopular is not enough in itself.

3. Extreme Relative Prices Must Return to Numbers

When discussing oil and silver, Jason uses the relative prices of the two assets to explain his research methodology. He first observes if their price relationship deviates from historical norms, then checks whether supply, demand, and market narratives can explain this gap.

He is particularly cautious about the good news stories that continuously emerge after price increases. Increased utility and strong demand may be true; however, whether they can sufficiently explain substantial short-term price surges still needs to be tested with numbers. In unfamiliar areas, he demands more obvious price deviations to compensate for cognitive shortcomings.

In this methodology, the extreme state of relative prices serves as research clues. Uncommon historical price relationships cannot directly inform when a reversal may occur nor can they substitute for understanding specific assets. The experiences of agricultural products discussed in the interview reveal the difficulties of waiting.

4. Reviewing Agricultural Products: Direction Judgment and the Ability to Wait Are Two Different Matters

Jason previously assessed that rising oil prices would impact agricultural products along the cost chain and participated in related opportunities. According to his reflection, after waiting for several months, he exited the trade, and only then did the expected market changes occur. He describes this experience as “cutting before the dawn.

This reflection does not provide a simplistic answer of “perseverance leads to victory.” Jason instead sees more clearly that familiarity with a field affects one's ability to endure price reversals; for unfamiliar assets, merely having seemingly reasonable reasoning may not be sufficient to sustain a long wait.

His adjustment involves considering both the price tolerance range and the waiting time range simultaneously. How much loss needs reevaluation, and how long to wait if no expected changes arise should all be included in the decision-making process. An instance of misjudgment, reflecting too early, does not mean the constraints at the time were absent.

5. Long-Term Optimism and Trading Expression Can Be Separate

Regarding MSTR, Manlin posed an intuitive question: if one is long-term bullish on Bitcoin, why hold a bearish view on related stocks? Jason's answer is that being bullish on an asset does not mean one must hold a full position at all times; the choice of tools, the price paid, and when to retain cash need to be considered separately.

Reflecting on his changing attitude towards MSTR, he emphasizes that the evidence he focuses on is also changing: signals from the company, cash and payment pressures, and whether the market has already reflected these changes. Risk worsening not being reflected in the price, versus improving financial conditions while the market remains mired in panic, will lead to different judgments.

The key here is retaining the capacity to adjust perspectives when studying a long-term favored asset. Historical cases illustrate his decision-making process but do not constitute a judgment on the current direction of related stocks.

6. Research on Bitcoin is Increasingly Emphasizing the Demand Side

Manlin observes that Jason previously discussed halving and four-year cycles more, but has become increasingly focused on ETFs, institutional funds, and dollar liquidity. Jason explains this shift through changes in supply and demand forces.

In his understanding, as the Bitcoin stock expands, the relative impact of new issuance on the overall market is declining; tools like ETFs allow more traditional financial funds to participate, hence changes on the demand side become more important. He has begun to study Bitcoin within the framework of global assets, currencies, and capital flows.

This does not mean the interview proved the four-year cycle has become ineffective. Jason expresses a shift in research focus and his judgment about Bitcoin's further integration with traditional finance. Broader funding participation, institutional building, and industry trust still require time.

7. The Use of Stablecoins and How Much Shareholders Can Earn Must Be Viewed Separately

Besides Bitcoin, Jason is optimistic about the use of stablecoins in transfers and settlements. He values whether transactions can be faster and cheaper, whether they can support around-the-clock settlements, and further connect tokenized asset transactions. Reducing real transaction costs is an important basis for his judgment on whether a technology can be more widely accepted.

However, when Manlin inquired about which segment long-term profits remain in, his response was more cautious. The distribution of revenues among issuers, banks, and other participants will be influenced by regulatory and business relationships; industry growth does not directly equate to returns for a specific company's shareholders.

Thus, he prefers to analyze stocks in relation to the companies themselves: where their revenue and profits come from, whether future growth is reasonable, and whether current prices are justifiable. For assets like Bitcoin, he takes a greater perspective from supply and demand, relative scale, and potential buyers to understand the price. Though superficially belonging to the same digital asset theme, behind them may lie completely different businesses.

8. After News Comes Out, Price Response Must Be Observed

Discussing regulatory news, Jason emphasizes that he will observe the price response after an event occurs. If the market discusses intensely but the price shows no corresponding change, he will continue to question: has the news already been reflected in advance, and does the actual impact align with the narrative?

This continues a recurring habit from the interview: first understanding the event, then checking what price the market has assigned it. A story making sense does not mean it still contains exploitable price differentials; being bullish on an industry long-term also cannot skip comparisons of tools and valuations.

9. AI Makes Research Quicker but Judgment Still Requires Acceptance of Results Verification

Jason states that his team currently lacks dedicated researchers, and he has used AI to assist in tracking various commodities, filtering extreme cases of relative prices, organizing information, and analyzing option risks. This allows him to access more assets at a lower cost, leaving more time for issues worth deeper investigation.

As obtaining and processing information becomes easier, where do investment advantages still come from? He believes that judgment and choice of opportunities remain important: is the story already reflected in the price, what funding and time constraints are different investors under, and can he understand the reasons behind the price?

On specific tools, he shares his experience of alternating between Claude Code and Codex, using "liberal arts student" and "science student" as metaphors. This discusses personal user experiences. He values whether tools practically solve problems, such as writing, researching, or risk analysis, rather than using new tools for their own sake.

At the same time, he acknowledges that despite heavily using AI, he has not fully participated in related investment opportunities. Insufficient understanding of the hardware and manufacturing segments, as well as concerns over the prices of popular assets, have impacted his level of engagement. He also reminds himself that the success experience gained from familiarity with Bitcoin may create path dependence.

10. Public Expression is a Form of Self-Supervision but Can Also Lead to Internal Strain

Jason discusses his personal program "20 Minutes of Non-Consensus" from the multi-person podcast The Wanderers. He hopes to document his judgments and reflect on them after some time: why he thought that way at the beginning, what later happened, and what needs to be corrected. Continuous writing, communication with investors, and public expression all serve this purpose.

He candidly admits that negative feedback can be upsetting. While public expression is helpful for him, it does not mean there are no emotional costs involved. In terms of time allocation, he increasingly values high-quality information and communication, reducing unnecessary meetings, and focusing his energy on what he considers more valuable activities.

11. Managing Others' Money Amplifies Sense of Responsibility

The pressure brought by managing funds includes ensuring investors are protected during downturns and capitalizing on opportunities during upswings. Jason believes that this sense of responsibility amplifies emotional pressure compared to managing his own money, while also forcing him to establish stronger discipline.

In a rapid-fire Q&A, he chooses Bitcoin over gold on a ten-year scale, also mentioning attention to U.S. Treasury issuance. These answers reflect his personal judgments. The more prominent self-reminder throughout the interview is not to see oneself as “god” when making money: past successes may provide experience, but they can also make it harder to acknowledge new opportunities and one’s own limitations.