资深分析师对谈：鲍威尔离任，沃什接任对加密意味着什么？

Compiled & Edited by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Guest: Noelle Acheson

Host: Steve Ehrlich

Podcast Source: Unchaind

Original Title: Powell Is Out, Warsh Is In: What It Means for Crypto

Air Date: May 22

Editor's Introduction

Former IMF Chief Economist Gita Gopinath's "Bliss Trade" (Big, Lasting, and Sustained Stimulus) is replacing the "Taco Trade" as the underlying logic of the market. This structural expectation of fiscal backstops, transcending parties and political systems, forms the true moat for current risk asset valuations and the core rationale for currency debasement trades.

Noelle Acheson, author of the "Crypto is Macro Now" newsletter, offers three core judgments in this podcast: First, the current extreme divergence between stocks and bonds sees the bond market pricing global tightening while the stock market is driven by AI hype, similar to the divergence between the S&P 500 equal-weight and market-cap-weighted indices before the 1999 dot-com bubble. Second, while Powell's defense of Fed independence during his tenure should be acknowledged, one must not forget his role in the closure of Silvergate and the debanking of crypto companies in 2023. Third, inflation will not fall quickly; even if the Hormuz crisis ends tomorrow, energy price transmission and consumer expectations will take months to repair. Furthermore, rising inflation predates Trump's tariffs, driven by the long-term trend of deglobalization.

Key Takeaways

Stock-Bond Divergence, "Bliss Trade," and Systemic Vulnerability

• "Global bond yields are rising. This is global tightening, which is not good for markets. But equities always march to a different drumbeat. That's not new. What's new is the *magnitude* of this divergence. It's startlingly large."
• "Bond markets are traditionally called 'smart money' because they look at macro data, narratives, and trends; while equities get swept up in various hype cycles. The situation now is equities follow the hype, bonds follow the macro indicators. They're telling completely different stories, but they don't need to be the same either."
• "The Bliss Trade is structural, unlike the Taco Trade which is limited to the Trump term. It means no government today will choose *not* to bail out people when they are in trouble – be it a market crash, a banking crisis, or high oil prices. This has nothing to do with political party, or even whether it's a democracy. We've seen it too many times south of the equator."
• "'Backstop' is now part of the system. This, of course, adds another layer of vulnerability. It's also one reason why risk appetite remains so strong even in such an uncertain environment."
• "Historically, market tops are often triggered by a mega-sized IPO."
• "The contrarian indicator I'm most focused on right now is everyone cheering the S&P 500 hitting new highs while ignoring the widening gap between the S&P 500 and the equal-weight index. The last time it widened this fast was in 1999. Anything top-heavy, according to the laws of physics, will eventually topple."

Inflation Won't Fall Quickly

• "I have to push back on an assumption. Inflation hasn't actually been falling as much as people think. Since 2024, core CPI has been moving sideways between 2.6% and 3%. It hasn't declined at all."
• "The real reason for rising inflation is deglobalization. This trend predates even the Trump administration; it started during Biden's term. Trump is just accelerating it, supercharging it. Tariffs are oscillating wildly, the Hormuz crisis is lighting another match underneath, but the underlying trend was already there."
• "Even if the Hormuz crisis ends tomorrow, it takes time for energy prices to fall back down. It takes even longer for that to transmit to inflation indices and expectations. So this inflation story, regardless of what happens with Hormuz, is not ending in the short term."
• "A 3% target would have been the rational one. Many Fed officials privately think so. But they can't change the target because a large part of what the Fed does is manage trust. If they changed the goal, it tells the market 'we can't make our original target,' and the entire trust system of the Fed would be damaged."

Assessing Powell's Tenure

• "Powell looks like the grandfatherly guy you'd go get a marshmallow latte with. But we can't forget he was the driving force behind the debanking of crypto companies, the mastermind behind the shutdown of Silvergate and the events of March 2023. He also completely misjudged inflation."
• "The term 'independence' itself deserves scrutiny. He deserves credit for fighting back when the DOJ subpoenas came in. But on shutting down crypto-related banking, there was no independent thinking whatsoever; it was politically influenced. Does independence mean no accountability for decisions? Does it mean ignoring subpoenas?"
• "He wants to shrink the balance sheet, but the market won't let him. It's that simple. The bond market is the boss here. The Fed cannot allow disorder in the Treasury market because that impacts the dollar and price stability. So he can wish, but it won't happen. I also wish I were a professional pianist, but that's not happening either."

The Cost of Bitcoin's Macro Assetization and the Prospects for the Clarity Act

• "Bitcoin is a hedge against currency debasement. When Bitcoin surged during the 2023 banking crisis, everyone said 'because people realize the banking system is corrupt and fragile.' I said no. It's because people expected central banks to step in and print money. That's what Bitcoin truly reacts to."
• "Bitcoin becoming a macro asset is a good thing, but it has a cost. It's now just one macro asset among many. And investors seeking volatility will choose higher-beta assets, which currently isn't Bitcoin. There are countless AI concepts to trade, prediction markets... too many toys to play with."
• "Even if the Clarity Act passes this year, its impact on Bitcoin will be minor. Bitcoin doesn't lack regulatory clarity. The real beneficiary is ETH. And when ETH goes up, it usually pulls Bitcoin up too because they often move in the same direction."
• "What worries me is the detail around the innovation exemption. If it allows third parties to issue tokens wrapping a company's stock without its knowledge or consent, that's purely a speculative derivatives market, not a capital formation market. That goes against the fundamental purpose of a market and is harmful to crypto's already existing 'pure speculation' stigma."

Steve Ehrlich: Hello everyone. Welcome to Bits and Bips, where we explore the intersection of macro and crypto. I'm Steve Ehrlich, Head of Research at SharpLink, and your host for today. This is going to be a great episode. There's a lot happening in the macro world. Stocks and bonds are moving in completely opposite directions. Crypto is caught in the middle. A new Fed Chair takes office tomorrow, and there's much more to discuss.

Let me introduce our guest. She previously worked at Genesis, served as Head of Research at CoinDesk, and is currently the author of the highly influential newsletter "Crypto is Macro Now." Noelle Acheson. Noelle, welcome.

Noelle Acheson: Hi Steve. Great to be talking to you again.

Steve Ehrlich: How are you doing today?

Noelle Acheson: I'm still recovering from the nearly 35-degree Celsius heat in Philadelphia. It's so hot for May.

Steve Ehrlich: I get it. You'll probably have to get used to this weather going forward. Like many of our viewers today, I'm trying to figure out what's happening in the markets. As I mentioned at the start, equities are still strong.

Noelle Acheson: Yes, but some warning signals are starting to appear.

Steve Ehrlich: Right. Nvidia delivered another fantastic earnings report, but the market reaction was muted. Meanwhile, there's significant fear in the bond market. Yields on the 10-year and 30-year are rising – a trend you've been watching closely. To make matters worse, we got our first inflation data since the outbreak of the Iran war. No one is sure what happens next. Powell steps down as Fed Chair on Thursday, though he'll remain on the Board and vote, at least for the foreseeable future. Crypto is caught in this too. Bitcoin rallied to the $80k-$83k range, and ETH surged to the $2400 range, but both have pulled back.

So let's take it one by one. First question: How do you interpret the fear in the bond market? Yields are being pushed higher; 10-year and 30-year yields are up. To me, these are worrying signals, but the stock market is largely unfazed.

Stock-Bond Divergence and the Bond Market's "Smart Money" Narrative

Noelle Acheson: You're right. These are indeed worrying signals, and they are global warning signals. Global bond yields are rising. This is global tightening, and it's not good for markets. But equities always march to a different drumbeat. That's not new. What's new is the *magnitude* of this divergence.

You might remember that everyone used to love the 60/40 portfolio. The theory was that stocks and bonds would move inversely. We are seeing that inverse movement now, but the magnitude is staggering.

The stock market is currently driven by some endogenous, temporary factors – mainly enthusiasm for AI. Just look at the performance of the chip sector. Meanwhile, the bond market is looking at the macro outlook, the future. Bond markets are traditionally called "smart money" because they focus purely on macro data, narratives, and trends. The stock market can get swept up in various hype cycles, and these cycles are becoming more frequent.

So the situation today is that equities follow the hype – which may have some basis or not, we can discuss that later – and bonds follow the macro indicators. And the macro indicators don't look good right now. That's why the two drumbeats are telling completely different stories. But they don't need to be the same either.

Steve Ehrlich: Let's talk about those macro indicators. Everyone is focused on the inflation data. PPI (Producer Price Index) is also starting to tick up. What else are you seeing, and how do you interpret these inflation signals? I don't want to use the word "transitory," but theoretically, if the Strait reopens, or if the Iran issue gets resolved, the energy market should at least return to its pre-strike levels from February 28th, and things should calm down.

Noelle Acheson: Things will calm down, at least on the oil price front. But that doesn't mean inflation will immediately fall back, for two reasons. First, the transmission of inflation is slow. We've already seen some uptick in the core indices the Fed watches, but not much, because oil, while it affects everything, takes time to transmit through the economy.

Second, we will see increased volatility in expectations. This is very interesting, particularly in the US economy. Gasoline prices have a huge impact on inflation expectations. Seeing the numbers tick up at the gas station feels like money being drained directly from your bank account. So even if gasoline doesn't enter core inflation, consumers already feel inflation is rising. This affects their expectations, which then alters their behavior, and eventually impacts actual inflation.

So, even if the Hormuz crisis ended tomorrow, it would take a considerable amount of time for energy prices to fall. It would take even longer for that to transmit to inflation indices and expectations. In other words, this inflation story is not ending in the short term, regardless of what happens with Hormuz, because this isn't new. Inflation was building up even before the Hormuz crisis.

Steve Ehrlich: Can you elaborate on that? I know you're in Spain, so you have a European perspective; I'm American. Since inflation fell from its post-COVID peak, the Fed has been raising rates to push it down. It hasn't reached the 2% target, but it has been declining. What do you mean it was "building up" all along?

Noelle Acheson: I have to push back on an assumption. It hasn't been falling like you think it has. Look at the chart from 2024 onwards. Core CPI has been moving sideways between 2.6% and 3%. It hasn't been falling at all.

In fact, a year, maybe a year and a half ago, many people were already saying, "Okay, the inflation story is over. The disinflation process is done. We'll move sideways here for a while and then move up." Why did they expect inflation to go up? Because of the deglobalization trend. This trend predates even the Trump administration. It started during Biden's term. So it's a long-term trend. Trump is just accelerating it, supercharging it. Tariffs are oscillating wildly, tariff rebate situations are still unclear, but prices have already moved up due to tariffs. The Hormuz crisis is lighting another match underneath. But honestly, if you look at the chart, inflation hasn't been falling for a long time.

Steve Ehrlich: You're right. I remember there were discussions about whether the Fed's 2% target should be raised, perhaps recalibrating the neutral rate.

Noelle Acheson: 3% would have been the rational target. Many people discuss this, even many Fed officials privately think so. But they cannot change the target. The fundamental problem for the Fed is credibility. A large part of what the Fed does is manage trust. If they suddenly say, "We can't reach 2%, so we're changing the target," they are damaging market trust in the Fed's ability to achieve its own goals.

Steve Ehrlich: Understood. We'll come back to the Fed and the issue of trust in about ten minutes.

From Taco Trade to Structural Backstop Expectations

Steve Ehrlich: I want to push a bit further on this "irresistible force vs. immovable object" dynamic between stocks and bonds. In your newsletter this week, you pointed to an interesting opinion piece by a former IMF Deputy Director about the so-called "Bliss Trade." It might be a more sustainable extension of the Taco Trade, belonging to the same family as the Fed put. I read a book a few months ago about the rise of the carry trade. Its thesis was that there will always be a market backstop, and this expectation was turbocharged during COVID when global central banks had to flood the system to support the shut-down economy. Can you explain this Bliss Trade? Which side do you think breaks first?

Noelle Acheson: The Bliss Trade comes from a very interesting opinion piece in the FT a few weeks ago, written by Gita Gopinath, former IMF Chief Economist and Deputy Director, now a Harvard professor. You have to read the article through the lens of her background at the IMF, but she makes a brilliant point: The market's expectation of a "backstop," a "safety net," is no longer just the Taco Trade. The Taco Trade is certainly part of it. Trump has provided countless events leading the market