对话宏观分析师：AI吸干美股全部流动性，比特币4万才是底部

Organized & Compiled: Deep Tide TechFlow
Guest: Luke Groman, founder of FFT LC, institutional macro strategist
Podcast Source: Coin Stories
Original Title: The $40K Bitcoin Bottom Coming?
Broadcast Date: June 5, 2026

Key Takeaways
US long-term Treasury futures have depreciated 90% against gold over the past 10 years, while GDP is still growing – meaning 90% is not enough. This is the wake-up call from Luke Groman, founder of FFT LC and a macro strategist with 30 years of experience on Wall Street, to all investors.
In this conversation, he lays out a stark yet self-consistent analytical framework: on the surface, the S&P 500 keeps hitting new highs, but it’s actually driven by just seven AI stocks alone. Meanwhile, Bitcoin, "the last smoke alarm for liquidity," is sounding a warning.
If you want to know why Groman sold most of his Bitcoin near the top and hasn’t bought back in, why he thinks stocks will continue to rise in dollar terms but fall in gold and Bitcoin terms, and why technical indicators point to a potential Bitcoin retracement to the $40,000 range, this podcast is worth a listen.

Highlights & Insights
Why hasn’t Luke Groman bought back Bitcoin yet?
"I bought a little bit, but basically the answer is no. I haven't really bought back in. I didn't sell all of it, but I sold most of it."
"I'm watching. Bitcoin has had a pretty rough time lately."
The Divergence Mystery: Stocks Hit New Highs, Bitcoin Liquidity Dries Up
"Bitcoin is the smoke alarm for liquidity – maybe the last one still working – and it’s telling us something not so good."
"AI is sucking all the oxygen out of the room, sucking all the liquidity. I think that’s happening to Bitcoin too."
The Illusion of Value: How Accounting Boosts AI Valuations
"The faster you build and the less cash flow you have, the higher and faster your reported earnings grow – but you become desperately short of cash."
"Once construction slows down and revenue growth decelerates, the lag effect of amortization will catch up, and then the tables turn."
Dollar-Denominated Rise, Gold and Bitcoin Denominated Fall
"My base case is: stocks go up a lot in dollar terms, but crash in gold and Bitcoin terms."
"Over the past 10 years, US long-term Treasury futures fell 90% against gold, while GDP was still growing – proving that 90% isn’t enough."
China’s Grip on Rare Earths
"Trillions of dollars of US stocks – especially tech, but not only – are all built on rare earths, a commodity with a tiny market size."
"China dominates this field. Why? First, they’ve worked at it for 30 years. Second, they have more engineers than anyone else and fewer environmental regulations."
"The US government is now explicitly stepping into this sector. Historically, when the government gets involved with companies, those companies rarely turn out to be good holdings."
The Strait of Hormuz: America's "Suez Moment"
"My base case is like someone jumping off a 100-story building. Passing the 40th floor, they say, 'Hey, this feels like flying, awesome!' It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop."
"When you face this level of complacency, this level of inventory decline… why isn’t it reopened yet? That’s what keeps surprising us ‘tail risk’ people."
Why is Iran Keeping the Strait of Hormuz Closed?
"Rationing demand through price means recession. That’s what it implies. And it comes with inflation – a stagflationary recession."
"If I were in Iran’s shoes – bombed but still standing, having prepared for this day for 40 years by digging countless tunnels, with far less damage than they think – why reopen?"
Surge in US "Non-Monetary" Gold Exports to China
"For five of the past six months, non-monetary gold was the single largest US export."
"Many Trump supporters cheered 'look how much the trade deficit shrank!' It did shrink, and the biggest marginal change was – gold exports."
Building a "No Ticky, No Washy" Proof-of-Work System
"The world is moving toward a 'no ticky, no washy' system. Meaning: The US wants rare earths? Bring gold, or the next shipment isn't coming. China wants oil? Bring gold, or the next shipment isn't coming."
"No one trusts anyone anymore. In such a world, where do you turn? You can't trust a ledger – you need a trustless way to settle."
When Debt-to-GDP Hits 130%: What Happened in 58 Out of 58 Cases
"Over 150 years, 58 countries hit a debt-to-GDP ratio of 130%. So far, 58 out of 58 defaulted – primarily through a significant period of inflation."
"If AI isn't going to destroy jobs, it’s not the greatest thing since the internet, and it doesn’t deserve these valuations. If it is the greatest thing with justified valuations, then white-collar jobs are about to be decimated – and US employment contributes half of tax revenue."
Are Technical Indicators Pointing to a $40,000 Bitcoin Bottom?
"If you actually buy back in the $40,000 to $50,000 range, you become an epic legend – because you sold near the top."
"They predict a bottom around Q3 or Q4, roughly in the $40,000 range. I genuinely think we might see that level."
Why hasn’t Luke Groman bought back Bitcoin yet?
Host Natalie Brunell: Let’s start with the Bitcoin question everyone cares about: Have you started buying back in, or are you waiting for Bitcoin to drop further? Because its performance has been pretty poor lately.
Luke Groman:
It’s been a rough few days. I bought a tiny bit as a small test position, but basically the answer is: I haven’t really re-entered. I didn't sell my entire position, but I sold most of it. Bitcoin’s recent price action – especially over the past three to four days – has been quite difficult.

The Divergence Mystery: Stocks Hit New Highs, Bitcoin Liquidity Dries Up
Host Natalie Brunell: Can you break down why this is happening? The stock market looks so strong, hitting new all-time highs. It reminds me of the stock market in 2021 – setting new records every other day. Back then, Bitcoin was also performing very well as part of a bull market. So what’s causing this divergence today?
Luke Groman:
I’m not sure, but my working hypothesis is that if you look at the underlying basis of this market rally, it’s not healthy. The indices are at new highs, but it’s essentially seven stocks. I saw a chart yesterday: Excluding AI-related stocks, the S&P 500 is actually slightly down from before the Iran war erupted. I also saw another chart comparing US MSCI to ex-US MSCI Emerging Markets. If you remove TSMC, Samsung, and one other large AI or memory-related company from the EM index – the narrative of EM crushing the US falls apart. Remove those three or four AI-related names, and EM is getting crushed. This is a breadth issue. We’ve heard a lot about market breadth, and I think the breadth underlying the headline index levels is extremely poor. Ultimately, AI is sucking all the oxygen out of the room, sucking up all the liquidity, concentrating it in one sector. I think this is also happening to Bitcoin; it’s a victim of this dynamic. I believe Bitcoin is the smoke alarm for liquidity – perhaps the last one still functional – and it’s telling us something bad is happening. Meanwhile, oil is also absorbing liquidity. The Trump administration, the US, is trying everything to keep oil prices down – mainly through jawboning and SPR releases. But oil has still risen. Since the war started, even at these relatively suppressed levels, it’s up about 50%. So, oil is absorbing liquidity, commodities are absorbing liquidity, and AI is absorbing liquidity. From a liquidity perspective, anything that isn’t one of these three, or directly related, isn’t performing well – flat or down.

The Illusion of Value: How Accounting Boosts AI Valuations
Host Natalie Brunell: Regarding AI companies, it’s interesting: Some call it a bubble, others don’t. Their P/E ratios aren’t that high, unlike the dot-com era. People see more room to run. But I remember you wrote about the accounting issue – pulling demand forward, spending all investment now, while revenue generation takes years. Data centers need years to be built and generate real growth, but the investment is all happening now.
Luke Groman:
The issue isn’t that real growth isn’t happening; it’s more about the accounting treatment. The way accounting works, you book the construction investment upfront, amortize revenue to the front end, and spread the expenses over a longer period. The effect on reported earnings is: The faster you build and the less cash flow you have, the higher and faster your reported earnings grow. But you become desperately short of cash because you are continuously spending, even though book earnings are high.
You can expect to see earnings estimates revised upward and stock prices responding positively. You can also expect them to move from financing with cash to borrowing, to needing to borrow more – and we are already seeing this. The tricky part begins when this construction cycle slows down for any reason – whether it’s supply chain constraints for physical materials, chip supply disruptions, or delays in data center approvals. Whatever the cause, once construction slows, your revenue growth decelerates. Then the lag effect of amortization catches up, and the tables turn. Earnings decelerate significantly or start declining. Much of that decline is non-cash, but meanwhile, you’ll actually see cash flow improve.
So the question becomes: How does the market treat this? Does it say, "Earnings are decelerating, but cash flow is now healthy"? On one hand, these stocks aren’t particularly expensive on a valuation basis, so it doesn't necessarily have to be a disaster. On the other hand, they have huge momentum and are sucking up all the liquidity. If earnings start to decelerate, why would I hold them instead of any other asset that previously had its liquidity sucked away? Will capital start leaving this sector, flowing elsewhere? I suspect the latter is more likely – at that point, they could have a prolonged period of underperformance.
But it also raises a difficult question: When does that deceleration happen? What triggers it? Many different factors could cause it. And there is a complicating factor today that didn’t exist in 1999: Back then, we had a free market. The government wasn’t as involved. It was arguably "peak America." Now, the government is deeply involved. Then, we were a unipolar hegemon; now, we are not – we are in a new great power competition. So, the dot-com bubble burst under its own weight. Today, I would also expect this cycle to collapse or reverse under its own weight at some point. But it won’t be allowed to burst freely because AI has been designated a critical battleground in the great power competition. That’s the tricky part – the government is likely to step in and support it, taking what it thinks are necessary actions to keep this construction boom going. This, in turn, means it will continue to suck oxygen from everything else, creating more problems. There are many things that remind me of 1999-2000, but also some important differences.

Dollar-Denominated Rise, Gold and Bitcoin Denominated Fall
Host Natalie Brunell: A lot of people are saying the stock market will crash soon, that we are near the top. But it sounds like this rally could continue for a while. I know you are cautious on stocks overall. You’ve focused a lot on gold and infrastructure. Do you think gold and Bitcoin prices could be suppressed? For Bitcoiners, I remember you saying it might trade sideways in the $58,000 to $72,000 range for a long time.
Luke Groman:
That comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but I did see logic in it. When you look at what seems to be happening, it appears the US is trying to force a decoupling from China. Politically, they need certain things: a weaker Yen, a weaker Won, to facilitate shifting production capacity out of China; a weaker Dollar to boost manufacturing reshoring. All of this should, in essence, be very bullish for gold and Bitcoin. However, there are domestic forces in the US that don’t want this, because a rise in gold and Bitcoin sends a signal to the world: "You’re just printing money recklessly." This creates problems in funding the bond market, especially given the 10-year yield movements since the war started.
I think their method of managing this will be to expand the derivatives market, similar to what was historically done with gold. I don’t think they can do this to Bitcoin in the long term; but in the short term, they can amplify derivatives. Someone mentioned a few months ago that a lot of call options were being sold – essentially passive shorting. You are meeting demand: people want Bitcoin exposure, but instead of buying Bitcoin, they buy call options. Without these derivatives, the only way to have exposure is to buy Bitcoin. Now, you can buy derivatives, making things loose and murky. In the long run, this doesn't matter, but in the short term, it works – depending on how policymakers want to manage the surface numbers. They can manage appearances in the short term, but not over the long term.
Host Natalie Brunell: Does the stock market need to crash first for gold to take off? Or is there a scenario where all assets rise together, and Bitcoin rejoins the rally? Or is it a zero-sum game where one crashes while the other soars?
Luke Groman:
My inference is: <