#政策监管 Seeing the recent changes in the Fed chair nomination, my thoughts have returned to the moment in 2013 when Bernanke handed over to Yellen. Back then, the market's sensitivity to monetary policy direction was far less intense than it is now. And what happened? The taper tantrum triggered by the QE exit caused a "reduction panic," and the entire crypto market trembled.

This time is different. Trump is considering suing Powell and publicly stating he wants to fire him, while the probability of a Fed chair candidate swinging wildly in a short period—Haskett dropping from a higher position to 44%, Wosh soaring to 33%. What does this reflect? Direct political interference in monetary policy making is becoming more transparent.

I experienced the period before the 2017-2018 regulatory storm, when policy signals were most uncertain. It’s not that bad policies themselves are terrifying, but that in volatile expectations, markets fall into repeated pricing and corrections. The current situation is somewhat similar—who controls the Fed directly determines the liquidity tone for 2025, and this decision-making power is constantly being reassessed.

History shows that during such power transitions, smart people usually do two things: either prepare defenses for the worst-case scenario in advance or wait until the probability actually materializes before acting. It’s still too early to bet on any candidate. The key is to observe the true reactions of the interest rate expectations curve and risk assets—those numbers don’t lie.