I now view macro and bridge “gaps” as pretty much the same: it’s all about whether people are willing to take risks with their money. When interest rates rise, everyone talks about long-term value, but in practice they still reduce positions first—especially those assets that have poor liquidity and keep getting shuttled back and forth across chains; once the wind blows, they slip.

Recently, that whole interpretation of ETF capital flows has been taken out again as a universal remote control: if sentiment in the US stock market is good, then crypto should be up… To be blunt, it’s pretty lazy. Capital flows obviously matter, but when they get passed through to your and my positions, there’s a whole lot of human nature in between: whether I’m afraid, whether I’ll get smashed, and who will take the blame if something goes wrong. In any case, for me: when the macro environment is uncertain, I add less leverage; if there’s abnormal movement on the bridge, I’d rather miss out than chase safety-related events into the early hours of the morning. If you’re also the kind of person who often stays up late watching the chain, you’ll understand that feeling of not wanting to be educated again.