Charlie Morris

12K posts

Charlie Morris banner
Charlie Morris

Charlie Morris

@AtlasPulse

21Shares Bitcoin and Gold ETF (ticker BOLD) blends Bitcoin and Gold on a risk weighted basis. Founder ByteTree. Fund manager by trade.

London, UK Katılım Kasım 2013
586 Takip Edilen9.1K Takipçiler
Charlie Morris retweetledi
Mohamed A. El-Erian
Mohamed A. El-Erian@elerianm·
Consensus is shifting, and rightly so: This third week of the war has fueled a shift from a short-term energy disruption to long-term structural damage. With that, the broader fallout—also marked by the non-linear risks associated with tipping points and multiple equilibrium dynamics—poses an increasing threat to global economic wellbeing and financial stability. #economy #energy #markets #middleeastwar
Mohamed A. El-Erian tweet media
English
31
42
138
16.3K
Keith Weiner
Keith Weiner@RealKeithWeiner·
They look pretty, but why in 2026 do they have soldiers wearing steel ponytail capped helms riding horses?
Keith Weiner tweet media
English
7
1
2
544
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
@martinjhunter We never did. Other events took over whereby real yields became marginalised. But the correlation was always there, but became unimportant. Now that the other events have taken a back seat, real yields are back in charge. When this crisis is over, they will fall.
English
0
0
0
1
40 followers
40 followers@martinjhunter·
@AtlasPulse So now we're again sensitive to yeilds ?? Hadn't we shaken that correlation ?? DISSAPOINTING !!!
English
1
0
0
3
Charlie Morris retweetledi
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
Gold hasn’t enjoyed this crisis in Iran, to many peoples’ surprise. The obvious points are that gold came into this red hot, having had its best year since 1979, and that the dollar is rising. There’s also the idea that some central banks are likely selling as they now need the money to buy energy. Another important reason is that bond yields (black) are rising faster than inflation expectations (red), meaning that real yields are rising (blue). Gold hates that. This happened in 2008, when gold recovered post crisis, and in 2013, when it didn’t. I sense this is more ’08 than ’13.
Charlie Morris tweet media
English
2
2
9
588
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
Thanks Dominic. That piece can be found here. bytetree.com/research/2026/…
Dominic Frisby@DominicFrisby

Oil Broke the System Never mind the dodgy mortgages, oil spiking to $150/barrel in July, 2008, just before the panic set in, was as big a cause of the Global Financial Crisis. The price rise was like a sudden, unexpected liquidity drain on the economy. The US economy is built on oil. Costs suddenly rose across every supply chain. Disposable income was sucked out of households. Corporate margins got squeezed and inflation expectations rose, effectively tightening financial conditions, just as the system needed liquidity. Funding costs then rose and collateral quality deteriorated. In a system already stretched with cheap credit and thin margins, highly leveraged institutions and ordinary borrowers were simultaneously pushed over the edge. The structure was fragile and it only worked in a low energy, low rate world. Subprime may have been the trigger, but the energy shock had already destabilised the foundations. In short, the oil price tightened financial conditions before central banks did. This is not a one-off As Charlie Morris observes, there have been three major oil shocks - in 1973/4, 1980 and 2008. In 1973 the US was dependent on Arab nations for most of its oil, and shortly after the Egypt-Syria alliance suddenly declared war on Israel, oil-producing Arab nations imposed an embargo on any nation that supported Israel. “You can support Israel or have cheap oil, but you can’t have both,” the Saudi Arabian king had said on US TV. The oil price went from $3.50 to $10. It would eventually peak at $40 in 1980. I was only a little boy in the 1970s but we lived in South Kensington and I remember how many Arabs suddenly moved to the area, many of them with a great deal of money. My step-father ran a business in Belgravia selling modern Italian furniture and his clientele changed almost overnight. Hundreds of billions of dollars, previously in Western bank accounts, now made their way to the Gulf in a transfer of wealth like no other. Next came the Rolls Royces, the racehorses, the Harrods shopping sprees (indeed Harrods itself), the mansions, the public school educations, the City petro-dollar recycling trade and yes the over-priced, glitzy Valentino furniture. London would never be the same. And what impact did those years have on markets more generally? The 1970s were horrible, unless you were long commodities. The low reached in 1982 was so extreme that it marked one of the greatest long-term buying opportunities ever known. 2008 had its own consequences, not least the end of the City as a main player in global finance, followed by the general decline of London. It might not feel that way today with oil at $100, but we are still a long way from the extremes of 1974, 1980 or 2008. What is 2008’s $150 oil in today’s money? I consider CPI a bogus measure, but using money supply instead (M2), the equivalents look like this 1974: $10 oil ≈ $150 1980: $40 oil ≈ $360-440 2008: $150 oil ≈ $375-450 In the context of those extremes $100 oil does not look unreasonable The sub-$60 prices with which we began this year now look extraordinarily cheap. I don’t think we are going back to them any time soon. I’m also not saying we are going to those comparable numbers above. I merely show them for context. In terms of where we are going, I think Charlie has it right when he says, “We should assume that $100 oil implies a slowdown, $150 a recession, and $200 a depression”. $200 is not impossible if this war carries on.

English
1
2
10
1.1K
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
A terrible 24 hours for bitcoin and gold, and pretty much everything else. Remarkable that bitcoin in gold is rising and back up to 15 ounces from 12.
Charlie Morris tweet media
English
0
0
10
786
Charlie Morris retweetledi
Izabella Kaminska
Izabella Kaminska@izakaminska·
I think this is right. My own personal theory (not entirely uninformed) is that everything that’s going on reflects the fact that we are about to get a major breakthrough in fusion tech. When you run everything through that lens suddenly all sorts of things begin to make sense. A fusion announcement risks massively destabilising the Middle East one way or another. It also risks destabilising Iran, since its primary source of revenue might become irrelevant. From their POV this raises the urgency of achieving nuclear power since only then do they maintain leverage in a system which would otherwise disadvantage them greatly. All the more so if it is America that is about to make the breakthrough rather than china. In the context of a fusion breakthrough all geopolitics becomes focused on rollout, distribution and scaling. And it seems to me the player that is most likely to benefit from a fusion breakthrough is Saudi Arabia because of its massive investment in green steel. If it got its hands on a fusion reactor powered by sea water, it would be able to transform energy into a new type of tradable commodity. Hydrogen produced Green steel. It would be a new type of petrodollar agreement but one centered on technology transfer in exchange for industrial capability that nobody wants in their back yard in the West. Even if it’s green. But in that future, the US simply can’t allow Iran to have nukes. Also, only allies get the tech transfer. A Fusion breakthrough would empower the transition to a “green” economy and play into all economies geared up for electrification. The key remaining issue becomes grid capacity. The whole thing would require a a revamped global “atoms for peace” initiative. I see that coming together with the board of peace. There’s much more that fits into place but it is deeply speculative. The issue we face now is that if the current crisis continues beyond the next couple of weeks, fusion or no fusion, without access to oil and products the economy begins to grind to a halt and people begin to die. So what we have here, I think, is Iran using the people of the world as a human shield in a negotiating strategy aimed at getting a better position on the board of peace.
English
10
6
40
10.1K
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
@AICIindex It doesn’t help when both assets fall. This will always be a short term issue, often when the dollar rises sharply. But has never been an issue over the medium term. If or when that happens, the outcome will be the average return. The low correlation drives the alpha.
English
0
0
2
27
AICI Index
AICI Index@AICIindex·
@AtlasPulse The complementary thesis holds well in normal regimes. In sharp risk-off both tend to get hit together, at least initially. Does the risk-weighting help there or does it lag the correlation shift?
English
1
0
1
21
Charlie Morris retweetledi
Charlie Morris
Charlie Morris@AtlasPulse·
The main reason I launched BOLD (Bitcoin and Gold risk-weighted) was to diversify holding Gold. I have followed the yellow metal since the late 1990's, and when Bitcoin came along, it became clear that these assets are complimentary, and not in competition. Even after a sharp fall in Bitcoin since October, BOLD is still 3x gold over ten years. Gold is now tired after an extraordinary run. Bitcoin now carries the baton.
Charlie Morris tweet media
English
2
4
33
1.4K