Arthur Hayes is still structurally bullish on Bitcoin. He just doesn’t think now is the time to buy.
Speaking on the Coin Stories podcast on March 10, BitMEX co-founder and CIO Maelstrom said he would be patient until a more familiar catalyst arrives: central bank liquidity. According to Hayes, the protracted Iran war and the credit crunch that could result from AI-driven economic disruption could eventually force the Federal Reserve to start printing money again, and that’s the signal he’s waiting for.
“If I had $1 to invest right now, would I put it in Bitcoin? No. I would wait,” Hayes said at the end of the interview. “I think the longer this conflict goes on, the more likely it is that the Fed will print money to support the American war machine, and that’s when I buy Bitcoin when the central banks start printing money.”
This difference was important during the conversation. Hayes pushed back against the idea that a war would automatically be an insult to Bitcoin, arguing that the real delivery mechanism is liquidity expansion. “If you say, ‘Well, war is good for Bitcoin,’ what you’re really saying is that war means printing money. Printing money is good for Bitcoin,” he said. “So wait for the money to be printed. Don’t try to time it because you might get it wrong.”
Related reading
Arthur Hayes sees more pain ahead for Bitcoin
The argument fits with the broader framework Hayes laid out in the interview: Bitcoin is less of a “liquidity bearer” than a clean, low-quality trade that is already reacting to tightening conditions, credit stress and a lack of new dollar creation. He attributed that view to the rise of AI, which he said could accelerate job losses, put pressure on private and bank credit and force markets to price in a sharper economic downturn than many now expect.
“I think it’s going to happen sooner than people think, just because of the exponential nature of how fast AI is improving,” Hayes said. “It only takes 10 to 20% (of jobs). And then the levers of the banking system do the rest. At some point the market goes, ‘Oh, that’s zero.'”
In this scenario, he said, market recognition of the problem may come before the full economic damage is visible in the data. Regional banks, private debt and broad financial stocks could re-price sharply as savings and emergency support from the Fed followed. This is a moment that Hayes sees as much more constructive for Bitcoin than the current context.
Related reading
However, his near-term caution did not extend to Bitcoin’s long-term role. Hayes described crypto as “structurally very long” and argued that the case for fiat money is stronger now than it was at Bitcoin’s inception. He also warned against shaping the industry around institutional preferences, saying crypto should not reduce itself to a more sophisticated version of traditional finance.
“Bitcoin has gone from zero to $66,000 today without government support, unclear regulations, hostile banking infrastructure and regulators,” Hayes said. “So why are we bending over backwards to accommodate these people who don’t have our best interests at heart?”
He equally rejected conspiracy explanations for the market’s sluggish performance, including claims that market makers are deliberately suppressing the price of Bitcoin. Often, he said, losses are attributed to bad positioning, bad timing, or leverage used by traders who are ill-equipped for crypto speed.
For investors disappointed that Bitcoin didn’t generate the immediate returns of life, Hayes’ answer was blunt: adjust your expectations. “The market’s job is not to make you money. The market’s job is to take your money,” he said, arguing that long-term engagement is more important than trying to force a six-month profit.
At press time, BTC was trading at $69,538.
Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
