Compiled: Cognitive Alchemy
In mid-to-late November 2025, macro analyst Luke Gromen, a long-term bull on Bitcoin and gold, sold the vast majority of his Bitcoin position—not a complete liquidation, but a clear, phased reduction—sparking considerable market debate.
Yesterday, in what he stated would be his final video update of 2025, Luke systematically explained the reasoning behind this decision for the first time.
He discussed not just Bitcoin, but a set of interconnected judgments: why he is cautious about Bitcoin in the short term, why he remains bullish on precious metals, and how he understands the emerging "multipolar world."
These views, though seemingly disparate, all point to the same issue: The macroeconomic environment we are familiar with is changing.
For over thirty years: the Treasury market won, Wall Street won, holders of financial assets won; while manufacturing, industrial capacity, and the working class were consistently squeezed.
Starting in 2025, with geopolitical competition, supply chain security, and industrial base becoming hard constraints, the U.S. government's policy objective function is being forced to change.
We are leaving a "finance-first" world and entering a world where "realpolitik is returning."
You can certainly disagree with Luke's short-term view on Bitcoin's price action—this was never a binary choice. But this macro signal is worth serious consideration for all long-term investors:
The world is no longer one where "financial assets have a natural tailwind."
It is also for this reason that it's necessary to remind ourselves of something often overlooked: Long-term investing does not mean you must always be fully invested at every stage.
Sometimes, true long-termism means knowing when to step back, preserve judgment, and not let short-term volatility force you into making irreversible choices at the wrong time.
If this discussion helps you view the market more冷静地 (calmly) in the coming period, then it has served its purpose.
The rest is your own rhythm.
The following is a translation of the original text from Luke's video,希望 (hopefully) it will provide some inspiration.
Video Transcript Translation
This is my final public video update for 2025.
Frankly, this year has been exhausting; at times it felt like "aging in dog years." But precisely because of that, I want to clarify key judgments rather than leave more misunderstandings.
The question I've been asked most recently is: Why did you sell most of your Bitcoin in the short term?
Let me state the most important point clearly upfront: I did not exit Bitcoin completely. I am still bullish on it long-term.
But over the past month or so, I did sell the "bulk" of my position. The reason wasn't emotion or price, but a change in my judgment regarding "sequence."
I. What I Got Right Before, and What I Got Wrong
I have long believed that Bitcoin is the last functioning "liquidity smoke alarm" in the global financial system. When liquidity begins to tighten, it often sounds最早 (first). This has been repeatedly verified over the past few years.
But I must also admit one thing: My previous judgment about Bitcoin's role in a "deflationary environment" was wrong.
I originally thought that in deflation, it would act more like a "neutral reserve asset." But reality has shown me: when deflation arrives, Bitcoin trades more like a high-Beta tech stock.
This isn't a matter of立场 (stance); it's a fact.
II. Why Does Bitcoin Become Vulnerable in Deflation?
The reason is actually simple, though many are reluctant to view it from this angle.
We are in a highly leveraged global economic system. In such a system, any asset can be understood within the framework of a "capital structure."
When liquidity is ample and asset prices are rising → The "equity layer" at the very bottom of the capital structure performs best.
When deflation appears → The equity layer is hit first and most violently.
In 2008, the equity layers of CDOs, CLOs vanished exactly like this.
And I am increasingly coming to the clear view that: Bitcoin, in the current system, is precisely the "equity layer."
This isn't to贬低 (belittle) it, but a realistic assessment of its position.
III. What Really Changed My Mind Was AI and Robotics
If this were just an ordinary economic downturn, I might not have sold.
What truly made me reassess the sequence was seeing that AI and robotics are creating an "exponential" deflationary force.
This round of deflation has three characteristics:
-
It stems from technological efficiency, not a demand cycle -
It is beginning to substantially impact employment, especially youth employment -
It is spreading very quickly
In this environment, any policy response short of "nuclear-level money printing" is effectively tightening.
And what bears the pressure first in a tightening environment? Still the equity layer.
This is the core reason for my short-term caution on Bitcoin and selling most of my position.
IV. I'm Not Rejecting Bitcoin, But Correcting the "Timing Sequence"
I still believe: Deflation will ultimately trigger a crisis, and that crisis will likely force a truly massive monetary response.
But I now believe this step will not come so quickly.
Frankly, I overestimated the speed of the policy response. I thought they would act sooner, but they didn't, and I don't think they will act very soon now either.
So for me, it's a question of sequence: Before policies truly turn, before the "nuclear response" appears, I prefer to first exit the most vulnerable layer of the capital structure and wait to return after prices more fully reflect reality.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm "calculating too precisely." But this is my most honest judgment at the moment.
V. So Why Am I More Willing to Hold Silver?
Silver is not an emotional judgment, but a structural one.
What I see is: Industrial demand is持续 rising, the supply side has almost no capacity for rapid expansion, and even if prices rise, it's difficult to quickly form an effective supply response.
Unless we use a deep recession to destroy demand. But if that truly happens, the world would反而 return faster to the "crisis—money printing" path.
From this perspective, silver's logic is反而 more direct and simpler.
VI. Behind This Lies a Larger Structural Change
What I want to make clear this time is not just about Bitcoin or silver.
What I really want to say is: We are leaving a "finance-first" world and entering a world where "realpolitik is returning."
For over thirty years: the Treasury market won, Wall Street won, holders of financial assets won; while manufacturing, industrial capacity, and the working class were consistently squeezed.
Now, with national competition, supply chain security, and industrial base becoming hard constraints again, the policy objective function is being forced to change.
This does not mean a美好的 (beautiful), low-interest-rate, weak-dollar utopia. It is more likely a world that is: less stable, more friction-filled, less "elegant," but also more real.
Conclusion: All I Can Do Is Clarify What I See
I know these judgments are not popular. Especially when sentiment remains highly optimistic.
But I always believe: More important than making people feel comfortable is making the logic clear.
I still respect Bitcoin's long-term significance and am still preparing for that "true turning point."
It's just that for now, I choose to stand aside and see how far this deflation真正 goes.
This is the most honest explanation I can offer at the end of 2025.
