Opinion: The Hedging Relationship Between U.S. Treasuries and Stocks Has Broken Down, and BTC, as a Risk Asset, Is Under Dual Pressure

marsbitPublicado em 2026-07-20Última atualização em 2026-07-20

Resumo

For the past 20 years, U.S. investors relied on a free insurance policy: when stocks fell, bonds rose, cushioning portfolio losses. This reliable inverse correlation underpinned entire financial strategies. However, this mechanism broke down around 2020 and has not recovered. Currently, the two-month rolling correlation between the S&P 500 and 10-year Treasury yields is at -0.69, its lowest level since 1996, indicating stocks and bonds are moving in sync to an unprecedented degree, eliminating the traditional portfolio shock absorber. The失效 of this hedge is not simply due to lost confidence in U.S. debt. The key driver is the shift from growth-dominated to inflation-dominated market narratives. When growth fears prevail, stocks and bonds move inversely. Since 2022, persistent inflation volatility has been the dominant factor, causing both asset classes to suffer simultaneously from higher inflation expectations. Investors now seek safety without duration risk, favoring cash, dollars, and short-term Treasuries while selling long-duration bonds. Record U.S. deficits, rising net interest payments, and waning foreign demand (e.g., from Japan) are pressuring long-term yields, with the 30-year yield surpassing 5%. This environment places Bitcoin, as a risk asset on the far end of the risk curve, under dual pressure. Higher risk-free rates increase the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets like Bitcoin, while falling equities reduce overall risk appetite. Bitcoin's perfo...

Author: CryptoSlate / Andjela Radmilac

Compiled by: TechFlow

Deep Tide TechFlow Introduction: Over the past 20 years, the hedging relationship where U.S. Treasuries rise when stocks fall, and vice versa, has completely broken down. Now, both are falling simultaneously, which means the final "shock absorber" in investment portfolios has disappeared. Bitcoin, as the asset furthest out on the risk curve, is under dual pressure.

For the past 20 years, U.S. investors have essentially enjoyed free insurance: when stocks fell, Treasuries rose, with losses on one side of the portfolio partially offset by gains on the other. This relationship was so reliable that an entire industry built products around it, and a whole generation of asset allocators took it for granted.

But this mechanism broke down around 2020 and has not recovered since.

UBS now calculates a two-month rolling correlation between the S&P 500 index and the 10-year Treasury yield of -0.69, the lowest reading since 1996.

This means stocks and bonds are moving in sync to a degree not seen in 30 years, and the asset that was supposed to offset stock losses has instead become a source of losses itself.

If Bonds Are No Longer a Safe Haven, What Is?

It's easy to say the convergence of bonds and stocks is due to investors losing confidence in U.S. government debt. But as usual, the answer is more complex. Data tells us investors still want the safety offered by bonds, but now they want safety without duration risk.

Duration is a bond's sensitivity to interest rate changes. A 30-year Treasury bond nominally protects holders from default but is fully exposed to inflation and the path of policy rates. Although these are two different risks, after the 2008 financial crisis, the distinction wasn't very important because inflation was largely dormant.

Once inflation reared its head, the hedge broke down. The correlation between stocks and bonds depends less on the actual level of inflation and more on its volatility. It also depends on what is driving the market: news about growth or news about inflation.

When growth dominates, stocks and bonds react inversely, because weak growth hurts stocks but benefits bonds. When inflation dominates, they move in the same direction, because higher inflation hurts both equally. AQR research found this explains about 70% of the long-term variation in U.S. stock-bond correlation, with similar results internationally.

Since 2022, inflation has been the dominant factor, and it has lasted longer than we've ever seen before. Even cooler inflation reports like the June one—which pulled headline CPI down to 3.5% and brought the long-end 30-year yield back down near 5%—haven't changed anything, because it's the volatility of inflation that is the problem, not any single reading.

The 30-year Treasury yield broke above 5% for the first time since 2007 and has spent most of 2026 above that line, hovering around 5.1% as of July 16th. Earlier this year, a $25 billion new 30-year bond auction cleared above 5%, the first time in 18 years investors got that kind of yield on a long bond.

The U.S. deficit is projected to expand from about 5.8% of GDP in 2026 to 6.7% in 2036, with net interest payments growing as a share of the economy each year. OECD governments will need to raise a total of about $18 trillion this year.

Just as supply thickens, foreign demand is thinning. Japanese investors were net sellers of $29.6 billion of U.S. government, agency, and local debt in the first quarter, the largest net selling since 2022, as domestic yields finally became worth holding. Japan's 10-year climbed to its highest level since 1997, and Germany's 10-year bund reached a 15-year high. The global buying that suppressed long-end borrowing costs for two decades is pulling back in multiple places simultaneously, and the term premium is the price of that pullback.

All of this tells us investors are buying dollars, short-term Treasury bills, and short-term bonds—liquid and with almost no duration risk. They are selling the long end because it carries all the duration risk. This is a 180-degree turn in the safe-haven trade, and it explains why the dollar can remain strong in a week when the 30-year is being sold off.

Where Does This Leave Bitcoin?

Bitcoin is now as sensitive to macro conditions as the dollar and gold.

BTC performs well when real yields fall, the dollar weakens, financial conditions ease, and investors seek alternatives to traditional assets. A rise in U.S. Treasuries brings the first three together, which is why a falling bond market removes three supports at once. The bounce that pulled Bitcoin back above $64,000 this week occurred precisely when a mild inflation report pulled down front-end yields.

Goldman Sachs arrived at a similar conclusion from a different angle, warning that rising yields have compressed the equity risk premium to the point where investors get almost no compensation for holding stocks relative to risk-free assets. The 10-year Treasury spent most of 2026 above this threshold, moderating only to around 4.55% after this week's cooler data.

Bitcoin is further out on the same curve than stocks, meaning it absorbs pressure from both sides. Higher risk-free rates increase the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets. Falling stocks reduce the risk appetite for funding equity positions.

Neither of these is a crypto-specific problem, so neither can be solved by crypto-specific news, which is why regulatory developments in Washington have repeatedly failed to support buying pressure this year.

But despite the correlation, this is not a battle between Bitcoin and U.S. Treasuries. Under the inflation risk-off regime, they are not competing for anything. They are on the same side of the same trade, selling duration and volatility, and accumulating cash. Gold, long bonds, and Bitcoin can all fall in the same week while the dollar stays strong, telling us exactly how much interest rate and volatility exposure anyone wants to hold right now.

The fiscal conditions producing a 5% long-term yield—deficits, interest burdens, and waning foreign buying—are the very conditions that make fixed-supply assets outside the sovereign credit system attractive to institutional holders.

Some of this capital is already visible in the $15 billion of tokenized Treasuries held on-chain, a crypto-native bet on yield, not scarcity. Bitcoin's problem is that the conditions strengthening its long-term logic hurt it in the short term.

U.S. Treasuries can reclaim the role they played from 2000 to 2019. That requires inflation volatility to subside, growth risks to become the dominant factor again, and for the Fed to have room to ease in the face of weakness.

We've seen this combination of factors after every previous inflation shock, and so far, nothing rules it out from happening after this one. But a single month of mild inflation data is not that combination yet, even if it is the kind of data point that will eventually accumulate in that direction.

Until then, Bitcoin trades in a market where the world's deepest asset class no longer absorbs anyone's shock. This removes the floor beneath every risk asset, and it removes it fastest from those assets that pay nothing to wait.

Perguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, why has the traditional hedging relationship between US stocks and bonds broken down since around 2020?

AThe traditional hedging relationship between US stocks and bonds has broken down primarily because inflation volatility has become the dominant market factor, replacing growth concerns. When inflation dominates, stocks and bonds tend to move in the same direction, as higher inflation hurts both asset classes. This shift has been ongoing since 2022, making the previous negative correlation (where bonds rose when stocks fell) ineffective.

QWhat is 'duration risk' in the context of US Treasury bonds, and how are investor preferences changing regarding it?

A'Duration risk' refers to the sensitivity of a bond's price to changes in interest rates. Long-dated bonds (like 30-year Treasuries) have high duration risk. The article states that investors now seek safety without duration risk, preferring highly liquid assets like US dollars, short-term Treasury bills, and short-term bonds. They are selling the long end of the bond market due to its exposure to duration risk amid high inflation volatility.

QHow does the current macro environment, specifically rising yields, create a 'double pressure' on Bitcoin as a risk asset?

ARising yields create a 'double pressure' on Bitcoin. First, higher risk-free yields (like those from Treasuries) increase the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset like Bitcoin. Second, falling stock prices reduce the overall risk appetite available to fund speculative positions, including those in risk assets like Bitcoin. Bitcoin, being on the far end of the risk curve, absorbs pressure from both sides simultaneously.

QWhat evidence does the article provide that foreign demand for US government debt is weakening?

AThe article cites that Japanese investors were net sellers of $29.6 billion in US government, agency, and local debt in the first quarter, marking the largest net selling since 2022. This shift is attributed to rising domestic yields in Japan (with the 10-year yield at its highest since 1997) and other countries like Germany, making foreign bonds less attractive. This global pullback from long-dated debt is driving up the term premium.

QUnder what conditions could US Treasuries reclaim their traditional role as a hedge against stock market declines?

AFor US Treasuries to reclaim their traditional hedging role, the article states that inflation volatility would need to subside, growth risks would need to become the dominant market factor again, and the Federal Reserve would need to have the room to ease policy in response to economic weakness. While this combination has followed previous inflation shocks, the current single month of cooler inflation data is not yet sufficient to signal this shift.

Leituras Relacionadas

New Fire Research Institute: Inflation May Become a Stubborn Problem, Can Cryptocurrencies Achieve Independent Performance in the Short Term?

New Fire Research Institute argues that despite the recent U.S. June CPI decline to 3.5% year-on-year—primarily driven by energy—core goods inflation remains persistent, with core PCE likely showing slight growth. Federal Reserve Chairman Wash has emphasized the Fed's independence and a "zero tolerance" stance on inflation, suggesting a continued hawkish posture that will pressure risk assets, especially if energy prices rise again. Concurrently, the semiconductor memory sector faces structural pressures, as seen in significant sell-offs for Micron and SK Hynix. High leverage in markets like South Korea is triggering deleveraging, amplifying volatility. Investors are also questioning the sustainability of AI-related capital expenditures. In contrast, the crypto market showed relative stability last week, with BTC and ETH gaining slightly. Positive developments include a shift to net inflows for U.S. Bitcoin spot ETFs, a narrowing Coinbase discount, and strong activity on the Robinhood Chain ecosystem. The potential advancement of the U.S. CLARITY Act provides a policy catalyst. Overall, the probability of an independent crypto bull run in the short term is low, given overarching macro pressures. However, fundamentals are improving with ETF inflows and robust on-chain activity, providing solid support. Technically, BTC and ETH show strong support at key moving averages. New Fire Research maintains that Bitcoin around $60,000 represents a high-value allocation zone, with limited downside risk near current levels. The true bull market catalyst awaits a confirmed market bottom combined with a macro policy shift and legislative progress.

marsbitHá 18m

New Fire Research Institute: Inflation May Become a Stubborn Problem, Can Cryptocurrencies Achieve Independent Performance in the Short Term?

marsbitHá 18m

Base Under Pressure

**Title: The Pressure Mounts for Base** Base, the Ethereum Layer 2 scaling solution backed by Coinbase, is facing significant pressure and public scrutiny from its leadership following the launch of Robinhood Chain. Base co-founder Jesse Pollak recently acknowledged strategic missteps, admitting that the chain's past focus on social and creator tokens (e.g., through Farcaster, Zora) failed to deliver sustainable adoption. He has refocused on core infrastructure, handing leadership of the Base App back to Coinbase's Cobie. While Base remains a top L2 contender alongside OP Mainnet and Arbitrum, and boasts the highest TVL (nearly $12B), its weaknesses are being highlighted by the new competitor. Key criticisms include its slow progress on decentralization. Base has faced issues with its single sequencer causing block production halts, and L2BEAT is reportedly considering downgrading its decentralization rating from Stage 1 to Stage 0. This contrasts sharply with the rapid initial success of Robinhood Chain, whose DEX quickly entered the top five by volume. The leadership styles of the parent companies are also being compared: Robinhood's CEO actively engages with new projects, while a recent incident where Coinbase's Brian Armstrong briefly changed his profile picture—sparking and then crashing a related meme token—drew community ire and mockery. Pollak stated Base is working with Coinbase on tokenized stocks backed 1:1 by real equity, differentiating it from Robinhood's derivatives model. However, the article argues that Base's most urgent task is to address its long-standing technical and trust issues. With more traditional finance players likely to emulate Robinhood's path, Base must use this competitive pressure to solidify its position as long-term financial infrastructure.

Foresight NewsHá 35m

Base Under Pressure

Foresight NewsHá 35m

White House Concession Removes Ethical Hurdle, Clarity Act Races Against Final Window Before Recess?

On July 21st, industry sources reported that the Trump administration has agreed to include an ethics provision in the "Clarity Act" (Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025). This concession addresses the long-standing conflict-of-interest concerns regarding government officials and the crypto industry, potentially removing the final major obstacle to the bill's progress. Additionally, Patrick Witt, the executive director of the White House's Digital Asset Advisory Committee, confirmed he will remain in his role to help finalize the bill, alleviating previous concerns about his potential departure. The Clarity Act aims to establish a unified federal regulatory framework for the U.S. digital asset market. Its core objective is to resolve regulatory ambiguity by defining different types of digital assets (digital commodities, investment contract assets, and permitted payment stablecoins) and clarifying the respective oversight roles of the SEC and CFTC. This would end the long-running jurisdictional dispute between the two agencies and provide clearer compliance paths for the industry. With the ethics issue moving toward resolution, the most urgent challenge now is time. The U.S. Congress is set to begin its August recess in mid-August, leaving only a few working weeks to finalize the text and advance the bill through the Senate. Industry advocates, like the Blockchain Association's Kristin Smith, stress that this is a critical moment. If negotiations conclude successfully in the coming weeks, the Clarity Act could pass a key hurdle before the recess; otherwise, it may face significant delays. If enacted, the Clarity Act could mark a historic turning point in crypto regulation. By providing a clearer and more predictable legal framework, it aims to reduce uncertainty for businesses, developers, and traditional financial institutions looking to enter the digital asset space, potentially setting a global benchmark for market structure regulation.

Odaily星球日报Há 41m

White House Concession Removes Ethical Hurdle, Clarity Act Races Against Final Window Before Recess?

Odaily星球日报Há 41m

Trading

Spot
活动图片