UBS raises US recession odds to 60%, but what does this mean for crypto prices?

Cointelegraph2022-08-31 tarihinde yayınlandı2022-08-31 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

On Aug. 30, global investment bank UBS increased its view on the risk of the United States entering a recession within one year to 60%, up from 40% in June.

On Aug. 30, global investment bank UBS increased its view on the risk of the United States entering a recession within one year to 60%, up from 40% in June. According to economist Pierre Lafourcade, the latest data showed a 94% chance of the economy contracting, but added that it "does not morph into a full-blown recession."
Partially explaining the difference is the "extremely low levels" of non-performing loans, or defaults exceeding 90 days from credit borrowers. According to Citigroup Chief Executive Jane Fraser, the institution "feels very good about" liquidity and credit quality. Furthermore, Reuters states that the financial industry wrote off merely 0.1% of its loans in the 2Q.
The problem is that even in the now-improbable scenario of avoiding a generalized recession, companies will face diminishing earnings as surging inflation limits consumption and Central Banks increase interest rates while winding down their balance sheets. Either way, the pressure on corporate profits is huge and this puts pressure on stock prices.
The valuation dynamics for cryptocurrencies vastly differ from equities, corporate debt, and stock markets. The truth is that there are no set metrics or indicators to guide token prices. Market participants have different perspectives on the protocols and their use cases.
On the other hand, the stock market has battle-tested valuation indicators that have been consistently used for decades, pounded by analysts, pundits and investors. For instance, the Price / Earnings multiple measures how many years would take a company to generate enough profit to cover its current market capitalization.
Regardless of how one measures the stock market success, it depends on margins, revenues, interest rates, and the U.S. dollar foreign exchange rate. That's why a stock can go down 70% or more even before a recession hits the markets, as it desperately needs a constant inflow of revenues. It’s unlikely that the same rationale is applicable to crypto?
Understanding stock markets and commodities valuation
The first rule of equities valuation is: investors have different inputs, expectations, and timeframes for a stock. Sure, there are consolidated models, indicators and analysts' recommendations, but ultimately, there's no guarantee that the equity price will follow any rationale.
We can chart the Price / Earnings multiple, Enterprise Value / EBITDA, or whatever metric investors closely monitor. However, one will never know what the future holds for those companies, even those carrying long-term contracts, such as the energy sector.
Trader’s should not confuse volatility with valuation. A company can have steady and predictable cash flow, but that might become a liability during bull markets when other sectors are growing earnings and expanding. Moreover, a stock market price is never immune to the broader economy because, ultimately, a financial institution's collapse might as well drag down counterparties.
Let's take a simple and utopic example, the New York real estate market. If development enters a grinding halt, there is no change in the utility of the land, including houses, commercial and agricultural spaces. If an aggravated crisis causes the rupture, there's even room for price appreciation since some investors would seek shelter in hard assets.
The same can be said for oil, gold, or cattle. There's no need for a constant flow of earnings to sustain those assets' value. Worst case scenario, no more gold and oil gets extracted from the ground, but their price will likely increase as the currently available supply diminishes.
What are cryptocurrencies after all?
It does not matter whether investors consider Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) as commodities, currencies or novel technology bets. Both assets have extremely limited production schedules, which will be kept even if the hashrate and validators (nodes) drop by 90%. Their use as independent digital asset transmission systems will continue working as planned.
As previously stated, the price of cryptocurrencies might be heavily impacted by an enduring economic recession, but there's hardly a scenario where the networks become useless due to inflation, rising interest rates or credit defaults. The same rule cannot be applied to Walmart, UnitedHealth Group, or Ford Motor Company — all top 20 companies by revenue.
Paradoxically, failing companies are not a suitable store of value during a recession, meaning bankrupt assets can be liquidated and the shareholder gets zero. The decentralization aspect of cryptocurrencies shields investors from even the worst-case scenarios, including delisting from major exchanges.
At the same time, the initial shock of a global recession, for example, the housing market crash and growing distrust in the financial system, could pave the way for alternative hard assets, including cryptocurrencies.
Right now, it sounds like a distant dream, but a full-blown recession would be the first major global financial crisis experienced by cryptocurrencies since Bitcoin's inception in 2009.
Whether or not crypto valuations will sustain themselves in the long run is still undecided. So far, the sector has endured major market participant failures, including exchanges and lending intermediaries and during this time no need for intervention was required. Thus, one could say that it passed its first test, although it’s too early to issue the final report.

İlgili Okumalar

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手9 saat önce

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手9 saat önce

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit12 saat önce

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit12 saat önce

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手13 saat önce

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手13 saat önce

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit14 saat önce

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit14 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片