> 3) Capital pools unable to access ETF (eg credit/equity buckets) I think we heavily underestimate the size of these buckets... (they are the biggest buckets) For context: these treasury-based crypto debt instruments allow TradFi players to legally channel low-risk capital into high-volatility crypto exposure. I think it's delusional to think this will not be abused in self-serving ways that basically are a clever form of insider trading. E.g. a company exec buys spot BTC or ETH and then passively pumps his bags on the credit market This likely will end very badly, as more and more crypto volatility is injected into debt markets. Think another 2008 financial crisis.
When DATs might make sense: 1) No ETF exists (eg HYPE) 2) Broader mandate than ETF (eg DeFi yield generation) 3) Capital pools unable to access ETF (eg credit/equity buckets) 4) Tax efficiency (eg certain jurisdictions have dif/worse tax treatment for direct crypto)
1.47K
0
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.