1/9 Precious Metals:
It stinks more than you think,
Let's stop & think for a minute.
What was happening in markets?
From Feb 21st the Nasdaq was already in trouble while
the Precious Metals Gold and Silver were ramping.
D-I-V-E-R-G-E-N-C-E
@DerivativesDon
2/9 We have notorious velocity problems with an insolvent Fed, and a quasi fiscal deficit. Meaning that the Fed has to pay Banks for not using reserves. IORB..
That's a sterilization short-term but inflationary long term.
A QFD as explained by Rodriguez at the World Bank is a very nasty condition of sterilization costs documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/465…
3/9 Now you know what signal it meant. In a situation where stocks are dumped and precious metals are rallied it means "we don't trust the Financial assets, nor the currency".
So when the real issue is sterilization problems and velocity at the Fed. It was just not authorized to happen let me explain....
4/9 As I have explained many times #BTC is non-inflationary liquidity decoy to absorb this excessive liquidity without creating inflation. As explained in a previous post, if the liquidity was going into food and metals, this would create inflation with 2nd & 3rd consequences.
5/9 #BTC is most likely a Gov sponsored program.
It has a SECOND impact as a non-inflationary liquidity decoy.
If the liquidity were to go into
Foods and Metals =>
higher prices =>
higher inflation numbers =>
higher interest costs for the gov =>
higher deficit interest burden =>
higher cost of sterilization for the #Fed via IORB and more negative equity at the FEd (compromising the other components that is M0)
#BTC is therefore a way to protect the USD and UST.
6/9 Except that the liquidity was going into PM until the 3td of April, while stocks were going down hence of course the necessary intervention on April 3rd and raising the margins.
IT HAD TO BE STOPPED. MARGINS.
7/9
Can you imagine margins increased on April 3rd at brokers on Stocks?
What would have been the plunge in stocks?
Well the authorities did EXACTLY THAT on Precious Metals.
Why for the reasons explained before.
Sterilization and velocity control.
THE FLOWS CAN NOT BE ALLOWED TO GO INTO COMMOs (BECAUSE IT's INFLATIONARY)
8/9 Liquidity fleeing the financial assets and the currency into commodities (inflationary)? NOT ALLOWED.
#BTC, the non-inflationary decoy since April 2nd? Miraculously flat.
lol...
9/9 People are being fooled into thinking that the primary risk is deflation. The condition of the Fed and primary deficit point to the complete opposite direction.
This market A JOKE
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/8 Blackwell Party Crash:
Interconnects will "Poof" NVIDIA's Premium
Everyone excited about Blackwell? 🎉
PARTY CRASHING
inefficient
Like each chip guzzles up to 1kW but with horrendous scalability limits due to crappy interconnects.
PARTY CRASHER?
MicroLED interconnection
2/8 The Bottlenecks in AI Scaling: Interconnection (Copper vs. Laser)
Let's see...
COPPER
Result you cram a few very good architecture chips in a box connected with cooper wires(that’s the Blackwell situation today)
OR...
3/8 You do brute force scaling like the Huawei cluster with options?
It comes at a Huuuuuge interconnect energy cost (laser are very power hungry)
In classical economics the bust is often attributed by the British writers to “overtrade”, and this is often magnified by excessively loose monetary policy. But it can happen without excessive loose monetary or fiscal policy... archives 👇
3/10
You can spot that in the writings from Thomas Tooke in 1826 about the BoE buying some exchequer bills in 1823 repressing rates and creating an overtrade situation in the mining scheme in Central and South America culminating with the “poyais” fictitious country.
1/14
$SOFI, as I was starting to read the actual 10-Q thinking I am missing something, right from the beginning KABOOM! 💥🤣
The Company posted this cash flow statement and we can see through that the non cash gain of fair value adjustment of 270 million for 9 months (in red)
2/14
LITTLE REMINDER
In the cash flow statement, non cash expenses like stock compensation are added back and non cash gains are substracted, nothing special just a bit of education for the non-specialists.
3/14
So the cash flow statement shows
That section highlighted (“Fair value changes in loans held for investment”) shows a negative adjustment to reconcile net income to cash flow from operations.
The fed is signalling that it will restart monetization of gov debt. Why?
It is not QE, it is monetization. Yes, there is a difference.
Why would any central bank be crazy enough to stimulate a bubble?
There are problems with debt absorption.
We have discussed that before with the problems of repo.
Dalio is talking about monetization not QE. We’ll explain the change in denomination.
1/23 BESSENT THE HEDGE FUND FARMER
As I was reading the piece from Joseph Wang on repo, I remember my readings from different sources and notably from the BIS on systemic risk that showed up in April 2025.
In fact the FED is forced to backstop the dgeneracy of the repo market and hedge fund. The Negative haircuts on UST decried as a source of systemic risk by the BIS. x.com/FedGuy12/statu…
So what are hedge funds doing with REPO in present of a large primary deficit?
2/23 THE CORE MECHANISM (Simplified)
The U.S. government is spending $2 trillion more than it collects each year → it must issue $2 trillion in new Treasury bonds/bills annually.
Who buys all these Treasuries?
Not just pension funds or foreign central banks (who pay with cash).
A huge chunk is bought by hedge funds, proprietary trading desks, and dealers—but they don’t use their own cash.
Instead, they use leverage:
They borrow cash overnight in the repo market.
They use the newly bought Treasury as collateral for that loan.
This lets them control $100 of Treasuries with only $5–$10 of their own capital. (and in fact with negative haircut as explained by the BIS and it’s a key point)
hy do they do this?
Mainly to run the cash-futures basis trade:
Long the actual Treasury (bought with repo cash),
Short the corresponding Treasury futures contract.
Profit if the two prices converge (which they usually do… until they don’t).
We will explain why they didn’t and it’s structural
The catch: This trade only works if repo funding is cheap and reliable.
And because trillions of dollars of these trades exist, they create massive, ongoing demand for repo loans—not once, but every single day, since repo is often rolled overnight.
It’s that every new Treasury issued is potentially fuel for another leveraged trade, which needs more repo financing.
More deficit → more Treasury issuance → more leveraged buying → more demand for repo.
The lenders of repo cash (money market funds, banks) are finite.
As they run out of “easy” cash (e.g., from the Fed’s RRP facility), they demand higher rates to lend.
Repo rates rise above the Fed’s Interest on Reserves (IOR)—a red flag that funding is getting tight.
3/23 WHAT WANG ARGUES AND WHY THE BIS “SMIRKING” ABOUT IT
Key insight: Even if the Fed flooded the system with reserves, as long as fiscal deficits keep growing and leveraged demand keeps rising, that cash will eventually get absorbed.
Hence: “Without a change in fiscal policy, any amount of cash will ultimately be exhausted.”
“That cash will eventually get absorbed”
The Bank of International settlement is saying “not so fast” Jo. Let’s remember what happened in April.