Bitcoin’s Divergence From Nasdaq Signals Dollar Liquidity Risk, Says Arthur Hayes
Key Takeaways
- Arthur Hayes highlights a concerning divergence between Bitcoin and the Nasdaq, pointing to a potential dollar liquidity crisis.
- The traditional correlation between Bitcoin and tech stocks has unraveled, signaling potential market mispricing.
- Economic instability, driven by AI adoption, may be foreshadowed by Bitcoin’s current behavior.
- Liquidity stress is evident in the crypto market, with significant capital withdrawals.
- The outlook on Bitcoin’s recovery will critically influence its relation to traditional equities.
WEEX Crypto News, 2026-02-19 09:08:30
Breaking Down the Bitcoin-Nasdaq Correlation: A Wobbly Relationship
For an extended period, Bitcoin and the Nasdaq appeared to be dancing to the same tune, moving in synchronization as tech stocks and digital currencies surged. This cozy relationship was underscored by a striking 0.75 correlation rate by January 2026, reflecting their intertwined fortunes. However, cracks in this partnership have emerged with shocking abruptness. As the Nasdaq 100 holds its ground, threats of a bear market cast a shadow over cryptocurrency, particularly as Bitcoin recedes sharply from its robust October 2025 peak of $126,080.
Arthur Hayes, the co-founder of BitMEX, interprets this development not as a fleeting anomaly, but as a sign of deeper currents at play. In his thought-provoking Substack post “This Is Fine,” he presents an argument that Bitcoin is offering an early warning signal, reacting to the strains in fiat credit systems. The post contemplates an AI-fueled financial crisis scenario that will catalyze abrupt economic disruption. Within this narrative, Bitcoin emerges as the “canary in the coal mine,” sensing and pricing in liquidity distress before these shocks ripple across broader financial markets.
Understanding the Data Behind Bitcoin’s Movements
The numbers painting Bitcoin’s recent trajectory provide a more vivid picture of its liquidity challenges. A striking marker is the dramatic 20% plunge in open interest within Bitcoin futures over a mere week, slumping from $61 billion to $49 billion. This rapid reduction underscores capital’s hasty retreat from the crypto space, significantly outpacing the exodus from traditional financial sectors.
On closer examination, the liquidity scenario tightens further as the U.S. Federal Reserve ramps up efforts to drain the Reverse Repo Facility, a move that has raised alarms about a potential full-blown financial crisis. However, some analysts caution that these crisis warnings could be exaggerated.
Hayes, in “This Is Fine,” contends that the expanding integration of AI could herald widespread job losses in white-collar sectors, projecting a rise in defaults on credit and mortgages, bank failures, and a creeping deflationary crisis. The recent decline in Bitcoin reflects these fears, accentuating its deviation from Nasdaq’s steadiness.
Moreover, several crypto-specific issues, including stalled regulatory progress and waning ETF flows, are further compounding Bitcoin’s struggles. Interestingly, Bitcoin appears to have lost its previous sensitivity to fluctuations in the U.S. dollar. Historically, a weaker dollar would often elevate crypto prices, but Bitcoin has not capitalized on recent periods of dollar softening, marking a significant shift.
Assessing the Implications of Bitcoin’s Recovery Prospects
The durability of Hayes’ theory hinges significantly on Bitcoin’s potential rebound. Should Bitcoin succeed in mounting a quick and sustained recovery, the forewarned link between equities and crypto might reaffirm itself. If not, the divergence may deepen, particularly as sharp-minded investors pivot to assets emphasizing privacy like Zcash and decentralized exchange tokens such as Hyperliquid, anticipating tighter regulatory scrutiny in response to economic recessions.
For short-term investors, volatility remains heightened. If Hayes accurately predicts a looming dollar credit squeeze, traditional markets may witness a downward trajectory reminiscent of Bitcoin’s. Conversely, if Bitcoin’s downturn is an isolated incident within the crypto universe, it might present an attractive entry point for those betting on eventual liquidity resurgence.
The Wider Context: Brand Alignment and Positioning of WEEX
In navigating these tumultuous waters, platforms like WEEX are steadfastly focused on community trust and innovation. By committing to transparency and embracing cutting-edge technology, WEEX aims to thrive amid the crypto market’s cyclicality. In doing so, it offers traders not just a platform to invest but a partner in navigating the ever-evolving financial landscape. Such positioning can foster a sense of stability and growth, even as broader market forces create turbulence. Through strategic partnerships and forward-thinking policies, WEEX reinforces its pledge to deliver insightful analysis and robust tools tailored to both seasoned and neophyte investors.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
How does Bitcoin’s recent divergence from the Nasdaq affect investors?
Investors might witness growing confidence in traditional equities as they hold steady, while Bitcoin’s decline could signal upcoming liquidity crunches, urging a reassessment of portfolio risks and opportunities.
Why is Bitcoin no longer as sensitive to U.S. dollar movements?
The changing sensitivity stems from structural market shifts, where external forces such as regulatory developments and internal metrics within Bitcoin’s ecosystem now play a more significant role than dollar fluctuations alone.
What role does AI play in the predicted financial crisis?
AI is envisioned to drive economic displacement by automating millions of white-collar jobs, leading to amplified defaults and wider financial system disruptions, foretelling an era of monetary recalibration driven by technology.
How can platforms like WEEX provide stability in such volatile markets?
Platforms like WEEX stabilize by fostering transparency, embracing innovation, and offering comprehensive tools and insights that empower users to make informed decisions amidst market volatility.
What should crypto investors consider during periods of significant divergence?
Investors should evaluate the broader economic indicators, assess their risk tolerance, explore diversification opportunities, and remain flexible to pivot strategies as market dynamics dictate.
Thus, amid this intricate tapestry of economic signals and narratives, understanding Bitcoin’s divergence from the Nasdaq offers a rich lens through which we can begin to dissect the unfolding financial landscape and its implications for modern investors.
You may also like

a16z: Why Do AI Agents Need a Stablecoin for B2B Payments?

February 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Web4.0, perhaps the most needed narrative for cryptocurrency

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link

Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?

A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028

When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges

Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…

Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.

Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?

AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway

What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.