Bits + Bips LIVE

This episode unpacks the market chaos triggered by the Trump administration's tariff strategy—exploring the geopolitical debates, economic fallout, and the resulting uncertainty impacting both traditional and crypto markets.

Episode Introduction & Host Banter

• James Safford, Joe McCann, Noel Aerson, and Rahm Aluwalia kick off the discussion, setting the stage for analyzing the intersection of crypto and macroeconomics.
• Note: Sponsor mentions are omitted as per guidelines.

Tariff Turmoil and White House Division

• The discussion immediately centers on tariffs as the dominant macro theme, highlighting conflicting reports and apparent division within the White House regarding exemptions, particularly for electronics.
• James notes the lack of clear messaging, citing differing signals from figures like Lutnik versus other administration sources, suggesting internal policy disagreements.
• Rahm introduces the recent All-In podcast debate between David Sacks and Larry Summers as a key point of reference for understanding the different perspectives on the tariff strategy.

Analyzing the Sachs vs. Summers Tariff Debate (Rahm's View)

• Rahm summarizes David Sacks' arguments, which focused on the geopolitical lens:
  • The US enriched China ("baby dragon became a dragon") through policies like Most Favored Nation status and WTO inclusion.
  • China failed to meet expectations regarding behavior (Taiwan, human rights, international standards).
  • China never truly opened its markets, imposing restrictions like mandatory joint ventures (JVs).
• Rahm finds Sacks' points largely accurate but critiques Larry Summers' defense of past engagement policies as less compelling. He suggests Summers missed an opportunity to critique the present chaotic approach and advocate for alternatives like nearshoring to Mexico. Rahm characterizes the debate as somewhat disconnected, with Sacks critiquing the past and Summers defending it.

Analyzing the Sachs vs. Summers Tariff Debate (Noel's View)

• Noel agrees the debate was fascinating but takes a different angle, critiquing both Sacks and Summers for focusing too narrowly on China when geopolitics is broader.
• She argues that if the goal was specifically targeting China, less disruptive methods than broad tariffs (which risk inflation and business failures) could have been used. Noel emphasizes the lack of clarity on the tariffs' objectives, stating, "there's no clear message as to what these tariffs are actually even supposed to achieve."
• The critical missing piece, Noel highlights, was the failure to answer the forward-looking question posed in the debate: "How will we know we're on the right track? What metrics are we looking for?"

Market Whiplash and the Search for Strategy

• Joe McCann expresses the difficulty investors face navigating the "whiplash nature of the messaging," trying to reconcile words, actions, and omissions.
• He introduces a contrarian thought: perhaps the apparent chaos is the strategy, designed to bring numerous countries (reportedly 130) to the negotiating table simultaneously, a situation potentially unprecedented outside structures like the WTO (World Trade Organization) - an international body established to supervise and liberalize international trade.
• Joe points to Vietnam's rapid drop to zero tariffs and the EU's willingness to negotiate as potential early signs of this strategy bearing fruit, suggesting the administration might be leveraging US market dependency, even if the approach causes short-term market turmoil for participants.

Critiquing the "Grand Plan" Narrative

• Rahm pushes back on the "grandmaster plan" idea, comparing the administration's approach to a mouse randomly bumping into walls until it finds the exit. He argues it lacks an organized strategy.
• He also reframes the US-China economic relationship, noting that while China was enriched, the US financialized, imported disinflation, and upgraded to a service economy, suggesting a more complex picture than Sacks presented.

Execution Failures and Market Reactions

• James echoes the sentiment that the policy rollout has been poor, highlighting the internal contradictions (e.g., potentially exempting chips after arguing for onshoring critical tech).
• He points out how market predictions about tariffs (stronger dollar, lower rates) were inverted, with the dollar weakening and Treasury yields initially spiking (10-year hitting 4.5%, 30-year hitting 5%). This reinforces the theme of mixed messaging and unintended consequences.
• James emphasizes the real-world impact, citing reports of businesses facing failure due to reliance on Chinese manufacturing and the years it would take to build domestic alternatives, even with incentives.

Intentional Chaos vs. Strategic Blunder

• Joe references Steve Bannon's "flood the zone" concept as a possible explanation for the chaotic approach, suggesting it might be an intentional tactic to overwhelm and disrupt. He also notes Trump's tendency to "AB test stuff in production," floating ideas to gauge public reaction, even if risky for global trade policy.
• Rahm contrasts Trump's initial "founder president" velocity with the current "bull in a china shop" approach to trade, arguing it lacks a principled foundation and seems driven by personality clashes (Bessant vs. Lutnik) and real-time reactions rather than a coherent plan. He criticizes Trump's misunderstanding of the trade deficit.

Market Trust, Political Constraints, and the "Trump Put"

• Noel reiterates the market impact of the lack of trust and clear goals, noting this has worsened.
• Rahm observes a positive sign: the public and market consensus seems to be against the tariffs, unlike typical populist appeals. He argues Trump is now directly linked to the market consequences, creating a political constraint.
• Noel provides data points: a Reuters poll showing significant Republican (24%) and Independent (around 70%) disapproval of the tariffs post-"Liberation Day." This disapproval, combined with approaching midterms and the threat of impeachment if Democrats regain control, creates pressure for a potential policy pivot – the "Trump put." Seven Republican senators co-signing a bill to unwind the tariffs further signals internal party dissent.

The Basis Trade Unwind and Market Liquidity Crisis

• James raises the question of whether the Treasury market spike (30-year to 5%, 10-year to 4.5%) forced the 90-day tariff pause. He asks Joe to explain the "basis trade" and its potential role.
• Joe explains the Basis Trade: A strategy involving simultaneously holding a long position in an asset (like a US Treasury bond) and a short position in its corresponding futures contract, aiming to profit from the small price difference (basis) which converges over time. Because the basis is small, hedge funds use significant leverage.
• Joe explains the recent Treasury market volatility likely involved an unwind of these highly leveraged basis trades. Forced liquidations occurred due to margin calls or broader risk-off sentiment, exacerbated by thinning liquidity in Treasury futures markets. He notes the cost to trade futures (spreads) widened dramatically, indicating severe liquidity stress.
• This thin liquidity extended to equity futures (E-minis) and individual stocks, amplifying price moves. Joe states, "these types of moves are not slowing down... each one of these markets is starting to feel this bit of stress." This underscores the need for consistent messaging from the administration.

Market Stress Indicators and Reflexivity

• Rahm confirms the thin liquidity observation across markets, noting the "reflexivity" where small events can cause large moves in the absence of fundamental anchors (citing high P/E ratios for Costco, Nvidia). He likens it to a "hockey puck on ice."
• He notes some signs of liquidity returning slightly but highlights the blow-up of "safety trades" (like gold miners ETF GDX) and his own contrarian purchase of bonds.
• James adds another indicator: the percentage of US exchange volume from ETFs. It spiked over 40% during peak stress and remains elevated around 35%, signaling continued uncertainty. He cites the April 9th SPY market-on-close auction trading at an unusual ~1% premium as evidence of market dislocation due to thin liquidity.

Hedge Fund Positioning and ETF Liquidity Valves

• Joe explains that extreme volatility and wide spreads in individual stocks push fast-money traders (hedge funds) towards more liquid macro products like ETFs (SPY, QQQ, etc.) to manage risk and express views.
• Rahm presents a chart showing hedge fund net exposure at a 5-year low (zero percentile, around 40% net long), indicating a highly cautious, defensive posture ("crouch position"). This low positioning, however, means any positive news could fuel a sharp rally.
• James reflects on how ETFs function as "liquidity valves," aggregating trading interest, a concept he wrote about years ago when many feared ETFs were destabilizing. He notes their resilience during the recent turmoil.

Crypto's Role in the Emerging Macro Landscape

• Noel connects the current macro upheaval to the "realignment" she's been writing about – the search for alternatives to the US dollar system by nations facing US pressure (sanctions, policy shifts).
• She sees the tariff situation accelerating the exploration of alternatives like CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies), stablecoins, and potentially Bitcoin, not as dollar replacements, but as tools for flexibility and resilience for both nations and individuals. Noel mentions a Moran paper suggesting gold and crypto could benefit from such geopolitical fractures.
• Rahm counters the idea that tariffs were needed to bring nations to the table, arguing the US already holds immense power via existing institutions (World Bank, IMF, WTO) and intelligence leverage. Joe adds that Trump's approach, while perhaps less efficient, plays better to his populist base and generates "good TV."

Economic Risks and Policy Levers

• Joe points out other Trump administration levers beyond tariffs: deregulation, tax cut extensions, and potential changes to bank regulations like the SLR (Supplementary Leverage Ratio) – a rule requiring large banks to hold a minimum level of capital against their assets. He suggests the tariff chaos might be a "big swing" early in the term, to be potentially offset later by pro-growth policies before the midterms.
• Rahm warns the economy is near "stall speed," citing weak real income growth, soft survey data, and tightening bank lending standards (shown in the Fed Loan Officer Survey). He argues the tariffs act as re-regulation, hindering business, and risk tipping a fragile economy into recession if confidence isn't restored quickly. He notes the irony that Trump's election initially boosted "animal spirits" (confidence driving economic activity), but the tariffs now risk unwinding that.

Market Psychology, Valuations, and Narrative Control

• Joe highlights the "real psychological damage" to markets, creating PTSD where rallies are seen as selling opportunities due to lack of confidence. Restoring this confidence requires consistent messaging, which is currently lacking.
• Rahm discusses market psychology reflected in valuations (like the S&P 500 P/E ratio). He argues the previous high multiples (e.g., 22x forward earnings) reflected optimism, while the current lower multiple (around 19.5x) reflects tactical fear. He doubts a return to peak optimism soon, even anticipating an intermediate-term rally.
• Joe pushes back on the relevance of P/E ratios in the current environment, arguing, "fundamentals don't matter... the only thing that matters right now are headlines." He sees the primary driver as news flow and policy signals from the administration.

China's Response and Potential Crypto Implications

• James notes the Fed signaling no May rate cut, pushing expectations to June/July, while China's "national team" might inject $100B+ into their markets via ETFs.
• Joe focuses on the Chinese Yuan (CNY) devaluation, allowing it to weaken past the key 7.20 level against the USD. This makes exports cheaper (offsetting tariffs) but also historically fuels Capital Flight narratives – wealthy individuals moving money out of China.
• Joe posits a key strategic insight: If China lets the Yuan weaken further, it signals less willingness for a deal and could drive capital flight, potentially boosting Bitcoin (as seen historically). If the Yuan strengthens back below 7.20, it might signal a higher probability of a trade deal with the US.
• Noel agrees, noting China might move towards crypto legislation sooner rather than later – not out of love for crypto, but to monitor and control inevitable capital outflows, potentially favoring stablecoins or even Bitcoin as non-US-controlled assets.
• Rahm outlines his own theoretical "playbook" to weaken China without a trade war: encourage crypto/stablecoin adoption within China, attract wealthy entrepreneurs via "golden passports," enable uncensored internet access (e.g., Starlink), and permit cyber counterattacks.

Upcoming Crypto Catalysts & Conclusion

• James flags key upcoming crypto events:
  • The Trump memecoin (ticker: TRUMP) token unlock on April 18th, releasing a significant portion of supply.
  • The launch of four Solana ETFs in Canada this week, notably featuring staking yields shared with investors, potentially setting a precedent.
• The hosts acknowledge they ran out of time to discuss stablecoins in depth, slating it for a future episode.

Strategic Conclusion

The episode highlights extreme market uncertainty driven by unpredictable tariff policies, forcing investors to focus on macro headlines and liquidity over fundamentals. Crypto AI investors must navigate this volatility, monitor policy shifts closely (especially regarding China and potential US crypto regulation), and watch liquidity indicators for strategic positioning.