(Even though there was money to be made, Wall Street seems to have behaved 
somewhat appropriately/conservatively here, imho. Unlike in '08.   --rick)

How Wall Street Escaped the Crypto Meltdown

As cryptocurrency prices plunged and funds failed, strict rules on risky assets 
helped Wall Street companies sidestep the worst. Retail investors weren’t as 
lucky.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/05/business/economy/wall-st-cryptocurrency-prices.html

By Emily Flitter

July 5, 2022, 5:00 a.m. ET

Last November, in the midst of an exuberant cryptocurrency market, analysts at 
BNP Paribas, a French bank with a Wall Street presence, pulled together a list 
of 50 stocks they thought were overpriced — including many with strong links to 
digital assets.

They nicknamed this collection the “cappuccino basket,” a nod to the frothiness 
of the stocks. The bank then spun those stocks into a product that essentially 
gave its biggest clients — pension funds, hedge funds, the managers of 
multibillion-dollar family fortunes and other sophisticated investors — an 
opportunity to bet that the assets would eventually crash.

In the past month, as the froth around Bitcoin and other digital currencies 
dissipated, taking down some cryptocurrency companies that had sprung up to aid 
in their trading, the value of the cappuccino basket shrank by half.

Wall Street clients of BNP who bet that would happen are sitting pretty. Those 
on the other side of the trade — the small investors who loaded up on 
overpriced crypto assets and stocks during a retail trading boom — are reeling.

“The moves in crypto were coincident with retail money flooding into U.S. 
equities and equity options,” said Greg Boutle, who heads BNP’s U.S. equities 
and derivatives strategy group, which put together the trade. “There’s a big 
bifurcation between retail positioning and institutional positioning.” He 
declined to name the specific stocks that BNP clients got to bet against.

“The moves in crypto were coincident with retail money flooding into U.S. 
equities and equity options,” said Greg Boutle of BNP Paribas.

It’s not that financial giants didn’t want to be part of the fun. But Wall 
Street banks have been forced to sit it out — or, like BNP, approach crypto 
with ingenuity — partly because of regulatory guardrails put in place after the 
2008 financial crisis. At the same time, big money managers applied 
sophisticated strategies to limit their direct exposure to cryptocurrencies 
because they recognized the risks. So when the market crashed, they contained 
their losses.

“You hear of the stories of institutional investors dipping their toes, but 
it’s a very small part of their portfolios,” said Reena Aggarwal, a finance 
professor at Georgetown University and the director of its Psaros Center for 
Financial Markets and Policy.

Unlike their fates in the financial crisis, when the souring of subprime 
mortgages backed by complex securities took down both banks and regular people, 
leading to a recession, the fortunes of Wall Street and Main Street have 
diverged more fully this time. (Bailouts eventually saved the banks last time.) 
Collapsing digital asset prices and struggling crypto start-ups didn’t 
contribute much to the recent convulsions in financial markets, and the risk of 
contagion is low.

But if the crypto meltdown has been a footnote on Wall Street, it is a bruising 
event for many individual investors who poured their cash into the 
cryptocurrency market.

“I really do worry about the retail investors who had very little funds to 
invest,” Ms. Aggarwal said. “They are getting clobbered.”

Lured by the promise of quick returns, astronomical wealth and an industry that 
isn’t controlled by the financial establishment, many retail investors bought 
newly created digital currencies or stakes in funds that held these assets. 
Many were first-time traders who, stuck at home during the pandemic, also dived 
into meme stocks like GameStop and AMC Entertainment.

They were bombarded by ads from cryptocurrency start-ups, like apps that 
promised investors outsize returns on their crypto holdings or funds that gave 
them exposure to Bitcoin. Sometimes, these investors made investment decisions 
that weren’t tied to value, egging on one another using online discussion 
platforms like Reddit.

Spurred partly by the frenzy, the cryptocurrency industry blossomed quickly. At 
its height, the market for digital assets reached $3 trillion — a large number, 
although no bigger than JPMorgan Chase’s balance sheet. It sat outside the 
traditional financial system, an alternative space with little regulation and 
an anything-goes mentality.

The meltdown began in May when TerraUSD, a cryptocurrency that was supposed to 
be pegged to the dollar, began to sink, dragged down by the collapse of another 
currency, Luna, to which it was algorithmically linked. The death spiral of the 
two coins tanked the broader digital asset market.

Martin Robert has two Bitcoins stuck on Celsius Networks and is afraid he will 
never see them again. He had planned to cash the coins in to pay down debt.

The fortunes of many small investors also began tanking.

On the day that Celsius froze withdrawals, Martin Robert, a day trader in 
Henderson, Nev., was preparing to celebrate his 31st birthday. He had promised 
his wife that he would take some time off from watching the markets. Then he 
saw the news.

“I couldn’t take my coins out fast enough,” Mr. Robert said. “We’re being held 
hostage.”

Mr. Robert has two Bitcoins stuck on the Celsius network and is afraid he’ll 
never see them again. Before their price plunged, he intended to cash the 
Bitcoins out to pay down around $30,000 in credit card debt. He still believes 
that digital assets are the future, but he said some regulation was necessary 
to protect investors.

“Pandora’s box is opened — you can’t close it,” Mr. Robert said.

Beth Wheatcraft, a 35-year-old mother of three in Saginaw, Mich., who uses 
astrology to guide her investing decisions, said trading in crypto required a 
“stomach of steel.” Her digital assets are mostly in Bitcoin, Ether and 
Litecoin — as well as some Dogecoins that she can’t recover because they are 
stored on a computer with a corrupted hard drive.

Ms. Wheatcraft stayed away from Celsius and other firms offering similar 
interest-bearing accounts, saying she saw red flags.

Beth Wheatcraft, a mother of three, said trading in crypto required a “stomach 
of steel.”

The Bitcoin Trust, a fund popular with small investors, is also experiencing 
turmoil. Grayscale, the cryptocurrency investment firm behind the fund, pitched 
it as a way to invest in crypto without the risks because it alleviated the 
need for investors to buy Bitcoin themselves.

But the fund’s structure doesn’t allow for new shares to be created or 
eliminated quickly enough to keep up with changes in investor demand. This 
became a problem when the price of Bitcoin began to sink rapidly. Investors 
struggling to get out drove the fund’s share price well below the price of 
Bitcoin.

In October, Grayscale asked regulators for permission to transform the fund 
into an exchange-traded fund, which would make trading easier and thus align 
its shares more closely with the price of Bitcoin. Last Wednesday, the 
Securities and Exchange Commission denied the request. Grayscale quickly filed 
a petition challenging the decision.

When the crypto market was rollicking, Wall Street banks sought ways to 
participate, but regulators wouldn’t allow it. Last year, the Basel Committee 
on Banking Supervision, which helps set capital requirements for big banks 
around the world, proposed giving digital tokens like Bitcoin and Ether the 
highest possible risk weighting. So if banks wanted to put those coins on their 
balance sheets, they would have to hold at least the equivalent value in cash 
to offset the risk.

U.S. bank regulators have also warned banks to stay away from activities that 
would land cryptocurrencies on their balance sheets. That meant no loans 
collateralized by Bitcoin or other digital tokens; no market making services 
where banks took on the risk of ensuring that a particular market remained 
liquid enough for trading; and no prime brokerage services, where banks help 
the trading of hedge funds and other large investors, which also involves 
taking on risk for every trade.

Banks thus ended up offering clients limited products related to crypto, 
allowing them an entree into this emerging world without running afoul of 
regulators.

Goldman Sachs put Bitcoin prices on its client portals so clients could see the 
prices move even though they couldn’t use the bank’s services to trade them. 
Both Goldman and Morgan Stanley began offering some of their wealthiest 
individual clients the chance to buy shares of funds linked to digital assets 
rather than giving them ways to buy tokens directly.

Only a small subset of Goldman’s clients qualified to buy investments linked to 
crypto through the bank, said Mary Athridge, a Goldman Sachs spokeswoman. 
Clients had to go through a “live training” session and attest to having 
received warnings from Goldman about the riskiness of the assets. Only then 
were they allowed to put money into “third party funds” that the bank had 
examined first.

Morgan Stanley clients couldn’t put more than 2.5 percent of their total net 
worth into such investments, and investors could invest in only two crypto 
funds — including the Galaxy Bitcoin Fund — run by outside managers with 
traditional banking backgrounds.

Still, those managers may not have escaped the crypto crash. Mike Novogratz, 
the chief executive of Galaxy Digital and a former Goldman banker and investor, 
told New York magazine last month that he had taken on too much risk. Galaxy 
Digital Asset Management’s total assets under management, which peaked at 
nearly $3.5 billion in November, fell to around $1.4 billion by the end of May, 
according to a recent disclosure by the firm. Had Galaxy not sold a major chunk 
of Luna three months before it collapsed, Mr. Novogratz would have been in 
worse shape.

But while Mr. Novogratz, a billionaire, and the wealthy bank clients can easily 
survive their losses or were saved by strict regulations, retail investors had 
no such safeguards.

Jacob Willette, a 40-year-old man in Mesa, Ariz. who works as a DoorDash 
delivery driver, stored his entire life savings in an account with Celsius that 
promised high returns. At its peak, the stored value was $120,000, Mr. Willette 
said.

He planned to use the money to buy a house. When crypto prices started to 
slide, Mr. Willette looked for reassurance from Celsius executives that his 
money was safe. But all he found online were evasive answers from company 
executives as the platform struggled, eventually freezing more than $8 billion 
in deposits.

Celsius representatives did not respond to requests for comment.

“I trusted these people,” Mr. Willette said. “I just don’t see how what they 
did is not illegal.”

Emily Flitter covers banking and Wall Street. She is the author of “The White 
Wall: How Big Finance Bankrupts Black America.” @FlitterOnFraud

-- 
Iw mailing list
[email protected]
http://sticklist.org/mailman/listinfo/iw_sticklist.org

Reply via email to