Le Royaume-Uni interdit la vente de dérivés cryptographiques aux investisseurs de détail et déclare vouloir économiser 69 millions de dollars en pertes

La Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) du Royaume-Uni a interdit la vente de produits dérivés de crypto-monnaie aux investisseurs de détail dans une mesure qui, selon elle, permettra aux clients ciblés d’économiser 53 millions de livres sterling (68,9 millions de dollars) de pertes chaque année.

L’interdiction entre en vigueur le 6 janvier 2021

Dans une déclaration du 6 octobre, le régulateur a déclaré que la vente, la commercialisation et la distribution de tout produit dérivé, y compris les contrats de différence, les options, les contrats à terme et les billets négociés en bourse (ETN) par toute société locale ou étrangère opérant au Royaume-Uni, est interdite. .

L’Autorité a déclaré que les dérivés basés sur des actifs numériques tels que Bitcoin ( BTC ) ou Ethereum ( ETH ) sont «mal adaptés aux consommateurs de détail en raison du préjudice qu’ils posent». La FCA a décrit une série de risques qu’elle considère comme résultant de ces produits. Ils incluent un manque de «base fiable pour l’évaluation» de l’actif sous-jacent, des manipulations de marché et une volatilité «extrême» des prix.

Il a déclaré que les clients de détail n’avaient pas de «besoin d’investissement légitime pour investir dans ces produits» et qu’ils ne comprenaient pas non plus pleinement le négoce de produits dérivés. L’interdiction, proposée pour la première fois en juillet 2019, n’affecte pas le trading de monnaies virtuelles telles que le bitcoin, qui ne sont pas réglementées par la FCA.

Les investisseurs de détail détenant actuellement de tels dérivés cryptographiques seront autorisés à les conserver aussi longtemps qu’ils le souhaitent, a rapporté Bloomberg.

Sheldon Mills, directeur exécutif par intérim de la stratégie et de la concurrence à la FCA, a commenté:

La volatilité significative des prix, combinée aux difficultés inhérentes à l’évaluation fiable des crypto-actifs, expose les consommateurs de détail à un risque élevé de subir des pertes en échangeant des crypto-dérivés. Nous avons des preuves que cela se produit à une échelle significative. L’interdiction offre un niveau de protection approprié.

Chainlink for more security with Bitcoin on Ethereum – BitGo shows transparency

Bitcoin is becoming increasingly popular in Decentralized Finance (DeFi) . This is mainly due to the status of BTC and its relevance for the entire cryptospace.

But since DeFi mainly runs on the Ethereum blockchain, Bitcoin can only be used there in the form of „promissory notes“ (derivatives or synthesized assets)

In order to use the bitcoins in the form of derivatives on the Ethereum blockchain, tokens that are stored with real BTC must be issued. We are talking about the most popular BTC image on Ethereum – WBTC from BitGo.

But until now there has been a lack of transparency. There were concerns that more derivatives were being issued than Bitcoin could ever cover.

This should be over now. The crypto custody service BitGo and Chainlink have now joined forces to verify the actual amount of real Bitcoin stored.

Bitcoin Reserve verified by WBTC through Chainlink

Chainlink’s decentralized Oracle should help BitGo to gain even more trust. Because currently you have to give the Bitcoin to someone else in order to get a BTC derivative on the Ethereum blockchain. A decentralized verification would be more than helpful at this point.

Since Bitcoin is also about „don’t trust, verify“, this mechanism does not really fit into the basic construct of BTC.

Nevertheless, the community should be convinced with additional transparency to transfer their BTC to the ETH blockchain in order to participate in the flourishing DeFi market.

We are confident that Chainlink will provide WBTC users with a reliable, on-demand source of collateral information as well as an additional level of transparency for tracking WBTC reserves.

Why is a strong dollar not good for Bitcoin?

Everyone wants to see the strength of the dollar, but is it really positive?

The usefulness of a fiat currency lies primarily in its stability. The ideal is a fair compromise.  In this case, the shortage of supply is not the most important thing. What is important is that the monetary supply reflects the amount of goods and services available at any given time. In other words, production and currency must be synchronized in order to have price stability. In the case of speculative assets, the opposite is true. A scarce asset increases in value with increasing demand. But even the most scarce asset can fall in price, if demand falls due to a lack of liquidity. Why do so many Bitcoiners promote a strong dollar? 

Here is a great irony. The Bitcoin community celebrates the shortage of Bitcoin and welcomes the arrival of new buyers. But it is generally critical of cash injections. We must remember that this is a community obsessed with the price of Bitcoin. It’s our bread and butter to read a new price forecast. It’s said that Bitcoin will reach $40K very soon. But then it will easily reach $250k. And after that, it’ll keep going up like crazy.

Now, you could say that Bitcoin is priceless. We say informally that it has a price, but in reality the term is not the most appropriate. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. It’s a crypt currency and what it really has is an exchange rate. And, at the moment, its most important pair is the US dollar. A currency always exists in relation to other assets. Does a medium of exchange without exchange make sense? That would be absurd.

Exchange is the life of a currency. The dollar, for example, is closely related to the domestic production of the United States and the rate of other currencies. If there is too much money, inflation will be triggered. If there is too little money, deflation sets in. If the dollar rises in value relative to other currencies, exports suffer. If the dollar falls in value in relation to other currencies, the price of imports rises.

The stability of the dollar is important for the US economy and world trade. And that means moving away from extremes. Deflation and inflation. Strength and weakness. The adjective „strong“ is generally regarded as positive. And one could assume that all countries wish to have a strong currency. But here we must make an important distinction. We could say that a currency is strong if it is stable and has a high level of adoption. Such a currency makes a sound financial market possible.

On the other hand, the adjective „strong“ can be used in a slightly different sense.  „Strong“ in this context does not mean stability. What it means is lack of liquidity. This leads to a fall in demand, reduced spending and depreciation of assets. It also hurts exports and makes imports more expensive. This scenario decreases revenues. Consequently, unemployment increases and the economy decreases.

This contradicts many of the public’s assumptions about the economy and money. Of course, this does not mean that it is false. What it really means is that the average person understands very little about economics. 

Counter-cultural movements have traditionally promoted savings and discouraged spending.  That is, materialism and excess. This discussion is perfectly valid. And everyone has the right to choose their own lifestyle.  However, in this article I will limit myself to describing the economic fact. I will do so as one who describes the processes of a machine.

Spending has a twin brother. That is, one cannot live without the other. I mean the brothers, expenditure and income. Because one man’s expenditure is another man’s income. In other words, the economy requires transactions. And economic growth needs money to circulate.  This does not mean that we should all become consumerists. What it really means is that, from a financial point of view, the smartest thing to do is to become an investor.

The investor is different from the saver.The saver accumulates dollars. The investor invests in assets. The saver discourages spending and wants a strong currency. But without spending there is no income. And without income, there is no employment. Therefore, the economy does not grow. On the other hand, the investor wants economic growth, because his investments depend on the success of the economy. Liquidity injections raise the price of assets. Then we have jobs, growth and investments. But with a stable currency. 

Of course, there is still a discontented minority of investors who want to return to the past. Historically, in the promotion of the saver we have right-wing groups and left-wing groups. But in the case of the crypto community, this current comes to us from the American right. The libertarians, in particular. This is a position that derives from classical liberalism and goes back to the time of Thomas Jefferson. Their hero is the self-sufficient individual, inspired by the Yeoman farmers and the pioneers. It is an ultra-conversational vision that promotes the separation of the state and the economy. As well as the return to the gold standard. The current still lives in a very small wing of the Republican Party (remember Ron Paul?) and in the Libertarian Party. And in economic matters they rely heavily on the Austrian school and the Chicago school. 

Of course, I am afraid that this is more of a political than an economic movement. I mean, these ideas are more popular among libertarians than among contemporary economists. In the investment world, these ideas are still alive in many gold beetles and many bitcoiners. Wall Street, for example, has fully subscribed to the path of the investor. But not just Wall Street. The way of the investor is the way of governments, the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the banks, the multilateral organisations, the big corporations and, above all, the Federal Reserve.

However, a medium of exchange cannot claim to be totally autonomous. That would be pointless. It is like having a dollar note and saying that its exchange value is irrelevant. That is like buying a watch and not caring whether it gives the time or not. Or, it’s like creating a language that only its creator understands. 

I must confess that I personally do care about the price of Bitcoin. I’m not satisfied with the idea that a Bitcoin is a Bitcoin. Would it be worth a ton of gold or $100 million on a desert island? An apple can be an apple, because I can eat the apple. Because with money I can meet my needs, such as housing, food and so on. A strong dollar does not increase the price of Bitcoin.Employment, economic growth, production and liquidity do increase the price of Bitcoin. That’s why I choose the path of the investor.

Bitcoin es una apuesta asimétrica y aquí está por qué deberías evitarlo…

La narrativa prominente para Bitcoin ha sido su correlación con el Oro y su capacidad de ser un almacén de valor. Esta narrativa ha impulsado el crecimiento y la correlación entre Bitcoin y Gold.

La correlación entre los dos activos ha ido en aumento últimamente y se sitúa en el 60% sobre una base de 30 días. A medida que esta narración gana fuerza en el mercado, los inversores tradicionales probablemente mantengan posiciones de Bitcoin y oro potencialmente por la misma razón de protegerse contra los sustos del mercado. Esto puede llevar a que Bitcoin y el oro tengan movimientos de precios direccionales similares, según un informe de Ecoinometrics.

2008 y 2020

Esta narrativa se vuelve aún más importante cuando se compara con la crisis financiera enfrentada en 2008, donde el balance de la Reserva Federal había crecido un 150% y los programas de alivio cuantitativo empujaron el crecimiento por encima del 400%.

En 2020, la Fed ya ha ampliado su balance en alrededor del 70%, mientras que los activos del Banco Central Europeo se han expandido en casi un 40%. El Banco de Japón no se quedó atrás ya que su balance subió un 20%, pero ha estado en el camino de la QE infinita desde 2013, por lo que no fue una sorpresa.

Este mapa tenía más sentido cuando nos alejamos a 2008 y comparamos el crecimiento de los activos del banco central desde entonces. El aumento del balance fue la Fed tratando de hacer frente a la crisis de liquidez, sin embargo, el año siguiente de los programas de QE terminan haciendo los daños reales en forma de la inflación del precio de los activos y la distorsión del mercado financiero.

A pesar de que el BCE y la Reserva Federal trataron de desapalancarse después de 2008, no tuvo ningún impacto.

Según el informe:

„La expectativa de que este patrón va a continuar es lo que está llevando a muchos inversores a buscar dinero sólido para preservar su riqueza.“

Bitcoin se desvinculará del oro

La narración de ‚Bitcoin es mejor oro que el oro‘ se afirmará cuando en algún momento Bitcoin empiece a corroer el valor total del mercado del oro. Este punto resultará en el desacoplamiento de los dos activos, que por ahora, es casi 50 veces. Esta fue una brecha enorme y el potencial alcista de Bitcoin es enorme, lo que lo convierte en una apuesta asimétrica.

Sin embargo, como esta narración no ha sido todavía dominante entre los comerciantes, puede proporcionar una ventaja a los que se dedican a la venta ambulante a largo plazo.