NDV's Jason: From Bitcoin to Global Macro, How Markets and AI Changed My Investing

Author: NDV Research & Observations | Jason

Tiger Brokers' "Tiger Talk" host Manlin spoke with NDV founding partner Jason Huang, covering his investment experience and evolving methods, extending to digital assets, global macro, AI research tools, and his personal feelings about managing money. The following is organized by theme, with views and cases based on his own account in this interview.

This interview is about how Jason forms investment judgments and how he changes them when new evidence emerges. Running through GBTC, agricultural commodities, MSTR, and AI is his repeated questioning of three things: whether there is support behind the price, whether he understands it deeply enough, and whether he can endure the time needed for his judgment to play out.

1. From Bitcoin to Global Macro

Jason worked in primary market investing early on, later managed family office money, and founded NDV in 2023. Speaking about changes after managing his own fund, he first mentioned shifting from buy-and-hold to gradually considering both long and short positions; second, expanding from Bitcoin-related assets to commodities such as gold and oil.

There are two reasons for this shift. On one hand, he believes different assets have unsynchronized cycles, and a broader research scope increases options and helps smooth volatility. On the other hand, as Bitcoin's scale has grown, expecting the same multiple returns as before may take longer. His long-term view on Bitcoin has not changed because of this, but he has begun to compare other opportunities more seriously.

Reviewing his early investments, he admitted that a considerable portion of returns came from the market's overall rise. Tool selection and active judgment contributed, but you cannot count all results in a tailwind as personal ability. What he cares more about is whether his original methods still work when the market turns unfavorable.

2. GBTC's Discount Led Him to Look for Support Beyond Price

After the FTX turmoil, Jason noticed that trusts like GBTC, which hold Bitcoin, were trading at a significant discount to the value of their underlying assets. Manlin's key follow-up question was: Does the cheapness come from panic, or has the market already detected risks that have not yet been exposed?

Jason recalled that what gave him confidence at the time included third-party audits and the team's verification of Grayscale-related on-chain wallets. He tried to judge whether the underlying assets existed and how much could be verified, then assess whether the price left room for remaining uncertainty. The key here is to look for verifiable support; you cannot conclude something is cheap just because of the decline.

This also shaped his understanding of "non-consensus": when the market is very pessimistic, you still need to find clear evidence to justify a different view. A direction being unpopular is not enough by itself.

3. When Relative Prices Reach Extremes, Return to the Numbers

On oil and silver, Jason used the relative prices of the two assets to illustrate his research method. He first observes whether their price relationship has deviated from historical norms, then checks whether supply, demand, and market narratives can explain the gap.

He is especially wary of bullish stories that keep emerging after prices rise. Increased use and strong demand may all be true; but whether they can explain a sharp price increase in a short time still needs to be tested with numbers. In unfamiliar areas, he requires a more obvious price deviation to compensate for his cognitive shortcomings.

In this method, extreme relative price states are research clues. Historically rare price relationships cannot directly tell people when a reversal will happen, nor can they replace understanding of specific assets. The agricultural commodities experience in the interview precisely reveals the difficulty of waiting.

4. Agricultural Commodities Review: Judging Direction and Being Able to Wait Are Two Different Things

Jason once judged that rising oil prices would affect agricultural commodities along the cost chain, and participated in related opportunities accordingly. By his account, after waiting several months, he exited the trade, and only then did the market show the expected change. He called this experience "cutting before dawn."

This review did not offer a simple "persistence wins" answer. Instead, Jason saw more clearly: familiarity with a field affects whether you can withstand adverse price moves; for unfamiliar assets, seemingly reasonable reasoning alone may not be enough to support long-term waiting.

His adjustment was to consider both the price tolerance range and the time waiting range. How much loss requires a reassessment, and how long without the expected change requires an exit, should both be part of the decision. One time admitting a mistake later proved too early, but that does not mean the constraints at the time did not exist.

5. Long-Term Optimism and Trading Expression Can Be Separate

Around MSTR, Manlin raised an intuitive question: If you are long-term bullish on Bitcoin, why would you hold a bearish view on related stocks? Jason's answer is that being bullish on an asset does not mean you must be fully invested at all times; which tool to choose, what price to pay, and when to hold cash need to be considered separately.

Reviewing his changing attitude toward MSTR, he emphasized that the evidence he focuses on is also changing: signals from the company, cash and payment pressures, and whether the market has already reflected these changes. Deteriorating risk not yet priced in, versus improving financials while the market remains in panic, lead to different judgments.

The key point here is that when researching a long-term bullish asset, you still retain the ability to adjust your view. The historical case illustrates his decision-making process and does not constitute a judgment on the current direction of the related stock.

6. Bitcoin Research Increasingly Focuses on the Demand Side

Manlin observed that Jason used to discuss halving and the four-year cycle more, but later increasingly focused on ETFs, institutional money, and dollar liquidity. Jason explained this shift through changes in supply and demand forces.

In his understanding, as Bitcoin's existing supply grows, the relative impact of new issuance on the overall market is declining; tools like ETFs allow more traditional financial capital to participate, so changes on the demand side become more important. He began studying Bitcoin within the framework of global assets, currencies, and capital flows.

This does not mean the interview proved the four-year cycle has failed. Jason expressed a change in research focus and his judgment that Bitcoin will further integrate with traditional finance. Broader capital participation, institutional building, and industry trust still need time.

7. Stablecoin Use Cases and How Much Shareholders Can Earn Need to Be Viewed Separately

Besides Bitcoin, Jason is bullish on stablecoins' use in transfers and settlement. What he values is whether transactions can be faster and cheaper, whether they can support 24/7 settlement, and further connect to tokenized asset trading. Reducing real transaction costs is an important basis for him to judge whether a technology can be more widely adopted.

But when Manlin asked where long-term profits will remain, his answer was more cautious. How revenue is distributed among issuers, banks, and other participants will be affected by regulation and commercial relationships; industry growth does not directly equal shareholder returns for a particular company.

Therefore, he puts stocks back into the company itself for analysis: where revenue and profit come from, whether future growth is reasonable, and whether the current price makes sense. For assets like Bitcoin, he understands price more from supply and demand, relative scale, and potential buyers. On the surface they belong to the same digital asset theme, but behind them may be completely different businesses.

8. After News Comes Out, Watch How Price Reacts

On regulatory news, Jason emphasized that he observes the price reaction after an event. If the market discussion is intense but the price does not change accordingly, he keeps asking: Has the news already been priced in, and does the actual impact match the narrative?

This continues the same habit throughout the interview: first understand the event, then check what price the market has paid for it. A story making sense does not mean it still contains an exploitable price gap; being long-term bullish on an industry does not mean you can skip comparing tools and valuations.

9. AI Makes Research Faster, but Judgment Still Needs to Be Tested by Results

Jason said the team currently has no dedicated researchers, and he has used AI to help track multiple commodities, screen for extreme relative price situations, organize information, and analyze options risk. This allows him to access more assets at lower cost and leave more time for questions worth deep research.

As information acquisition and processing become easier, where does investment edge come from? He believes judgment and selection of opportunities remain important: whether the story is already reflected in the price, what capital and time constraints different investors face, and whether he can understand the reasons behind the price.

On specific tools, he shared his experience alternating between Claude Code and Codex, using the metaphors of "liberal arts student" and "science student." This is about personal user experience. He cares more about whether a tool actually solves problems, such as writing, research, or risk analysis, rather than using new tools for their own sake.

At the same time, he admitted that although he is a heavy AI user, he has not fully participated in related investment opportunities. Insufficient understanding of hardware and manufacturing, as well as concerns about hot asset prices, have affected his participation. He also reminds himself that the successful experience from familiarity with Bitcoin may create path dependence.

10. Public Expression Is Self-Monitoring but Also Brings Internal Friction

Jason talked about the multi-person podcast The Wanderers and his personal show "20 Minutes of Non-Consensus." He wants to leave his judgments on record and review them later: why he thought that way at the time, what happened afterward, and what needs correction. Continuous writing, investor communication, and public expression all serve this purpose.

He also admitted that negative comments make him uncomfortable. Public expression helps him, but that does not mean there is no emotional cost. In terms of time allocation, he increasingly values high-quality information and communication, reduces unnecessary meetings, and focuses energy on things he considers more valuable.

11. Managing Other People's Money Amplifies Responsibility

The pressure of managing money includes both whether investors were protected during declines and whether opportunities were captured during rises. Jason believes that compared with managing his own money, this sense of responsibility amplifies emotional pressure and also forces him to build stronger discipline.

In the rapid-fire Q&A, he chose Bitcoin over gold on a ten-year horizon and mentioned watching U.S. Treasury issuance. These answers reflect his personal judgment. The more striking self-reminder throughout the interview is not to treat himself as a "god" when making money: past success can provide experience, but it can also make it harder to admit new opportunities and one's own limitations.