Author: NDV Research Observation｜Jason
The host of Tiger Securities' "Little Tiger Interview," Manlin, converses with NDV founding partner Jason Huang. The discussion extends from investment experiences and changes in methods to digital assets, global macro, AI research tools, and personal feelings about managing funds. The following is summarized by theme, with opinions and cases organized based on this interview.
This interview discusses how Jason forms investment judgments and how he changes them when new evidence emerges. Central to his discussion of GBTC, agricultural products, MSTR, and AI are his repeated questions: Is there support behind the price, do I understand it deeply enough, and can I withstand the waiting time for judgment to materialize?
1. From Bitcoin to Global Macro
Jason initially engaged in primary market investments, later managing family office funds, and established NDV in 2023. When discussing the changes after managing a fund, he first mentions a gradual shift from buy-and-hold to considering both long and short positions; secondly, he expanded from Bitcoin-related assets to commodities like gold and oil.
This change has two layers of reasons. On one hand, he believes the cycles of different assets do not synchronize, and a broader research scope can increase options and help smooth volatility. On the other hand, as Bitcoin's scale expands, expecting multiple returns like in the past may take longer. His long-term view of Bitcoin has not changed, but he has started to compare other opportunities more seriously.
Reflecting on his early investments, he admits a significant portion of the profits came from the market's own rise. Tool selection and active judgment contributed, but one cannot attribute all results in favorable conditions to personal capability. He is more concerned about whether his original methods can still work when the market is unfavorable.
2. The Discount of GBTC Makes Him Look for Support Beyond Price
After the FTX incident, Jason noticed a significant discount between the trading price of trusts like GBTC that hold Bitcoin and the underlying asset's value. Manlin's key question is: Does the lower price come from panic, or has the market detected risks that have yet to be exposed?
Jason recalls that confidence was built by third-party audits and the team's verification of Grayscale-related on-chain wallets. He attempted to determine whether the underlying assets existed, how much could be verified, and measured whether the price left room for residual uncertainty. The focus here is on finding verifiable support, rather than concluding something is cheap based solely on its decline.
This also formed his understanding of "non-consensus": when the market is very pessimistic, if you can still find clear evidence, then there is reason to hold a different view from the market. A direction being unpopular alone is not sufficient.
3. When Relative Prices Reach Extremes, It's Time to Return to the Numbers
Talking about oil and silver, Jason uses the relative prices of these two assets to illustrate his research method. He first observes whether their price relationship deviates from historical norms, then examines whether supply, demand, and market narratives can explain this gap.
He is particularly cautious of positive stories that emerge after price increases. Increased utility and strong demand may indeed be true; however, whether they are enough to explain significant price rises in a short time still needs to be verified numerically. In unfamiliar areas, he requests more apparent price deviations to compensate for cognitive shortcomings.
In this methodology, extreme states of relative prices are research cues. Uncommon price relationships historically do not directly inform when reversals will occur, nor do they replace an understanding of specific assets. The experiences with agricultural products in the interview highlight the difficulty of waiting.
4. Reviewing Agricultural Products: Judgment Direction and the Ability to Wait Are Two Different Things
Jason once judged that rising oil prices would affect agricultural products along the cost chain and participated in related opportunities based on that. According to his reflection, after waiting a few months, he exited the trade, and only then did the market present the expected changes. He refers to this experience as "cutting before dawn."
This reflection does not provide a simple answer of "perseverance will lead to victory." Instead, Jason sees more clearly: Familiarity with a field affects one's ability to endure price reversals; for unfamiliar assets, merely reasonable reasoning may not be sufficient to support long-term waiting.
His adjustment involves simultaneously considering the price tolerance range and waiting period. How much loss requires re-evaluation, how long without anticipated changes necessitates exit, should both be included in decision-making. An early mistake does not mean the constraints at the time were nonexistent.
5. Long-Term Optimism and Trading Expression Can Be Separated
Regarding MSTR, Manlin raised an intuitive question: If one is optimistic about Bitcoin in the long term, why hold a bearish view on related stocks? Jason's answer is that being optimistic about an asset does not mean one must always be fully invested; one should consider which tools to choose, what price to pay, and when to hold cash separately.
Reflecting on his changing attitude towards 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. Risk deterioration that is not reflected in prices and financial conditions improving while the market remains in panic will create different judgments.
The key here is to retain the ability to adjust views when researching an asset one is optimistic about in the long term. Historical cases illustrate his decision-making process and do not constitute a judgment on the current direction of related stocks.
6. Bitcoin Research Is Increasingly Focusing on the Demand Side
Manlin observed that Jason previously discussed halving and four-year cycles more, but later focused increasingly on ETFs, institutional funds, and US dollar liquidity. Jason explains this shift with changes in supply and demand forces.
In his understanding, as the supply of Bitcoin increases, the relative impact of new issuance on the overall market is decreasing; tools like ETFs allow more traditional financial funds to participate, making changes on the demand side more crucial. He has started to place Bitcoin within the framework of global assets, currencies, and capital flows for study.
This does not mean the interview proved that the four-year cycle has become ineffective. Jason expresses a shift in research focus and his judgment that Bitcoin will further integrate with traditional finance. Broader capital participation, institutional development, and industry trust still require time.
7. The Use of Stablecoins and How Much Shareholders Can Earn Need to Be Considered Separately
Apart from Bitcoin, Jason is optimistic about the use of stablecoins in transfers and settlements. He values whether transactions can be faster and cheaper, whether they can support around-the-clock settlements, and further connect tokenized asset trading. Reducing actual trading costs is a crucial basis for judging whether a technology can be more widely accepted.
However, when Manlin inquired about where long-term profits lie, his response was more cautious. How earnings are distributed among issuers, banks, and other participants will be influenced by regulations and commercial relationships; industry growth does not directly equal shareholder returns for any particular company.
Therefore, he analyzes the stock based on the company itself: Where do revenues and profits come from, is future growth reasonable, and is the current price justifiable? For assets like Bitcoin, he understands prices more from supply and demand, relative scale, and potential buyers. Although they superficially belong to the same digital asset theme, there may be entirely different businesses behind them.
8. After News Breaks, It’s Important to Observe How Prices React
When discussing regulatory news, Jason emphasizes that he will observe price reactions after an event occurs. If the market is very active in discussion but prices do not change correspondingly, he will continue to ask: Is the news already reflected in advance, and does the actual impact align with the narrative?
This continues the same habit from the interview: first understanding the event and then checking what price the market paid for it. A story makes sense does not mean it still contains an exploitable price differential; being long-term optimistic about an industry cannot exclude comparisons of tools and valuations.
9. AI Makes Research Faster, but Judgments Still Need Result Validation
Jason mentioned that his team currently does not have dedicated researchers. He uses AI to assist in tracking various commodities, screening extreme cases of relative prices, organizing information, and analyzing option risks. This allows him to access more assets at a lower cost, leaving more time for issues worthy of in-depth study.
As information acquisition and processing become easier, where do investment advantages still come from? He believes that the judgment and selection of opportunities remain important: Is the story already reflected in the price, what capital and time constraints different investors face, and can one understand the reasons behind the prices?
On specific tools, he shared his experiences of alternating between using Claude Code and Codex, using "liberal arts major" and "science major" as metaphors. This discusses personal user experiences. He places more importance on whether tools actually solve problems, such as writing, research, or risk analysis, rather than using new tools for the sake of it.
At the same time, he acknowledges that although he heavily uses AI, he has not fully participated in related investment opportunities. Insufficient deep understanding of hardware and manufacturing processes, along with concerns about popular asset prices, have affected his level of participation. He also reminds himself that the successful experiences brought by familiarity with Bitcoin may create path dependence.
10. Public Expression Is a Form of Self-Supervision but Can Also Lead to Internal Conflicts
Jason discussed his personal program "20 Minutes of Non-Consensus" from the multi-person podcast The Wanderers. He hopes to leave behind his judgments and revisit them after some time: Why did he think that way initially, what happened later, and what needs correction. Continuous writing, communication with investors, and public expression all serve this purpose.
He also admits that negative comments can be distressing. Public expression is helpful to him, but it doesn't mean there are no emotional costs. In terms of time allocation, he increasingly values high-quality information and communication, reducing unnecessary meetings and focusing his energy on what he considers more valuable.
11. Managing Other People's Money Amplifies the Sense of Responsibility
The pressure brought by managing funds includes not only whether investors are protected during downturns but also whether opportunities are seized during upturns. Jason believes this sense of responsibility amplifies emotional pressure compared to managing one's own money, while also forcing oneself to establish stronger discipline.
In a rapid-fire Q&A, he chose Bitcoin over gold on a ten-year scale and mentioned his focus on the issuance of U.S. Treasury bonds. These responses reflect his personal judgments. A more pronounced self-reminder throughout the interview is not to think of oneself as a "god" when making money: past successes may provide experience but may also make it harder to acknowledge new opportunities and one's limitations.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
