Macro reality check: Why US$4,000 gold and falling BTC go hand in hand

Macro reality check: Why US$4,000 gold and falling BTC go hand in hand

Risk sentiment has retreated sharply, not due to a sudden economic contraction, but rather to growing investor unease over the sustainability of surging artificial intelligence-related capital expenditures and a surprisingly hawkish pivot from the US Federal Reserve.

Despite delivering a widely anticipated 25-basis-point rate cut to a target range of 3.75 per cent to 4.00 per cent, Chair Jerome Powell used the post-decision press conference to push back firmly against expectations of further easing, warning that inflation remains sticky and that the labour market, while cooling, still shows signs of underlying strength. This messaging effectively neutralised the dovish implications of the cut itself, triggering a repricing across asset classes.

Equity markets responded with a clear rotation out of high-duration tech names. The Nasdaq fell 1.6 per cent, significantly underperforming the Dow Jones, which declined only 0.2 per cent. This divergence underscores a market increasingly sceptical of the lofty valuations underpinning the AI trade, which had been a primary driver of the year’s gains. The repricing was mirrored in the bond market, where yields edged higher.

The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield climbed by two basis points to settle at 4.097 per cent, while the two-year yield rose one basis point to 3.608 per cent. This steepening of the yield curve, albeit modest, signals that traders are now pricing in a more prolonged period of elevated rates than previously expected. The US Dollar Index capitalised on this shift in sentiment, rising 0.3 per cent to 99.53, its highest level in three months, as global capital sought the relative safety of the greenback.

This risk-off environment spilt over into commodities and, more acutely, into the cryptocurrency market. Gold, often a haven during uncertainty, surged by 2.4 per cent to close at an extraordinary US$4,023.20 per ounce, a level that speaks to deep-seated anxieties about long-term monetary debasement and a potential flight from traditional financial assets. In the oil market, Brent crude was relatively stable, gaining just 0.1 per cent to settle at US$65 per barrel.

This calm, however, belies a complex backdrop. The market is digesting news that OPEC+ is poised to approve another modest output increase of 137,000 barrels per day for December, a move that would continue its gradual unwinding of production cuts. This potential supply boost is being counterbalanced by new US sanctions on Russia, which have stoked uncertainty about the reliability of global oil supply, creating a tense equilibrium that has so far prevented a major price move in either direction.

Against this macroeconomic tapestry, the cryptocurrency market has entered a period of pronounced weakness. Over the past 24 hours, the total market capitalisation has fallen by two per cent, extending a monthly decline of 6.46 per cent. The current market cap stands at approximately US$3.67 trillion, a figure that has broken below both its seven-day and 30-day simple moving averages, signalling a clear deterioration in its technical structure. This downturn is not a simple market correction but the result of a confluence of powerful, bearish forces operating in unison.

The most significant driver of this weakness is a sudden and substantial exodus of institutional capital from Bitcoin spot ETFs. On October 30, these funds recorded a net outflow of US$488 million, the largest single-day withdrawal since June 2025. The selling was led by the market’s two heaviest weights: BlackRock’s IBIT saw US$291 million flee its coffers, while Ark Invest’s ARKB bled a further US$65.6 million. This synchronised institutional retreat is a critical development.

For much of 2025, the steady inflow of capital into these ETFs had been the bedrock of Bitcoin’s price stability and its primary source of new demand. The abrupt reversal suggests that large, sophisticated players are either taking profits after a strong run or, more ominously, are repositioning their portfolios in anticipation of a more challenging macro environment ahead. With total ETF assets now at US$143.9 billion, the market is now on high alert for November’s flow data, which will be the key indicator of whether this is a temporary pause or the beginning of a sustained institutional withdrawal.

Compounding this problem is a sharp contraction in the derivatives market. Total open interest, a measure of the total value of outstanding leveraged bets, has plummeted by 4.4 per cent, falling from US$848 billion to US$812 billion. At the same time, average funding rates on perpetual futures contracts have turned negative, settling at -0.0018 per cent. This combination is a classic sign of market deleveraging.

Traders are actively closing their long positions, often at a loss, to reduce their risk exposure. While this process of forced liquidation removes the immediate threat of a cascading crash, it also strips the market of its bullish momentum. The negative funding rate confirms that the short-term sentiment is firmly bearish, as those holding short positions are now being paid to do so by the longs who remain in the market.

From a technical perspective, the picture is equally grim. The market has not only broken key moving averages but has also seen its Relative Strength Index (RSI) fall to 40.9, entering oversold territory. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) indicator remains in negative territory, suggesting that the bearish momentum is still in control.

This creates a precarious situation where the market is technically primed for a bounce, but the underlying trend remains firmly down. The next major support level appears to be the US$3.6 trillion mark, a 78.6 per cent Fibonacci retracement level, which will be a critical test of the market’s resilience.

The prevailing sentiment is one of fear. The market’s Fear and Greed Index has plunged to 31, a level categorised as Extreme Fear and the lowest it has been in a week. This psychological state is further amplified by a rising Bitcoin dominance index, which now sits at 59.3 per cent.

When Bitcoin’s share of the total crypto market cap increases during a downturn, it typically indicates that investors are fleeing from riskier altcoins and rotating into what they perceive as the safest asset in the space. This dynamic suggests that if the current pressure continues, altcoins could face even more severe selling than Bitcoin itself.

In conclusion, the crypto market’s current malaise is a direct reflection of a broader macroeconomic shift. The trifecta of institutional caution, derivatives deleveraging, and a broken technical structure has created a formidable headwind. While the oversold conditions may eventually attract bargain hunters, the market is in desperate need of a catalyst to reverse its course.

That catalyst could come in the form of a renewed wave of ETF inflows, signaling that institutions have regained their confidence, or from a more dovish signal from the Federal Reserve that eases the pressure on risk assets. Until then, the path of least resistance remains lower, and all eyes will be on whether Bitcoin can hold its October low near US$105,000 as the ultimate test of its underlying support.

 
 

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

j j j

Where does Singapore’s crypto policy go from here?

Where does Singapore’s crypto policy go from here?

Singapore, the leading economy in Southeast Asia, has long been thought of as welcoming to innovation, particularly in the fintech sector as an engine for growth. With that embrace of innovation came a forward-looking embrace of all things cryptocurrency and blockchain, attracting startups from around the world, with Singapore ranked as the second most popular country for ICOs in 2018. This approach has contrasted with China, which has banned crypto trading and mining, and in the U.S., where the Securities and Exchange Commission sought to play enforcement catch-up, following the ICO boom.

It seemed to the outside world that up until recently, Singapore was leading the way on crypto. As reported last summer, while many parts of the world was hellbent on cracking down on crypto, “crypto players like Binance have found Singapore to be a paradise of opportunity, even while a regulation storm looms over the industry in other parts of the globe.” Even as recently as last October, after more crackdowns on crypto in China, the city-state of Singapore was seen as a chief beneficiary of fleeing businesses.

This liberal status quo persisted even as over 300 crypto companies waited for a license to operate in Singapore under the 2020 Payments Services Act (PS Act), following 2019 legislation from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). An optimistic 2020 report that the system of providing a temporary exemption from licensing under the new law amounted to “regulatory acceptance.” Which, coupled with Singapore’s robust reputation, ensured it’s “likely to make the country a haven for crypto exchanges and startups over the next few years.”

How off the mark has that prediction proven to be? Fast forward to the start of 2022, with only a handful of licenses awarded by MAS to a few well-resourced and well-connected concerns, coupled with the world’s most popular crypto exchange Binance withdrawing its application and shutting down its exchange operations in Singapore, one wonders: how has the crypto dream for Singapore proved so illusory?

To answer this rhetorical question, let’s go back to before 2020 when Singapore was a powerful magnet for crypto startups and businesses, starting in the ICO boom years from 2017 when the authorities classified crypto as digital commodities.

In March 2018, speaking at Money 20/20, Ravi Menon, the head of MAS, wryly accepted that “not all developers and programmers in the crypto world are anti-establishment anarchists” but expressed concerns about issues around the use of cryptocurrencies for criminal activity, how KYC and money-laundering (AML) regulations applied, and the use of crypto in ransomware attacks. Equally concerning to Menon and MAS is the perceived threat from the volatile nature of cryptocurrencies, and the risk this posed to retail investors. These concerns lie behind the legislation in 2019-20, bolstered further in January 2021 to ensure crypto regulation was aligned with the requirements of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

Clearly, what gave the impression of continuity with the liberal pre-PS Act approach was the fact that crypto companies were given a temporary license exemption. And what better way to illustrate this discrepancy between image and reality than an on-camera Bloomberg interview in November 2021 when Menon reiterated the policy aim to make Singapore a global center for crypto business, was based on “strong regulation” to avoid the multitude of risks involved.

“But not to get into this game, I think, risks Singapore being left behind. Getting early into that game means we can have a head start, and better understand its potential benefits as well as its risks,” Menon added for clarity. As the Bloomberg report observed, this forward-looking approach “can be a fine line to tread, given the crypto industry grew up with few regulations, so many players balk at government officials’ attempts to impose guardrails.”

From my perspective, Singapore’s aim has never been to grant all applicants a license, rather to use the process to implement a highly selective approach. “We don’t need 160 of them to set up shop here. Half of them can do so, but with very high standards, that I think is a better outcome,” Menon has said.

Singapore’s current approach is also at odds with the crypto startup spirit of transparency and flexibility. In contrast, under the current approach, MAS rarely if ever tells crypto applicants what is required to succeed. Thanks to the absence of objective criteria available to the public, this gives the impression that MAS favors the elite, with very little real transparency as to why these decisions are made. I’ve heard it argued that MAS should get a free pass as its job is to protect the public, and in that regard, MAS is not alone as a financial regulator in its opaqueness.

In a similar jam as crypto startups in Singapore, the U.K.’s crypto trade body, CryptoUK, wrote to the Chancellor at HM Treasury regarding the crypto asset industry last year. It encountered similar concerns about the pace of crypto regulation, the lack of feedback, and the risks this posed to the post-Brexit economy — all of which echo the situation crypto businesses currently face in Singapore.

So, while I recognize on a basic level that MAS as a regulator is “only doing its job” like the case of the U.K., the danger is the current application process will only benefit an elite handful of larger organizations that have the resources to sit and wait. With the result being, they leave for friendlier jurisdictions. Binance is already reportedly looking to move its corporate HQ to the United Arab Emirates, and when that deal is sealed, no doubt many crypto startups will be sorely tempted to follow suit and move, too.

My aim at the outset in writing this op-ed was to underline my belief in the long-term viability of Singapore’s crypto and blockchain ecosystem, based within a successful financial system that is the envy of Southeast Asia. I also welcome the latest guidelines from MAS designed to warn the public about the risks in trading and investing in cryptocurrency. These advertising guidelines are necessary, correct and forward-looking.

Finally, crypto trading can be dangerously addictive too. Singapore’s National Council on Problem Gambling (NPCG) should take the initiative to create a task force to cope with possible issues derived from crypto speculations or crypto betting. I appreciate this is no simple task, for example, the growth of crypto casinos operated from a decentralized network (DAO) can be a new problem, too, but I believe it is important to act promptly to safeguard the public and to get rid of the industry’s bad actors.

 

Original Source: https://forkast.news/where-does-singapores-crypto-policy-go-from-here/

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

j j j

Why True Decentralization Is Missing? – Redecentralization Needed To Go Beyond Web3 to Web4

Why True Decentralization Is Missing? – Redecentralization Needed To Go Beyond Web3 to Web4
In 2019, I began to speak publicly about a concept I called re-decentralization. At the time, the narrative was already drifting. The cypherpunk ethos was being co-opted by a libertarian fervor that misunderstood the assignment. I argued then, as I do now, that the mission of Web3 was never about removing the government or abolishing banks out of spite. It was not an exercise in anarchy. Rather, it was about building a decentralized crypto ecosystem that could serve as the future of finance. This system would rely on mathematical trust instead of institutional trust.
The goal was to create a parallel financial infrastructure that was more efficient, transparent, and accessible than the legacy system. We wanted to build a better mousetrap, not burn down the house. Many people misunderstood this distinction. They thought decentralization meant eliminating all oversight. My view was that we needed a system that could operate alongside traditional finance while offering superior technology. We needed rails that allowed value to move as freely as information moves on the internet. This vision required true decentralization at the protocol level. It required that no single entity could halt transactions or seize funds without consensus.
As the years progressed and I moved from observing the space to actively investing in it, a disturbing pattern emerged. The promise was beginning to fray. I began to realize that Web3, in its current iteration, is not truly decentralized. In fact, much of it is a sophisticated mirage. My realization did not come from reading whitepapers or listening to keynote speeches. It came from the trenches of due diligence. When you invest capital in a project, you gain a level of visibility that the average retail user never sees. You get to look under the hood. What I found was that most projects were merely pretending to be decentralized.
They used the aesthetics of Web3, including tokens, DAOs, and governance portals. The control structures remained stubbornly Web2. I saw smart contracts with admin keys held by a single founder. I saw treasury funds controlled by multisig wallets, with all signers being employees of the same venture capital firm. I saw community governance where the voting power was so concentrated among early insiders that the average token holder’s vote was mathematically irrelevant. This was decentralization theater. It was a performance designed to attract liquidity and hype without ceding actual power.
The infrastructure was built on public blockchains, yes. The switches that controlled the flow of value were held in private hands. This centralization creates single points of failure. It invites regulatory crackdowns because there is always a human to subpoena. It defeats the purpose of censorship resistance. If a small group of humans can pause the contract, blacklist an address, or change the tokenomics overnight, the system is not trustless. It is simply a digital bank with a worse user interface and higher volatility. This defeats the technology’s original purpose. We built these systems to remove intermediaries, not to create new ones with better marketing.
As I analyzed why this centralization persisted, I identified the root cause. It was not just greed or malice. It was a structural limitation. The human element is stopping how we can grow in this DeFi space. Humans are the bottleneck. In the current DeFi model, humans are required to make almost every critical decision. Humans set the interest rates. Humans decide which collateral is acceptable. Humans vote on governance proposals. Humans monitor the protocols for exploits. This reliance on human intervention introduces latency, emotion, and corruption into a system that was designed to be objective.
Human governance is slow. By the time a DAO votes on a parameter change to mitigate a risk, the market has often already moved. Human decision-making is emotional. Panic selling or FOMO-driven investment strategies destabilize protocols. Furthermore, human governance is susceptible to social engineering and bribery. We have seen countless instances of whales accumulating governance tokens to push through proposals that drain treasuries. As long as humans are the brain of the operation, the system will remain centralized. Humans naturally congregate power. We form committees, we elect leaders, and we create hierarchies. This is antithetical to the concept of a decentralized web.
To achieve the vision, we must remove the human from the decision-making loop, not just the settlement layer. We need a system that thinks faster than a human, acts more objectively than a human, and cannot be bribed. This realization led me to a new conclusion. The evolution of the internet and finance cannot stop at Web3. Web3 provided the ledger, but it lacks the intelligence to manage it autonomously. This is why I term the next phase Web4.
The definition of Web4 is distinct. If Web3 is the decentralized web of ownership, Web4 is the decentralized web of intelligence. In this paradigm, Artificial Intelligence serves as the brain, and the Blockchain serves as the verifier. This symbiosis solves the centralization dilemma. AI agents, unlike humans, can monitor markets 24/7 without fatigue. They can adjust liquidity pools, rebalance collateral, and execute trades in milliseconds based on complex datasets that no human could process in real time. An AI-driven DeFi protocol could autonomously optimize yield strategies. It would react to on-chain data and off-chain oracle inputs instantly. This removes the emotional and slow nature of human management.
AI alone presents its own risks. An AI is a black box. If an AI makes a decision that drains a fund, how do we know it was not malicious? How do we trust the code running the mind? This is where the blockchain becomes critical. In Web4, the blockchain does not necessarily execute the complex logic. That is too expensive and slow for current chains. Instead, the blockchain verifies the outcome. The AI operates off-chain or on layer-two solutions to perform heavy computation. It then submits proof of its actions to the main blockchain. The smart contract verifies that the AI’s actions comply with the protocol’s pre-agreed rules before settling the transaction. The blockchain acts as the immutable truth layer. It ensures that the AI, the brain, did not hallucinate or deviate from its mandate.
This architecture allows for true re-decentralization. We no longer need a human council to vote on every parameter change. The AI adjusts parameters based on algorithmic stability targets, and the blockchain records the change immutably. We no longer need a centralized risk committee to approve collateral. The AI assesses the risk profile of assets in real-time, and the blockchain secures the custody. This is not about creating a rogue AI that controls the world money. It is about creating autonomous economic agents that operate within the strict, trustless confines of cryptographic verification. The rules are coded on-chain. The execution is handled by AI.
When I started talking about re-decentralization, I envisioned a future where finance was open and permissionless. We are closer than ever, but we hit a wall. That wall was human nature. We tried to build decentralized systems, then handed the keys to centralized groups. It was a contradiction that could not hold. Web4 resolves this contradiction. By delegating cognitive load to AI and trust load to the blockchain, we create a truly autonomous system. It is a system that does not sleep, does not feel fear, and cannot be coerced. It fulfills the original promise of the crypto movement. The aim was not to destroy the existing financial order. The aim was to build a superior one that renders the old inefficiencies obsolete.
The journey from 2019 to today has been one of disillusionment, but also of clarity. We stripped away the hype and found the structural flaws. Now, we have the blueprint to fix them. The future of finance is not just decentralized. It is intelligent. It is Web4. This shift represents the industry’s maturation. We are moving from speculative assets to functional utility. We are moving from human error to algorithmic precision. The banks and governments will remain, but their role will change. They will interact with these new protocols rather than control them. The interoperability between legacy finance and Web4 will define the next decade.
We must remain vigilant against centralization creep. Every time a project introduces a human admin key, it introduces risk. Every time a governance vote is dominated by insiders, it reduces security. The path forward requires strict adherence to code-based law. It requires us to trust math over men. It requires us to trust verification over reputation. This is the only way to build a system that lasts. The technology is ready. The AI models are capable. The blockchains are secure. The only missing piece was the integration of these two powerful forces. Web4 brings them together. 

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

j j j