CMS Holdings: Don't Let 'Narrative Congestion' Eat Into Your Profits, Tokenized Stocks Will Surpass Stablecoins

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Guest: Dan Matuszewski (Co-founder of CMS Holdings, former head of Circle Trade)

Host: The Rollup Team (Robbie and co-host)

Podcast Source: The Rollup

Broadcast Date: September 15, 2026

Duration: Approximately 41 minutes

Assets Discussed: Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Zcash (ZEC), Gold, Hyperliquid (HYPE), NEAR, Monad, Chainlink (LINK), Robinhood Chain (tokenized stocks), etc.

Disclosure: Dan Matuszewski is a co-founder of CMS Holdings, and CMS holds positions or investments in BTC, ETH, ZEC, HYPE, Monad, Chainlink, and other assets mentioned in this episode; all opinions expressed are his personal views and do not constitute investment advice. Please verify any specific multiples, target prices, and figures against the original program.

Key Takeaways

• Barbell Strategy is the Winning Approach: One end consists of macro-sensitive value storage assets (BTC, ZEC, Gold, ETH), which are highly sensitive to events like CPI (CPI being hot → BTC rises about 10%, ZEC skyrockets); the other end includes on-chain businesses that can continuously print money and return it to holders (like HYPE). Build positions in these two buckets, and consider reducing exposure during speculative phases.
• But Congestion is the Biggest Risk: This narrative of "hard currency + on-chain cash flow" has been repeated by everyone to the same tune. Once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage is squeezed out; akin to 2021 when everyone heavily invested in "that basket," followed by violent deleveraging, where Solana returned but 2/3 of the positions went to zero. The crypto market is a pool of funds, lacking the structural continuous inflow of retirement funds seen in stock markets; during overall contraction, the most crowded assets suffer the most.
• The Next Marginal Buyer: Crypto-native/liquidity funds have completed about half of their positions, followed by high-net-worth individuals using ETF allocations, larger Wall Street institutions, and retail investors driven by FOMO and social trading. The idea that institutions are putting these assets on their balance sheets is still largely a joke, but it represents a significant tailwind for the coming years.
• The Value of L1 Comes from 'Monetary Nature': Native assets become useful within the system, accumulating value: BNB (IEO), ETH (ICO → DeFi), Solana (reserve currency for memes). Monad's only risk is running out of money before completing iterations; ETH, due to its belief in decentralization, is reluctant to pick winners, which may harm it in the long run.
• Tokenized Stocks Will Surpass Stablecoins: Many people worldwide cannot buy US stocks; tokenization = anonymous assets, extending "exporting American wealth creation." The beneficiaries may not see it early on, but the L1s, oracles, and issuers carrying them will reap the benefits first.
• Social Trading is Eating Away at Gambling: FOMO/Pump.fun replaces sports betting, casinos, and perpetual contract trading, not investment; entering should come with the expectation of losing money.

Highlights of Opinions

• On Barbell: "My bull market strategy is a barbell: one end is hard currency highly correlated with macro, the other end is on-chain businesses that can continuously print money and return it to holders."
• On Congestion: "This narrative has been repeated by everyone. It doesn't mean it's wrong, but once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage is squeezed out."
• On Institutions: "Saying any large institution has really put these assets on their balance sheet is still basically a joke. Almost none, except for IBIT."
• On Tokenized Stocks: "Tokenized stocks will go north for many years, and I believe they will be bigger than stablecoins."
• On ETH: "Oh, this makes me extremely bullish on ETH; there's a reason they have value."
• On Social Trading: "Social trading is essentially eating away at existing forms of gambling elsewhere. You should expect to lose money when you enter."

Section 1: CPI and Macro: Noise Dominates the Period, Don't Let Fear Drive Trading

On the day of the program, CPI data was released. Dan said the data was basically in line with expectations: "Hot, but not as hot as imagined," and the market breathed a sigh of relief.

Host: It feels like external forces are dominating the market, and we seem to have no advantage.

Dan: This kind of macro data vacuum is the hardest; you're being led by a bunch of information where you have no advantage, and the market is highly tense for no good reason. The upcoming election cycle will continue to dominate headlines, and this external drive will lead for a while. Interestingly, it used to be "buy the expectation, sell the fact," but now it seems like a reverse fear marketing: bad news is priced in early, and when the event actually happens, it often isn't as bad as originally feared, and prices go up. It's just that fear keeps the market down before the event lands.

Host: Previously, funding rates were a good sentiment indicator, but now they seem to be failing.

Dan: Yes. When BitMEX was dominant, a negative funding rate meant you could mindlessly go long, and an annualized rate of over 30% meant you could mindlessly go short; it was a "mindless signal." But now looking at the overall open interest, once the total open interest of altcoins exceeds that of Bitcoin, it means the speculative environment has shifted, and money is starting to seek excess returns in higher beta. This is more suitable than funding rates for the current situation.

Section 2: Where to Find Signals: Winning Baskets, Stock Market, DAT, and the '10-Day Rule'

Dan: I look at two proxy indicators. One is the winning basket (HYPE, NEAR, ZEC, Fartcoin, etc.); as long as they are still being bought on dips and the intensity remains, it indicates that money is still flowing in. The second is the stock market; in the short term, the crypto market is still driven by the stock market.

Host: Why can't the crypto market sustain itself?

Dan: Because there isn't enough independent capital flow within the crypto market. There isn't a large amount of new fund raising, nor is there a continuous influx of new money; retail investors come quickly and leave quickly, and there hasn't been sustained net inflow for a long time. So the market can't "self-sustain": if the stock market drops 10%, the crypto market itself can't hold up.

Another tail worth noting is DAT (Digital Asset Treasury Company). If the market stabilizes, they should have beta with the market's upward movement; but the problem is they also have beta when it goes down, so the real good signal is: they first consolidate, and then start trading at a premium when they continuously raise funds to buy underlying assets.

Host: Speaking of DAT, Tom Lee's "10-Day Rule" is interesting: since 2014, the best 10 days each year have contributed 162% of market returns, while the remaining 355 days average a 14% decline each year.

Dan: I completely agree with this framework. The conclusion is: you should be in the market (holding assets). Don't obsess over catching the exact bottom. Most of the market's returns come from those few days, and many people lose their mindset because they didn't participate. In the long run, holding assets is far more important than trying to trade every independent fluctuation.

Section 3: Barbell Strategy: Hard Currency + On-Chain Money Printer

Host: We reduced our positions early last year, taking about a 20% drawdown, but we avoided the worst part. Later, we gradually figured out a combination theory: the winning combination in this bull market is a "barbell."

Dan: Yes, I agree with this framework; there's nothing wrong with it.

Host: One end of the barbell consists of macro-sensitive value storage assets (BTC, ZEC, Gold), and ETH can also be included. On the day when CPI was hot, BTC directly rose about 10%, and ZEC skyrocketed; this is your side of fiat currency depreciation. The other end includes those on-chain businesses that can continuously print money and return it to holders (or do buybacks), like HYPE. We built positions in HYPE, ZEC, and Venice early on, and many are still held now. Build positions in these two buckets, and consider reducing exposure during speculative phases.

Dan: My addition is: be wary of "congestion." This narrative has already been repeated by everyone. It's not wrong and has worked, but once everyone crowds into the same investment logic, the advantage starts to get squeezed out. The only thing to be careful of is this.

Section 4: Congestion Risk: When Everyone Repeats the Same Narrative, the Advantage is Gone

Host: Is this congestion in the mid-cycle or late-cycle?

Dan: This is where the money is, but you're asking a fund manager's question; I'm just a podcast host (laughs). However, looking back at history, in 2021, everyone treated "that basket" as the future, and then there was violent deleveraging; Solana came back, but 2/3 of the positions basically went to zero. The crypto market doesn't have the structural continuous inflow like the stock market (the entire set of retirement products in the US depends on money flowing into the stock market); this asset class in the crypto market will expand or contract with inflows/outflows, it's a "contained pool of funds." So once everyone crowds into the same thing and then the overall shrinks, those most crowded assets will drop the hardest.

Host: Does that mean we should buy the "second tier" that hasn't risen?

Dan: That's very dangerous. Logically, when the first tier rises too much, funds will spill over to those that haven't run (like Lighter, Hyperliquid, etc.). But this isn't the game to play; you're essentially betting on where the next marginal funds will go. I advise against doing this. Moreover, as this rotation becomes more frequent, it itself is a signal that the cycle is getting later.

Section 5: The Next Marginal Buyer: From Crypto Native to Institutions

Host: I think the next wave of marginal buyers is more likely to be FOMO and social trading, rather than dinosaur coins. First, about the "next marginal buyer": how much off-exchange capital is there for crypto natives and liquidity funds?

Dan: It's hard to judge precisely. Crypto Twitter is very loud, and some people do have large positions, but there is still a huge amount of capital that isn't participating there at all. I've done OTC for 4 or 5 years (having experienced the most intense bull market in 2017), and I know that the amounts moved by people you don't even know far exceed the "lit" trading volume you see every day. So don't be fooled by the traffic on Twitter, thinking that's the real capital flow.

Host: What about institutional adoption?

Dan: Saying any large institution has really put these assets on their balance sheet is still largely a joke. Almost none, except for IBIT. Traditional large capital players haven't entered yet. The only asset that has truly broken through this threshold is BTC. But this also means there is still a long tailwind ahead, and the inflow of funds is a slow variable over the years.

Host: So what does the profile of marginal buyers look like?

Dan: My ranking is: crypto natives/liquidity funds are still FOMO building positions (I think about half is complete); then there are smart high-net-worth individuals using ETF allocations; next are larger institutional capital players on Wall Street; and finally retail investors, coming in through FOMO and social trading, rather than dinosaur coins.

Section 6: ETH, Solana, and the 'Monetary Nature' of L1

Host: You mentioned putting ETH and Solana in the barbell, but we haven't figured these two out before. Moreover, people's views change quickly: two years ago, everyone said "only hold Solana."

Dan: Yes, views switch quickly. But your point about "not finding investment logic" precisely indicates that it's not crowded; when something can't be clearly articulated as "why to hold it," it often becomes worth looking at. Let me break it down: these L1 native assets become "useful" within the system, thus accumulating value. BNB relies on IEO (you need to use BNB), ETH relies on ICO to DeFi (you are the foundational asset within the system), and Solana relies on becoming the reserve currency for memes, with a lot of assets locked in pools. These L1s have a huge "surface area" that makes native assets extremely useful; what you're buying is essentially this.

Host: Oh, this makes me extremely bullish on ETH; there's a reason they have value.

Dan: I completely agree; I just couldn't articulate it before. As for Monad, I am optimistic because the team will continue to iterate until they find a value capture mechanism for the token, and they will keep iterating. The only risk is running out of money before achieving that. The same goes for other L1/L2: the risks are either the founders getting tired and quitting or genuinely running out of money. The long-term value proposition of Solana largely depends on Toly (Anatoly Yakovenko, co-founder and CEO of Solana) continuing to iterate tirelessly.

Host: ETH seems to be too focused on decentralization, unwilling to pick winners?

Dan: Yes, this has hurt it. In contrast, the market is increasingly accepting of centralization; for example, Hyperliquid has only 24 nodes, and people find that very acceptable. ETH's "identity crisis" lies in the fact that it built everything initially, yet no one truly used it, leading to a shift towards stablecoins, tokenized assets, perpetual contracts, and prediction markets, all of which almost stemmed from that "identity crisis." Whether the infrastructure layer (cross-chain bridges, ZK, intent, valued at $50 million to $150 million, unprofitable) can survive depends on whether the team is willing to continue transforming, like Ondo shifting from impermanent loss hedging to doing RWA overnight.

Section 7: Tokenized Stocks: A Bigger Narrative than Stablecoins

Host: Pairing memes and stocks on Robinhood is a terrible idea: just as we enter traditional finance, we act like children and ruin our reputation.

Dan: Right, don't do that. But tokenized stocks themselves "will go north for many years." The reason isn't trading convenience (you and I can directly open brokerage accounts to buy), but because there are vast numbers of people worldwide who simply cannot buy US stocks; just like Tether, you look at its par value and think "can't I just use Venmo?" But there are many people in the world who want dollars but can't hold them; similarly, there are far more people who want to buy Nvidia but can't for various reasons than you might think. Tokenizing it, turning it into anonymous assets, is extremely powerful, and the same goes for American companies, opening up an entire capital base without giving governance rights.

Host: So this is "exporting wealth creation"?

Dan: Exactly. The US exports dollars, and now the financial market has also become an export product. Look at the Chinese version of the S&P 500, which has basically been flat for the past 20 years; holding American companies is the compounding machine. Tokenized stocks open up the global capital base of American companies, and the scale will surpass stablecoins. However, after Robinhood goes live on-chain, trading volume has been sluggish, and sustainability is in question.

Host: So the $35 billion on-chain tokenized assets, who benefits?

Dan: That's a good question, and it's where big money will go, but the answer is hard to see early on. The L1s carrying them will benefit, oracles (like Chainlink) will also have value, and some issuers are already listed and can be invested in. Currently, those truly reaping the "legalization" dividends are companies that have gone through the CFTC Innovation Advisory Committee and were named by Trump (like Hyperliquid). L1 may also benefit again from trillions of assets going on-chain (stablecoins, short-term treasury bonds, money market funds, stocks), leading to increased TVL, fees, profits, and buybacks. But the question always remains: who can outperform?

Section 8: Social Trading and Meme: Eating Away at Gambling, Not Investment

Host: I sent $400-$500 worth of memes to a few sports betting friends, and some have already multiplied their accounts by 3-4 times. I set rules for them: no additional capital, always sell, leave one position for growth, rotate small-cap profits into large-cap to build a foundation, and treat it as a portfolio rather than a one-time deal.

Dan: Social trading is essentially eating away at existing forms of gambling elsewhere: sports betting, casinos, and even many perpetual contract trades are gambling. It is a substitute for these games. FOMO/Pump.fun has a harsher cut, and the probability of winning is slightly higher than sports betting, resembling a lottery or mutual betting. You should expect to lose money in both cases; the difference is just which one has a lower cut.