NDV Jason: From Bitcoin to Global Macro — How Markets and AI Changed My Investment Approach

Tiger Brokers' "Tiger Talk" host Manlin spoke with Jason Huang, founding partner of NDV. The conversation ranged from his investment experience and how his methods have changed, to digital assets, global macro, AI research tools, and his personal feelings about managing money. The following is organized by theme; the views and cases are compiled from 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 a price, whether he understands it deeply enough, and whether he can endure the time it takes for a judgment to play out.

1. From Bitcoin to Global Macro

Jason worked in primary-market investing early on, later managed family office capital, and founded NDV in 2023. Speaking about how he changed after managing a fund, he first mentioned moving from buy-and-hold toward considering both long and short positions; second, expanding from Bitcoin-related assets to commodities such as gold and oil.

There are two layers to this change. On one hand, he believes the cycles of different assets are not synchronized, and a broader research scope increases options while helping smooth volatility. On the other hand, after Bitcoin's scale grew, expecting the same multiple returns as before may require more time. His long-term view on Bitcoin has not changed because of this, but he began comparing other opportunities more seriously.

Reviewing his early investments, he acknowledged that a considerable portion of the returns came from the market's own rise. Tool selection and active judgment contributed, but one cannot attribute all the results of a tailwind to 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, traded at a clear discount to the value of their underlying assets. The key question Manlin pressed on was: does the cheapness come from panic, or has the market already detected risks that have not yet surfaced?

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

This also shaped his understanding of "non-consensus": only when the market is very pessimistic and you can still find clear evidence do you have reason to differ from the market. A direction being unpopular is not enough on its own.

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

Speaking about 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 the favorable stories that keep emerging after prices rise. Increased use cases and strong demand may all be true; but whether they are enough to explain a sharp price rise in a short time still needs to be tested with numbers. For unfamiliar areas, he requires a more obvious price deviation to compensate for his lack of understanding.

In this method, an extreme state of relative prices is a research clue. A historically rare price relationship cannot directly tell people when it will reverse, nor can it replace an understanding of the specific asset. The agricultural commodities experience in the interview happens to reveal 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 on that basis. By his account, after waiting several months, he exited the trade, and only then did the market show the change he had expected. He called this experience "cutting before dawn."

This review does not offer a simple "persistence wins" answer. Instead, Jason saw more clearly: familiarity with a field affects whether one can withstand adverse price moves; for unfamiliar assets, reasoning that merely looks sound may not be enough to support a long wait.

His adjustment was to consider both the price tolerance range and the time waiting range. How much loss requires a reassessment, and how long a wait without the expected change requires an exit, should both be part of the decision. That one admission of error later appeared premature does not mean the constraint did not exist at the time.

5. Long-Term Optimism and Trade Expression Can Be Separated

Regarding MSTR, Manlin raised an intuitive question: if you are long-term bullish on Bitcoin, why hold a bearish view on a related stock? Jason's answer is that being bullish on an asset does not mean you must be fully invested at all times; which instrument 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: the signals the company sends, cash and payment pressures, and whether the market has already reflected these changes. Risks worsening without being reflected in price, versus financial conditions improving while the market remains immersed in panic, lead to different judgments.

The point of this section is that even when studying a long-term bullish asset, one should retain the ability to adjust one's view. The historical case illustrates his decision-making process and does not constitute a judgment on the current direction of the relevant stock.

6. Bitcoin Research Increasingly Emphasizes the Demand Side

Manlin observed that Jason used to discuss halvings and the four-year cycle more, but later paid increasing attention to ETFs, institutional capital, 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, making changes on the demand side 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 become invalid. What Jason expressed is a shift in research focus, and his judgment that Bitcoin will further integrate with traditional finance. Broader capital participation, institutional building, and industry trust still require time.

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

Beyond 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 around-the-clock settlement, and further connect to tokenized asset trading. Reducing real transaction costs is an important basis for his judgment of whether a technology can be more widely adopted.

But when Manlin pressed on where long-term profits will remain, his answer was more cautious. How returns are 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 analyzes stocks by returning to the company itself: where revenue and profit come from, whether future growth is reasonable, and whether the current price adds up. For assets like Bitcoin, he understands price more through supply and demand, relative scale, and potential buyers. On the surface they belong to the same digital-asset theme, but underneath they may be entirely different businesses.

8. After the News Comes Out, Still Watch How the Price Reacts

On regulatory news, Jason emphasized that he observes the price reaction after an event. If the market discusses something intensely but the price does not change accordingly, he keeps asking: has the news already been reflected in advance, 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 excuse skipping the comparison of instruments and valuations.

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

Jason said the team currently has no dedicated researcher, and he has used AI to help track various 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 deeper study.

As information acquisition and processing become easier, where does the investment edge still 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 a price.

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

At the same time, he admitted that although he uses AI heavily, he has not fully participated in related investment opportunities. Insufficient understanding of the hardware and manufacturing segments, and concerns about the prices of hot assets, both affected his level of participation. He also reminds himself that the successful experience gained from familiarity with Bitcoin may create path dependence.

10. Public Expression Is a Form of Self-Supervision, but Also Brings Internal Friction

Jason moved from the multi-host podcast The Wanderers to his personal show "20 Minutes of Non-Consensus." He wants to leave his judgments on record and revisit them after a while: why did I think this way at the time, what happened later, and what needs to be corrected. Continuous writing, investor communication, and public expression all serve this purpose.

He also admitted frankly that negative comments make him uncomfortable. Public expression being helpful to him does not mean there is no emotional cost. In allocating time, he increasingly values high-quality information and exchange, reduces unnecessary meetings, and puts energy into what he considers more valuable.

11. Managing Other People's Money Amplifies the Sense of Responsibility

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

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