NDV Jason: How My Investment Approach Has Been Changed by the Market and AI from Bitcoin to Global Macro

Author: NDV Research Observation | Jason

In an interview hosted by Manlin from Tiger Brokers, Jason Huang, founding partner of NDV, discussed his investment experiences and the evolution of his methods, extending to digital assets, global macro, AI research tools, and personal feelings about managing funds. The following is a thematic summary, with viewpoints and examples organized based on this interview.

This interview talks about how Jason forms investment judgments and how he changes them when new evidence emerges. Central to his discussions on GBTC, agricultural products, MSTR, and AI are three recurring questions: Is there support behind the price? Do I understand it deeply enough? Can I endure the time it takes for my judgment to materialize?

1. Expanding from Bitcoin to Global Macro

Jason started in primary market investments, later managing family office funds, and founded NDV in 2023. When discussing the changes after managing funds, he first mentioned a shift from buy-and-hold to considering both long and short positions simultaneously; secondly, he expanded from Bitcoin-related assets to commodities like gold and oil.

This change has two layers of reasoning. On one hand, he believes that different assets do not have synchronized cycles, and a broader research scope can increase options and help smooth out volatility. On the other hand, as Bitcoin's scale has expanded, expecting the same multiple returns as before may take longer. His long-term view on Bitcoin has not changed, but he has begun to compare other opportunities more seriously.

Reflecting on his early investments, he admits that a significant portion of the gains came from the market's own rise. Tool selection and active judgment contributed, but one cannot attribute all results during favorable conditions to personal ability. What he cares more about is whether the original methods still work when the market is unfavorable.

2. The Discount of GBTC Led Him to Seek Support Beyond Price

After the FTX incident, Jason noticed a significant discount between the trading price of trusts like GBTC, which hold Bitcoin, and the value of the underlying assets. Manlin's key question was: Does the cheapness come from panic, or has the market detected undisclosed risks?

Jason recalled that what built his confidence at the time included third-party audits and the team's verification of Grayscale-related on-chain wallets. He tried to determine whether the underlying assets existed, how much could be verified, and then assess whether the price left room for remaining uncertainties. The focus here is on finding verifiable support, not just assuming cheapness based on declines.

This also formed his understanding of "non-consensus": when the market is very pessimistic, finding clear evidence is the reason to hold a different view from the market. A direction being unpopular is not enough by itself.

3. Extreme Relative Prices Must Return to Numbers

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

He is particularly wary of the positive stories that emerge after price increases. Increased usage and strong demand may be true; however, whether they are sufficient to explain significant price hikes in a short time still needs to be verified with numbers. In unfamiliar areas, he requires more obvious price deviations to compensate for cognitive shortcomings.

In this method, the extreme state of relative prices serves as a research clue. Rare historical price relationships cannot directly tell people when a reversal will occur, nor can they replace an understanding of specific assets. The agricultural product experiences discussed in the interview reveal the difficulty of waiting.

4. Reviewing Agricultural Products: Direction of Judgment and Ability to Wait Are Two Different Matters

Jason once judged that rising oil prices would affect agricultural products along the cost chain and participated in related opportunities based on this. According to his review, after waiting for several months, he exited the trade, and only then did the market show the expected changes. He referred to this experience as "cutting before dawn."

This review did not provide a simple answer of "perseverance will lead to victory." Instead, Jason saw more clearly that familiarity with a field affects one's ability to endure price reversals; for unfamiliar assets, having seemingly reasonable reasoning may not be enough to support long-term waiting.

His adjustment is to consider both the price tolerance range and the time waiting range simultaneously. How much loss requires re-evaluation, and how long without expected changes necessitates exiting, should all be included in decision-making. A misjudgment may seem too early later, but it does not mean that the constraints at that time did not exist.

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

Regarding MSTR, Manlin raised an intuitive question: If you are optimistic about Bitcoin in the long term, why do you hold a bearish view on related stocks? Jason's answer is that being optimistic about an asset does not mean one must always hold a full position; the choice of tools, the price paid, and when to hold cash need to be considered separately.

When reviewing his changing attitude towards MSTR, he emphasized that the evidence he focuses on is also changing: the signals sent by the company, cash and payment pressures, and whether the market has reflected these changes. Risk deterioration that is not reflected in prices, and financial improvements while the market remains in panic, will lead to different judgments.

The key here is to retain the ability to adjust views while studying a long-term optimistic asset. Historical cases illustrate his decision-making process but do not constitute a judgment on the current direction of related stocks.

6. Bitcoin Research Is Increasingly Focusing on Demand

Manlin observed that Jason used to discuss halving and four-year cycles more, but is now increasingly focused on ETFs, institutional funds, and dollar liquidity. Jason explained this shift with changes in supply and demand forces.

In his understanding, as Bitcoin's stock expands, 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 has begun to study Bitcoin within the framework of global assets, currencies, and capital flows.

This does not mean that the interview proved the four-year cycle has become ineffective. What Jason expresses is a shift in research focus and his judgment on the further integration of Bitcoin with traditional finance. Broader capital participation, institutional development, and industry trust still require time.

7. The Uses of Stablecoins and How Much Shareholders Can Earn Need to Be Viewed Separately

Apart from Bitcoin, Jason is optimistic about the uses of stablecoins in transfers and settlements. What he values is whether transactions can be faster and cheaper, whether they can support around-the-clock settlements, and further connect tokenized asset transactions. Reducing real transaction costs is an important basis for him to judge whether a technology can be more widely accepted.

However, when Manlin inquired about where long-term profits would be retained, his answer was more cautious. How the profits are distributed among issuers, banks, and other participants will be influenced by regulations and business relationships; industry growth does not directly equate to shareholder returns for a specific company.

Therefore, he would analyze stocks based on the company itself: where the income and profits come from, whether future growth is reasonable, and whether the current price is justifiable. For assets like Bitcoin, he tends to understand prices more from supply and demand, relative scale, and potential buyers. Although they superficially belong to the same digital asset theme, they may represent completely different businesses behind the scenes.

8. After News Comes Out, It’s Important to Observe How Prices React

When discussing regulatory news, Jason emphasized that he would observe the price reaction after an event occurs. If the market discusses it very intensely, but the price does not change accordingly, he will continue to question: Has the news already been reflected in advance, and does the actual impact align with the narrative?

This continues the same habit from the interview: first understanding the event, then checking what price the market has paid for it. A story may make sense, but that does not mean it still contains exploitable price differences; being optimistic about an industry in the long term does not exempt one from comparing tools and valuations.

9. AI Makes Research Faster, but Judgments Still Need to Accept Result Verification

Jason said that his team currently does not have dedicated researchers; he has used AI to assist in tracking various commodities, screening extreme cases of relative prices, organizing information, and analyzing options risks. This allows him to access more assets at a lower cost and devote more time to issues worth in-depth study.

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

On specific tools, he shared his experience of alternating between Claude Code and Codex, using the analogy of "liberal arts students" and "science students." This discussion is about personal usage experiences. He values whether the tools actually solve problems, such as writing, research, or risk analysis, rather than using new tools for the sake of using them.

At the same time, he admits that although he heavily uses AI, he has not fully participated in related investment opportunities. Insufficient understanding of hardware and manufacturing processes, as well as concerns about the prices of popular assets, have affected his level of participation. He also reminds himself that the successful experience 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 his judgments behind and revisit them after some time: why he thought this way at the time, what happened later, and what needed to be corrected. Continuous writing, communication with investors, and public expression all serve this purpose.

He also admitted that negative comments can make him feel uncomfortable. Public expression is helpful to him, but it does not 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 upswings. Jason believes that compared to managing his own money, this sense of responsibility amplifies emotional pressure and also forces him 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 answers reflect his personal judgments. A more prominent self-reminder throughout the interview is not to consider oneself a "god" when making money: past successes may provide experience but can also make it harder to acknowledge new opportunities and one's limitations.