Arthur Hayes Warns Bitcoin May Stall Until Liquidity Returns

Key Takeaways:

• Arthur Hayes ties bitcoin’s outlook to global liquidity, with upside dependent on policy-driven liquidity.
• Geopolitics create a bearish setup as war risk, deleveraging, and AI-driven stress weigh on markets.
• Liquidity injections could lift bitcoin once credit stress forces intervention.

Bitcoin Outlook Hinges on Liquidity

Arthur Hayes’ latest market note, titled “No Trade Zone,” signals that bitcoin’s outlook is increasingly tied to global liquidity conditions rather than traditional macro indicators. On April 15, the Bitmex co-founder and Maelstrom CIO outlined a cautious stance, citing geopolitical tensions and artificial intelligence-driven economic risks as key constraints. The essay presents BTC as vulnerable in the short term but positioned to respond to future monetary expansion.

Hayes centered his outlook on monetary conditions rather than conventional valuation models. He asked, “Do you believe the quantity or the price of money is more important when valuing bitcoin?” He then answered with a direct thesis:

“I believe the quantity of money determines the price of bitcoin, not its price.”

That view underpins his broader market framework, which expects bitcoin to struggle during periods of forced deleveraging, then strengthen when policymakers expand credit. He tied that dynamic to several geopolitical outcomes involving the Strait of Hormuz, as well as to a domestic economic slowdown driven by job losses among white-collar workers. In Hayes’ view, those pressures could hit credit quality, weigh on banks, and delay any durable crypto rally until authorities supply fresh liquidity to stabilize the system.

War Risk and Credit Stress Threaten Rally

That caution appears clearly in one of the essay’s most specific forecasts. “ Bitcoin might bounce a bit after the situation reverts to the pre-war status quo,” Hayes wrote. “However, the AI agentic deflation bomb still ticks below the surface. Until the Fed provides the liquidity needed to plug the black hole in banks’ balance sheets caused by consumer credit defaults, bitcoin will not meaningfully rise.” He further shared:

“That’s not to say it couldn’t spike to $80,000 to $90,000, but for me putting new units of fiat at risk requires an all-clear from the Fed.”

The statement shows that he still sees upside potential, but not before broader financial stress is addressed.

Hayes also warned that market stress could produce another sharp bitcoin selloff before any recovery takes hold. “As investors de-risk their portfolios because of higher volatility and lower prices, investors sell bitcoin to meet margin calls,” he described, adding: “Only when things get bad enough will bitcoin rise, as expectations of a bailout become the consensus.” In the most extreme scenario, even a liquidity-fueled rally may not last. As Hayes put it: “The rally in bitcoin, inspired by money printing, might be short-lived because the destruction of the Iranian state materially raises the prospect of WW3.” Taken together, the essay presents a conditional forecast: near-term volatility remains high, while any lasting upside still depends on crisis-era money creation.