Bitcoin’s roughly 5% leap on Jan. 5 landed on a clear, TV-friendly clarification: a shock political flip in Venezuela would “unlock” oil provide, push power costs down, cool inflation, deliver charge cuts ahead, and elevate BTC. Bitwise Head of Analysis Ryan Rasmussen says there’s a serious flaw with that.
The catalyst for the narrative was Venezuela’s weekend drama, culminating in Nicolás Maduro’s seize and switch into US custody, an episode that instantly spilled into geopolitics, commodities chatter, and macro cross-asset takes.
Rasmussen, posting in a thread on X, summarized the “Wall Avenue principle” as follows: “Venezuela oil reserves unlocked >> decrease oil costs >> decrease inflation >> rates of interest >> bitcoin rallies. A thread on why that’s improper.”
Why This Bitcoin Idea Is Improper
Rasmussen’s central level is mechanical: if the rally is being pushed by a sudden repricing of financial coverage expectations, it ought to present up within the possibilities merchants are assigning to charge cuts. In his learn, it didn’t.
He cited a slight dip within the implied odds of a 25 basis-point minimize in January 2026 instantly after the Venezuela headlines. “Chance of a 25bps Charge Reduce in Jan’26: Previous to Maduro’s Seize: 16.6%. After Maduro’s Seize: 16.1%,” Rasmussen wrote, including that “the likelihood of a 25bps charge minimize this month truly fell.”
Even additional out, he argued, the change was marginal to nonexistent. “Chance of a 25bps Charge Reduce in Dec’26: Previous to Maduro’s Seize: 19.1%. After Maduro’s Seize: 19.2%,” he wrote, framing it as “barely moved.”That’s the mismatch Rasmussen needs traders to note: a tidy causal story was making the rounds, however the pricing within the instrument closest to that story, charge expectations, was successfully unchanged.
If not a Venezuela-to-Fed chain response, what explains the day’s BTC energy? Rasmussen pointed to a cluster of themes which were constructing while not having a weekend headline to justify them.
First is institutional demand. Rasmussen argued that the post-2024 spot bitcoin ETF channel continues to widen, with extra main platforms starting to allocate. He cited an instance of “+$500m into bitcoin ETFs on Jan. 2nd,” and named Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, and Merrill Lynch as a part of the distribution wave which have opened their door with the start of the 12 months.
Second is the regulatory backdrop. Rasmussen described a “pro-crypto regulatory shift” following the 2024 election, saying crypto markets are starting to “really feel the advantages” as wealth managers, endowments, pensions, and sovereigns get extra comfy adopting bitcoin.
Third is a broader risk-on tone tied to AI. In Rasmussen’s framing, “fears of an AI-bubble are settling,” and traders have been “piling into risk-on belongings, like tech shares and bitcoin.”
Lastly, he returned to coverage, simply not through Venezuela. “Did Maduro’s seize materially change short-term charge minimize expectations? No. Does that imply QE is out of the image. Additionally no,” Rasmussen wrote, earlier than including: “QE is simply starting. The market was—and nonetheless is—anticipating 50bps (or extra) charge cuts in 2026.”
General, Rasmussen didn’t argue Venezuela is irrelevant. His conclusion was narrower: “Sure. Considerably,” he wrote when requested whether or not the weekend’s occasions matter for bitcoin, earlier than answering the larger query whether or not it’s the primary motive for the +5% transfer with a flat “No. Zoom Out.”
At press time, BTC traded at $93,750.
Featured picture created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Editorial Course of for bitcoinist is centered on delivering completely researched, correct, and unbiased content material. We uphold strict sourcing requirements, and every web page undergoes diligent evaluation by our group of high expertise consultants and seasoned editors. This course of ensures the integrity, relevance, and worth of our content material for our readers.
