The Clarity Act, stablecoin yield and crypto's path: Matt Hougan

Transcript

What we needed from the Clarity Act, from this step in the Clarity Act process, was a bill that no one really loved. That's the kind of thing that can get through Congress. What's up everybody? It's LG Ducet here and welcome to the Milk Road Show, the daily crypto show where every bill in Washington is somehow bullish, bearish, and misunderstood all at the same time. Today's January 13th, 2026. Prices feel stable, but something else is going on. Something we've been thinking about for a long, long time. Today felt like one of those quiet yet important days in crypto. The Clarity Act hit some turbulence. A new draft came out and it wasn't as expected. And the polyarket odds for the bill to pass went from 75% this morning to 18% but now back to 50%.

We're going to break that all down with Matt Hogan from Bitwise. Why this is maybe potentially a bit of a loss for some crypto companies because stable coin yield is right at the center of the controversy that's going on today. We'll bring him on in a second. But first, today's episode is brought to you by Bridge said stable coin payments instantly simple, global, frictionf free, and chain link links web 3 to Wall Street. Matt, happy new year, man. Welcome back to Milk Road. >> Happy New Year, bud. It's good to be here. >> All right, this is a one v one. Usually Ryan is here to moderate or give his two cents, but this is a this is a cage match, death match, and it's on a perfect day. Uh super controversial news this morning. the new Clarity Act bill, uh the new draft came out, uh and it's

basically telling us, Matt, that uh we're not going to be able to earn some yield on our stable coins. Can you can you maybe explain this for us? >> Yeah, maybe it's telling us that. Uh you know, we don't know. >> We don't know. I mean, let's break it down. the the the big question or one of the big questions that was preventing this bill is whether the holders of stable coins can earn yield on their money, which obviously they should be able to. But banks and particularly community banks don't want that to happen because if you can hold a stable coin that's one for one backed by short-term treasuries and earn interest, that's a better deal than holding money in a bank that lends it out to Yahoos and does fractionalized banking and doesn't pay you interest. So the the

banks didn't want all their money to flow into stable coins, so they pushed to prevent stable coin issuers from paying interest directly to holders. What this bill says is that they can't do it, but it does have carveouts for platforms like Coinbase and others who are where those stable coins tend to aggregate to provide yield for things like opening accounts or doing certain activities or providing liquidity. There's like eight things they can do to provide yield. My gut tells me that this is a good compromise in terms of getting the bill through. I think that's why polymarket odds rebounded because people will find a way around these

regulations. Yield is like water. It flows downhill. It will find a way into the pockets of crypto investors through various gimmicks that Coinbase and others will offer. So, I think this is like a it's it's a it's a facade. It's it's not actually going to block the yield. >> Let's take a look at those poly market odds because I was, you know, I was messaging you earlier this morning prepping for our episode and I pulled this up and it was minutes after it dipped, right? So, we're looking at the 6-hour chart here this morning 6:30 a.m. Pacific time where we our time zone. Uh 71% and then after this draft comes out within an hour we were down to 14%. Matt and that I thought I was like somebody knows something that this thing is going to get absolutely like totally rejected.

Uh but clearly that was a that was a massive opportunity for anybody who who felt otherwise because now we're back at 56 55%. So nice 3 4x for anybody who was paying attention. So Matt, so so is this thing going to go through? Right? Because this is the big week for clarity, right? This this was this was it this week. So, do you think it's still going to go through despite this uh I don't know if you would call it a setback setback, but a new set of loopholes, let's call it, uh for people to jump through. >> Yeah. Look, what what we needed from the Clarity Act from this step in the Clarity Act process was a bill that no one really loved. That's the kind of thing that can get through Congress. You have to have Crypto a little bit upset and Tradfi a little bit upset and

Democrats a little bit upset and Republicans a little bit upset. This is sort of that bill, right? The yield is not great, but it's not terrible. The DeFi protections are surprisingly good, but maybe not perfect. The easy nonobjectionable things like the right to self-custody are in there, which makes crypto happy. I think the odds are better than 50%. But they're not 100%. The thing that the bill doesn't address, which is the thing that I I'm watching to see if this bubbles up in the news, is it does nothing about politicians enriching themselves through crypto projects, which is something that Democrats wanted

in that bill. And for this to pass in Congress, it needs some Democratic support. So, the question is, is it moderate enough to get moderate Democrats on board, or are they going to dig in hard on uh this self-enrichment part that they wanted in the bill? I don't think it belongs in the bill, but but they wanted it in the bill. I think that's why I'm not at 100%, but I do think the odds are better than 50. This was a good step. It was a good compromise. Everyone's a little bit frustrated, which for my mind is perfect. If you've been paying attention, you know we're going heavy on AI here at Milk Road. We launched the AI podcast, the AI newsletter, and now we're taking it up a notch with AI Pro.

To celebrate the launch, we're giving you 20% off this week only. Head to the link in the show notes to lock in your discount on the only research you need to navigate the AI super cycle. Wait, so you're telling me that you you were hoping or you assumed that there would be a clause in this bill, a part of this bill that would say that politicians can't enrich themselves through crypto? Is that Hold on, Matt. Is that why last night Eric Adams launched a memecoin and then almost immediately rugged it? Cuz he realized I this is my last this is the last week where I can launch a memecoin and make money on it. >> No, but really like is that is that not part of the timing here where he's like I got to do this now before before it's too late.

>> I knew he was a clever guy. Yeah, he just snuck it in under the window. The three-hour rug is I mean it's hard to set new records in crypto for rugging. And the fact that Adams managed to do that in just a few hours is really good. Really remarkable. >> Just wild. That was that happened so quick. A blink of an eye and you missed it last night. Oh my god. But but clearly you're referring to Trump and and and Trump coin, right? That that came out a year ago. Um and any other future iterations of that, but there's nothing in this bill that would that would prevent >> Yeah. The thing about it was the Democrats strongly wanted this in the bill originally, at least the Warren wing of the Democratic party and the traditional sort of Republicans who were

designing the bill really didn't want it in. And so this is like a flash point. The fact that the bill doesn't deal with it is probably good. It probably means that Democrats are okay, but we don't yet know. We haven't seen the Democratic response to this. If they dig in their heels on this, then I think you'll see those poly market odds retract. If they're quiet, if there are no uh op-eds in the New York Times, if there are no thought bubbles in the media, if people aren't on CNBC talking about this from uh from the Warren wing of the party, then I think the odds are probably close to 100%. Because it otherwise straddles the line pretty perfectly, >> right? Yeah, that makes sense. Let's talk about what else is in this bill, right? Because we've talked about this

so many times, Matt, when you've come on, you've told us the Clarity Clearly Act is is so vital for crypto. Um, there are a few other bits in here and this is a tweet from Paul Baron telling us the lo the loss really for the crypto community is this yield on stable coins or at least that it's going to be a little bit more complex. Uh, but he's pointing out in his tweet uh quite a few other wins things that are good like uh the right to self- custody for I think for tokens and a few DeFi wins. Can you give us kind of a broad overview of what's what's in there that you think is good uh or in general what's in there maybe other? >> Yeah, I mean I think Paul's doing a good job there. I think the right to self-custody is key. the right to be

able to do peer-to-peer transactions are key. It's it's from a crypto perspective, the idea that those could not be allowed seems absurd. Those are like natural laws that we assume were passed down from the beginning. But of course, that doesn't have to be the case. And the most surprising piece, I think, is the positive parts on DeFi. There were a lot of concerns on how liable open-source software developers would be for the the work they put into building DeFi protocols. And if those productions weren't in there, DeFi was just dead. Like there was no DeFi. No one was going to sign up for unlimited liability on something they won't even

control in the future, right? It sort of killed that idea. The fact that those protections are in there are a very big deal. And then more generally, it's just a broad architecture of how crypto will be regulated. To me, that's the biggest thing. We're in this procrypto regulatory environment in the US, but it is a castle built on sand because under a new administration, the regulators can change and do change and they could take a strictly different view. The way to constrain that change is through legislation. So the core of this bill is just the core of how crypto is regulated going forward and that's why it's so important. But yeah, positive DeFi, that's a big win. Positive self-custody

and peer-to-peer transactions, that's a fundamental right had to be in there. And then the stable coin yield thing is annoying and like I mean it's absurd that politicians are protecting banks from giving people interest. >> Yeah, >> it's like crazy idea, but we'll take it because there's enough ways to work around it. Maybe we can dig into that more. Maybe that's something we should done right at the start is is like so why would that happen? Why why would it be why would they prevent stable coin yield? Like and I'm assuming and and this I'm going to make a broad assumption here that it's it's the banks telling the people they they fund or their the people that they're donors for saying like listen we don't want that as part of the bill. Like they're lobbying them telling them don't do this. Like we

we we're not ready for that. we want is it like do they want their own stable coins out there to earn so that they can be the ones issuing that instead of the current companies? How does that work? >> Yeah, to give you a Matt Hogan uh finance history tour, there's actually like a there's a there's a long history of this through something called narrow bank proposals. So the way banks work, you know, are fractionalized reserve. You deposit money and then they lend it out effectively 10fold. They don't keep much of the money there and it only works because people don't withdraw their money. If there is a big withdrawal of money, you have a bank run. the bank collapses and the government has to step in and that's bad. For years, people have proposed quote unquote narrow banks. What a narrow bank would be is you deposit

money and they buy short-term US treasuries, which are the most liquid, secure financial instrument in the world, right? Government debt that's 30 days or less, always going to be repaid, and that is it. But the Fed has consistently denied these narrow banks for the last like 30 years, just rejecting them out of hand. And you might say, "This is crazy. This would be the safest place to keep your money. Why does the Federal Reserve force American citizens to put it in a less safe ecosystem?" Their argument has been that in any crisis, all of the money, if these narrow banks existed, all of it would withdraw from the existing system and go into the narrow banks. And so, one collapse at a small bank, at Silicon

Valley Bank, could have taken down the entire US banking system. That's the argument against narrow banks. Stable coins are effectively narrow mix, right? When you give money to a stable coin issuer, they just buy short-term treasuries. That's why Circle, from my view, is safer than JP Morgan Chase as a bank account because it's backed one for one for treasuries. So the worry was if these were allowed to pay interest, they would just be strictly better than existing banks and all the money would come out of banks and all of it would go into stable coins because it's a better experience. And that would be bad for banks arguably if you think banks pay a key role in credit development, bad for the economy, bad for mortgages. And

that's the banking argument. It's wrong. We can talk about why it's wrong, but but that's the argument. That's why people have pushed against this, right? Because the banks are afraid they'll lose all their deposits, they'll lose all their money, and they'll effectively lose their reason for being. >> Are banks not currently afraid that they're going to lose a lot of of capital to to crypto? >> Definitely. And they are. Yes. So, so when you're falling down an ice slope, you keep throwing your pick into to slow your descent. That's what they're doing. They're trying to slow their descent. And I don't blame them, right?

Obviously, they're protecting their profit margins. They don't want this new competitor. They see a way to restrict it because crypto still has these this risky label. What's really shocking is it's so anti-consumer because I just made this argument which is all about what's good for the banks. What's good for you? What's good for me is the ability to earn interest. Like it's crazy that the government creates inflation and then is preventing us from earning interest to protect ourselves. Again, this is wild. >> And politicians are doing this brazenly. They're just saying it. It's like we're in this alternate reality where you want to shake these people and say, "Why are you protecting Jamie Diamond instead of someone in Iowa?" Like, "Let's help the person." And it's crazy to me. It's it's

it's upside down world. >> Yeah, absolutely. So, would you say So, hold on. So, so, so how does this all shape out over like 20 years though? Because eventually this shift will happen. You know what I mean? as as populations age out, turnover, people wanted new text like you know same way as you know 30 years ago we'd be reading magazines about this but now we're we're just having a live podcast from across the world with each other you know it's it's something where eventually those is that just what happens like is is are you just is this is part of the debankment obviously this is a much bigger question than we're just talking >> no no no I mean >> is this what you think >> it's a great question every example I can think of in technological history ends with the technology winning the one

that's coming to mind right now is uh e-ign or docuign which was initially not at the same legal robustness level as traditional wet signatures. We used to talk about wet signatures which sounds really weird but you would need a wet signature on a document. It's crazy. Um now the idea of like signing a document and mailing it is it's a crazy idea >> wild. >> Ultimately the faster, cheaper, better, easier technology always wins and that's what will happen here. It's all going to stable coins. I think, you know, give me a long enough time frame and a 100% of payments are on stable coins and stable coins are primary bank deposits because it's just a better, faster, cheaper technology. But again, the banks are sliding down that slope and throwing the

ice pick to try to slow their descent. And I don't blame them. That's their job. But but they're they're they're a dead man walking from this perspective. >> Absolutely. >> Stable coins are the biggest use case in crypto right now. But let's be real, using them on chain is still way too complex. That's exactly the problem Bridge is solving. Recently acquired by Stripe. Yep, that's Stripe. Bridge helps businesses send, store, accept, and launch stable coins instantly. Explore the future of global financial infrastructure at milkroad.com/bridge. Sure, tokenized financial products are the future, but there is a big sticking point. They all need to speak to each other. This is a tough problem to solve, but chain link does exactly that. It's the universal language for financial

markets, linking Wall Street to web3, banks to blockchain, and so much more. See how chain link is linking the world by going to milkroad.com/chainlink. Matt, if we zoom out a little bit, many recent episodes with you guys with Bitwise, we talked about Clarity Act. We're like, listen, government's shut down. When that reopens, whether it's late 2025, early 26, this thing's going to pass. We're in good shape. We've got we know what we can do with our crypto. Once this passes, what's the ne what is the next thing we should care about as as as crypto people? >> Yeah. The so the like at the start of this year, there were three red lights that needed to turn green in order for crypto to go to new all market all-time highs. The first was we needed to get through the end of the year without a

major blow up from the 1010 liquidation event. We did that. Light turned green. I think that's part of why we rallied to start the year, right? And everything is up, particularly altcoins. been a good start to the year and and crypto equities also soaring. Then we needed the Clarity Act to pass to provide a firm regulatory framework for the largest capital market. And the third thing is we need the global economy not to collapse, which actually is looking pretty great. I know the politics are weird. I know the world seems uncertain, but like the Atlanta Fed Now estimate of US GDP growth is skyrocketing, right?

The economy looks pretty good. If we have no negative impact from the 1010 liquidation event and we have the Clarity Act pass and we have the S&P 500 or the the total world stock market at least tread water, we're going to be all-time highs on Bitcoin, all-time highs on ETH, alltimes highs on Salana because the positive trends of institutional adoption, of stable coin growth, of tokenization growth, of the rebirth of real DeFi, of better uh ownership rights and token econom omic rights in crypto. Those are all going to push us up. And I don't see any way that the balloon keeps down if we get those three things. So far, we have one and a half of those things. You know, maybe

one and two halves. Once those lights are all green, I think it's all systems go. >> I noticed you didn't mention XRP for alltime highs, but I'm just I'm just going to say that you it was it was not a notable emission. It it wasn't that it wasn't on purpose. You just you just said the main three. >> I just said the big three. And and and and particularly because XRP is figuring out its go to market. I still think it's in that phase of figuring out its go to market. So it has more idiosyncratic risk than Ethereum and Salana which know what they're doing right now and know what their platform is and that's just off into the races if we get the Clarity Act. XRP still has more execution uh risk and idiosyncratic risk or opportunity depending on how you want to view it. So, you had a great tweet the

other day, um, Matt, that I wanted to pull up that I thought was really a great way and you've been such a champion of this every time you've come on the show and across the industry about how there's a point basically where sellers run out of steam, right? And, you know, we talked a couple months ago about Jordi Bisser's essay about, you know, this is the kind of the IPO moment for Bitcoin. We're going to have a lot of early people sell and you're going to have all the new people who want it longterm coming in. You're kind of painting the same picture here with your long tweet and we'll link it in the in the description. Uh but saying that this this kind of happened due to geopolitical reasons for gold a couple years back, right? And as a result, you had a huge supplies of gold kind of

coming down the pipe and then a lot of potential buyers and now those sellers are gone. 2025 gold went absolutely berserk. Silver today, another all-time high. So those those uh those are still printing new uh new highs. but that basically this is what's about to happen for Bitcoin that we're going to be soon ending this selling phase of the o the fabled OGs and everybody else uh and that the institutional bid is finally going to get to do its thing. >> That's exactly right. Yeah, we actually had a central bank in the office here at Bitwise and we were chatting with them about this yesterday and I made this point to them. Everyone talks about gold's parabolic move in 2025 up 60 plus percent.

>> And they ascribe it to central bank purchases, but I I showed this uh this chart which is the central bank purchases lifted three or actually four years ago, right? They came in 2022 when the US seized Russia's assets and central banks around the world were like, "Whoa, I don't actually own the treasuries I thought I owned. I better own something that I can hold directly." And they started buying gold. You can see here it went from roughly 500 tons to roughly 1,000 tons. But the price didn't move in 2022. It was up like 2%.

And then that demand persisted in 2023 and the price went up like 11%. And the demand persisted in 2024 and the price went up like 27%. And it's persisted in 2025. And that's when we went parabolic. And the reason I keep harping on this is the number one question institutions ask me is ETFs are buying two or 3x the available new supply of Bitcoin. Right? Last year Bitcoin produced 164,000 new Bitcoin. ETFs bought something like 350,000. Why didn't the price go parabolic? And the answer is just wait.

We're in year two of ETFs. I'm not saying it's going to exactly follow the gold chart, but that would mean that year three would be a pretty good year and year four the price would go parabolic. But the parabolic is coming. As long as the ETF demand strongly exceeds new supply, the sellers will eventually be exhausted. They don't have infinite Bitcoin to sell. And um I really just, you know, you won't know when this moment is coming until it's there. But you do know that the law of supply and demand is a fixed law of the universe. It doesn't bend. And as long as that demand is persistent, eventually you get the 2025 gold year. And I I think it's coming in Bitcoin. I don't

know when, but I think it's coming. >> Do you think is there a universe, Matt, because we talk about narrative so much and we've had a lot of people on talk come on and tell us bare market. They were doing technical analysis and you've had good rebuttals to that as well. But is there a world where everybody's right? Right. Where it's like, okay, yes. It's like, you know, it October kicked off a year-long bare market. So, we're going to be in this chop phase until September and then come se come Q4 2026, all the things that you're talking about, right? This this kind of parabolic move then comes and those TA people are, hey, they say they're like, hey, I was right and Matt also gets to say you were right. You know, is that is there a world where like a lot of these

narratives are true all at the same time? >> Yeah, that is definitely that is definitely a possibility. And you know, when you look at the options data or when you talk to log chime sellers, there's still a lot of Bitcoin for sale around 100K. I don't think we're free of this range. So, I don't think those technical people are necessarily wrong. I think where I would differ, and I will be wrong if I get this wrong, is I don't think there'll be a 60% retracement from all-time highs. I don't think we're going down to 60K or 50K before we go higher. I think we're more in a range. But could we be in a range until September and then up? Yeah, absolutely.

We're, you know, we're in a bare market. The market's down 30 plus percent. So, they were right in that sense. Kudos to them. I don't think we go minus 60, but you're right. It could, it could be that they are right for a year and then we go higher. I just don't know when that happens. So, for me, what I do is, you know, you just hold uh or buy more if you have more capital and wait for it to happen. If your times Horizon is 10 years out. Who cares? But yeah, they could be right and I could be right. Both of those could be true. >> Absolutely. Okay, let's get to a couple questions from our community because uh as usual when you guys are coming on, we'll poll our community to see if they have any questions for you and I did not

tell you what they were before and honestly I just I just copy pasted them into my notes. I actually haven't really read them. So this is this is a bit of a a surprise for both of us. but from our usual uh really fantastic community uh in Milk Road Pro who who who who was very sharp. They were they were the ones giving me all these tweets earlier about uh what was going on at the clarity act. So this is from patent pending not not patent patent like you get it patent. >> I like it. >> Yeah. If an investor has a theoretical extra dollar to invest, why should he or she invest that extra dollar in digital asset ETFs instead of an S&P 500 or NASDAQ broad index fund? It'd be great to hear his pitch. So, this you're on the spot, Matt.

Why do we need ETFs when we have index we have these nice stock indexes? >> Yeah. I think there there there's two reasons depending on your starting point. So, if your starting point is you have 0% exposure to digital assets, you're actually missing a part of the market, right? The equity market is 110 trillion. Crypto is a $3 trillion market. A neutral position is like two and a half% crypto versus what you're holding in equities. So if you're starting at zero, that incremental dollar should go into digital because you want to at least have some exposure to the area of the market that Harvard endowment has its largest position in that the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund has its largest position in that Ray Dio says you have 15% in. You have zero right now. So, the incremental dollar

needs to go into digital just so you catch up with the market in case uh the bulls are right and this runs away. And if it doesn't, your other $99 are already in equities. You'll be fine. So, I think that's a really important point. In terms of the marginal dollar, look, I think the riskadjusted outlook for crypto is extraordinarily strong and better than the riskadjusted outlook for the S&P 500. I have more concerns personally about sort of uh the circular revenue in AI than I do about the long-term threats to Bitcoin, right? Do I think governments will keep spending too much money? Uh I think they will. Do I think the technology will keep working? I think it will. So I I think Bitcoin is just better from a risk

adjusted long-term perspective for that incremental dollar. But I actually think the bigger deal is many people are at zero. And if you're at zero, you're short the market. You don't want to be short this market. You want to be at least neutral. So you need to get that extra dollar in. >> Good answer. Hope that hope that answers your question. Patton. Uh this is from Sapna. This is from Sapna who I think usually sends us questions. Also when institutional money fire hose I think we also kind of answered that. Which of their newest ETFs like link and other new batch does he think have the potential to surprise?

>> Potential to surprise. I >> surprise. >> Yeah. So, I still think our index fund, which turned into an ETF uh late last year, has the potential to eventually be a hundred billion dollar fund. Uh it's about a billion dollars today, a little bit less. I think it'll be a hundred billion fund because many of the institutional investors we speak to don't want to pick and choose between Bitcoin, ETH, etc. They just want to own the market. I know it's a boring answer, but I think that will do well. on an individual asset perspective. I can't speak to any specific ETF, but I can speak to the assets that underly these ETFs. I do think since he raised uh Chainlink, I do think Chainlink is one

of the Mount Rushmore assets of crypto. I think it's one of the four most important assets in the crypto market. It's at a relatively low valuation. It very much appeals to institutional investors because it's very real world oriented. It's very tied into stable coin growth. It's very tied into tokenization growth. It's very tied into DeFi growth. I think it belongs there up in the firmament. I think anyone allocating crypto with a 0% exposure to chain link is missing a big piece of the market. And so of the remaining individual assets out there, uh I'm pretty excited about chain link. I'm also excited downstream about some of the DeFi protocols where I think the token economics and governance rights are getting much better and those may be

revalued to reflect that in the future. >> Okay, this one and this is from Martin, our pro researcher, and I can't I I don't know. I'm not sure if he's serious or not, but maybe he maybe he is. >> I'm ready. >> Why haven't they applied for a Sky ETF? >> Good question. You know, there there probably two reasons for that. I can address it directly. Um, one is that some ETFs uh you can't yet do in a traditional 33act rapper. You have to do in a 40act rapper because there's no associated futures contract with that asset on a regulated exchange. And that would be um a technical reason. Uh the more broad

reason, you know, we're just we're looking at all available individual assets and picking assets with extremely strong communities that we think have uh growth. We can only do so much and um we're sort of working down our list. So, I'll never say never, but from a 33act traditional ETP perspective, you need to see it sort of meet generic listing standards before it can qualify into that traditional rapper. >> A quick little timeout from the pod here because we've got a huge problem. You're listening to the show, but most of you are not actually subscribed, which is crazy because we're here every single day dropping the stuff you actually want to know, the liquidity, the charts, the major players, and which way the market's going to go. So, hit subscribe, hit like, and let the algo know that you actually kind of like this.

>> Got it. Okay, Martin, I hope that helps. Matt, I want to wrap up. Um, I think you another fantastic episode, and I think super well timed that we got to talk about clarity. uh with just the last few minutes we have. Every time you and I have done a show together, we end on the same topic and it is not crypto or finance related, but it is on poly market. Listen guys, if you listen to all the the the Matt uh Milk Road episodes of Q4, you know that Matt was very bullish on Wicked being the top grossing film of 2025 and it was looking good for a bit, but then it disappointed its first two weekends of box office. I think Minecraft or Zootopia won. Matt, there is a market for 2026 already on Poly Market and it's all it's all the IP leading the way, man.

Spider-Man at 37%. I didn't even know there's a Super Mario a new Super Mario movie coming, but apparently there is. It's a 34%. A new Avengers movie in a year coming out. Toy Story 5. I feel like I've been watching the same movies for 30 years. Uh Star Wars Mandalorian. All this is all the top Odyssey. Odyssey will be Odyssey probably has a good chance maybe as like an outsider at 3%. Uh but there is Wicked the next Wicked movie. Is there another Wicked movie coming out or is that from >> I think that must be Legacy. I would short I would short that one to make up for my previous loss.

>> You can't short it anymore. It's a no 99. >> I'd sell seven sex on Wing Heights. >> Um >> Jumanji 3. I didn't even know these films were coming out, man. >> Yeah. Can we short the bottom of this table? Um, I'd short straight up to Toy Story 5. I think I think I think Avengers Doomsday and Spider-Man have uh have a good chance. I think that that that combo >> at 52%. That feels like a pretty good a pretty good bet. I just Yeah, I mean, Christopher Nolan, the Odyssey, sure, but there aren't that many people who want to go see that. I I think >> I can't Yeah, three hours of Matt Damon on a boat is a little too much for me. I

think >> too too much. I think Spider-Man say uh the the the combo and then short the rest of the field. >> The maybe No, I don't think Super Mario. Come on, man. >> There could be something. There could be a dark horse here, but who knows? I didn't even I I didn't know these movies were coming out. >> I'll make a more specific call. You're going to see Avengers Doomsday trade higher than 15% before it comes out. It doesn't come out. It comes out like December 18th, though. That's the thing. It's at the end of the year, so it's only going to have two weeks to to accumulate. But but who knows, right? It could still The last one was such a a huge hit.

>> I I've learned I wouldn't ride this to the finish. I would ride that 15 to 25 and then cash out. That's my >> He knows his poly market. >> Let's jump to our other favorite poly market, which is the presidential election winner of 2028. Listen, Matt Marco Rubio making gains in the last couple weeks, man. With a 3x on his odds from four four and a half percent now to 11.1% today. Uh, so that's no not much movement on a Josh Shapiro or anybody else really. Nothing else has changed too much. JD Vance and Gavin Newsome leading the way, but Marco Rubio making making gains here.

>> That is that is remarkable. Plus seven. Um, I I think I'd fade that move. I think that's a little bit of excitement around Venezuela. I I continue I continue to think Josh Shapiro will trade in the double digits. So that's still a 5x from here. I'm not saying he'll win, but at some point um yeah, I think I think he'll get up to 10 cents. So I'm sticking with my Josh Shapiro call on this one. I think it's the best bet. I also think Donald Trump at 2% is too cheap. I think that'll have a that'll have a moment where he flirts with a third term and it spikes to like 12.

>> Um maybe a 6x. Yeah. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Right on. Well, Matt, thank you so much, man. I'm sure we'll see you again sometime very soon. Um, and, you know, here's to to hopefully a continued nice start to the year and, uh, the passing of the Clarity Act, whatever ends up happening. Kind of funny to talk about it at 50%. Uh, but again, thank you for your insight and uh, we'll see you again soon. >> All right, I'll be here. Thanks, LG. >> If y'all are making swaps or trades right now, highly recommend you check out Milkroad Swap. This is a DEX that we built in partnership with Cow Protocol.

Why do we build it? Not to make money, just honestly so we could have a place to do our swaps for the lowest fees that we could find. This is the fees on Ethereum, Arbitum, and Bass are only.15% fees. Uh this is a huge difference from uh other centralized exchanges that charge half a percent or even up to 1.2% fees on their swaps. Also, you can swap on Salana all at swap.mmilcro.com. Check it out today. you won't be upset and you can join me in my favorite place to make swaps on chain. Want insights on what's moving crypto markets and how we're trading each event? Subscribe to our channel and join the Milk Road daily and pro newsletters and start investing

like the top 1%. This show is for educational purposes only. Nothing we say is financial advice. Investing is risky. Never invest more than you can afford to lose.