Fink Frames Fear as Macro Insurance

Speaking at a high-profile New York event, Larry Fink described a bitcoin hedge as the mirror image of the long-term optimism that underpins traditional asset management.

BlackRock chairman and CEO Larry Fink used the New York Times’ DealBook “Crypto and Capital” event to sharpen his evolving view on Bitcoin. Sharing the stage with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, he contrasted Bitcoin demand with the roughly $13.5 trillion that BlackRock manages for clients worldwide.

That institutional capital, Fink argued, is effectively “managing hope” over long horizons. “The $13.5 trillion that BlackRock managed on behalf of our clients, it is basically managing hope,” he said, stressing why investors commit to a 30-year outcome. However, he noted that such allocations depend on confidence in compounding over decades.

Bitcoin as an ‘asset of fear’

By contrast, Fink framed Bitcoin as sitting on the opposite side of the psychological spectrum. “Bitcoin is an asset of fear,” he said, emphasizing that ownership often reflects anxiety rather than optimism about the future.

According to Fink, investors turn to Bitcoin because they worry about physical safety, financial stability and the long-term erosion of purchasing power. “You own Bitcoin because you’re frightened of your physical security. You own it because you’re frightened of your financial security,” he said. Moreover, he linked demand to concerns over “debasement of financial assets because of deficits.”

His remarks came after a dramatic reversal in the Bitcoin price. The asset hit an all-time high above $125,000 in early October 2025, then slid nearly 30% and briefly fell below $90,000 in mid-November. Fink highlighted the move to show how violently it can trade.

Volatility, timing and the role of macro hedging

Fink warned that anyone treating Bitcoin purely as a short-term trade must accept extreme swings. “If you had bought it at $125,000 and it’s now sitting at $90,000,” he said, you are exposed to a “very volatile asset” and must be “really good at market timing, which most people aren’t.” That said, he argued the calculus changes when investors use Bitcoin as a macro hedge.

In that framework, he said, the asset functions as a hedge against what he called “all your hope” embedded in other holdings. “If you’re buying it as a hedge against all your hope, you know, then it has a meaningful impact on a portfolio,” Fink explained. He pointed to episodes such as a US–China trade agreement or talk of a possible Ukraine settlement, after which Bitcoin “fell a little bit” as fear eased.

In his telling, Bitcoin tends to rally when geopolitical tension and fiscal worries rise, then retrace when those pressures calm. The pattern, he suggested, is consistent with a fear-driven hedge against conflict risk and persistent budget deficits. This view aligns with investors who see a bitcoin hedge as protection against systemic shocks rather than a simple risk asset bet.

Leverage, structural fragility and IBIT flows

Despite rising institutional interest, Fink underlined that the market structure remains delicate. “The other big problem of Bitcoin is it is still heavily influenced by [leveraged players],” he said, linking some of the outsized volatility to high leverage across trading venues.

He noted that leverage-driven swings persist even as flows through BlackRock’s spot ETF channel stabilize. Since launching IBIT, the firm’s flagship US spot product, BlackRock has already experienced several drawdowns in the range of 20–25%. However, Fink said those moves did not trigger a wholesale exit from the product.

Instead, he sees the holder base gradually shifting. “We’re seeing more and more legitimate long-only investors investing in it,” Fink told the audience, highlighting a large foundation endowment as one example. Moreover, he said “a number of [sovereign funds]” are “adding incrementally at $120k, at $100k,” and “bought more in the $80k’s.”

Long-only buyers and Bitcoin’s evolving role

For those allocators, Fink stressed, Bitcoin is not a short-term punt. “This is not a trade. You own it over years. This is not a trade. You own it for a purpose,” he said. That purpose, in his description, is tightly linked to fear of debasement, geopolitical risk and distrust in traditional fiscal trajectories.

Institutional demand from large endowments and sovereign funds also signals that the asset is moving further into mainstream portfolios. However, Fink’s emphasis on fear, leverage and structural fragility underscores that these investors still treat it as a specialized allocation rather than a core holding.

He warned that ongoing exposure to leveraged players means sudden drawdowns will remain a feature of the market. Yet, as he suggested, long-only owners may be more willing to ride out 20–25% price swings if they see the asset as insurance against outcomes that would damage their much larger pools of traditional securities.

From ‘index for money laundering’ to public mea culpa

Fink acknowledged that his present stance marks a sharp departure from earlier criticism. In 2017, he described Bitcoin as an “index for money laundering… and thieves,” a line that resonated across traditional finance. Now, he openly concedes that his outlook has changed.

During the pandemic, Fink said, he “took it upon myself to visit and talk to a lot of people who were advocates of it,” repeatedly asking, “What am I missing?” Those conversations, he explained, contributed to an evolution in his perspective “around 2021–22.” Moreover, he called the experience “a very glaring public example of a big shift in my opinion.”

“I have very strong views but that doesn’t mean I’m not wrong,” Fink told the DealBook audience, framing his reassessment as part of a broader willingness to revisit convictions. His comments suggest that top-tier asset managers can recalibrate quickly when market structures and client demand change.

At press time, Bitcoin traded at $93,107, well below its early October peak yet still far above levels seen before the latest boom-and-bust cycle. In Fink’s framing, that price represents less a straightforward bet on growth than a barometer of fear, leverage and shifting institutional attitudes toward digital assets.