Wolf of Main Street price

During the crypto crisis in 22, I jumped on a call to convince a crypto PM not to join a well-know TradFi hedge fund. I wanted him to build his own firm with L1D as an investor. My pitch wasn’t great, and the odds were tough. Luckily, he didn’t join, and now we’re his biggest investor. I’m more convinced than ever: crypto talent shouldn’t join TradFi. L1D’s bet on 2 other teams that joined TradFi hedge funds only strengthened our conviction: 1. Performance: TradFi crypto funds have lagged due to structural flaws. a. Mandate: Multistrat hedge funds optimise Sharpe ratios and can’t handle crypto’s volatility. Max drawdowns get PMs fired, so mandates are way too restrictive. b. Operational rigidity: TradFi ops aren’t built for crypto’s dynamic markets. They’re slow to adapt, most couldn’t trade HYPE on day 1 and took weeks to get it approved, and good luck getting TRUMP approved on a Saturday, compliance ain’t loggin in! 2. Risk Management: Allocators might feel safer with bluechip TradFi names (fell for it myself), but crypto’s unique risks (super nuanced) slip through their generic models. Our experience? TradFi’s risk management is a liability, not a strength. 3. Asset Raising: TradFi struggles to raise for crypto. Their BDs see it as a niche, low-priority strategy. They’re rarely bought in, and the long education process for smaller tickets isn’t worth burning investor relationships when they can push mainstream strategies. 4. Culture: Obvious but brutal. TradFi firms breed infighting, and many resent the “crypto experiment.” As a crypto PM, you’re their punching bag, facing constant pushback. 5. Brand: that shiny TradFi brand won’t count for much in your “alpha” circles. 6. Allocator experience: Crypto’s a tiny slice of TradFi’s business, and it shows. As an allocator, we’ve dealt with less transparency, arrogance, and compliance stonewalling when things go wrong. Why would they risk their business over crypto mistakes? It’s a worse experience than working with crypto-native firms. It all comes down to incentives. Crypto-native firms focus on 1 strategy and 1 vision. They’re all-in on delivering and raising for crypto. No distractions. Our take: - Crypto-native firms will dominate active management in crypto. - Crypto talent should join these firms and bring in TradFi experience for BD and ops, they fit great. - There’ll always be a couple exceptions (e.g., legacy plays like CME basis, equities, ETF options). DM us at @L1D_xyz if you need guidance. It’s a tough road, but we’re highly convinced that crypto-native is the way to go.

During the crypto crisis in 22, I jumped on a call to convince a crypto PM not to join a well-know TradFi hedge fund. I wanted him to build his own firm with L1D as an investor. My pitch wasn’t great, and the odds were tough. Luckily, he didn’t join, and now we’re his biggest investor. I’m more convinced than ever: crypto talent shouldn’t join TradFi. L1D’s bet on 2 other teams that joined TradFi hedge funds only strengthened our conviction: 1. Performance: TradFi crypto funds have lagged due to structural flaws. a. Mandate: Multistrat hedge funds optimise Sharpe ratios and can’t handle crypto’s volatility. Max drawdowns get PMs fired, so mandates are way too restrictive. b. Operational rigidity: TradFi ops aren’t built for crypto’s dynamic markets. They’re slow to adapt, most couldn’t trade HYPE on day 1 and took weeks to get it approved, and good luck getting TRUMP approved on a Saturday, compliance ain’t loggin in! 2. Risk Management: Allocators might feel safer with bluechip TradFi names (fell for it myself), but crypto’s unique risks (super nuanced) slip through their generic models. Our experience? TradFi’s risk management is a liability, not a strength. 3. Asset Raising: TradFi struggles to raise for crypto. Their BDs see it as a niche, low-priority strategy. They’re rarely bought in, and the long education process for smaller tickets isn’t worth burning investor relationships when they can push mainstream strategies. 4. Culture: Obvious but brutal. TradFi firms breed infighting, and many resent the “crypto experiment.” As a crypto PM, you’re their punching bag, facing constant pushback. 5. Brand: that shiny TradFi brand won’t count for much in your “alpha” circles. 6. Allocator experience: Crypto’s a tiny slice of TradFi’s business, and it shows. As an allocator, we’ve dealt with less transparency, arrogance, and compliance stonewalling when things go wrong. Why would they risk their business over crypto mistakes? It’s a worse experience than working with crypto-native firms. It all comes down to incentives. Crypto-native firms focus on 1 strategy and 1 vision. They’re all-in on delivering and raising for crypto. No distractions. Our take: - Crypto-native firms will dominate active management in crypto. - Crypto talent should join these firms and bring in TradFi experience for BD and ops, they fit great. - There’ll always be a couple exceptions (e.g., legacy plays like CME basis, equities, ETF options). DM us at @L1D_xyz if you need guidance. It’s a tough road, but we’re highly convinced that crypto-native is the way to go.