Recently, market discussions have been heated over the Federal Reserve's policy direction. In the current political environment, the independence of central banks is facing unprecedented challenges—what does this mean for financial markets?

From a traditional financial perspective, central bank policies are gradually evolving into bargaining chips in political games. When monetary policy becomes subordinate to election cycles, the stability foundation of the fiat currency credit system begins to shake. Historical data repeatedly proves: whenever the traditional financial order falls into chaos, code-driven decentralized assets attract renewed attention.

In recent weeks, there has been a clear shift in institutional capital flows. Mainstream cryptocurrencies with high consensus continue to attract incremental capital, and the underlying logic is very clear—when the power structure of central banks faces reshaping, de-politicized asset allocation becomes a hedging option. Just like the historical context of multiple gold rallies, Bitcoin's safe-haven narrative has evolved from niche consensus to mainstream recognition.

Interestingly, this shift is not sudden. Liquidity restructuring, policy expectation reversals, and decoupling of cross-asset correlations—these are signals that the market has reacted in advance. Leading assets within the crypto ecosystem benefit most directly, but the valuation logic of the entire ecosystem is quietly changing as well.

The key moving forward is whether this macro risk premium can be sustained. If discussions about central bank independence continue to heat up, then the safe-haven function of crypto assets will no longer be just a concept but a real allocation need. Conversely, if risks are released, we must also prepare contingency plans.

What is your view? In this round of policy uncertainty, is a single cryptocurrency or the entire crypto ecosystem more valuable for allocation?