A new framework for understanding digital-asset strategies reveals a deepening split between herd followers and sovereign players. The distinction may determine who survives the coming institutional reshuffle.
I. The psychology of participation: Two tribes, one market
To understand cryptocurrency investing in 2025, one must first recognise that participants are divided not by which assets they choose, but by why they choose them. Their decision-making is filtered through distinct psychological frameworks—what might be called “investment operating systems”. These internal programmes determine how investors interpret volatility, scarcity, risk and reward. They often matter more than technical charts or whitepapers.
Let us examine these two dominant mindsets.
1.1 The herd: Investors who seek validation
Human beings are neurologically wired for social conformity. For millennia, being cast out from the group meant greater risk of death. Today, that evolutionary impulse manifests in financial markets as a powerful need for social proof. Investors in this category don’t merely buy an asset; they buy reassurance. They need to hear an asset mentioned on mainstream television, discussed by influencers on social media, or held by large institutions. Without that chorus of approval, they feel psychologically exposed—as though venturing into the wilderness alone.
These investors naturally gravitate toward what we term “mass‑liquidity” assets: tokens such as XRP, Dogecoin or Kaspa, which are widely held and frequently discussed. For them, the fear of missing out (FOMO) outweighs the fear of loss. Indeed, losing money alongside the crowd often feels more acceptable than being the only one waiting for an opportunity that others cannot see. This mindset is not irrational in a social sense—it fulfils a deep‑seated need for belonging—but it can be financially hazardous.
Why does this matter? Because the herd is easily stampeded. When sentiment shifts, the same social proof that encouraged buying can trigger panic selling. Moreover, as we shall see, the herd is increasingly dependent on institutional infrastructures that may themselves be fragile.
1.2 The sovereigns: Investors who seek asymmetric opportunity
At the opposite pole stands a different psychological type: the sovereignty‑minded investor. This participant actively seeks what the herd overlooks—assets that are invisible to institutional radars, undervalued by conventional metrics, or structurally scarce. Their mindset is built on conviction, not consensus. They are comfortable with silence: low trading volumes, little media coverage, and prolonged price stagnation do not frighten them. In fact, they may interpret such quiet periods as necessary incubation phases before a major shift.
These investors are not trying to be right frequently. They are trying to be massively right on a few decisive occasions. They understand that extraordinary profits are the reward for being correct when the majority is mistaken. Their strategy is inherently asymmetric: they risk a small amount to gain a large amount, often by betting on rare events or structural anomalies that others dismiss.
Why does this matter? Because sovereign investors provide the market with its diversity and resilience. They are the early adopters, the contrarians, the ones who identify value before it becomes obvious. Without them, markets would become pure echo chambers—and dangerously unstable.
II. The coming institutional squeeze: Why “mass liquidity” may be a mirage
Now, let us apply this psychological framework to a concrete scenario that may unfold in early 2026. It illustrates how the herd’s dependence on institutional validation could become its Achilles heel.
2.1 The January 2026 inflection point
Global financial markets are increasingly governed by index providers such as MSCI, FTSE and S&P. These firms decide which stocks and assets belong in which indices—and thereby determine how trillions of dollars of passive investment funds are allocated. In October 2025, MSCI opened a consultation on whether to exclude “Digital Asset Treasury Companies”—firms that hold more than 50% of their assets in cryptocurrencies—from its standard indices. The decision is expected by January 26th, 2026.
Why is this technical detail so important? Because many large institutions, including Morgan Stanley, BlackRock and countless pension funds, invest in cryptocurrencies indirectly through such companies. The most prominent example is MicroStrategy (ticker: MSTR), a business‑intelligence firm that has accumulated over 671,268 Bitcoin (BTC) . If MSCI decides to remove MicroStrategy from its indices, any fund that tracks those indices will be forced to sell its MicroStrategy shares—regardless of whether the managers believe in Bitcoin’s long‑term value.
2.2 The domino effect
Analysts estimate that an exclusion could trigger forced selling of up to $9 billion in securities as index‑tracking funds rebalance their portfolios. That selling would likely depress MicroStrategy’s share price, which could in turn force the company to sell some of its Bitcoin holdings to defend its balance‑sheet. A wave of institutional selling could then spread to other crypto‑related assets that are similarly dependent on index inclusion.
In short, the very institutional infrastructure that makes the herd feel safe—the ETFs, the index funds, the blue‑chip proxies—could become the source of a violent market correction. The “mass liquidity” that herd investors crave is, in reality, a form of systemic interdependence. When one part of the system trembles, the whole edifice may shake.
III. The mathematics of impossibility: Why token supply matters critically
To grasp why some assets are more vulnerable than others in such a scenario, we must examine a simple but often‑ignored metric: total supply.
3.1 The Powerball fallacy
Consider a lottery player who buys a Powerball ticket. The odds of winning are minuscule—about 1 in 300 million—but they are mathematically real. The jackpot exists, the rules are public, and someone will eventually win. The player knows exactly what they are betting on: a tiny chance of a life‑changing payout.
Now consider an investor who buys Dogecoin, which currently has 145 billion coins in circulation, with billions more created each year. That investor might dream of Dogecoin reaching $10 per coin—a common fantasy on social media. But for that to happen, Dogecoin’s total market value would need to exceed $1.45 trillion. That is more than the annual economic output of Spain, and about 3.5 times the market capitalisation of JPMorgan Chase. It would require almost unimaginable amounts of new money flowing into this one asset.
The same logic applies to other high‑supply tokens. XRP has 100 billion coins. Kaspa will have 28.7 billion. For any of these to deliver thousand‑fold returns to early investors, their market capitalisations would have to surpass the wealth of entire nations. This is not a low‑probability event; it is a mathematical impossibility under realistic assumptions about global capital flows.
3.2 The crucial distinction
The Powerball player faces long odds, but the game is designed to pay out eventually. The high‑supply crypto investor, by contrast, is betting on an outcome that the market literally cannot accommodate. This is not investing; it is hope arithmetic—and it leaves participants dangerously exposed when liquidity evaporates.
IV. The sovereign alternative: An anatomy of extreme scarcity
Against this backdrop of herd psychology and institutional fragility, a small category of assets offers a different proposition: absolute, verifiable scarcity. One example is BITNET.MONEY (ticker: BTN), a Proof‑of‑Work cryptocurrency launched in July 2023.
4.1 The numbers that define it
BTN’s entire supply is capped at 6 million coins—less than a third of Bitcoin’s 21 million, and a tiny fraction of the billions issued by Dogecoin or XRP. After 30 months of operation, only a portion of those 6 million have been mined. This creates a supply dynamic that is fundamentally different from “mass‑liquidity” tokens.
To put this in perspective: if BTN were to achieve a market capitalisation of $1 billion (about 0.05% of Bitcoin’s current valuation), each coin would be worth roughly $166. The same market cap would move Dogecoin’s price by less than a cent. In other words, scarcity amplifies the price impact of new demand. This is basic economics, but it is often forgotten in crypto markets obsessed with “viral” narratives.
4.2 The fairness imperative
BTN was launched with zero pre‑mining: no coins were allocated to founders, developers or insiders before the public could participate. Every coin has been earned through Proof‑of‑Work mining—a process that requires real‑world expenditure on hardware and electricity. This “fair launch” principle ensures that early holders cannot dump large pre‑mined stashes on the market, which often plagues projects where founders control most of the supply.
4.3 The energy‑efficiency argument
BTN uses an algorithm called Ethash, which is designed to be resistant to specialised mining hardware (ASICs). This allows ordinary computers with graphics cards (GPUs) to participate effectively, reducing the risk of mining centralisation and lowering the network’s energy footprint compared to Bitcoin. In an era of growing concern about crypto’s environmental impact, such efficiency may become increasingly valued.
V. Why mindset determines outcomes: A guide for self‑assessment
The division between herd followers and sovereign players is not merely academic. It has practical consequences for portfolio performance, especially during market stress. Readers might ask: which camp do I belong to? The following checklist may help.
Are you a herd follower?
- You check cryptocurrency prices several times a day.
- You feel anxious when you see others buying assets you don’t own.
- Your investment decisions are heavily influenced by social‑media trends or news headlines.
- Your portfolio looks similar to the “top 10” list on CoinMarketCap.
- Your greatest risk: Becoming exit liquidity for larger players when sentiment shifts or institutions rebalance.
Are you a Powerball‑style speculator?
- You chase tiny, low‑market‑cap coins hoping for a “100x” return.
- You invest based on online tips or influencer recommendations without deep research.
- You rarely calculate the total supply or market‑cap implications of your investments.
- Your greatest risk: Betting on mathematical impossibilities—assets that simply cannot appreciate to the levels you imagine, no matter how compelling the story.
Are you a sovereign player?
- You prioritise protocol fundamentals (scarcity, security, decentralisation) over short‑term hype.
- You are comfortable holding assets that others ignore or ridicule.
- You think in terms of asymmetric risk/reward: small bets that could pay off enormously if you are right.
- You accept that your investments may take years, not months, to mature.
- Your greatest advantage: You are positioned to benefit after the herd realises its mistakes—for example, when institutional dependencies unravel or when scarcity becomes painfully obvious to everyone.
VI. The road ahead: Scarcity as a defensive strategy
As cryptocurrency markets mature, the distinction between psychological approaches may become more pronounced. The January 2026 index rebalancing—if it unfolds as described—could serve as a stress test for different investment styles.
Herd investors, tied to institutional proxies, may find their “safe” assets suddenly correlated with traditional finance’s mechanical rules. Powerball speculators may discover that tokens with billions in supply cannot defy arithmetic. Sovereign players, by contrast, may find that absolute scarcity provides a form of defensive insulation. An asset with only 6 million coins cannot be diluted by endless issuance; its value is anchored by cryptography, not by the whims of index committees.
This is not a prediction that any particular asset will rise or fall. It is a framework for understanding where vulnerability lies—and where resilience might be found. In a world of increasing financial interdependency, the ability to think independently and act with conviction may be the ultimate scarce resource.
Cryptocurrencies are volatile, speculative and largely unregulated. Readers should conduct their own research and consult professional advisers before making financial decisions.
Top comments (0)