With the SVB debacle, and with the recent signs of an apparent bull run on the horizon, it is now possible to conclude that crypto has resolved many of its previous issues, whereas fiat has not. As a result, crypto may indeed be a safer option at this point, which both depositors and investors should consider as they are reminded yet again that their deposits belong to the bank, and that the bank can do whatever it wants with that money, including investing in crashing bonds which result in depositor losses. Moreover, despite the fact that the largest US banks are making over $100 billion in profits per quarter, if they are indeed gambling in the bond or stock markets, even huge profits may not be enough. This was the case of SVB, which collapsed with tens of billions in deposits and, crucially, no one really knows why this happened with absolute certainty. In contrast, not only is everyone in crypto in charge of their own assets but the community also quickly identifies what is and is not affected in these types of situations, as well as how far it might all reverberate. Crypto is thus now arguably safer, whereas in fiat we do not yet know the full effects of the rapid increases in debt costs, which have most likely not yet fully cleared through the system either.
Skip to content
