2025 Market Storm Panorama: From Michael J. Saylor's Bitcoin Bet to 11 Moments That Changed the Financial Landscape

The financial markets of 2025 resemble a blockbuster full of twists—featuring dizzying moments of explosive profits as well as sudden cliff-like declines. This year, from Wall Street traders’ offices to Istanbul’s foreign exchange markets and Tokyo’s bond exchanges, global investors are experiencing a heart-pounding “confidence game.” Among them, the confrontation between MicroStrategy led by ไมเคิล เจ. เซย์เลอร์ and Jim Chanos has become the most eye-catching personal show in this financial storm—a high-stakes bet on Bitcoin’s future value. This is not just a competition between two investment masters but a collision of understandings of “capitalism in the digital age.”

ไมเคิล เซย์เลอร์’s Bitcoin Empire Dream: From Short Squeeze to Victory Declaration

When Jim Chanos announced shorting MicroStrategy’s stock, no one expected it to become one of the most dramatic investment duels of 2025. Chanos’s logic seemed impeccable: MicroStrategy’s stock was severely overvalued relative to its Bitcoin holdings. He decided to “short MicroStrategy’s stock while holding Bitcoin long-term,” and publicly announced this strategy in May.

ไมเคิล เซย์เลอร์ was undeterred. The founder of MicroStrategy stated in June on Bloomberg TV, “I don’t think Chanos understands our business model.” More aggressively, Chanos responded via social media platform X, calling Chanos’s explanation “complete financial nonsense.” The debate escalated into a comprehensive dialogue about Bitcoin’s value, leverage financing, and corporate governance.

But numbers don’t lie. By July, MicroStrategy’s stock hit a record high, rising 57% from the start of the year to July. However, as the number of digital asset management firms surged and cryptocurrency prices retreated from their highs, the price gap between MicroStrategy and Bitcoin began to narrow. By November 7, when Chanos announced he would “sell all,” MicroStrategy’s stock had fallen 42% from its peak.

This duel reflects more than just the victory or defeat of two investors; it reveals a deeper market law: when “confidence” becomes the sole support, once shaken, “valuation premiums” evaporate rapidly. ไมเคิล เซย์เลอร์ “bet” on Bitcoin’s appreciation through aggressive leverage and corporate asset management, but once market sentiment reverses, this model amplifies risks.

Leverage Traps in Digital Assets

The story of MicroStrategy exposes a key truth: when a company’s value depends mainly on “market confidence” rather than “cash flow,” any shift in psychological expectations can act as a catalyst. In this duel, Chanos’s short position ultimately yielded a 94% return—another proof of the old market rule: “bubbles will burst eventually.”

Michael Burry’s AI Wake-up Call: From Predicting the 2008 Crisis to Shorting Tech Giants

Michael Burry has once again become a warning voice. The legendary short seller made famous by the movie “The Big Short” discovered and publicly disclosed a compelling 13F filing in November 2024: he held put options on Nvidia and Palantir.

Burry’s put options were astonishing: Nvidia’s strike price was 47% below its closing price at disclosure, and Palantir’s strike was even 76% lower. This was not just routine risk hedging—it was a clear market warning signal. Burry seemed to be saying: these companies, hailed as “saviors” of the AI era, are hugely overvalued.

This disclosure ignited the market’s “dry tinder.” Shortly after, Nvidia, one of the world’s most valuable companies, saw its stock plunge sharply, and Palantir also declined. Although both stocks later rebounded, Burry revealed on social media that his Palantir put options, bought at $1.84, surged 101% in less than three weeks.

Burry’s move reveals a long-ignored market truth: while the AI boom is real, the “narrative” around AI has become extremely inflated. When the market is dominated by “a few AI leaders, massive passive inflows, and extremely low volatility,” any doubt about this stability can trigger chain reactions. This is the danger Burry warns of: beneath the surface of “calm waters” lies enormous accumulated risk.

Geopolitical Reshaping of Investment Landscape: The Rise of European Defense Stocks

When Trump announced cuts to military aid to Ukraine, Europe’s defense industry experienced its strongest “political dividend” in recent years. This shift is profound: defense stocks, once firmly avoided by many fund managers due to “ESG” principles, suddenly became the new darling of “responsible investing.”

Rheinmetall AG exemplifies this trend. The German defense company’s stock rose approximately 150% from the start of the year to December 23. Similarly, Italy’s Leonardo SpA gained over 90%. More dramatically, some fund managers like Pierre Alexis Dumont, CIO of Sycomore Asset Management, explicitly stated: “We reintroduced defense assets into our ESG funds early this year. The paradigm has shifted.”

What is the essence of this change? When geopolitical risks rise, “moral considerations” are often overridden by “survival needs.” The surge in defense stocks and the emergence of related “European defense bonds” mark a turning point: national security needs are once again the primary factor in investment decisions. Banks have even issued specialized “European defense bonds,” structured similarly to “green bonds,” but with funds explicitly allocated to weapons manufacturers and related institutions.

The Ultimate Reversal in Japan’s Bond Market: Short Sellers’ Victory Moment

One trade has haunted short sellers for decades—shorting Japanese government bonds. The logic seemed perfect: Japan’s massive public debt would inevitably push interest rates higher, causing bond prices to fall. Yet, Japan’s years of ultra-loose monetary policy kept short sellers bleeding.

Until 2025, when the situation finally reversed. The Bank of Japan’s rate hikes and the new Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s large-scale fiscal spending plan ignited this “dry tinder.” The 10-year Japanese government bond yield broke above 2%, reaching multi-decade highs; the 30-year yield rose over 1 percentage point, setting new records.

By December 23, 2025, Bloomberg’s Japanese government bond index had fallen over 6%, making it the worst performer among major global bond markets. For institutions like PIMCO, Jupiter Asset Management, and RBC Blue Bay Asset Management, their profits from shorting Japanese government bonds this year were astonishing—final reward for long-term patience.

The story of Japan’s bond market reminds us of an ancient truth: in markets, ultimate victory often belongs to those who can endure long enough until the paradigm shifts.

The Strange Boom of South Korea’s Stock Market and Domestic Investors’ “Betrayal”

In Bloomberg’s ranking of major global stock indices, South Korea’s KOSPI led with over 70% gains—an almost “K-pop-style” spectacular performance. The driver was President Lee Jae-myung’s “capital market stimulus policy.” He even explicitly set a “KOSPI 5,000 points” target during his campaign, which is highly aggressive in a world where most political leaders avoid making clear promises about stock indices.

Even more surprisingly, Wall Street investment banks like JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup have begun to suggest that this target could be reached within 2026. Part of this optimism is fueled by the global AI boom, which has strengthened South Korea’s position as an “Asian AI trading hub.”

But there is a glaring “missing” element: domestic retail investors. Despite Lee’s reform promises, South Korean investors remain net sellers—they have shifted $33 billion to U.S. stock markets and are seeking higher-risk investments like cryptocurrencies and overseas leveraged ETFs. This reveals an unsettling reality: even with official government support, domestic investors harbor “structural doubts” about the long-term value of their own stock market.

South Korea’s example shows that government policy incentives are limited—they can boost short-term prices but cannot fundamentally change market participants’ deep-seated judgments about “fundamentals.”

The Political Game of Cryptocurrencies: From Trump Coin to the Collapse of World Liberty Financial

After Trump returned to the White House, the frenzy around “assets related to Trump” reached astonishing levels. Within hours, Trump launched a Meme coin and promoted it on social media; then First Lady Melania also released her own token; later, the Trump family-related World Liberty Financial launched the WLFI token, allowing retail investors to participate.

All this looks like a financial “celebrity race”—investors seem to be “buying political belief” rather than “buying an asset.” By December 23, 2025, Trump’s Meme coin had fallen over 80% from its January high; Melania’s Meme coin nearly collapsed, dropping close to 99%; American Bitcoin (a crypto mining company co-founded by Eric Trump) also declined about 80% from its September peak.

The lesson here is sharp: even with “White House support,” these assets cannot escape the fundamental laws of the crypto market—price rises → leverage inflows → liquidity dries up → price crashes. Political backing provides short-term narrative momentum but cannot sustain long-term value.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: From “Toxic Twins” to “Saviors” — a Reversal

Since the 2008 financial crisis, these two government-sponsored housing finance giants have been at the center of an eternal debate: “Is reform possible?” Many investors, like Bill Ackman, have long held their stocks, dreaming of a “privatization miracle.”

In 2025, that dream seems to have begun. With the Trump administration expected to pursue “aggressive deregulation,” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stocks were swept by a “meme stock” style speculative frenzy. From the start of the year to September’s peak, their combined stock prices surged 367%—a staggering figure.

In August, reports emerged that the government was considering relisting these companies via IPO, potentially raising $30 billion. This sparked investors’ imaginations. By November, Ackman even submitted a 6,000-word proposal to the White House, outlining a roadmap to transform these “toxic assets” into market stars. Michael Burry also joined the chorus, expressing optimism about these two companies.

While timing remains uncertain, the market has already decided: these former symbols of financial crisis are being reinterpreted as “reform beneficiaries.”

Lightning Collapse of Turkey’s Carry Trade: A Real Lesson in Political Risk

By 2025, Turkey became a “paradise” for Carry trades: government bond yields exceeded 40%, and the central bank pledged to maintain currency stability. Institutions like Deutsche Bank, Millennium Partners, and Gramese Capital poured billions of dollars in.

Then, on March 19, 2025, everything collapsed within minutes. That morning, Istanbul’s opposition mayor was arrested by police, sparking mass protests. The Turkish lira was sold off, and the central bank couldn’t prevent depreciation. About $10 billion was withdrawn from Turkish assets on the same day.

The message was clear: high yields can never hedge political risk. This was a profound warning to all Carry traders.

The “Cockroach Effect” in Credit Markets: Growing Hidden Dangers

When JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon issued a warning in October, he used an unforgettable metaphor—“When you see one cockroach, it usually means there are many hiding in the corner”—referring to the increasing number of defaults emerging in the credit market.

Bankruptcies or reorganizations of companies like Saks Global, New Fortress Energy, Tricolor, and First Brands reveal a deeper problem: in years of low interest rates and loose credit, many “zombie companies” that should have been eliminated have survived. Lenders even failed to detect illegal activities like “re-mortgaging” and “co-signature fraud.”

This suggests that in 2026, more “cockroaches” may be uncovered in the credit market—risks are far from fully realized.

Gold and the “Currency Devaluation Trade”

In 2025, concerns over “government debt” and “currency devaluation” peaked. Massive debts in major economies like the US, France, and Japan, combined with a lack of political will to resolve debt issues, prompted some investors to turn to gold and cryptocurrencies as “devaluation hedges.” This strategy is called the “currency devaluation trade.”

In October, this narrative reached a climax: fears about US fiscal prospects, coupled with the threat of the “longest government shutdown in history,” drove investors to seek safe assets outside the dollar. Gold and Bitcoin both hit record highs during this period—rare for two assets traditionally seen as “rivals.”

Conclusion: Deep Lessons from the Market Storm

The financial markets of 2025 teach us a key truth: under extreme conditions, individual decisions—whether ไมเคิล เซย์เลอร์’s Bitcoin bet, Michael Burry’s options plays, or others’ choices—can reshape market dynamics.

But this year also warns us: investments based on “political support,” “sentiment,” or “leverage expansion” will ultimately face reality testing. Those who win in “bubbles” are often not because they predicted the direction correctly but because they saw when the bubble would burst.

When 2026 arrives, market participants should remember: in this era of “high-risk bets” and “rapid reversals,” caution is always wiser than recklessness.