The market is fixated on the daily flows of IBIT and FBTC. They track the net inflows as if they were the heartbeat of the crypto economy. But the real signal is not in the volume of capital entering the existing ETFs. It is in the shape of the new products being proposed. Anthony Pompliano, the loudest Bitcoin bull on Main Street, is reportedly planning not one but two thematic ETFs: one that bundles Bitcoin, gold, and guns, and another that exploits a market dislocation known as the mNAV discount. This is not just another ETF filing. It is a statement about the future of value storage in a deglobalizing world.
Tracing the liquidity ghosts through the ICO fog, I recall the 2017 pattern. Back then, every token sale pumped a narrative of disruption. Today, every ETF filing pumps a narrative of institutional maturity. Both are surface-level distractions. The real architecture is the liquidity plumbing beneath. Pompliano's proposal is a test of whether the crypto-native investment thesis can survive the translation into a regulated wrapper. The answer will tell us more about the SEC's tolerance for innovation than about the assets themselves.
Context: The Man, The Myth, The Product
Anthony Pompliano is not a ETF issuer. He is a media personality, a venture capitalist, and a relentless Bitcoin maximalist. His firm, Pomp Investments, has backed dozens of crypto startups. But an ETF is a different beast. It requires a third-party custodian, an authorized participant network, a compliance framework, and a registration statement with the SEC. The reported plans—first broken by Crypto Briefing—are still in the "reportedly planning" stage, meaning no S-1 has been filed. The product is a ghost, a rumor, a concept.
Yet the concept is rich. The first ETF is a tri-asset basket: Bitcoin, gold, and a basket of defense/gun-related equities. The second is a closed-end fund (or similar structure) that trades at a discount to net asset value (mNAV), with a strategy to capture that discount. The core idea is diversification across three stores of value—digital, physical, and industrial—plus a tactical arbitrage overlay. On paper, it is a hedge portfolio for the end of the dollar hegemony. In practice, it is a regulatory minefield.
Core: The Macro-Liquidity Architecture of the Tri-Asset Basket
Let me start with the macro context. The global liquidity cycle is entering a phase of synchronized tightening, but with pockets of expansion. The Fed has paused rate hikes, but the balance sheet is still shrinking. Meanwhile, M2 money supply in the US has been flat to slightly negative, but the velocity of money remains low. This is a liquidity desert. In such an environment, investors seek assets that are either (a) productive (yield-generating) or (b) monetarily hard (scarce). Bitcoin and gold fit the latter. Guns fit the former—defense stocks have pricing power and government contracts.
Bitcoin in the Basket
Bitcoin is the most volatile, but also the most asymmetric. Based on my earlier modeling of on-chain flows during the 2020 DeFi summer, I found that Bitcoin's price action is increasingly correlated with global M2, but with a six-week lag. That relationship held through 2023 and 2024. Now, with M2 growth slowing, Bitcoin's upside is capped by the absence of fresh liquidity. The ETF structure, however, creates a new channel for demand. If Pompliano's ETF gains traction, it could pull marginal capital from gold and equity investors into Bitcoin. But the magnitude is small: the existing Bitcoin ETFs already have ~$50B in AUM. A tri-asset ETF might capture $1B at most in its first year. That is a rounding error.
Gold: The Unwinding of the Decoupling Thesis
Gold is the traditional hedge. In 2022, gold underperformed as the dollar strengthened. But in 2024, gold hit new highs—not because of inflation, but because of central bank buying. The decoupling thesis I wrote about in 2021—that crypto would replace gold as the ultimate reserve asset—has failed. Gold is still the preferred safe haven for sovereigns. Adding gold to a Bitcoin ETF dilutes the crypto-native narrative. It says: "We don't trust Bitcoin enough to go all-in." From a portfolio construction standpoint, the correlation between Bitcoin and gold is low (0.2-0.3), so the combination reduces volatility. But it also reduces the upside. The target audience is likely conservative advisors who want a one-ticket solution for a "hard asset" allocation.
Guns: The Political Bet
Guns are the most controversial piece. The ETF likely will not hold physical firearms. Instead, it will hold shares of defense contractors: Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Sturm Ruger, Smith & Wesson. This is a bet on geopolitical instability and the Second Amendment economy. The defense sector has outperformed the S&P 500 in 2023 and 2024, driven by wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. But it is also a sector subject to political risk: ESG funds divest from defense, and a Democratic administration could curb gun sales. Pompliano is known for his libertarian leanings. The "guns" component is a dog whistle to a specific investor base: the prepper, the survivalist, the anti-establishment American. It is a branding move, not a diversification move. The inclusion of guns also raises the compliance burden. The SEC must ensure that the ETF's marketing is not misleading and that the underlying assets are not too volatile or illiquid.
The mNAV Discount ETF: A Strategy of Structural Arbitrage
The second product is more interesting. mNAV stands for "market price minus net asset value." A closed-end fund or a trust that trades at a discount to NAV presents an arbitrage opportunity: buy the fund at a discount, hold until the discount narrows, profit. But the discount is persistent for many closed-end funds. The strategy to capture it involves active management—perhaps using leverage, derivatives, or a redemption mechanism. The SEC scrutinizes such strategies heavily. The product is essentially a bet on the persistence of market inefficiency. In crypto, the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) famously traded at a discount for years until it converted to an ETF. The mNAV discount ETF is a structure that attempts to institutionalize the arbitrage. But the question is: why would anyone buy a fund that is designed to exploit its own discount? It is a circular logic. The strategy is more likely a marketing gimmick to attract systematic traders.
Contrarian: The Bear Case They Won't Tell You
Here is the contrarian angle. Pompliano's ETF plans are a distraction from the real issue: the commoditization of crypto ETFs. The market already has a Bitcoin ETF, a gold ETF, a defense ETF. Why would anyone pay a higher fee for a packaged version? The product is a solution in search of a problem. The target audience is small. The regulatory hurdles are high. The SEC will likely ask: "Is this a '40 Act company? How do you value the guns component? What is the leverage ratio for the mNAV strategy?" The answers are unknown. The team is a single person—Pompliano—with no proven ETF operational experience. The probability of approval is low. Even if approved, the survival rate of thematic ETFs is poor. Most close within two years due to low AUM.
Moreover, the macro environment is shifting. If the US enters a recession, defense stocks may fall as government spending is cut. Gold may fall as liquidity is drained. Bitcoin may fall as risk appetite collapses. The tri-asset basket could become a triple-loss scenario. The liquidity ghosts I traced in 2017—the recycled capital that created fake demand—are now haunting the ETF space. The inflows into thematic ETFs are often driven by retail FOMO, not institutional conviction. When the music stops, these products become orphaned.
Takeaway: Watch the Plumbing, Not the Products
Pompliano's ETF is not a watershed moment. It is a signal that the market is entering the phase of product proliferation. The real test is whether the SEC allows a multi-asset, actively managed, and politically charged ETF to pass. If yes, it opens the door for even more exotic products—crypto + real estate, crypto + commodities, crypto + AI. If no, it confirms that the SEC still views crypto as a separate, siloed asset class. For now, the smart money is on the sidelines. The bubble breathes. Don't mistake the pattern.
Tracing the liquidity ghosts through the ICO fog, I see the same pattern of terrible ideas wrapped in regulatory fiction. The yield curve is a map of future pain. The mNAV discount is a lie wrapped in a promise. The only thing that matters is the structure of the liquidity plumbing underneath. Watch the filings. Watch the authorized participants. Watch the custody arrangements. Those are the real signals. The rest is noise.
Digital land prices exist in a vacuum only when the macro tide is rising. When it recedes, the portfolio of Bitcoin, gold, and guns will be stranded on the beach of a liquidity crisis. The question is not whether the ETF will be approved. It is whether the narrative of "hard assets" can survive the structural reality of a printing-press world. The answer is no. But the ride will be entertaining.