Bitcoin, Global Liquidity, and the Shadow Financial System

Bitcoin's price dynamics are increasingly understood not in isolation, but as a reflection of broader macroeconomic forces and evolving financial structures. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the intricate relationships between Bitcoin, global monetary conditions represented by M2 money supply, the crypto-native liquidity engine of Tether (USDT) operating as a "Shadow M2," and the wider, often opaque, shadow banking system.

The analysis reveals that Bitcoin exhibits a strong, positive long-term correlation with global M2 growth, positioning it as a sensitive barometer for global liquidity shifts, albeit with notable time lags and susceptibility to crypto-specific events or extreme valuation levels. Tether functions as a significant amplifier of dollar-denominated liquidity within the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Its issuance mechanism, particularly its absorption of government debt like US Treasuries into its reserves, effectively creates a parallel "Shadow M2," boosting liquidity available for crypto assets but also potentially contributing to broader inflationary pressures.

Beyond Tether, the traditional shadow banking system – encompassing activities like repo financing and entities such as Money Market Funds (MMFs) – is becoming increasingly intertwined with the crypto sphere. Stablecoins, in particular, function as a form of modern shadow money, sharing characteristics and vulnerabilities with MMFs and creating new pathways for liquidity and risk transmission between the traditional and digital financial worlds. Consequently, Bitcoin's price is influenced by a complex interplay of official monetary supply, crypto-native liquidity mechanisms, and broader shadow financial flows.

This growing interconnectedness, particularly involving lightly regulated crypto intermediaries functioning as shadow banks, introduces significant systemic risks, including potential contagion pathways between these distinct but linked financial realms. Understanding these multifaceted drivers and risks is crucial for investors, risk managers, and policymakers navigating the modern financial landscape.

II. Bitcoin and the Pulse of Global Liquidity: The M2 Connection

The narrative surrounding Bitcoin has evolved from a niche technological curiosity to an asset class increasingly responsive to global macroeconomic trends. Central to this understanding is its relationship with global liquidity, often proxied by the global M2 money supply.

A. Defining and Measuring Global M2 Money Supply

Global M2 money supply represents the total amount of broad money circulating within the global financial system, aggregating data across major economies such as the United States, the Eurozone, China, Japan, the UK, Canada, Russia, and Australia.1 It encompasses not only physical currency (cash and coins) and demand deposits (checking accounts) but also near-money assets like savings deposits, money market securities, money market mutual funds, and other easily accessible forms of money.1 As a broad measure, M2 is considered a key indicator of the overall liquidity available within an economy, reflecting the funds readily available for spending, investment, and speculation worldwide.

Changes in global M2 levels are primarily driven by the monetary policies enacted by central banks. Expansionary actions, such as interest rate cuts and quantitative easing (QE) – the purchase of government bonds and other securities to inject liquidity – lead to an increase in M2. Conversely, tightening measures, like raising interest rates or quantitative tightening (QT), aim to reduce M2 growth or even contract the money supply, often to curb inflation. Fiscal policies, such as large government stimulus programs, can also contribute to M2 expansion.

Accurate measurement can involve nuances. Some analyses incorporate additional central bank liabilities and instruments like Overnight Reverse Repurchase Agreements to capture a more effective measure of financial money supply, distinct from purely traditional M2 definitions. Furthermore, when aggregating M2 across different currency zones, denominating the total in a single reference currency, typically the US dollar, is crucial. This approach captures not only the pace of credit creation within each economy but also the relative strength or weakness of the dollar against other major currencies, providing a more comprehensive proxy for global liquidity conditions accessible to international investors.

The significance of tracking Global M2 lies in its role as a macroeconomic signal. It reflects the aggregate flow of capital available globally, influencing risk appetite across various asset classes. When liquidity is abundant (M2 is expanding rapidly), capital tends to seek higher-yielding opportunities, often flowing into perceived 'risk assets' such as equities, commodities, and, increasingly, Bitcoin. Conversely, when liquidity tightens (M2 growth slows or contracts), investors often adopt a risk-off stance, potentially leading to capital outflows from these same assets.

B. Quantifying the Correlation: Evidence, Lags, and Statistical Significance

Empirical analysis reveals a compelling relationship between Bitcoin's price movements and changes in global M2. Over extended periods, a strong positive correlation has been observed. Notably, one study found a correlation coefficient of 0.94 between Bitcoin's price and global liquidity (proxied by global M2) from May 2013 to July 2024, indicating a very strong positive linear relationship during this timeframe.1 Research by Fidelity Digital Assets also confirmed high positive correlations and high R-squared values between Bitcoin and broad money supply measures like M2 and global M2, suggesting that changes in money supply explain a substantial portion of Bitcoin's price variance.8 Studies employing various econometric methods have further corroborated the statistical significance of this relationship.

However, the strength of this correlation is sensitive to the timeframe analyzed. While the long-term correlation appears very high, shorter-term rolling correlations present a more nuanced picture. The average 12-month rolling correlation between Bitcoin and global liquidity, while still moderately positive at 0.51, is considerably lower than the overall figure. This discrepancy indicates that while Bitcoin's long-term trajectory is closely tied to liquidity trends, its price can deviate significantly over shorter periods, likely influenced by factors specific to the cryptocurrency market itself, such as internal market dynamics or idiosyncratic events.

A crucial refinement in analyzing this relationship involves focusing on the rate of change of Global M2 rather than its absolute level. Several analyses suggest that comparing Bitcoin's Year-on-Year (YoY) return with the Global M2 YoY change reveals a much stronger and clearer relationship.5 Bitcoin's most significant bull runs historically align with periods of rapid acceleration in liquidity expansion, whereas periods of M2 contraction or flat growth often precede price declines or extended consolidation phases.3 For instance, during Bitcoin's consolidation in early 2025, Global M2 was increasing steadily, but its rate of change was flat; a breakout towards new highs was only anticipated if M2's expansion accelerated noticeably.5 This focus on the rate of change aligns with how financial markets typically operate, reacting more acutely to the marginal injection or withdrawal of liquidity and shifts in policy momentum rather than the existing stock of money. Markets tend to price in existing conditions, but react strongly to the acceleration or deceleration of key drivers like liquidity growth, as these signal changes in the underlying economic or policy environment.

Another critical observation is the existence of a time lag between changes in Global M2 and the corresponding impact on Bitcoin's price. Research suggests this lag is approximately 10 weeks, with further analysis refining it to around 56 to 60 days, or roughly two months. Other predictive offset models have tested lags of 78 days and 108 days, also finding strong correlations suggesting M2 acts as a leading indicator for Bitcoin's price movements after these delays.10 By shifting the Global M2 data forward by these observed lag periods, the correlation with Bitcoin's price movements strengthens significantly, reinforcing the idea that liquidity changes take time to permeate the financial system and influence asset prices.5 This lag reflects the inherent friction in the transmission mechanism: central bank actions must filter through the banking system, influence institutional and retail investor sentiment and allocation decisions, and finally translate into buying or selling pressure in the Bitcoin market.

C. Transmission Mechanisms: How M2 Expansion/Contraction Impacts Bitcoin

Several mechanisms explain how changes in Global M2 translate into Bitcoin price movements:

1. Liquidity and Risk Appetite: This is the most direct channel. When central banks expand the M2 money supply through measures like QE or low interest rates, they inject liquidity into the financial system.1 This abundance of "easy money" often lowers yields on traditional safe assets, pushing investors to seek higher returns elsewhere.7 Consequently, risk appetite increases, and capital flows towards assets perceived as having higher growth potential or offering diversification, including equities, commodities, and speculative assets like Bitcoin.1 An expanding Global M2 signifies more capital available for investment and speculation, benefiting Bitcoin. Conversely, when central banks tighten monetary policy and M2 growth slows or contracts, liquidity is withdrawn from the system. This typically leads to a decrease in risk appetite ("risk-off" behavior), prompting investors to reduce exposure to volatile assets like Bitcoin, thus exerting downward pressure on its price.1

2. Inflation Hedge Narrative: Bitcoin's fixed supply schedule, capped at 21 million coins, contrasts sharply with the potentially unlimited issuance of fiat currencies by central banks.11 This scarcity has fueled a narrative that Bitcoin serves as a hedge against inflation, particularly monetary inflation – the devaluation of fiat currency resulting from excessive money supply expansion.3 Proponents argue that as M2 expands rapidly ("money printing"), the purchasing power of fiat currencies erodes, driving demand towards assets like Bitcoin that cannot be arbitrarily inflated.4 This view gained traction during the massive M2 expansion following the COVID-19 pandemic, which coincided with a major Bitcoin bull run.3 However, the debate regarding Bitcoin as a hedge against price inflation (measured by metrics like the Consumer Price Index, CPI) is more contentious. While some studies find a short-term positive correlation between Bitcoin and CPI, supporting a hedging role 9, others find negative or weak correlations, particularly during periods of high CPI inflation where Bitcoin's price has fallen, such as in mid-2022.8 This has led to skepticism about its reliability as a direct CPI hedge.8 Some analyses suggest Bitcoin correlates better with forward-looking inflation expectations rather than backward-looking CPI data, aligning with the forward-looking nature of financial markets.8

3. Interest Rate Channel: Changes in M2 are intrinsically linked to central bank interest rate policies.1 Lowering interest rates generally encourages borrowing and spending, expands M2, increases liquidity, and reduces the attractiveness of holding cash or low-yielding traditional assets, potentially pushing capital into riskier assets like Bitcoin.3 Conversely, raising interest rates makes borrowing more expensive, tightens liquidity (slowing M2 growth), increases the yield on safer assets, and raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets like Bitcoin, potentially leading to outflows.3 Some empirical studies explicitly find a negative relationship between interest rates and Bitcoin prices, supporting this channel.16

4. Capital Flows: Increased global liquidity implies a larger pool of capital seeking investment opportunities worldwide. In an environment of easy money, cross-border capital flows can increase, and a portion of this liquidity may find its way into alternative asset classes, including the global cryptocurrency market, thereby boosting demand for assets like Bitcoin.4

D. Comparative Analysis: Bitcoin vs. Other Assets in Response to Liquidity Shifts

Analyzing how Bitcoin responds to global liquidity shifts relative to other major asset classes provides valuable context. Bitcoin is often described as a potential "liquidity barometer," perhaps even the "purest" one.6 This argument stems from its unique characteristics: unlike equities, it lacks underlying earnings, cash flows, or dividends; unlike bonds, it offers no yield; and unlike commodities, its industrial use is negligible. Primarily viewed as a risk asset with a digitally enforced scarcity, its price might be more directly and sensitively influenced by the ebb and flow of global liquidity compared to assets with more complex fundamental drivers.

Quantitative comparisons support Bitcoin's high sensitivity, but also reveal nuances:

Asset Class	Overall Correlation (May 2013-Jul 2024) vs. Global M2	Avg. 12m Rolling Correlation vs. Global M2	YoY % Change Correlation vs. Global M2	Directional Alignment (12m Periods) vs. Global M2	Notes
Bitcoin (BTC)	0.94	0.51	Moderately Strong	83%	Highest overall & rolling correlation, highest directional alignment. YoY % change correlation slightly lower than stocks, possibly due to higher volatility.
Gold (XAU)	High (Implied)	High (Close to BTC)	Moderately Strong (Below Stocks/BTC)	High	Strong correlation, often seen as a traditional safe haven/inflation hedge, but also sensitive to liquidity.
S&P 500 ETF (SPX)	High (Implied)	Moderate (Below BTC/Gold)	Slightly Stronger than BTC	High	Strong correlation, especially on YoY % change basis. May be more sensitive to M2 than BTC based on some studies 8, but BTC shows higher return magnitude ("faster horse").8
World Stock ETF (VT)	High (Implied)	Moderate (Below BTC/Gold)	Strong (Similar to SPX)	High	Similar behavior to SPX, reflecting broad equity market sensitivity to global liquidity.
EM Stock ETF (EEM)	Moderate-High (Implied)	Moderate (Below BTC/Gold/Developed Stocks)	Moderate	Moderate-High	Generally follows global liquidity but with potentially higher volatility and sensitivity to EM-specific factors.
20+ Year Treasury (TLT)	Low	Low	Low	Low/Inverse	Bonds, especially long-duration, often have low or inverse correlation with liquidity/risk appetite, acting as safe havens during stress but underperforming during liquidity-fueled rallies.
Total Bond Market (BND)	Low	Low	Low	Low/Inverse	Similar to TLT, reflecting broad bond market behavior.

(Note: "Implied" correlations based on textual descriptions where specific coefficients for the full period were not provided for all assets in the snippets. Strength descriptions relative to Bitcoin.)

The data indicates that while stocks, gold, and Bitcoin are all closely tied to global liquidity, Bitcoin stands out with the highest overall and 12-month rolling correlation.6 Its directional alignment is also the highest, moving in tandem with liquidity trends 83% of the time over 12-month periods.6 However, on a year-over-year percentage change basis, stock indices exhibit a slightly stronger correlation, potentially because Bitcoin's extreme volatility can distort this particular measure compared to the relatively smoother movements of stock indices.6 Furthermore, some analyses suggest equities might have a higher correlation coefficient and R-squared with US M2 compared to Bitcoin, implying greater sensitivity in that specific comparison.8 Despite this, Bitcoin has historically demonstrated a greater magnitude of price response to liquidity changes – acting as the "faster horse" even if the statistical fit is marginally weaker than equities in some analyses.8 This suggests Bitcoin behaves akin to a high-beta asset relative to global liquidity; it experiences disproportionately larger gains during liquidity expansions and potentially larger losses during contractions compared to traditional assets.

E. Limitations and Decoupling Factors

While the correlation between Bitcoin and global M2 is statistically significant and supported by economic logic, it is crucial to acknowledge its limitations and the factors that can cause temporary decoupling:

1. Correlation is Not Causation: The observed relationship, however strong, does not definitively prove that M2 changes cause Bitcoin price movements. Other underlying factors could influence both, or the relationship could be bidirectional.1 Some research even suggests a bidirectional causality between Bitcoin price and US money supply.9 Nevertheless, the hypothesis of liquidity driving risk asset prices is grounded in established economic theory.8

2. Idiosyncratic Crypto Events: The cryptocurrency market is subject to internal shocks that can override macroeconomic trends. Major exchange collapses (e.g., Mt. Gox, FTX), large-scale hacks, sudden regulatory actions (like China's bans on mining and trading), the failure of significant projects (e.g., Terra/Luna ecosystem collapse), or even large Ponzi scheme unwinds (e.g., PlusToken) can trigger fear, forced selling, and capital flight within the crypto ecosystem, causing Bitcoin's price to plummet irrespective of prevailing global liquidity conditions.1 These events shake investor confidence specifically in crypto assets, leading to deviations from macro correlations.

3. Extreme Valuation Levels: During periods of market extremes – the euphoric peaks of bull markets or the panicked troughs of bear markets – the influence of global liquidity can be temporarily overshadowed by market psychology and positioning. At cycle tops (e.g., 2013, 2017, 2021), high valuations may prompt significant profit-taking by long-term holders, or speculative frenzy may push prices beyond what liquidity alone would justify.6 Conversely, during crashes, forced liquidations of leveraged positions or sheer panic selling can drive prices down further and faster than liquidity contraction alone might suggest. On-chain metrics like the Market Value to Realized Value Z-Score (MVRV Z-score) are often used to identify these periods of extreme over- or undervaluation where the correlation with liquidity tends to weaken.6

4. Bitcoin's Halving Cycles: Bitcoin has its own internal supply dynamic driven by the "halving" events that occur approximately every four years, reducing the rate of new coin issuance.1 These halvings are often associated with the start of major bull markets, though the effect is debated. This predetermined supply schedule interacts with demand driven by macro factors, and the timing of halving cycles can sometimes cause Bitcoin's price action to diverge from short-term global M2 trends.1

5. Evolving Market Structure: The Bitcoin market structure is not static. The increasing participation of institutional investors, the launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs, adoption by corporations for treasury reserves, and the growing amount of Bitcoin held in illiquid, long-term wallets could potentially alter how Bitcoin responds to liquidity flows compared to earlier cycles.4 Increased institutional presence and "stronger hands" holding Bitcoin might dampen volatility or change the lag structure of its response to M2 shifts.18

III. Tether's "Shadow M2": Amplifying Liquidity within the Crypto Ecosystem

While global M2 reflects broad monetary conditions, the cryptocurrency market possesses its own internal liquidity dynamics, significantly influenced by stablecoins, particularly Tether (USDT). Tether has evolved into a dominant force, functioning as a parallel "Shadow M2" that lubricates the digital asset market and amplifies dollar-denominated liquidity within this sphere.

A. Deconstructing the "Shadow M2" Analogy: Issuance, Reserves, and Effective Liquidity

The analogy of Tether as a "Shadow M2" stems from its functional equivalence to traditional broad money supply within the confines of the crypto economy. USDT serves as the primary medium of exchange for trading cryptocurrencies, a common unit of account for pricing digital assets, and a widely used short-term store of value for traders moving between positions or seeking temporary refuge from volatility .

The core mechanism of USDT issuance involves an entity sending fiat US dollars (which are part of the traditional M2 supply) to Tether Limited. In return, Tether Limited issues an equivalent amount of USDT tokens onto a supported blockchain (like Ethereum, Tron, etc.). Crucially, Tether Limited holds reserves intended to back the outstanding USDT on a 1:1 basis. The composition of these reserves is critical: while details have varied and attracted scrutiny, they reportedly consist of cash, cash equivalents (like money market funds), secured loans, corporate bonds, precious metals, other investments, and a significant allocation to US Treasury bills. Many of these reserve assets, such as cash held in bank deposits or investments in money market instruments like Treasury bills and commercial paper, are themselves components of, or closely linked to, the traditional M2 money supply.

The initial fiat dollar sent to Tether often remains within the traditional financial system, held as reserves in forms that contribute to or support conventional M2. Simultaneously, a new digital dollar equivalent (USDT) begins circulating within the crypto economy, functioning as readily accessible liquidity there. Thus, one initial "real" dollar effectively underpins two distinct pools of functional, dollar-denominated liquidity: one in the traditional system via Tether's reserves, and one in the crypto system via the circulating USDT. This expansion of dollar-denominated claims – one traditional, one shadow – represents an increase in the overall effective money supply available across both systems.

B. Tether's Role in Debt Monetization and Potential Inflationary Pressures

The composition of Tether's reserves, particularly its substantial holdings of US Treasury bonds and similar debt instruments, introduces another dimension: its role in facilitating the monetization of government debt. Governments issue Treasury bonds primarily to finance budget deficits, essentially creating debt instruments backed by future tax revenues to cover current spending .

When Tether Limited becomes a major purchaser of these Treasuries using the incoming fiat dollars it receives for USDT issuance, it directly participates in financing government spending. It then issues USDT stablecoins against these debt holdings. In effect, newly created government debt becomes the backing for newly created "shadow money" (USDT) circulating in the crypto sphere. This process turns government debt instruments into circulating currency-equivalents within the crypto market, adding to the economy's overall liquidity.

This mechanism carries potential inflationary implications. Expanding the money supply – whether the official M2 or the effective "Shadow M2" created by Tether – without a corresponding increase in the production of real goods and services is a classic driver of inflation, potentially devaluing the purchasing power of all dollar-denominated assets over time. By absorbing government debt and issuing parallel digital dollars against it, Tether's operations contribute to this dynamic, potentially amplifying broader inflationary pressures originating from fiscal deficits . This represents an unconventional transmission belt, linking government fiscal policy directly to the liquidity available in the crypto market. Fiscal deficits financed by debt issuance can, via Tether's reserve mechanism, translate more directly into purchasing power within the crypto ecosystem than through traditional banking channels alone.

The "effective doubling" mechanism also contributes to latent inflationary risk. By creating two active claims (the reserve asset in TradFi and the circulating USDT in crypto) on the underlying economic value represented by the initial dollar, Tether structurally increases the potential velocity and impact of that dollar. If both the traditional M2 component supported by the reserves and the USDT itself are actively circulating and demanding goods, services, or assets simultaneously, the aggregate demand supported by the original dollar is amplified, exerting a potentially stronger inflationary force than if only one form of the money existed. The actual inflationary impact depends crucially on the velocity of circulation of both the traditional reserve components and the USDT tokens themselves.

C. Beyond Trading: Tether's Expanding Utility and Systemic Importance

Initially, Tether's primary role was confined to facilitating cryptocurrency trading on exchanges, providing a stable medium to move between volatile assets without exiting to fiat. However, its utility has expanded significantly, increasing its systemic importance and driving organic demand for its issuance beyond pure speculation.

Key expanding use cases include:

• Cross-Border Payments and Remittances: USDT, particularly on low-fee blockchains like Tron, offers a faster and cheaper alternative to traditional international bank transfers or remittance services. It allows users to bypass slow correspondent banking systems, high fees, and potentially restrictive currency controls, making it attractive for both individuals and businesses conducting international transactions .

• Wealth Preservation in Developing Nations: In countries grappling with high domestic inflation, currency devaluation, or stringent capital controls, citizens increasingly turn to dollar-pegged stablecoins like USDT as a means to preserve wealth. They acquire USDT and hold it on exchanges or in private wallets as a readily accessible proxy for holding US dollars, seeking stability outside their local, often unstable, financial systems.

These growing applications mean that Tether's expansion is not solely dependent on speculative crypto trading volumes. It is becoming embedded in global commerce and personal finance, fulfilling transactional and savings demands previously met by traditional fiat M2 components. Each new adoption vector increases the size, circulation speed (velocity), and global reach of this "Shadow M2," amplifying its impact on global liquidity and its potential contribution to inflationary dynamics.

This expanding pool of deep, globally accessible USDT liquidity remains fundamentally linked to Bitcoin's market dynamics. The liquidity generated through the "effective doubling" and the monetization of debt creates a larger capital base available to flow into crypto assets like Bitcoin. The increasing use of USDT for payments and savings further normalizes the asset and increases the overall size and importance of the USDT market. This readily available pool of "digital dollars" makes it easier for growing adoption – whether retail, institutional, or transactional – to translate into Bitcoin purchases, facilitating smoother price absorption during periods of high demand. Consequently, while Bitcoin itself is often viewed as an inflation hedge due to its fixed supply, its price action within the current market structure is significantly reliant on the expansionary liquidity provided by its primary trading counterpart, Tether.

The broadening utility of USDT also increases systemic interconnectedness. As USDT moves beyond crypto trading into real-world payments and savings, its integration with the global economy deepens. This elevates the potential impact of any instability surrounding Tether – such as concerns about reserve adequacy, transparency, or regulatory action – extending the potential fallout beyond the crypto market to affect real economic transactions and savers globally. This increases Tether's systemic footprint and the potential for cross-system contagion.

IV. The Wider Shadow Banking Ecosystem and its Crypto Embrace

Tether's "Shadow M2" operates within a much larger context: the global shadow banking system. This system, comprising various non-bank financial intermediaries and activities, performs bank-like functions but largely outside the perimeter of traditional banking regulation. Increasingly, the cryptocurrency world is intersecting with, and arguably becoming a part of, this shadow financial landscape.

A. Understanding Shadow Banking: Functions, Entities, and Shadow Money Creation

Shadow banking, or Nonbank Financial Intermediation (NBFI) as termed by the Financial Stability Board (FSB), broadly refers to credit intermediation involving entities and activities that are fully or partially outside the regular banking system.19 A key characteristic is the lack of access to traditional safety nets like deposit insurance and central bank liquidity facilities, coupled with lighter regulatory oversight regarding capital reserves, liquidity requirements, and risk management compared to licensed depository institutions.19

The FSB and IMF identify several core functions performed by the shadow banking system 19:

• Credit Intermediation: Channeling funds from savers/investors to borrowers.19

• Maturity Transformation: Funding longer-term assets (like loans or securities) with short-term liabilities (like commercial paper or repo borrowing).19

• Liquidity Transformation: Using cash-like, easily redeemable liabilities to finance less liquid assets.19

• Leverage: Employing borrowed funds or complex financial structures to amplify potential returns (and losses).19

• Credit Risk Transfer: Shifting the risk of borrower default from the originator to other parties, often through securitization or derivatives.19

A diverse array of entities participates in these activities. Common examples include: Investment Banks (specifically their unregulated activities), Hedge Funds, Private Equity Funds, Mortgage Lenders, Money Market Funds (MMFs), specialized Finance Companies, Broker-Dealers, Securitization vehicles like Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) and Structured Investment Vehicles (SIVs), and the markets for Repurchase Agreements (repo).19 More recently, stablecoin issuers and cryptocurrency exchanges performing bank-like functions are increasingly considered part of this landscape.27

Within this system, shadow money is created. This refers to privately issued credit instruments that aim to be convertible into sovereign money (like the US dollar) at par value on demand, effectively serving as substitutes for traditional bank deposits but without state backing or deposit insurance.27 Classic examples include shares in MMFs and liabilities created in the repo market.29 The creation of shadow money allows the shadow banking system to intermediate assets, particularly sovereign debt like Treasury bonds, through mechanisms analogous to traditional banking's money multiplier; this is sometimes conceptualized as the collateral multiplier.29

The table below maps key traditional shadow banking components to their relevance and interactions within the cryptocurrency ecosystem:

Shadow Banking Component/Activity	Description	Crypto Relevance / Analogue / Interaction
Money Market Funds (MMFs)	Pool investor cash to buy short-term, high-quality debt (CP, Treasuries, repo); offer stable NAV ($1/share) and daily liquidity 19	Analogue: Stablecoins mimic MMF structure (liquid liabilities backed by assets) and face similar run risks.33 Interaction: Stablecoin reserves may include MMF shares or similar assets [Provided Article]. MMF flows (driven by monetary policy) inversely impact stablecoins.33 Tokenized MMFs emerging.37
Repurchase Agreements (Repo)	Short-term borrowing collateralized by securities (often Treasuries); crucial for dealer funding and system liquidity 23	Potential Interaction: Stablecoin issuers might hold repo assets or need repo access in stress.40 Crypto funds/entities might seek repo funding (indirectly via prime brokers). Repo market stress signals broad liquidity tightening impacting crypto.41
Securitization (SPVs/SIVs)	Pooling assets (e.g., mortgages) and issuing tranched securities backed by them 23	Analogue: Some complex DeFi protocols involve pooling crypto assets and issuing different risk/yield tokens. Potential for future tokenization of traditional asset-backed securities.
Investment Banks (Unregulated Activities)	Market making, prime brokerage, underwriting, proprietary trading outside strict banking regulation 19	Interaction: Provide prime brokerage, clearing (futures), and trading services to crypto hedge funds and institutions.28 May facilitate institutional access to crypto.
Hedge Funds / Private Equity	Investment funds using diverse, often leveraged strategies; lightly regulated 19	Interaction: Significant players in crypto markets, trading spot, derivatives, and DeFi. Drive institutional demand. May borrow from crypto shadow banks or traditional prime brokers.28
Broker-Dealers	Facilitate securities trading; often funded via repo 23	Interaction: Traditional broker-dealers offer crypto trading/custody to clients. Crypto exchanges function similarly but often with less regulation.28
Finance Companies	Extend credit (e.g., consumer, business) funded by commercial paper or other market sources 24	Analogue: Centralized crypto lending platforms (e.g., former Celsius, BlockFi) functioned similarly, taking crypto deposits and lending them out, often with high leverage and risk.45
New Crypto Components
Stablecoin Issuers	Issue tokens pegged to fiat, backed by reserves; aim for par convertibility 33	Function: Create crypto-native "shadow money".27 Perform liquidity/maturity transformation.33 Central to crypto market liquidity [Provided Article]. Link TradFi assets (reserves) to crypto.33
Centralized Crypto Exchanges	Platforms for trading crypto assets; often offer custody, leverage, lending/borrowing 27	Function: Act as de facto crypto banks/brokers, performing credit intermediation and liquidity provision, often with minimal regulation ("shadow crypto financial system").27 Vulnerable to runs.27
Decentralized Finance (DeFi)	Protocols aiming to replicate financial services (lending, exchange, derivatives) via smart contracts on blockchains 30	Function: Represents "Shadow Banking 2.0".30 Aims for disintermediation but often relies on stablecoins, centralized oracles, and governance tokens, creating new forms of intermediation and risk (complexity, leverage, rigidity, runs).30

B. Stablecoins as Modern Shadow Money: Parallels with MMFs and Eurodollars

Fiat-backed stablecoins, such as USDT and USDC, represent a significant modern incarnation of shadow money.27 They are privately issued digital tokens that promise holders the ability to redeem them for a fixed amount of a sovereign currency (typically one US dollar) on demand.33 To maintain this peg, issuers hold reserves composed primarily of traditional financial assets.33 This structure – issuing highly liquid, par-value liabilities backed by potentially less liquid or market-sensitive assets – places stablecoin issuers squarely within the definition of shadow banking entities performing liquidity and maturity transformation.33

The parallels with Money Market Funds (MMFs) are particularly striking.33 Both aim to provide a safe, stable-value, cash-like instrument for investors. Both achieve this by holding a portfolio of underlying assets (short-term debt for MMFs, a mix including Treasuries, CP, and deposits for stablecoins). Crucially, this transformation exposes both to the risk of runs.33 If investors lose confidence in the value or liquidity of the underlying assets, or in the issuer's ability to meet redemptions at par, they may rush to withdraw funds simultaneously. This dynamic has been observed in MMFs during the 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 COVID-19 market turmoil.34 Similar "flight-to-safety" dynamics are seen with stablecoins during crypto market stress, where investors tend to move funds from perceived riskier stablecoins (e.g., those with less transparent or lower-quality reserves, or algorithmic stablecoins) to perceived safer ones (e.g., those with audited reserves primarily in cash and Treasuries).33 Research has even identified a "break-the-buck" threshold for stablecoins, analogous to MMFs: redemptions accelerate significantly when a stablecoin's price dips below the $1 peg, indicating a loss of confidence in its stability.34 A key difference, however, remains regulation: MMFs operate under specific rules (like SEC Rule 2a-7 in the US) governing asset quality, liquidity, and maturity, whereas stablecoins currently lack a comparable comprehensive regulatory framework.34

Stablecoins also draw comparisons to Eurodollars.48 Eurodollars are US dollar deposits held in banks outside the United States, originating historically as a way to hold dollars beyond the direct reach of US authorities and regulations.48 Similarly, stablecoins are dollar-denominated liabilities issued and transacted largely outside the traditional US banking system, often on global, decentralized blockchains.48 While the Eurodollar market ultimately grew in a way that reinforced the US dollar's international role and the importance of US correspondent banks for clearing transactions (thereby enhancing US financial leverage for sanctions), stablecoins pose a potential challenge.48 They offer a mechanism for dollar-denominated value transfer that could potentially bypass the traditional banking system entirely, making it harder to monitor transactions and enforce financial sanctions that rely on controlling access to US dollar clearing.48

The proliferation of stablecoins, alongside centralized crypto exchanges offering leverage and lending/borrowing services, and DeFi protocols replicating traditional finance, has led analysts to characterize the entire cryptocurrency sphere as evolving into a new form of shadow banking system.27 Centralized exchanges, in particular, often act like banks – taking deposits (in crypto), providing custody, facilitating payments, and extending credit (margin trading) – but without banking licenses and the associated prudential oversight.27 This "shadow crypto financial system" 28 performs crucial intermediation functions but operates in a regulatory grey area, potentially accumulating systemic risks.27 This evolution appears driven, at least partly, by regulatory arbitrage – the ability to offer bank-like services and capture intermediation profits without incurring the costs and constraints of formal banking regulation, mirroring a key driver behind the growth of traditional shadow banking.22

C. Channels of Influence: How Shadow Banking Liquidity (Repo, MMFs, etc.) Permeates Crypto

Liquidity and risks from the traditional shadow banking system can influence the cryptocurrency market, including Bitcoin's price, through several channels:

1. Stablecoin Reserves and Backing: This is the most direct link. Major stablecoins like Tether hold reserves in traditional money market instruments, including commercial paper, Treasury bills, bank deposits, and potentially MMF shares or repo agreements.33 The value, liquidity, and stability of these reserves directly impact the stability of the stablecoin itself. Stress or losses in these traditional assets (e.g., defaults in the commercial paper market, sharp drops in bond prices due to interest rate hikes, illiquidity in repo markets) can undermine the stablecoin's backing, potentially triggering de-pegging events and runs.34 Since stablecoins are the primary source of liquidity for trading Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies 49, instability originating from their traditional asset reserves can rapidly transmit to crypto markets. This mechanism effectively imports traditional financial market risks (interest rate, credit, liquidity) directly into the crypto ecosystem via stablecoins.

2. Crypto Intermediaries' Funding and Operations: Centralized crypto exchanges, crypto hedge funds, and other intermediaries within the "shadow crypto financial system" interact with traditional finance.28 They hold operational accounts at traditional banks, may utilize prime brokerage services from investment banks for accessing leverage or derivatives, and rely on traditional payment rails.28 Institutional crypto funds also bridge the gap, channeling traditional capital into crypto assets.28 Disruptions in these traditional linkages – for instance, a bank failure impacting an exchange's operational funds, or prime brokers pulling back credit lines during market stress – can impair the functioning of these crypto intermediaries and spill over into the broader crypto market. While direct evidence of crypto firms heavily using the repo market for funding might be limited, the possibility exists, especially for larger, more sophisticated players or indirectly via their prime brokers.40

3. Money Market Fund Flows (Indirect Influence): While research suggests that shocks originating within the crypto market do not significantly impact MMF assets or traditional financial markets 33, the reverse influence exists via monetary policy. US monetary policy tightening causes outflows from stablecoins (as crypto becomes less attractive) but inflows into prime MMFs (as their yields rise relative to bank deposits).33 This highlights monetary policy as a key nexus linking the two spheres, albeit with opposing effects on flows. Furthermore, large shifts in general investor allocation driven by relative yields could indirectly link MMFs and crypto. If MMF yields become very low due to expansionary policy, some capital might rotate out of MMFs seeking higher returns in riskier assets, potentially including crypto, although this link is speculative and hard to quantify. The emergence of tokenized MMFs – traditional MMF shares represented as tokens on a blockchain – creates a much more direct future link, combining the safety of traditional MMF assets with the potential efficiency and accessibility of blockchain technology.37

4. Repo Market Conditions (Systemic Liquidity Signal): The repo market is a cornerstone of liquidity for the traditional financial system, particularly for broker-dealers funding their market-making activities.29 While direct participation by crypto entities might be limited, stress in the repo market – indicated by spiking rates (like the September 2019 event 43) or widening haircuts (the discount applied to collateral value 42) – signals broader systemic liquidity tightening, increased counterparty risk aversion, or collateral scarcity.41 Such conditions generally lead to a reduction in leverage across the financial system and a flight to safety, negatively impacting all risk assets, including Bitcoin.41 Therefore, the repo market acts as a crucial barometer of underlying financial stress that indirectly affects crypto through the overall liquidity and risk appetite channel. Hypothetically, in a severe crisis, stablecoin issuers might seek access to repo markets to meet redemption demands if other reserve assets become illiquid, creating a potential direct contagion vector.40 Similarly, a shock to corporate borrowers heavily reliant on private credit (a form of shadow banking) could stress the nonbank lenders, potentially impacting broader market liquidity.52

5. Leverage Provision within Crypto: Crypto-native shadow banks (exchanges, dedicated lenders) provide significant leverage to traders, often funded by customer deposits or other short-term, potentially runnable liabilities.45 This internal leverage cycle amplifies Bitcoin's price volatility. The availability and cost of this leverage are sensitive to overall market conditions, sentiment, and the perceived stability of the lending platforms themselves. Tightening global liquidity or increased risk aversion can lead these crypto lenders to reduce leverage availability or trigger margin calls, exacerbating price downturns.47

The layering of these interactions – traditional finance influencing stablecoin reserves, stablecoins providing crypto liquidity, crypto exchanges acting as unregulated banks, and all being sensitive to broader shadow banking conditions like repo market health – creates complex and often opaque intermediation chains.23 Risks originating in one part of this interconnected system can propagate through these chains in unpredictable ways, potentially amplifying shocks and making comprehensive systemic risk assessment challenging due to data gaps and lack of transparency, particularly within the crypto shadow banking sphere.26

V. Synthesis: Untangling the Drivers of Bitcoin's Price

Bitcoin's price is not determined by any single factor but emerges from the complex interplay between global macroeconomic liquidity, crypto-native liquidity mechanisms, and the increasingly integrated shadow financial system. Understanding these overlapping forces and their potential for creating feedback loops and transmitting risks is essential for comprehending Bitcoin's market dynamics.

A. The Interplay of Global M2 and Shadow Liquidity Flows

It is evident that Bitcoin responds to multiple layers of liquidity:

1. Global Macro Liquidity (Global M2): As established in Section II, the overall tide of global M2, driven by central bank policies, sets the broad context for risk appetite and the general availability of capital seeking investment. Expansive M2 fosters a "risk-on" environment conducive to Bitcoin appreciation, while contracting M2 creates headwinds. This acts as the foundational, long-term macro driver.

2. Crypto-Native Liquidity (Tether/Stablecoins): As discussed in Section III, stablecoins like Tether function as the immediate, operational liquidity within the crypto trading ecosystem – the "digital dollars" used for pricing, exchange, and settlement.49 The supply, stability, and flow of these stablecoins directly impact trading volumes and the market's ability to absorb buying or selling pressure in the short term. Research suggests stablecoin issuance may respond to demand pressures from the crypto market itself, indicating a bidirectional relationship.49

3. Broader Shadow Banking Liquidity: As explored in Section IV, conditions in the wider shadow banking system (repo markets, MMF dynamics, activities of nonbank lenders) influence the crypto market indirectly through stablecoin reserve stability, funding conditions for crypto intermediaries, overall systemic liquidity, and risk transmission channels.

The relative dominance of these drivers likely varies across different time horizons and market conditions. Long-term trends in Bitcoin's price appear strongly correlated with the slower-moving waves of global M2 growth.6 Short-term volatility, trading dynamics, and market microstructure effects, however, may be more sensitive to the flows and perceived stability of stablecoins and the activities within the crypto shadow banking system.6 Monetary policy acts as a critical link, influencing both traditional markets (like MMFs) and crypto markets (via stablecoins and risk appetite), although often with differing directional impacts on specific components like MMF vs. stablecoin flows.33

These liquidity sources can also interact and create amplification effects. For instance, a surge in global M2 can fuel general risk appetite, leading to capital inflows into the crypto market. This increased demand might stimulate further issuance of stablecoins.49 If these stablecoins are backed by assets purchased in traditional markets (like Treasuries), their issuance effectively pulls more traditional liquidity into the crypto sphere, further boosting the capital available to purchase Bitcoin, creating a reinforcing loop. Bitcoin thus sits at a unique nexus, its market processing signals and flows from the highly regulated, centrally managed global M2 system alongside the less regulated, rapidly evolving, and often opaque shadow and crypto liquidity systems. Its price reflects the complex, sometimes conflicting, dynamics arising from these distinct but interconnected regimes.

B. Assessing the Combined Impact on Bitcoin Market Dynamics

The confluence of these liquidity factors shapes Bitcoin's market cycles:

• Fueling Bull Markets: The most potent conditions for sustained Bitcoin bull markets likely occur when broad global M2 is expanding rapidly (signaling ample macro liquidity and risk appetite) and the crypto-native liquidity system (stablecoins) is stable and growing.1 This combination provides both the general willingness to invest in risk assets and the specific operational liquidity needed to facilitate large-scale buying within the crypto market.

• Exacerbating Downturns: Conversely, periods of sharp price declines or "crypto winters" are often associated with a tightening of global M2 (driven by monetary policy) occurring simultaneously with stress in the crypto shadow banking system.6 Examples include stablecoin de-pegging events, failures of major crypto lenders or exchanges (like Celsius or FTX), or forced deleveraging cascades. Such combined shocks severely restrict both the external capital available to flow into crypto and the internal liquidity needed for market functioning, leading to potential liquidity crunches and sharp sell-offs.

• Volatility Driver: The interaction between the relatively transparent, policy-driven changes in M2 and the often opaque, rapidly shifting dynamics within the shadow and crypto liquidity spheres likely contributes significantly to Bitcoin's characteristic high volatility. Sudden changes in stablecoin sentiment, hidden leverage unwinds, or failures within the less regulated crypto ecosystem can inject significant volatility that may appear disconnected from immediate macro trends.

This interplay can create powerful procyclical feedback loops. In positive cycles, rising M2 fuels Bitcoin price increases, which encourages more leverage within the crypto system and potentially drives demand for more stablecoins, further boosting liquidity and prices.45 In negative cycles, tightening M2 and falling Bitcoin prices can trigger margin calls, deleveraging, and runs on stablecoins or crypto lenders (funding risk), forcing asset fire sales and creating a downward spiral.34 The inherent characteristics of shadow banking, such as reliance on runnable funding and the use of leverage, naturally amplify this procyclicality.26

C. Systemic Risks: Contagion Pathways Between Traditional Finance, Shadow Banking, and Crypto

The growing interconnectedness between these financial spheres creates potential pathways for systemic risk and contagion:

From Crypto to Traditional Finance (TradFi) / Shadow Banking:

• Stablecoin Runs: A major failure of a systemically important stablecoin (like Tether or USDC) could have spillover effects. Forced liquidation of its reserves (which include Treasuries, commercial paper, MMF shares, bank deposits) to meet redemptions could potentially disrupt the functioning of these traditional money markets, particularly if the selling pressure is large and sudden.34 Losses for institutional holders of the stablecoin could also propagate through the system.

• Wealth Effects and Credit Risk: A sharp and sustained crash in the value of major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin could lead to significant wealth destruction for holders. This could negatively impact consumer spending (if retail investors suffer large losses) or lead to defaults on traditional loans where crypto assets were used as collateral (explicitly or implicitly).

• Confidence Channel: The collapse of large, high-profile crypto entities (exchanges, lenders, funds) can damage broader market confidence, potentially leading to a pullback from innovative financial technologies or increased regulatory scrutiny across the board.27

• Funding Risk for TradFi: Crypto firms hold significant deposits at traditional banks and invest in traditional money market instruments. Large, sudden fluctuations in the demand for these deposits or investments by crypto firms, driven by volatility or crises in the crypto ecosystem, could potentially create funding stress for the traditional institutions holding them.47

From TradFi / Shadow Banking to Crypto:

• Liquidity Tightening: As discussed, contractionary monetary policy or stress events in core traditional funding markets (like the repo market) reduce overall liquidity and increase risk aversion, negatively impacting demand for risk assets like Bitcoin.1 A severe freeze in traditional markets could significantly curtail capital flows into crypto.

• Counterparty Risk: Crypto firms rely on traditional financial institutions for banking, custody, and payment services. The failure of a key traditional counterparty serving the crypto industry could disrupt operations and trigger instability within the crypto ecosystem.47

• Reserve Asset Risk: Instability or losses in the traditional financial assets held as reserves by stablecoin issuers (e.g., defaults on commercial paper, haircuts on bonds during stress) directly threaten stablecoin pegs and can trigger runs, transmitting TradFi stress directly into the heart of crypto market liquidity.34

These contagion risks are potentially magnified by factors inherent in the current crypto ecosystem, including the widespread use of leverage (often opaque and cross-collateralized) 45, the general lack of robust regulation and transparency for many intermediaries 19, the operational risks associated with complex technologies, and the sheer speed at which transactions and liquidations can occur in the digital asset space.30

VI. Conclusion and Strategic Implications

The analysis demonstrates that Bitcoin's price is not merely a product of its internal dynamics or technological features but is deeply intertwined with the broader financial system through multiple liquidity channels. Its strong correlation with global M2 highlights its sensitivity to macroeconomic conditions, while its reliance on stablecoins like Tether underscores the importance of crypto-native "shadow M2." Furthermore, the increasing integration with the wider shadow banking system introduces complex feedback loops and potential contagion risks.

A. Summary of Findings: Bitcoin's Sensitivity to Macro and Shadow Liquidity

Bitcoin acts as a sensitive barometer of global liquidity, exhibiting a strong positive long-term correlation with global M2 growth, particularly its rate of change, albeit with a lag of approximately two to three months. This relationship positions Bitcoin as a high-beta asset relative to macro liquidity shifts. However, this correlation is imperfect and can be disrupted by crypto-specific events and periods of extreme market valuation. Within the crypto ecosystem, Tether functions as a potent "Shadow M2," amplifying dollar-denominated liquidity through an issuance mechanism linked to traditional assets, including government debt, potentially contributing to broader inflationary pressures. Beyond Tether, the wider shadow banking system – including MMFs, repo markets, and increasingly, crypto intermediaries acting as shadow banks – intersects with the crypto world. Stablecoins serve as modern shadow money, importing risks from traditional asset markets and sharing vulnerabilities with MMFs. Liquidity and stress can transmit bidirectionally between the traditional, shadow, and crypto financial spheres through channels like stablecoin reserves, intermediary funding, and overall risk appetite shifts driven by monetary policy. Bitcoin's price, therefore, reflects the confluence of these regulated, unregulated, and crypto-native liquidity flows and associated risks.

B. Considerations for Investors and Risk Managers

• Integrate Macro Analysis: Investors and risk managers should incorporate rigorous monitoring of global macroeconomic conditions into their Bitcoin analysis framework. Tracking global M2 trends (especially the YoY rate of change), central bank policy signals (interest rate expectations, QE/QT announcements), and inflation expectations is crucial for understanding the broader environment influencing Bitcoin.1 Crucially, the typical 2-3 month lag between M2 shifts and Bitcoin's response should be factored into strategic positioning.5

• Monitor Shadow Liquidity Indicators: Beyond macro trends, close attention should be paid to indicators of crypto-native and shadow liquidity. This includes tracking the supply growth, flows, and de-pegging risks of major stablecoins (USDT, USDC), assessing the transparency and quality of their reserves, and monitoring the health and stability of major crypto exchanges and lending platforms.49 Stress in traditional shadow banking indicators, like repo market rates and haircuts, can also serve as early warnings of broader liquidity tightening.41

• Acknowledge Complexity and Manage Risk: Bitcoin's price is driven by a complex interaction of macro, shadow, and crypto-internal factors, contributing to its high volatility. Investors must recognize its dual nature as both a macro-sensitive asset and one subject to significant idiosyncratic risks (hacks, regulation, project failures).6 Robust risk management strategies, including appropriate position sizing, diversification across asset classes, and awareness of potential contagion pathways between TradFi and crypto, are paramount.30 Understanding the potential for procyclical feedback loops involving leverage and runnable funding is also critical.

C. Considerations for Policymakers and Regulators

• Enhance Systemic Risk Monitoring: The growing linkages between traditional finance, the established shadow banking system, and the burgeoning crypto ecosystem necessitate enhanced monitoring by regulatory authorities. Understanding and mapping these interconnections, particularly the role of stablecoins and crypto intermediaries, is vital for assessing potential systemic risks.22 Addressing significant data gaps in the crypto and shadow banking sectors is a prerequisite for effective oversight.22

• Develop Adaptive Regulation for Crypto Shadow Banking: The performance of bank-like functions (credit intermediation, liquidity transformation, leverage provision) by lightly regulated crypto entities warrants a dedicated regulatory response. An adaptive approach, focusing on the economic functions and risks involved rather than specific entity labels or technologies, is likely necessary to keep pace with innovation and prevent regulatory arbitrage.21 Efforts should aim to create a more level playing field between traditional regulated institutions and crypto intermediaries performing similar activities, potentially involving prudential requirements (capital, liquidity) for systemic crypto players.28

• Implement Comprehensive Stablecoin Oversight: Given their central role in crypto liquidity and their potential systemic implications (run risk, impact on money markets, reserve transparency issues, potential for sanctions evasion), stablecoins require robust and clear regulatory frameworks.34 Regulation should address reserve requirements (quality, liquidity, auditing), operational resilience, redemption rights, and integration with payment system oversight.

• Consider Macrofinancial Implications: Policymakers should acknowledge the potential macrofinancial effects of crypto-related activities. Mechanisms like Tether's absorption of government debt and issuance of parallel liquidity could contribute to broader inflationary pressures and represent unconventional links between fiscal policy and financial markets, warranting consideration in overall macroeconomic assessments

In conclusion, Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency market are no longer isolated phenomena but integral parts of an increasingly complex and interconnected global financial system. Their sensitivity to both traditional monetary conditions and the dynamics of the shadow financial world necessitates a sophisticated, multi-layered approach to analysis, risk management, and regulation.

Works cited

1. Bitcoin Market Cycles and Global M2 Money Supply: A Historical Analysis - Flipster, accessed May 6, 2025, https://flipster.io/blog/bitcoin-market-cycles-and-global-m2-money-supply-a-historical-analysis

2. Global Liquidity (M2) vs Bitcoin Price | BM Pro, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/charts/global-liquidity/

3. The Correlation Between Bitcoin and M2 Money Supply Growth: A Deep Dive, accessed May 6, 2025, https://sarsonfunds.com/the-correlation-between-bitcoin-and-m2-money-supply-growth-a-deep-dive/

4. Bitcoin Hits New All-Time High: M2 Money Supply and Crypto Market Cycles - FAnews, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.fanews.co.za/article/cryptocurrencies-blockchain/1407/general/1408/bitcoin-hits-new-all-time-high-m2-money-supply-and-crypto-market-cycles/40596

5. How Global Liquidity Fuels Bitcoin Price Growth | Nasdaq, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-global-liquidity-fuels-bitcoin-price-growth

6. Bitcoin: A Global Liquidity Barometer - Lyn Alden, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-a-global-liquidity-barometer/

7. Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? - S&P Global, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.spglobal.com/content/dam/spglobal/corporate/en/images/general/special-editorial/are-crypto-markets-correlated-with-macroeconomic-factors.pdf

8. Bitcoin's Potential as a Leading Macro Asset - Fidelity Digital Assets, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.fidelitydigitalassets.com/research-and-insights/bitcoins-potential-leading-macro-asset

9. Short- and Long-Term Interactions Between Bitcoin and Economic ..., accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359338090_Short-_and_Long-Term_Interactions_Between_Bitcoin_and_Economic_Variables_Evidence_from_the_US

10. Global M2 Money Supply Shows Where The Bitcoin Price Is Headed Next And It's $100,000, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.mitrade.com/insights/news/live-news/article-3-772572-20250422

11. World - M2 Growth of Fed, ECB, PBoC & BOJ (YoY) | MacroMicro, accessed May 6, 2025, https://en.macromicro.me/charts/29385/global-money-supply-m2

12. PDF - VILNIUS TECH Journals, accessed May 6, 2025, https://journals.vilniustech.lt/index.php/TEDE/article/download/19300/11810

13. Understanding bitcoin's relationship with inflation - Articles - Hashdex, accessed May 6, 2025, https://hashdex.com/en-US/insights/understanding-bitcoins-relationship-with-inflation

14. Is Bitcoin An Inflation Hedge? A Critique Of The Bitcoin As Money Narrative, accessed May 6, 2025, https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/criticism-of-bitcoin-as-money-narrative

15. Understanding Our Current Monetary System And Bitcoin's Value Proposition, accessed May 6, 2025, https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/understanding-monetary-system-and-bitcoin

16. US macroeconomic determinants of Bitcoin - Business Perspectives, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.businessperspectives.org/index.php/journals/investment-management-and-financial-innovations/issue-456/us-macroeconomic-determinants-of-bitcoin

17. Is Bitcoin Price Driven by Macro-financial Factors and Liquidity? A Global Consumer Survey Empirical Study - Redalyc, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.redalyc.org/journal/6923/692372872007/html/

18. Bitcoin in the eye of the storm: A market shaped by two forces - 21Shares, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.21shares.com/en-eu/research/bitcoin-in-the-eye-of-the-storm-a-market-shaped-by-two-forces

19. Shadow Banking System: Definition, Examples, and How It Works - Investopedia, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shadow-banking-system.asp

20. Statistical work on shadow banking: development of new datasets and indicators for shadow banking, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.bis.org/ifc/publ/ifcb46p.pdf

21. Shadow Banking: Scoping the Issues - Financial Stability Board, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.fsb.org/uploads/r_110412a.pdf

22. Shadow Banking Around the Globe: How Large, and How Risky? - International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/-/media/Websites/IMF/imported-flagship-issues/external/pubs/ft/GFSR/2014/02/pdf/_c2pdf.ashx

23. Shadow banking system - Wikipedia, accessed May 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banking_system

24. Shadow Banks: Out of the Eyes of Regulators, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/Series/Back-to-Basics/Shadow-Banks

25. What Is Shadow Banking? - Back to Basics - Finance & Development, June 2013, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2013/06/basics.htm

26. Shadow Banking: what kind of Macroprudential Regulation Framework? - European Parliament, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662925/IPOL_STU(2021)662925_EN.pdf

27. Has Cryptocurrency Become a Shadow Banking System? • Office of ..., accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.fu-berlin.de/en/presse/informationen/fup/2025/fup_25_065-wandel-von-kryptowaehrungen/index.html

28. BIS Working Paper 1013: Banking in the shadow of Bitcoin? The institutional adoption of cryptocurrencies, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/work1013.pdf

29. Shadow Banks and the Collateral Multiplier - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed May 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9294781/

30. DeFi: Shadow Banking 2.0? - Scholarship Repository, accessed May 6, 2025, https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3977&context=wmlr

31. Full article: A credit theory of anti-credit money: How the cryptocurrency sphere turned into a shadow banking system - Taylor & Francis Online, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09692290.2025.2476738

32. CHAPTER 8 THE MINER OF LAST RESORT: DIGITAL CURRENCY, SHADOW MONEY AND THE ROLE OF THE CENTRAL BANK, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/s2050-206020240000025008/full/pdf?title=the-miner-of-last-resort-digital-currency-shadow-money-and-the-role-of-the-central-bank

33. Working Paper Series - Stablecoins, money market funds and monetary policy - European Central Bank, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp2987~1919e51abf.en.pdf?51818764e601f56ca4f1ed1d7276e20a

34. Runs and Flights to Safety: Are Stablecoins the New Money Market Funds? | Federal Reserve Bank of New York, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/staff_reports/sr1073.pdf

35. Runs and Flights to Safety: Are Stablecoins the New Money Market Funds?, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-working-paper/2023/runs-and-flights-to-safety-are-stablecoins-the-new-money-market-funds.aspx

36. Stablecoins and money market funds: Less similar than you think - CEPR, accessed May 6, 2025, https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/stablecoins-and-money-market-funds-less-similar-you-think

37. Boring money market funds face innovation: Moody's | Investment Executive, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/research-and-markets/boring-money-market-funds-face-innovation-moodys/

38. Tokenisation | Revolutionising Money Market Funds | abrdn, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.aberdeenplc.com/en-gb/news-and-insights/how-tokenization-and-blockchain-is-changing-money-market-funds

39. The Future of Cash May Be a Token - Capital Advisors Group, Inc., accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.capitaladvisors.com/research/the-future-of-cash-may-be-a-token/

40. Digital Money - Treasury, accessed May 6, 2025, https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/221/TBACCharge2Q22025.pdf

41. The Repo and Unsecured Markets' Reactions to Stress | RDP 2021-01: The Role of Collateral in Borrowing - Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2021/2021-01/the-repo-and-unsecured-markets-reactions-to-stress.html

42. 'No one length fits all' – haircuts in the repo market - Bank Underground, accessed May 6, 2025, https://bankunderground.co.uk/2024/07/10/no-one-length-fits-all-haircuts-in-the-repo-market/

43. The repo market disruption: What happened, why, and should something be done about it?, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/events/the-repo-market-disruption-what-happened-why-and-should-something-be-done-about-it/

44. Shadow Banking: Economics and Policy; by Stijn Claessens, Zoltan Pozsar, Lev Ratnovski, and Manmohan Singh - International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2012/sdn1212.pdf

45. Shadow Banking and Cryptocurrencies - Overview, Benefits, Risks, accessed May 6, 2025, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/cryptocurrency/shadow-banking-and-cryptocurrencies/

46. Taming the Crypto-Bear: Why Cryptocurrencies Will Cause the Next Recession and How to Soften the Blow - Fordham Law News, accessed May 6, 2025, https://news.law.fordham.edu/jcfl/2021/03/26/taming-the-crypto-bear-why-cryptocurrencies-will-cause-the-next-recession-and-how-to-soften-the-blow/

47. The Financial Stability Implications of Digital Assets - Federal Reserve Bank of New York, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/2024/EPR_2024_digital-assets_azar.pdf

48. Stablecoins and national security: Learning the lessons of Eurodollars, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/stablecoins-and-national-security-learning-the-lessons-of-eurodollars/

49. How does Liquidity affect Crypto Markets? - Universidade Católica Portuguesa, accessed May 6, 2025, https://repositorio.ucp.pt/bitstreams/f30a7d30-2bf6-470f-a9f2-66cccaa92d8e/download

50. What drives repo haircuts? Evidence from the UK market - Bank for International Settlements, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/work1027.pdf

51. Treasury market resilience—ever more important - Brookings Institution, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/treasury-market-resilience-ever-more-important/

52. Shadow Banking's Global Risks and Liquidity Concerns Loom Amid Market Turmoil, accessed May 6, 2025, https://www.pymnts.com/news/banking/2025/shadow-bankings-global-risks-and-liquidity-concerns-loom-amid-market-turmoil/