July 14th 2026
I've been thinking a lot about how to position my portfolio for the next 5+ years and have created this for posterity and as a forcing function to develop conviction and act upon it. I often struggle from inaction. I'll treat the status quo as a default rather than an active choice and as a result sit in unconsidered / low conviction positions for much too long and I believe it's because I don't take the time to interrogate my reasoning enough.
This will mostly be focused on the positions I plan to / have already taken, the bull cases surrounding them, and how they play into my vision of the future. It goes without saying that none of this is financial advice and the fact that one of my core positions will be $ETH should be enough to give you a healthy dose of skepticism about any suggestions I make.
Call it cope but I'm still long term bullish crypto. It's not an indiscriminant bullishness though - most of the coins out there are either dogshit, catshit, or dogshit wrapped in catshit. For something to be investible nowadays it needs to essentially be equity, own the revenue, or have meaningful Store of Value (SoV) properties.
My broad hypothesis for crypto longterm is as follows: the value of fiat currency monotonically decreases. Post 2008 and especially 2020 the Overton window has shifted dramatically with regard to government bailouts. I'm of the opinion that the likelihood of a huge scale crash is serverely diminished in this post-bailout world. The US government has even started to buy equity in companies they deem critical to defense which leads me to believe that a crisis we experience is more likely heavy debasement of fiat rather than a 2008-style stock market crash. I'll write more about defense-critical equities in the equity section. Additionally the US admin cutting itself off from international trade via tariffs and attempting to strongarm the Fed into lowering interest rates undermines USD hegemony.
Fiat currency debasement results in the value of assets considered SoVs increasing. Gold and other precious metals are the obvious beneficiary of this, but! I think the upside there is significantly muted. Gold is already a 27T asset, not to mention the downsides around buying paper gold or the limitations of having to handle physical transport and custody, as well as some uncertainty around future supply (new deposits, eventual asteroid mining, etc).
The S&P500 is basically considered a SoV due to its track record and insane amount of passive retirement inflows. It lacks moneyness though and is too US focused for my liking. Recent discussions around relaxing profitability requirements to fast-track SpaceX inclusion significantly eroded my trust.
The above leads me to my highest allocation within crypto - Ethereum.
Average price: ~$1800 USD (mostly bought April/May 2025, have sold some, bought more recently, hard to say exact cost basis).
Timeline: 5+ years.
Has holding ETH long term underperformed many other assets? Yes. Have I removed .eth from my name on X the Everything App? Perchance. Do I have Stockholm syndrome? How would I know? I believe more in Ethereum now than I did in the past. For the purpose of keeping this fairly concise I'll provide bullet points for my thesis.
ETH is not yet an SoV and has had pretty middling performance the last couple of years. I believe at some point it will cross the Rubicon into becoming a true SoV and at that point it will be worth an order of magnitude more.
There is a lot more I could write about the nuances of Ethereum, about Vitalik, the nature of the Ethereum Foundation, Saylor overhang vs Tom Lee, TPS scaling, Eth L2s, but I'll leave it here.
Average price: $12
Timeline: 1-3 years
My next biggest holding. Nothing can top the immaculate conception of the chain. 0 investors, 99% of revenue going towards buybacks, great technical track record, a small and insanely focused team who have made little to no missteps so far, and a charismatic yet humble leader.
For better or for worse the world is becoming increasingly financialised. The Covid crash -> GME memestock mania forever altered a generation's financial psyche. Wealth disparity is increasing, social media has globalised keeping up with the Jonses and as a result a large portion of people are now trying to escape the permanent underclass.
Perpetual futures adoption is a clear result of the above situation. Easy to sign up, 24/7 global instant leveraged trading, an ever increasing wealth of contracts to trade (crypto/equities/commodities so far), prediction markets + likely options soon too. Now that I've traded on perps dexes like Hyperliquid it's almost impossible to consider trading anywhere else.
Hyperliquid is building horizontally, focusing on an underlying trading/liquidity layer that anyone can build on top of. So far this approach has been very successful with Coinbase, VALR, Phantom, OpenSea and many others building on top of their infra.
Average price: $78
Timeline: 1-5 years
While I have reservations around the Solana Foundation and the need for validators to be subsidised, Solana has pretty confidently emerged as the #2 compute chain behind Ethereum.
There's a lot of network activity, a lot of projects being built there and meaningful RWA growth. For its faults, Solana is undoubtedly much hungrier than Ethereum and there is a world where Ethereum is complacent and missteps and SOL matures into a real SoV. I want to have exposure to this possibility. I see a world where Solana (Foundation and Ecosystem) grow past this and truly uphold what I see as the important crypto values.
That being said if SOLETH meaningfully appreciates in the next year I will likely sell if I believe it's overvalued compared to Ethereum.
Average price: $1.5
Timeline: 1-3 years
Similar thesis to Hyperliquid. They're taking more of a whiteglove more verticalised approach by building out siloed instances for partners like Robinhood.
0 fees, all the trades settling via ZK proofs and it being built as an ETH L2 also differentiate it from Hyperliquid. The tech and UX are genuinely good, it's relatively cheap compared to Hyperliquid and has had pretty stable OI/volume now that the airdrop is done.
I also like to own #1 and #2 in a category (in this case $HYPE and $LIT). Despite being a big Ethereum guy in 2024-25 I bought some Sol in 2023 and did most of my trading on Solana. Giving yourself some upside in a competitor hedges the possibility that the #1 is flipped for some reason, gives exposure to a new set of architectural decisions and most importantly reduces/eliminates tribalism by giving you upside in the "competitor". It's very easy to attach emotions and identity to a position and then hold way too long and avoiding this is very important.
On the other hand, spreading capital too much is detrimental as you reduce upside to the eventual winners. For me owning #1 and #2 is the sweet spot. I just need Vlad to tweet less and build more (he's very good at the latter, not so good at the former).
Average price: $0.4
Timeline: 6-18 months
I'll be honest here - this is a vibes based purchase. Borrowing conviction from my friend Ben as I haven't done deep research here. The core of the thesis is exposure to Unit/TradeXYZ. They have no token and IMO never will, but are an absolute juggernaut and I want exposure to their upside. Outside of owning $HYPE, $PYTH fits the bill. Unit use Pyth as their oracle which is a big testament to their effectiveness.
Additionally it's partially a bet on Solana as a meaningful Sol uptrend will see Sol eco coins like Pyth do well.
Average price: $0.7
Timeline: 6-18 months
Much smaller moonshot position. Worth reading on here. In short it's a PoW network that rather than having worthless computation secure the network (ie: Bitcoin's PoW computation solves no problem) it sits on top of existing AI inference matrix multiplication and uses that as the basis for a PoW network.
Only a small position here but in every crypto uptrend there are some net projects that temporarily defy financial gravity and do stupid numbers, this fits the vibe of something that could do that.
And finally, I must mention non-coins. Despite everything that happened in 2021 I believe there was an element of truth in everything we were spouting. Our world has been transformed in the last 30 years to the point where the digital arguably has flipped the physical in our daily attention. Outside of some poor simulacra (ie: CounterStrike skins which are natively trapped to Steam's marketplace) there exists no digital veblen goods. In basically every physical sector there exists wealth sinks, ways to signal that you have Taste and to buy into exclusive networks. Art, wine, music, sports, jewelry, cars, boats, houses, fashion, clubs - one can spend an infinite amount of money in expressing taste and joining these networks. This doesn't really exist digitally. For the most part I'm really happy about that, in many ways spaces like Crypto Twitter are meritocratic, but human nature is such that as our lives continue to be increasingly digital these networks will (continue to) appear.
In short - Cryptopunks. Jay-Z, Serena Williams, early SpaceX employee, Ramp CEO, as well as some of the higher signal/status early crypto folks form this network. I also have Terraforms.
Below are a few assets I don't have positions in but am considering
Currently have a mildly leveraged long position here (bought the Blackrock announcement ~0.82 lmao), considering converting to spot but at the very least the lev position is not a short term play
In an effort to become an actual Serious Investor I've decided to foray outside of crypto. I don't have the knowledge sources / skills to play short term games (earnings etc) so everything below is aimed at positioning for how the world looks in >5 years.
As of this article I'm mostly interested in the nuclear sector. The big 2 drivers of nuclear adoption in my mind will be geopolitics and compute-driven energy demand.
We need more energy, everything is becoming more electric and thsi is the ultimate in scalable, cheap, safe, and consistent energy.
Geopolitics I'm far from knowledgeable here but the US conflict with Iran has shown how fragile existing fossil fuel pipelines are. The price of petrol almost doubled here in Australia and the headlines spoke of running out of oil entirely. This was a vision of a potential oil-dominated future.
Compute Microsoft, Google, Meta, Nvidia, Amazon, and others are all in the process of restarting old plants, partnering with nuclear energy providers or working on colocating Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) with datacentres. Without a doubt the world 10 years from now is going to require more compute than what we currently have and the hyperscalers are actively pursuing nuclear energy. It is the only energy source that can be colocated with the compute and provide stable energy.
Having researched nuclear energy it seems apparent that the biggest barrier to nuclear adoption is that of public sentiment. Buildouts can be expensive and slow sure, but primarily it's misinformation and fearmongering. There are risks but most counterarguments boil down to an appeal to the status quo. These same arguments would have been used to oppose rail buildout in the 1800s. It's a mix of those with vested interest spreading propaganda and people not forecasting technological improvements that solve many of the existing problems. Locomotive engines / rail was significantly more dangerous 2 centuries ago, but fast-forward to now and it would be hard to find anyone arguing that we need to defund train lines in favour of boats and horses again.
The US government has been slowly investing in nuclear energy (both Biden and Trump administrations) and I believe the Strait of Hormuz has shown the reliance on oil to be a national security issue. More buildouts will mean more investment in the technology and given how much room for improvement (reactor design, enrichment, etc) there still is we will see rollout price and timelines decrease, safety and reliability increase, and a pathway to almost closed-loop systems.
I predict the sentiment around nuclear will be vastly different 10 years from now. In part this will be due to successful lobbying/propaganda from the now superpowers (mag 7 etc) that have a vested interested in its rollout where before incumbent oil powers dominated.
Here are some figures as well as an oversimplified example showing how nuclear could be used to safeguard a country's energy needs much eaiser than oil can.
Here's some back of the napkin maths using France as an example, a country whose electricity is 2/3rds from nuclear. One year's worth of electricity assuming 100% nuclear vs 100% oil breaks down to:
Not to mention the supply of uranium is significantly less geopolitically sensitive than oil. Additionally, assuming improvements in repurposing of nuclear waste (closed loop nuclear is under development) results in only 40-50 tonnes of waste, ~80 barrels.
It's worth noting that the above is just looking at the raw inputs. The enrichment/buildout for nuclear is still 95% of the cost, but given interest and investment these will come down and the buildout cost for a plant is one-time.
Now, onto the stock picks. I'm aiming to get exposure throughout the nuclear energy lifecycle, namely: enrichment (traditional and new approaches), reactor design and buildout.
Average price: $47
Timeline: 5+ years
Pre-revenue Small Modular Reactor startup. Sam Altman was on the board until 2025 (conflict of interest resulting from OpenAI energy deal). Received grants from the US govt.
Average price: $167
Timeline: 5+ years
Uranium enrichment, largest provider of enriched uranium within the US. They're building out centrifuge-based enriched uranium. Small explainer on enrichment: uranium from the ground is mostly the uranium-238 isotope, whereas traditional reactors needs uranium-235 which is there in much smaller quantities (0.7% U235). Enrichment is the process of increasing the proportion of U235 to 3-5%. The current main approach is to do this via centrifuges - spin the uranium in order to separate the lighter U235 isotopes out, continually do this until reaching desired percentage.
It's fairly energy/infra intensive as you need to pass the uranium through hundreds if not thousands of centrifuges. There is a benefit to this incumbent approach though in that the infrastructure requirement is a net positive when viewed from a defense lens. This is the same process needed to enrich uranium for weapons usage -> this bulky infrastructure makes it much harder to hide enrichment -> more government investment.
Average price: $5.2
Timeline: 5+ years
The other approach to enrichment is currently unproven but is done via lasers. Silex is one of the bigger companies pursuing laser enrichment. Laser enrichment is theoretically more efficient and has a much smaller footprint. Enrichment being 3-4x the cost of the raw uranium makes me want to own the improvement of this part of the nuclear pipeline.
The other instruments I considered were:
Just one name so far but looking to add to this list over time.
Average price: $85
Timeline: 5+ years
Fairly straightforward thesis. I'm not a big believer in "we're all going to live on Mars" but I do believe that there will be more and more space infrastructure as we progress. More satellites, compute in space, etc.
I don't want to own anything Elon related (both dislike him but more importantly think there's a huge Elon premium that will collapse when Dems are next in power. Part of my investment approach is trying to avoid partisan entities that are too attached to one admin and will get demolished if that changes).
As such I've opted for RKLB
My current watchlist.
This piece has become a lot longer than I originally planned, so I'll leave it at this. My approach in general is to not be that sensitive to entries and prefer to just buy and close the charts for a year. I'm likely quite early on some of the nuclear/space plays but I'm happy with their current discount from ATH so I've opted to allocate and chill vs trying to time them too much.
If anyone has other picks within these sectors or other sectors they believe in, let me know :)