In 2017, my business partner Ron Dixon talked me into buying crypto for the first time. In the past 6 years, we have: - built a crypto education business dedicated to financial professionals - built a crypto YT channel with 11k subscribers - and much more! This is my story of building Interaxis, how we are helping financial advisors, and why you should listen to us 🧵 After buying some early cryptos like Ethereum and Litecoin in 2017, I went down the crypto rabbit hole. I learned: - What are the inefficiencies in our current financial system? - Why is blockchain a better system than the current financial system? - Why and how did blockchain work? As I learned about it, I thought it was a revolutionary piece of tech with use cases in healthcare, financial management etc. By 2019, I was getting invited to speak to major crypto conferences, and that’s when it dawned on us. What if we started a dedicated community for financial advisors in crypto? We saw that there were crypto education platforms, but none of them were explaining it from the perspective of financial professionals. So we started the Interaxis YouTube channel in 2019, and started educating financial advisors on the idea of blockchain. And in 2020, I started Interaxis with my friend and business partner Ron Dixon. People loved the idea that I was explaining blockchain concepts from the perspective of a financial advisor, and that I wasn’t shilling any tokens to them. The aim was to genuinely educate financial advisors about crypto, and help them add crypto to their practice. Gradually, we developed the Certified Digital Asset Advisor (CDAA) course, which is a specialized course for financial advisors looking to add crypto to their practice. Why should you listen to us? 1. Since 2019, we have: - Garnered 300,000 views and 11,000 subscribers on the Interaxis YouTube channel. - Built the Weekly Axis, a dedicated newsletter for financial professionals interested in crypto. - Trained 2k financial advisors in crypto with our courses and certifications. 2. Committment to genuine education. Instead of talking about price action and 1000x shitcoins, we are committed to delivering quality education for financial advisors. In our history of 3 years, we have never promoted a token to our audiences, nor asked them to invest in anything. Our aim is to deliver quality crypto education tailored to helping your clients. 3. We are financial advisors. Before Interaxis, Ron and I ran our own financial practice called Chart Wealth Management. There are countless crypto education platforms, but hardly any platforms that talk about crypto for financial advisors. We cater to this specialized market! Since we have worked for years in this space: - We know what questions your clients will ask in the process. - We know what you are going through. - We know the exact steps you need to take to navigate this space. If you are a financial advisor interested in crypto, Interaxis is the place to be!

A few years we thought the game was turning into all hitting and pitching by committee. Now we have Misiorowski and Skenes

Imagine if I had actually read these in 1995 when I bought them.

Your company's about to IPO. You've done the tax math, talked to a banker. Here's the conversation you haven't had: does your partner actually know the numbers? Not the vibe — the numbers. The day the paper turns real, you go from deciding alone to a "family board" of two. Most people have that conversation way too late. You may not have time to rebuild your structure before the listing. You always have time for this one.

Let’s take a look at what’s happening here, especially since so many people are down on crypto because of negative price action. @JanusHenderson partnered with @ethena. JAAA, which has already been tokenized, will be used as backing for USDe, Ethena’s stablecoin. On top of that, Janus will distribute USDe to its holders, likely as the interest earned. So JAAA investors will be receiving income in onchain stablecoins. Also, @Morpho announced a huge raise to keep building the tech and vaults aimed at onchain lending and borrowing. As more people are receiving their money onchain, they will likely look to invest that money onchain, in vaults like Morpho. Why take the money off and have to deal with off ramping? The move to a more native onchain financial system is not made as one large wholesale change. It is small shifts where in a few years we look back and realize it was inevitable @Protocol_Wealth

Ethereum has a stewardship problem — and you can see it at the two biggest pools of ETH in the world. The @ethereum Foundation revised its treasury policy after years of criticism over selling ETH, launched a staking initiative pitched as a way to lean less on market sales, and then kept selling anyway to fund operations. They have a near-impossible task - manage the future of the network, while also appeasing those holding the tokens. There has never been an asset like ETH, so none of us knows hows to accurately value it. At the other end sit the ETH treasury companies: "100% ETH, 100% staked," conviction as a slogan, nine-figure quarterly losses when the price turns. Holding and staking isn't a treasury strategy. It's a conviction trade with a stock wrapped around it — the Strategy-with-Bitcoin playbook. And none of it drives actual use of Ethereum. It locks ETH up and waits.

We started a crypto RIA because we kept watching the same thing happen. Someone makes life-changing money in this industry - building a protocol, trading early, getting allocated into the right round - and then manages it like the rules that apply to every other fortune somehow don't apply to them. No plan. No structure. No one whose actual job is to protect it. The assumption underneath is that if you were smart enough to make it onchain, you're smart enough to keep it. That professional financial help is for people who don't get crypto. It's exactly backwards. The more unusual the wealth, the more it needs real stewardship — tax, custody, estate, entity structure. The boring fiduciary work that turns a number on a screen into something that survives a bad year, an audit, or a death in the family. I've watched brilliant builders lose more to bad structure than they ever lost to the market. This is the case I'm making all week - and onstage at AICPA on Wednesday. Because the gap in crypto isn't knowledge. It's stewardship. And it shows up at every scale: the individual, the foundation, the treasury. More on the foundation and the treasury tomorrow. @Protocol_Wealth

Back from @Vault__Summit NYC. Spent Friday on a panel (thank you @FordefiHQ) arguing that vaults are about to hold asset classes most people haven't priced in yet — and the room came along faster than I expected. The throughline of the whole trip: the infrastructure for onchain wealth is already here. What's missing is the people who know how to steward what goes into it. That's what I'm writing and talking about all week — including onstage at @AICPA Wednesday. Part 3 of What Wealth Management Becomes — what comes after the qualified custodian — is next.

Part 2 of What Wealth Management Becomes is live: Vaults have a Duration Problem Vaults usually get discussed as a yield story. I think that badly undersells them. They're becoming the default wrapper for an entire generation of onchain assets — which makes the question of what's inside them, and who's actually watching it, a fiduciary question, not a product one. The piece makes an argument I expect some people to push back on: 2008 wasn't fundamentally a crisis of leverage. It was a crisis of opacity and unmonitored interconnection — no one could see how the pieces were wired together until they failed at once. Blockchain transparency, paired with AI that can actually monitor it, gives this market the tools to avoid that failure mode for the first time. But there's one risk the current design hasn't answered: real-world duration on the underlying, instant liquidity on the wrapper, and no lender of last resort when those two collide. That's the conversation I'll be having with [co-panelists] at Vault Summit on Friday. If you're in NYC, bring your disagreements. Part 3 — what comes after the qualified custodian — drops later this month. @RockawayX @SentoraHQ @SteakhouseFi @Re7Labs @Bitwise @Protocol_Wealth

A few weeks ago I published a piece arguing that tokenization has a fiduciary problem — that the industry has been building real infrastructure without resolving who, exactly, is responsible for the risk inside it. The conversation that followed has been better than the article. Matthew Snider built a whole framework around it. @Ayyanrahman pushed back on X in a way that genuinely sharpened my thinking — that exchange became the spine of what I'm publishing tomorrow. This Friday, June 5, I'm carrying the same question onto a stage at Vault Summit NYC. The panel is "Vaults Are Bigger Than You Think: New Asset Classes Coming Onchain" — which is, more or less, the thesis I've been circling all year. Tomorrow: the written version. Friday: the live one. If you're in NYC, come find me. @protocol_wealth

Heading to @proofoftalk at the Louvre in Paris this week to explore the state of play for institutional adoption of digital assets. Appreciate RT for reach to connect with others attending

As a lifelong Rockets fan, I can’t imagine a more annoying NBA Finals

Wrapping the thread. The NVIDIA half is the one that surprises people. Setup: $5 basis on a position that's grown enormously. Selling triggers a tax bill that would take years to recover from. Standard hedging doesn't make economic sense at that basis. The client also has an estate tax problem waiting on the back end. Three usual answers, all wrong for this client: → Sell and diversify (tax-prohibitive) → Buy puts (negative expected value at this basis) → Hold and hope (not a plan) The pattern we use chains three pieces together: → Covered calls generate current income from the position without selling it → Premium income funds a life insurance policy on the older spouse → Policy proceeds eventually fund the estate tax the position itself creates In one structure: income, income-deferred tax exposure, stepped-up basis preserved for the surviving spouse, and a funded plan for the estate tax that follows. It's not a product. It's choreography between options, insurance, basis rules, and estate planning. Each piece is ordinary. The combination is what's rare. This is the work we think most RIAs will need to do over the next decade as concentrated wealth from tech, crypto, and private company sales hits the planning system. The clients with the biggest gains are the ones with the smallest set of usable answers — and the highest willingness to pay for someone who can build the structure. That's the gap we're built for. @Protocol_Wealth

Bitcoin yield without giving up custody. Here's the shape. Most "earn yield on your BTC" products require the client to transfer the asset to a counterparty who then does something with it. Lend it. Rehypothecate it. Stake a wrapped version. The yield exists because the client gave up control of the asset. For a client with a meaningful BTC position and a low cost basis, that math is broken before you start. Losing the asset to a counterparty failure costs more than years of yield. The approach we use looks different: → Client retains title to the BTC throughout → BTC stays with their qualified custodian → Covered call options are written against the position via an OTC desk → A tri-party agreement between custodian and derivatives counterparty governs the structure → No collateral transfer. No rehypothecation. No "trust us." The client is earning high-single-digit annualized USD income from a position that was generating nothing. Their Bitcoin has not moved. That USD can be used to pay bills, or make other investments. This is the kind of structure that doesn't exist on a platform you can sign up for. It requires a fiduciary willing to sit between the custodian, the derivatives desk, and the client — and a compliance posture that treats crypto operations as fiduciary operations, not as a side venture. That's the part most of the industry hasn't built yet. Thursday: the NVIDIA half of this case, including how covered call premium can fund the estate tax problem the position creates.

Here's a problem we see constantly with concentrated wealth, and almost nobody talks about it honestly. Client has a position that's grown 100x. Bitcoin. NVIDIA. A founder's stock. Doesn't matter. They want income. They want some risk management. The instinct is to sell some. But the tax cost of selling is so large that even a 30% drop in the asset would leave them better off holding. Which means traditional hedging — puts, collars, straight diversification — doesn't pencil out. So they do nothing. The position sits there, generating no income, exposed to single-asset risk, and growing the eventual estate problem. "Just hold" isn't a plan. Neither is "just sell." This week I'm walking through how we think about this on positions where the basis is so low that the usual answers don't work. Two posts coming — one on Bitcoin, one on a $5-basis NVIDIA position. The pattern matters more than the asset. @Protocol_Wealth

No one like him before or since