Investment bank Goldman Sachs recently held two roundtable sessions for chief investment officers of hedge funds. The bank found that they see bitcoin as their least favorite investment. In contrast, the latest Bank of America Fund Manager Survey found that â€œlong bitcoinâ€ was the most crowded trade.
CIOs Reveal Their Most and Least Favorite Investments
Goldman Sachs published a note Saturday after conducting a survey to find out what investments chief investment officers (CIOs) favor in the current market. Goldman Sachs strategist Timothy Moe wrote:
Besides growth style, the CIOs favored value style and then commodities. Their least favorite investment was bitcoin, followed by new IPOs, and rate-sensitive investments.
Unlike Goldman Sachs, Bank of America (BofA) found that bitcoin was a popular trade among asset managers it surveyed. The bankâ€™s Fund Manager Survey for May, in which 216 fund managers with $625 billion in total assets under management (AUM) participated, showed that â€œlong bitcoinâ€ was the most crowded trade in the world. In the previous month, long bitcoin was the second-most crowded trade.
Unlike the surveyed CIOs, Goldman Sachsâ€™ analysts are quite bullish on the outlook of bitcoin. They recently said that fear of missing out (FOMO) is driving institutional investors to the cryptocurrency. Moreover, the bank recently declared bitcoin an investable asset and a new asset class.
Goldman Sachs has also established a cryptocurrency trading desk with the aim to offer a full spectrum of crypto investments. The firm said that institutional demand for BTC continues to grow significantly.
What do you think about CIOs saying that bitcoin is their least favorite investment? Let us know in the comments section below.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.