Why Jeremy Grantham’s ‘Bitcoin Is Useless’ Call Is the Best Cadena Bitcoin Lending Entry Signal in Years

Jeremy Grantham recently called Bitcoin ‘useless.’ History says every similar bear call has marked one of the best Cadena Bitcoin lending entry points on record.

On June 26, 2026, Jeremy Grantham, the GMO co-founder who correctly called the dot-com bubble, the 2008 housing collapse, and the Japanese asset price collapse before it, walked onto CNBC’s Squawk Box and delivered his verdict on Bitcoin. He called it a ‘useless, speculative mechanism’ without intrinsic value, and predicted it would ‘dwindle, not with a bang, but a whimper.’ He also said he has never owned it and believes it will eventually fall to zero. CNBC host Joe Kernen pushed back hard. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas backed Kernen.

Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas Pliego, who has 70% of his investment portfolio in Bitcoin and recently convinced his wife to mortgage their home to buy more, rejected every premise of Grantham’s argument. The clip traveled everywhere it could travel, the internet did what the internet does, and Bitcoin kept trading near $60,000, unchanged by any of it. For Cadena Bitcoin lenders, this entire episode is not a debate to adjudicate. It is a sentiment signal to read, and history is remarkably clear about what that signal means. So, how does Grantham’s statement present an opportunity to Cadena Bitcoin holders?

What did Jeremy Grantham say about Bitcoin on June 26, 2026?

Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box on June 26, 2026, Jeremy Grantham, co-founder of GMO and one of Wall Street’s most prominent bubble analysts, called Bitcoin a ‘useless, speculative mechanism’ with no intrinsic value. He predicted it would ‘dwindle — not with a bang, but with a whimper’ over the years and decades. He pointed to Bitcoin’s 52% decline from its October 2025 all-time high of $126,080 as evidence that it cannot function as a reliable store of value. He also questioned Bitcoin’s practical utility as a currency and compared it to shells used as money on an island, arguing that proof-of-work generates no meaningful economic benefit.

Historically, the most prominent and credentialed Bitcoin bear calls — from Nouriel Roubini’s 2018 Congressional testimony declaring Bitcoin a ‘mother of all bubbles,’ to the wave of ‘Bitcoin is dead’ declarations at the 2022 $15,500 low — have clustered around moments that subsequently proved to be major accumulation zones rather than the beginning of permanent decline. The pattern is consistent: peak bearish sentiment from credentialed traditional finance commentators has historically coincided with, or immediately preceded, significant Bitcoin price recoveries. For Cadena Bitcoin lenders, this matters because deploying capital into a fixed-term contract during peak bearish sentiment has historically meant entering when borrower demand is highest, collateral is at or near its most conservative valuation, and the subsequent recovery during the loan term has been documented across four prior cycles.

The Historical Record: What Happens After Major Bitcoin Bear Calls

Grantham’s statement is not the first time a credentialed, prominent investor has declared Bitcoin irrelevant at a moment of significant price weakness. Mapping the most prominent bear calls against subsequent Bitcoin performance produces a consistent, if imperfect, pattern.

In December 2017, Jamie Dimon called Bitcoin a ‘fraud.’ Bitcoin corrects from $20K then reaches $69K ATH in 2021. 10 months later, Nouriel Roubini testifies Bitcoin is ‘mother of all scams’ at $6K. BTC reaches $60K+ within 30 months. In November 2022, FTX collapsed; ‘Bitcoin is dead’ declarations peaked; BTC hit a low of $15.5K but reached $126K ATH in October 2025. And now, Grantham calls Bitcoin ‘useless’ on CNBC, with BTC at $60K — 52% off ATH and Fear & Greed Index at 13. 3 out of 3, prior major bottom zones preceded by credentialed traditional finance bear calls — now potentially 4 of 4

The pattern holds across every major Bitcoin cycle: the credentialed bear call from a traditional finance heavyweight arrives after a significant price decline, at a moment of peak negative sentiment, framed around the most recent price weakness as evidence that the asset is broken. What the framing consistently fails to account for is the on-chain reality: long-term holder selling at its lowest in nearly two years, exchange outflows running higher than inflows, institutional buyers stepping in to absorb supply at the low. These are accumulation signals, not distribution signals — and they have appeared at every comparable sentiment low in Bitcoin’s history.

Why Grantham Is Wrong: The Data That His CNBC Appearance Didn’t Include

1. The 52% decline Grantham cited is not evidence of irrelevance — it is evidence of Bitcoin’s cycle

Grantham’s central argument is that Bitcoin halved from its all-time high ‘for no particular reason in a strong economy,’ which he says proves it cannot function as a reliable store of value. This framing ignores a documented and consistent pattern: Bitcoin has experienced 70–85% drawdowns in two prior cycles (2018 and 2022) and subsequently reached new all-time highs within 12–24 months in both cases. The 52% drawdown from October 2025 is shallower, not deeper, than either prior comparable. It is not evidence of terminal decline. It is evidence that Bitcoin moves in cycles — a fact that Grantham’s track record of calling bubbles should make him more, not less, familiar with.

2. Grantham’s ‘no utility’ argument is contradicted by the infrastructure being built around it

On the same day Grantham called Bitcoin useless, Bank of America held $37 million in Bitcoin ETFs, 199 public companies held Bitcoin on their balance sheets, the U.S. government was targeting 1 million Bitcoin for its Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, and Cadena Bitcoin was processing non-custodial lending contracts settled on Bitcoin’s base layer. These are not the activities surrounding an asset with no utility. They are the activities surrounding an asset in active, growing use as a monetary reserve, a financial instrument, and — through platforms like Cadena — a productive yield-generating credit collateral.

3. The ‘no cash flow’ argument misunderstands Bitcoin’s monetary role

Grantham’s objection that Bitcoin ‘pays no dividend’ and ‘doesn’t represent an asset you can put your fingers on’ is the same argument made against gold for decades. Gold pays no dividend. It generates no cash flow. It represents no underlying business. Yet Grantham himself cited gold as having delivered better returns than Bitcoin over the same recent period, implicitly acknowledging that non-cash-flow assets can function as stores of value. The argument is structurally inconsistent: gold is a valid store of value despite generating no income, but Bitcoin is not, despite an increasingly active yield market built around it, including the one Cadena Bitcoin operates.

4. Grantham’s prediction lacks the precision required to be actionable

A Forbes analysis of the CNBC exchange made this point cleanly: Grantham’s prediction that Bitcoin will ‘dwindle over years and decades’ lacks a timeframe, a catalyst, or a falsifiability condition. An investor who shorted Bitcoin in 2018 on Nouriel Roubini’s testimony, which was similarly confident and similarly unspecific, would have lost over 1,800% before Bitcoin eventually reached its prior low again. A prediction without a timeframe is not a thesis. It is a preference expressed with conviction.

What the Grantham Signal Means for Cadena Bitcoin Lenders Specifically

The argument for deploying capital on Cadena Bitcoin when Jeremy Grantham calls Bitcoin useless is not that Grantham is wrong, though the historical record suggests he may be. The argument is that the sentiment conditions under which credentialed traditional finance commentators deliver their most prominent bear calls have historically coincided with the most favourable conditions for patient capital in the Bitcoin market.

When Grantham appears on CNBC to call Bitcoin useless, it is because Bitcoin is down significantly, sentiment is deeply negative, and mainstream media has determined that bearish commentary is the most relevant framing for the asset. These are precisely the conditions that have historically produced the highest subsequent returns for Bitcoin — and, by extension, the strongest collateral environment for Cadena Bitcoin lending contracts entered during that period.

For a Cadena Bitcoin lender deploying capital during the week of Grantham’s appearance, the signal is not directional certainty. It is a probabilistic context. The fixed-term yield is contractually guaranteed regardless of price direction. But the lender who enters when sentiment is at its most negative — when the Fear & Greed Index reads 13, when Bitcoin has declined 52% from its high, and when the most prominent traditional finance bear is making his case on national television — is entering with historical odds that have, in three of three prior comparable sentiment environments, subsequently moved in their favour.

When Grantham Could Be Right About Bitcoin

This article would be incomplete without the honest caveat. Jeremy Grantham has a genuinely distinguished record of identifying asset price excess before it unwinds. He correctly called the dot-com bubble before 2000 and the housing collapse before 2008. His recent AI bubble thesis, published in January 2026 and arguing that Big Tech's capital expenditure of nearly $300 billion in 2025 meets every condition of prior innovation bubbles, may also prove accurate. A track record of that quality deserves a serious engagement with his argument, not reflexive dismissal.

The honest case for Grantham being right would require Bitcoin to fail to recover from the current drawdown over a multi-year period, for institutional accumulation to reverse rather than deepen, and for the use cases being built around Bitcoin, including Cadena’s non-custodial credit market, to fail to generate sufficient adoption to support a durable price floor. None of these outcomes is impossible. The 2022 bear market lasted longer than most prior cycles. A scenario in which the current drawdown extends further and deeper than the three prior comparable lows is within the range of outcomes any Cadena Bitcoin participant should model honestly.

The difference between that honest acknowledgment and Grantham’s position is not the level of uncertainty involved. It is the asymmetry. Grantham’s prediction is unfalsifiable in any useful timeframe. The Cadena Bitcoin lender’s position is precisely specified: a fixed yield, a fixed term, a fixed collateral pool, and a settlement outcome that is mathematically determined before any market movement occurs. One position is built on sentiment. The other is built on a contract. History has been considerably kinder to the latter.

The Bears Are Loudest at the Bottom. That Is When Cadena Bitcoin Lenders Deploy

Whether Grantham’s theory is bearish or not, Cadena Bitcoin Lenders Earn Regardless. Your yield is fixed at contract inception. Jeremy Grantham’s next appearance on CNBC has no bearing on it whatsoever. Deploy today and enjoy the benefits of earning returns on your capital. Earn while the Bears talk.