#比特币ETF Seeing this decision from BlackRock, my first reaction is one of relief tempered with caution. An institution managing trillions of assets placing Bitcoin alongside US Treasuries and tech leaders as one of three investment pillars reflects not speculative fervor, but deep thinking about global fiscal structure.

The logic of asset allocation is quite clear—when sovereign debt expands and currency devaluation risks rise, there's a need to find "non-correlated assets" outside traditional systems for hedging. Bitcoin's positioning as "digital gold" is essentially adding a layer of protection to an asset portfolio.

However, I want to remind that institutional endorsement is not a signal to chase rallies. On the contrary, it prompts us to think more rationally about allocation proportions. For most investors, the emergence of Bitcoin ETFs has indeed lowered the barrier to participation, but position management remains the top priority. No matter how good an asset is, if it's overweighted to an unbearable degree, it loses its protective purpose.

BlackRock's mention of "yield-bearing" products in 2026 is worth noting—this could be a future trend. But at this stage, my recommendation remains—if you decide to participate, start by understanding your own risk tolerance, carve out reasonable space within your existing diversification framework, and then select appropriate tools. A long-term mindset will ultimately show us that restrained allocation often yields more than aggressive chasing.