Crypto Investor Cobie: Isolating Risks to Bet on Weird Things to Capture the Next Wave
Crypto investor Cobie discussed his approach to finding the next crypto hotspot in an English interview and article, admitting he has never truly "predicted" what the next thing would be. If someone had told him in 2020 that it would be "monkey pictures," he would have thought it was unreliable. His mental model is to first isolate and control overall risk within a manageable range, and then, under this premise, try various novel things, not spending a lot of energy proving why something won't work, but instead directly "giving it a try" when costs are controllable.
Cobie cited examples of early participation in projects like Hyperliquid, FriendTech, or NFT "monkey pictures" using this approach, resulting in extremely high returns during airdrops or valuation explosions, stating, "Many people became millionaires directly from the Hyperliquid airdrop." He believes that most people's instinctive reaction is, "This is too stupid, it definitely won't work," while the truly effective approach is to reverse the question: "What if this thing actually works?" — Whenever he sees something sufficiently strange, he actively participates to observe whether it is forming a new, potentially significant phenomenon.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
Cobie describes a typical "option-like thinking": gaining exposure to asymmetric returns through small, diversified trial and error, rather than attempting to predict which narrative will become mainstream on a cognitive level. In the crypto space, the commonality among cases like Hyperliquid, FriendTech, and NFTs is that the cost of participation is limited, but once the narrative solidifies and liquidity and platform network effects take shape, early stakes will be revalued by the market at extremely high multiples.
This method is predicated on "risk isolation" and "portfolio trial and error." He emphasizes defining the total risk exposure first, then allocating a portion to projects that "look silly but have some new structural characteristics," rather than going all in. This differs from the traditional value investment path of "prove—then invest" and is closer to a systematic scanning of uncertain innovations: validating hypotheses through actual participation rather than observational commentary, allowing results rather than prior biases to filter out noise.
From a market structure perspective, this "friendliness towards weird things" behavior actually provides early liquidity and price discovery mechanisms for new narratives. Whether it's monkey pictures, social assets, or on-chain perpetual exchanges, they often carry strong labels of "not serious" or "marginal culture" in their early stages; but because most people instinctively say, "This is stupid," prices often undergo sharp revaluation only after emotional reversals and narrative expansions, creating extreme returns for a few early participants.
In the longer term, this mental model is essentially adapting to an environment where the "path of innovation is highly nonlinear": things that truly change industry structures often do not look impressive in their early stages and may even have strong gaming and speculative characteristics. In such an environment, "avoiding everything that looks stupid" can systematically miss black swans, while "first making small bets and then correcting cognition with results" becomes a mechanism to stay connected with structural opportunities in a high-noise market.