Are crypto markets correlated

with macroeconomic factors?

May 2023

This article, by S&P Global Ratings and S&P Dow Jones Indices, is a thought leadership report that neither
addresses views about ratings on individual entities nor is a rating action. S&P Global Ratings and S&P Dow
Jones Indices are separate and independent divisions of S&P Global.

spglobal.com | © 2023 S&P Global. All rights reserved.

Introduction
Authors
Cristina Polizu, PhD | Elijah Oliveros-Rosen | Miguel de la Mata | Todd Kanaster
Shubhangi Gupta | Lapo Guadagnuolo | Alexandre Birry

Contributors
Neil Denslow | Carla Donaghey

Key Takeaways:
– Bull and bear runs in the crypto market have both coincided with periods of ultra-
loose monetary policy and of significant tightening. While the recent rapid increase in
interest rates could have a negative impact on crypto markets, idiosyncratic factors
also seem to play a large role.

– Crypto assets could theoretically be a hedge against inflation. We think the track
record for crypto is too short to prove this. We have seen greater adoption of
cryptocurrencies in certain emerging markets with high inflation and rapid depreciation
of the local currency.

– The dollar has been generally inversely correlated with prices of crypto assets.

– Crypto markets appear to perform strongly during periods of low market volatility
and less well during high volatility.

Cryptocurrency prices seem to be less affected by macroeconomic factors than

prices of more traditional financial assets. Key drivers for crypto assets include market
confidence, adoption, technology and liquidity conditions (see Table 1).1 By contrast,
traditional financial assets are strongly influenced by macroeconomic drivers, such as
interest rates and inflation. These traditional assets also differ from crypto in being
subject to government regulations and in being more transparent in terms of know-
your-customer requirements and anti-money laundering measures.
Table 1

Key Performance Drivers

Cryptomarkets Traditional financial assets

Market confidence and adoption Operating profits

Regulatory framework Interest rates

Technology Inflation

Supply and demand/liquidity Monetary fiscal polices

1. A Deep Dive Into Crypto Valuation, Nov. 10, 2022

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 2

Interconnections between the crypto ecosystem and macroeconomic factors show
up in the fact that favorable market conditions increase investors’ appetite for higher-
risk assets, such as crypto currencies. Changes in interest rates and borrowing costs
could impact crypto markets through different channels than for traditional assets. For
example, financing costs influence venture capital firms’ decisions to invest in startups
that want to build applications on blockchains (such as Ethereum), and consequently
drive blockchain adoption. Likewise, for blockchains that lack an application layer
and only have a transaction layer (such as Bitcoin), higher costs for financing mining
rigs and warehouse space will lower marginal profits for miners. This difference is
explained by the crypto assets’ different value proposition. Bitcoin’s value proposition
is determined by transaction volumes and mining of these transactions, while Ether’s
comes from transaction validation, and additionally through the utility of applications
built on the Ethereum blockchain. Due to their short history and speculative nature,
we acknowledge that existing trends may change. New trends might affect how
macroeconomic factors impact the crypto ecosystem, especially as more retail and
institutional investors expand their investment portfolios to include crypto.

The recent period of historically low interest rates fueled investors’ appetite for
higher-yielding assets. The 2021 bull run in the crypto market coincided with a period
of ultra-loose monetary conditions, eliciting the question of what impact, if any,
low interest rates had on crypto valuations. By the same logic, as we are in a period
of tighter monetary conditions, driven by higher interest rates and the reversal of
Quantitative Easing (QE) – known commonly as Quantitative Tightening (QT) – it is of
interest to understand the impact these dynamics will have. To better understand this
relationship, we dove into the crypto ecosystem and analyzed the relationship with key
macroeconomic factors using data through March 2023.

In this article we address the following questions:

1. Does monetary policy matter to crypto markets?

a. Do crypto prices correlate to changes in interest rates?

b. Do quantitative easing and tightening make a difference in

cryptocurrency markets?

c. Is money supply important for the crypto ecosystem?

2. Does perception of a possible incoming recession matter for crypto markets?

3. Can crypto assets be a hedge against inflation?

4. What does a strong or weak dollar mean for crypto markets?

5. Do financial stress and market volatility spill over into the crypto ecosystem?

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 3

1. Does monetary policy matter to
crypto markets?
The past decade appears to show that crypto markets perform well when there is fast
growth in a broad measure of money supply (M2), stemming from a reduction in interest
rates, quantitative easing and fiscal stimulus. Conversely, monetary tightening seems
to have restricted appreciation of crypto assets, or even contributed to depreciation.
In this section, we analyze how these relationships hold over time and focus on interest
rates, and other monetary policy measures that influence money supply, such as
quantitative easing.

a. Do crypto prices correlate with changes in interest rates?

The US Federal Reserve’s (Fed’s) actions influence the global economy, arguably
including crypto markets. Low interest rates increase appetite for assets with higher
risk and higher returns. In reaction to the decline in economic activity as a result of the
Great Recession (2007-2009), the Fed and other central banks lowered interest rates to
zero and held them at that level for just shy of a decade. During that period, demand for
higher-yielding assets, including speculative grade credit was very strong. Global high
yield issuance increased from less than $50 billion in 2009 to more than $250 billion in
2014. This demand for higher-yielding assets could also have extended to crypto assets.

Conversely, when the Fed, and other major central banks increase benchmark interest
rates, higher-yielding assets become less attractive. It could be argued that the same
applies to crypto assets. We analyze whether this inverse relationship between interest
rates and crypto prices is supported by the data.

We use the risk-neutral yield on the 2-year US Treasury bond to gauge short-term
market expectations on the evolution of US interest rates – it reflects what markets
are pricing in for the Fed funds rates two years from today, according to the ACM model
developed by the Fed. To study the crypto markets, we use the S&P Cryptocurrency
Broad Digital Market Index (S&P BDMI). We focus our analysis on data from February
2017 (when the index started) to March 2023. In some cases, we look at longer time
periods and will use Bitcoin prices.

The S&P Cryptocurrency Broad Digital Market Index (S&P BDMI) reflects a broad
investable universe of digital assets listed on open digital exchanges. Assets have
to meet minimum liquidity and market capitalization criteria. Lukka is the pricing
provider. The index is weighted by the equivalent of market capitalization for
cryptocurrencies (coin supply multiplied by coin price). Bitcoin represents 40% of
S&P BDMI, so the index is highly correlated with Bitcoin prices.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 4

In Chart 1, we plot S&P BDMI and the 2-year Risk-Neutral Treasury Yield. Since 2017, the
two indices exhibit a historical correlation of –0.33.

Chart 1

On a daily rolling three-month basis (chart 2) interest rates and the crypto index have
exhibited an inverse relationship 63% of the time since May 2017. This increases to 75%
from May 2020, following the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The inverse relationship
is generally in line with how we would expect traditional assets to behave.

Chart 2

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 5

Some argue that crypto assets could be in demand in a high interest rates/high
inflation environment because they could serve as a store of value. We think the track
record for crypto is too short to prove this. We study the relationship between crypto
assets and inflation in section three of this report.

b. Do quantitative easing and tightening make a difference in

cryptocurrency markets?
When interest rates hit the zero bound after the Great Recession, and economic growth
remained sluggish, central banks sought additional tools to stimulate activity. One was
Quantitative Easing, in which central banks purchase mostly government-issued fixed-
income securities, typically of relatively long maturities. This let central banks further
ease financial conditions and reduce long-term financing costs by lowering term premia
in government bonds.

In the US, three QE rounds took place in 2009-2014, leading up to the Taper Tantrum of
May 2014 when bond yields surged after Fed officials announced plans to reduce the
pace of Treasury bond purchases. Then in 2018, the Fed started reducing its balance
sheet by lowering the amount reinvested from maturing securities through Quantitative
Tightening. A new emergency QE program was introduced in 2020 during the COVID-19
pandemic, before the resumption of QT in 2022. The Fed’s balance sheet peaked at
nearly $9 trillion in early 2022 and has since gradually fallen to roughly $8.7 trillion.

QE fueled appetite for higher-risk assets (in search of higher yield). Arguably, increased
global liquidity/money supply, in an environment of favorable market conditions, should
also have a positive impact on the crypto market, all else held equal. Unprecedented
levels of monetary easing by central banks across the world since 2008/09 have
increased money supply to record levels. Chart 3 below shows the total assets on the
Fed’s balance sheet and the price of Bitcoin since 2016. The markers highlight the
fourth round of QE, which began in 2020, and the two periods of QT.

Chart 3

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 6

After a Bitcoin rally in 2017, a significant price slump in 2018 coincided with the Fed’s
balance sheet reduction program. There was another bull run in 2020, in which Bitcoin
appreciated 1,000%. It coincided with a QE program that started during COVID-19 in
2020 and with increased institutional interest in cryptocurrency markets.

Bitcoin reached a peak in November 2021 before entering a ‘crypto winter’ in which
it lost more than two-thirds of its value over six months as market appetite for risky
assets decreased. This downturn took place during a tightening monetary policy that
started in June 2022. It was also coupled with crypto-specific events that followed the
decreasing price trend, such as the collapse of stablecoin TerraUSD (UST) in May 2022
and of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX in November 2022.

Chart 4 shows year-over-year changes for Bitcoin and the Fed’s balance sheet since
2017. Some periods of balance sheet reduction and tightening measures, captured
by negative changes, are associated with bearish periods for Bitcoin. The 2020
expansionary period is followed by a glaring crypto rally.

Chart 4

Bitcoin’s rally in 2020

coincided with a QE
program that started
during COVID-19
and with increased
institutional interest
in cryptocurrency
markets.

One can also look at QE and QT through the lens of the bond markets and study the
relationship between bond premia and crypto prices. Term premia fell into negative
territory during the 2020-2021 rally as another round of QE was implemented. This
spurred investors’ interest in higher-yielding assets and high-return speculative
investments like crypto. Chart 5 plots S&P BDMI and the 10-year Zero Coupon Treasury
Term Premia.

Bond yields and premia are not always consistently impacted by QE and QT. For
example, during the QT period in 2018-2019, the 10-year Zero Coupon Treasury Term
Premia was initially positive and then turned negative. It has oscillated between
negative and positive during QT since June 2022.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 7

Chart 5

c. Is money supply important for the crypto ecosystem?

To assess the impact of global liquidity on crypto markets, we start by looking at M2
(a measure of money supply). M2 has surged since the Great Recession as central
banks lowered interest rates and implemented QE. Chart 6 shows the relationship
between M2 and S&P BDMI. M2 is the US Federal Reserve’s estimate of total money
supply including all of the cash people have on hand plus money deposited in checking
accounts, savings accounts, and other short-term saving vehicles. Since the 1980’s,
M2 has exhibited exponential growth, particularly due to expansionary monetary
policies during recessionary periods. In July 2022, M2 declined as the US reversed loose
monetary policies.

Correlation between money supply and the crypto index is 0.75 over the historical
period starting in 2017. This positive relationship notably broke down during 2018, as
S&P BDMI fell, while M2 kept growing until July 2022. S&P BDMI’s decIine followed
a crypto boom in 2017, when the market was flooded with initial coin offerings and
new ventures, many of which ultimately failed. Both measures moved in the same
direction in the second half of 2022. M2 contracted while the crypto market was hit
by a series of events that fueled volatility and price declines, including the collapse of
stablecoin UST in May and the downfall of cryptocurrency exchange FTX in November.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 8

Chart 6

Chart 7 shows rolling three-month percent changes for M2 and S&P BDMI. Since 2017,
changes for M2 have been generally positive, with a pronounced peak at the beginning
of the pandemic, while the crypto index has exhibited several periods of negative
returns. In the second half of 2022, both indices exhibited negative returns.

In general, crypto markets have performed well in periods of expansionary monetary

policies, although we are not able to establish a causal relationship. Some of the large
swings in crypto currencies have taken place following factors that are not directly
related to monetary policy, such as the FTX collapse.
Chart 7

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 9

2. Does the perception of a
possible incoming recession
matter for crypto?
Growing recessionary risk could weigh on crypto assets if economic concerns dent
appetite for higher-risk assets. At the same time, a recession perceived to be driven by
poor government policies could arguably boost demand for crypto because the assets’
decentralized and borderless nature creates a potential shelter.

To understand whether recession risks weigh on crypto assets, we can use a widely
followed gauge of economic expectations – the slope of the US Treasury yield curve. In
particular, the difference between the yields on the 10-year Treasury Constant Maturity
and the 3-month Treasury Constant Maturity, which has historically been a better
signal of an incoming recession than other tenors. The yield on the 10-year Treasury is
usually higher than that on the 3-month T-bill, giving the curve a positive slope. When
this relationship inverts, it suggests that interest rates will fall in the future due to an
economic slowdown. In the past, recessions have generally occurred whenever there
was a sustained yield curve inversion. A notable exception is the current inversion that
started in October 2022.

The yield curve has inverted three times since the 2008 recession. The first took
place from March 2019 to October 2019, as above-target inflation prompted the Fed
to increase interest rates, increasing expectations that the economy would fall into a
recession. However, resiliency in the labor market prevented a recession during that
period. The second inversion, at the beginning of the pandemic in February 2020, did
not last long because of strong monetary and fiscal policies designed to mitigate the
economic shock of COVID-19 restrictions. The yield curve inverted again in October
2022, as noted in the previous paragraph, and it remains in that state as of May 2023.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 10

Chart 8 shows S&P BDMI and the difference between the 10-year and 3-month yields.
When this difference is negative, the yield curve is inverted. The data is too short to find
a consistent association between yield curve inversions and price declines for crypto.

Chart 8:

Chart 9 below shows a more detailed view since late October 2022. Notably, S&P BDMI
has more than recovered since losing 25% of its value in November 2022, even with the
yield curve remaining negative. Some of the crypto volatility was linked to the implosion
of digital-asset exchange FTX and its domino effect in the crypto lending space, as well
as general uneasiness about crypto risks and governance.
Chart 9

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 11

If a recession is caused by inflation, or poor government policies, investors may look at
crypto assets as a safe haven because they are decentralized, not tied to any country
or government, and at least partially driven by factors such as technology and market
sentiment. In countries where national currencies are unstable, the crypto market
offers an alternative for preserving purchasing power. A handful of countries have
adopted crypto as legal tender.

Fiat currencies in emerging markets can exhibit large and recurring depreciations,
or be characterized by limits on convertibility to hard currency. By contrast, crypto
assets have the potential to weather economic shocks and remain a unit of account
and medium of exchange. This perception may have helped to fuel adoption of
cryptocurrencies in developing nations. Crypto gained popularity as a means of
remittance payments and for sending money across borders. It is now seen by many as
an enticing investment opportunity as well, which has encouraged the launch of several
asset management products that include crypto assets.

3. Can Crypto assets be a hedge

for inflation?
During their limited life, crypto assets have had bull and bear periods that are not In countries with
directly tied to macroeconomic inflationary shocks. This helps to explain why adding unstable currencies,
crypto to a traditional portfolio increases returns, at the cost of also raising volatility. crypto assets
We also observe that retail investors in emerging markets with weak currencies and potentially offer
hyperinflation have turned to crypto assets to protect their wealth. an alternative
for preserving
Inflation is generally associated with an overheated economy after expansionary
monetary and fiscal policies have increased aggregate demand. In some cases, it is also purchasing power.
the result of negative supply shocks. Fiscal policies that increase disposable incomes
above sustainable levels raise consumption, leading to demand-driven inflation. They
also boost investment, including in assets that generate higher returns, such as crypto.

A frequently asked question is whether crypto assets can be a good hedge for
inflation. Bitcoin and other crypto assets should be less correlated to instabilities in a
financial system due to their decentralized nature. High fungibility also makes crypto
a potentially strong candidate to store value in unfavorable economic conditions. Still,
this is a complex topic, and the data may be too short to confidently address it.
We analyzed the relationship between inflation and the crypto ecosystem over the past
six years – a period featuring a transition from low inflation pre-pandemic to markedly
high rates. We also used the relationship between inflation and gold (a traditional
inflation hedge) since 1982 as a comparison. If crypto follows the path of “digital gold”,
returns should be positively related to changes in US inflation expectations.

For average US inflation expectations, we use 2-year and 10-year breakeven

inflation rates, derived from the relevant Treasury Constant Maturity Securities and
Treasury Inflation-Indexed Constant Maturity Securities. The rates measure inflation
expectations in the short and longer term. We use US inflation expectation as crypto
tends to be priced in dollars and the market for financial instruments linked to inflation
is liquid and well established.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 12

Chart 10 below shows S&P BDMI and breakeven inflation expectations. The 2-year
breakeven inflation rate dipped into negative territory during the pandemic when the
yield on Treasury Inflation-Protection Securities (TIPS) exceeded the yield on Treasuries.

Chart 10

The historical correlation between the daily returns of S&P BDMI and the inflation
expectation indices is low, around 0.10.

Looking at rolling three-month returns for S&P BDMI and 10-year breakeven inflation
expectations in chart 11 shows no conclusive pattern. There is a notable number
of periods where returns on crypto and inflation indices exhibit opposite signs,
meaning an increase in inflation expectations is not associated with an increase in
cryptocurrency prices. However, there are also periods where the two measures are
both positive or both negative.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 13

Chart 11

Overall, the data to date does not support a conclusive answer on crypto assets’
hedging capabilities with respect to inflation. By contrast, Chart 12 below shows that
S&P GSCI Gold index and the 10-year Breakeven Inflation Expectation index have
tracked each other quite well since 2013. Additionally, there is evidence of Granger
causality between the 10-year Breakeven Inflation Expectation index and the S&P GSCI
Gold index at a 95% confidence level. The same test fails for Bitcoin. (Granger causality
is a statistical test to verify whether one variable is useful in forecasting another.)

Chart 12

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 14

In developing economies, there are cases in which crypto assets have been used as
an alternative to holding the domestic currency amid very high levels of inflation, rapid
currency depreciation, or stringent capital controls. This could underpin reports that
emerging markets rank among the top countries for cryptocurrency trading (according
to Chainanalysis data for instance) . Still, in some countries, cryptocurrencies may
also be used to bypass financial sanctions, which complicates the study of crypto as a
counter-inflationary asset.

It’s also worth noting that supply matters in crypto markets, even if this isn’t directly
analogous to inflation. New coins are minted with proof-of-work mining or proof-of-
stake validation. Supply of Bitcoin increases because miners get newly minted coins in
return for their work. These rewards continually decrease and they will eventually end
in about 2140. Ether, on the other hand, has recently had brief periods of burning more
than minting. This will likely continue going forward.

4. What does a strong or weak

dollar mean for crypto markets?
The dollar has been generally inversely correlated with prices of crypto assets – in
periods of dollar strength, crypto prices have generally declined.

We measure dollar strength, using the Nominal Broad US Dollar Index, which tracks the
currency against a weighted basket of currencies used by US trade partners. Investors
should favor other currencies when the dollar is expected to weaken (an index decline)
and demonstrate the opposite amid dollar strength (a rising index). Arguably, the
same logic should apply to crypto assets, which would lead to a negative relationship
between crypto prices and the US Dollar Index.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 15

Chart 13

Chart 13 shows the Nominal Broad US Dollar Index and S&P BDMI. The historical
correlation between their daily returns is –0.16. That compares with a –0.40 correlation
between the US Dollar Index and S&P GSCI Gold. In chart 14, a rolling three-month
correlation analysis shows an inverse relationship (negative correlation) between the
US Dollar Index and both S&P BDMI and S&P GSCI Gold 75% of the time.

Idiosyncratic events may derail the expected relationship between crypto and the
US Dollar Index over short time periods. Furthermore, because correlation does
not substitute for causation, it is not obvious that a change in the US Dollar Index
can provide insight into future movements in the crypto markets. In fact, there is no
Granger causality between the US Dollar Index and Bitcoin prices.
Chart 14

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 16

5. Do financial stress and
market volatility spill over
into crypto markets?
Increased financial stress and market volatility are generally associated with declining
crypto prices. We use the Financial Stress Index (FSI) to measure stress in global
financial markets. The index incorporates five categories of indicators: credit, equity
valuation, funding, safe assets and volatility. The index is positive when stress levels are
above average, and negative when stress levels are below average. Chart 15 plots the
FSI index and S&P BDMI.

FSI turned positive in early March 2020, around the day when WHO declared COVID-19
to be a global pandemic. The shock was felt in crypto markets, with Bitcoin losing more
than 40% of its value that day. Many other cryptos also plunged, along with stocks.
Bitcoin then subsequently started a bull run, along with other assets, which continued
until late 2021. FSI turned negative in June 2020. The FSI turned positive towards the
middle of 2022, as the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine conflict increased prices of
several commodities, putting upward pressure on inflation, and consequently raising
interest rate hike expectations.
Chart 15

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 17

FSI turned positive most recently in mid-March 2023, though to a lesser extent than in
2022 or 2020. The failure of a few US banks added significant pressure to the banking
system. These upheavals caused two major stablecoins (USDC and DAI) to depeg by
13%. Circle, the issuer of USDC, confirmed that $3.3 billion of cash reserves backing
USDC were held at one of the failed banks. Both stablecoins recovered to their peg
levels after the government confirmed that it would support the banks’ creditors.
These events highlight contagion risks from traditional finance to decentralized
financial systems. Interestingly, Bitcoin rallied after the event, leading to speculation as
to whether this was a response to the banking crisis, to the government intervention or
to something else.

We also looked at another widely used metric for market volatility – The Chicago Board
Options Exchange’s (CBOE) Volatility Index (VIX). Also known as the market fear index,
the VIX measures expectations of near-term volatility conveyed by S&P 500 index
option prices.

Higher levels for the VIX indicate expectations for increased volatility. That adds
pressure and fear to financial markets, drives liquidity premiums upward and reduces
investors’ confidence. In such a market, it is expected that cryptocurrencies will exhibit
more volatility.

In addition to VIX, we looked at the CBOE Crude Oil ETF Volatility Index (OVX), which
measures the short-term volatility of crude oil as priced by the United States Oil Fund.
We chose to analyze this index because considerable energy requirements mean that
there may be a relationship between energy prices and Bitcoin miners. Chart 16 shows
the VIX and OVX indices and S&P BDMI. The volatility indices both show sudden spikes
in Spring 2020 during the COVID-19 period.
Chart 16

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 18

Crypto prices have an inverse relationship with the VIX and OVX indices – prices fall when
the fear indices go up. S&P BDMI’s historical return correlation is –0.20 with VIX and –0.11
with OVX. Rolling three-month correlation is negative 90% of the time, reaching –0.60
in the past year. Interestingly, considering that both indices pertain to different asset
classes, we found a Granger causality relationship between VIX and S&P BDMI.

The interconnectedness between traditional and decentralized finance is of particular

importance because a healthy banking system is the backbone of a healthy economy.
For example, in the US, the collapse of a few banks in March 2023 caused liquidity
pressure in the banking industry. This in turn depegged some stablecoins, which are
supposed to provide a stable bridge between the fiat and crypto ecosystems. There
is no indication of how the wider crypto ecosystem would have reacted if the crisis
hadn’t been contained. At the same time, crypto-friendly banks are exposed to crypto
instability and have no control over market trends. That means the banking industry
may be directly affected by uncertainties stemming from the crypto ecosystem.
Chart 17

As more institutional
investors turn to
crypto, contagion risk
between traditional
and crypto assets
may rise.

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 19

Conclusion
Crypto assets are not exempt from the effect of macroeconomic changes, even if
performance is also powered by other drivers such as technology and market sentiment.
The market’s relationship with macroeconomic indicators may become stronger – and
more in line with that of traditional financial assets – as more institutional investors turn
to crypto. If that happens, contagion risk between traditional and crypto assets may
rise, potentially flowing in both directions. With regulators demonstrating a heightened
scrutiny of cryptocurrency risks, the interconnections between the rapidly evolving
crypto ecosystem, the global economy and financial markets continue to develop.

– Stablecoin Depegging Highlights DeFi’s Exposure To TradFi Risks, March 15, 2023

– The Fed’s Plan For US Banks Should Reduce Contagion Risk, March 13, 2023

– DeFi Securitizations: A Credit Risk Perspective, Feb. 7, 2023

– A Deep Dive Into Crypto Valuation, Nov. 10, 2022

– Regulating Crypto: The Bid To Frame, Tame, Or Game The Ecosystem, July 14, 2022
– Stablecoins: Common Promises, Diverging Outcomes, June 15, 2022

spglobal.com Are crypto markets correlated with macroeconomic factors? | 20

CONTACTS

www.spglobal.com
www.spglobal.com/en/enterprise/about/contact-us.html

Copyright © 2023 S&P Global Inc. All rights reserved.

These materials, including any software, data, processing technology, index data, ratings, credit-related analysis, research, model,
software or other application or output described herein, or any part thereof (collectively the “Property”) constitute the proprietary
and confidential information of S&P Global Inc its affiliates (each and together “S&P Global”) and/or its third party provider licensors.
S&P Global on behalf of itself and its third-party licensors reserves all rights in and to the Property. These materials have been
prepared solely for information purposes based upon information generally available to the public and from sources believed to be
reliable.

Any copying, reproduction, reverse-engineering, modification, distribution, transmission or disclosure of the Property, in any form
or by any means, is strictly prohibited without the prior written consent of S&P Global. The Property shall not be used for any
unauthorized or unlawful purposes. S&P Global’s opinions, statements, estimates, projections, quotes and credit-related and other
analyses are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase,
hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security, and there is
no obligation on S&P Global to update the foregoing or any other element of the Property. S&P Global may provide index data.
Direct investment in an index is not possible. Exposure to an asset class represented by an index is available through investable
instruments based on that index. The Property and its composition and content are subject to change without notice.

THE PROPERTY IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS. NEITHER S&P GLOBAL NOR ANY THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS (TOGETHER,
“S&P GLOBAL PARTIES”) MAKE ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTIES
OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS,
THAT THE PROPERTY’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE PROPERTY WILL OPERATE IN ANY SOFTWARE OR
HARDWARE CONFIGURATION, NOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO ITS ACCURACY, AVAILABILITY, COMPLETENESS
OR TIMELINESS, OR TO THE RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. S&P GLOBAL PARTIES SHALL NOT IN
ANY WAY BE LIABLE TO ANY RECIPIENT FOR ANY INACCURACIES, ERRORS OR OMISSIONS REGARDLESS OF THE CAUSE. Without
limiting the foregoing, S&P Global Parties shall have no liability whatsoever to any recipient, whether in contract, in tort (including
negligence), under warranty, under statute or otherwise, in respect of any loss or damage suffered by any recipient as a result of or in
connection with the Property, or any course of action determined, by it or any third party, whether or not based on or relating to the
Property. In no event shall S&P Global be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive,
special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees or losses (including without limitation lost income or lost profits and
opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Property even if advised of the possibility of
such damages. The Property should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its
management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions.

The S&P Global logo is a registered trademark of S&P Global, and the trademarks of S&P Global used within this document or
materials are protected by international laws. Any other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.

The inclusion of a link to an external website by S&P Global should not be understood to be an endorsement of that website or the
website’s owners (or their products/services). S&P Global is not responsible for either the content or output of external websites.
S&P Global keeps certain activities of its divisions separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of
their respective activities. As a result, certain divisions of S&P Global may have information that is not available to other S&P Global
divisions. S&P Global has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information
received in connection with each analytical process. S&P Global may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses,
normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P Global reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and
analyses. S&P Global Ratings’ public ratings and analyses are made available on its sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge)
and www.capitaliq.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P Global publications and third
party redistributors.