- Solve real problems with our hands-on interface
- Progress from basic puts and calls to advanced strategies
Interactive Options Course
Posted January 9, 2026 at 1:00 am
The recent US military intervention and capture of Nicolás Maduro have triggered immediate, yet diverging, ripples across global markets. At its core, the episode highlights a growing contrast between assets shaped by policy control, such as energy, and assets that increasingly benefit from geopolitical fragmentation, most notably Bitcoin.
Beyond its foreign policy dimension, market participants are also interpreting the event through a domestic macro lens, particularly the role of energy supply as a key lever for US inflation management and, by extension, monetary policy flexibility. At the same time, the episode has drawn attention to a broader structural realignment in which asset allocators increasingly consider Bitcoin as a neutral, international and non-sovereign hedge against inflation and currency debasement.
Energy markets price expectations rather than immediate changes in physical production. In that context, signals pointing to expanded US influence over Venezuelan oil supply have led markets to reprice the medium- to long-term supply outlook, placing downward pressure on crude prices even in the absence of near-term output increases.
In the US, from a domestic macro perspective, energy plays a critical role in the growing AI industry and inflation dynamics, both directly through headline CPI and indirectly via transportation and production costs. Broader perceived control over future energy supply can help dampen inflation volatility, providing the Federal Reserve with greater flexibility on interest rate policy throughout the year. In this sense, the market reaction appears less geopolitical and more consistent with a rational repricing of inflation risk.
Expanded US influence over Venezuelan supply also has strategic implications for global producers. Even the expectation of future supply expansion can compress margins for higher-cost or geopolitically constrained producers, most notably Russia, by placing an effective ceiling on oil prices. This dynamic indirectly pressures fiscal revenues in energy-dependent states whose budgets rely heavily on sustained high commodity prices.
Additionally, greater US influence over key energy supply nodes may complicate de-dollarization efforts among producer nations. Reduced commodity pricing power limits the ability of exporters to shift trade settlement away from the US dollar on favorable terms, reinforcing the dollar’s role in global energy markets even amid broader efforts to diversify payment systems.
That said, while the long-term potential of Venezuela’s estimated $17 trillion oil industry3 is substantial, the path to realization remains complex. Analysts estimate that restoring the country to its former production capacity would require over $100 billion in investment and close to a decade of infrastructure rebuilding4, highlighting the gap between market expectations and near-term physical supply. While oil prices respond to expectations of future supply shaped by state influence and policy coordination, the reaction in digital assets reflects a fundamentally different dynamic –one driven less by control and more by neutrality in an increasingly fragmented global system.
While energy markets tend to respond directly to signals of state intervention and control, Bitcoin’s appeal in the current environment appears rooted in the opposite dynamic: its resistance to unilateral control and its perceived neutrality as a store-of-wealth asset. Against this backdrop, Bitcoin has demonstrated notable resilience, up ~7% YTD5, holding above $94,000 and repeatedly testing the $95,000 resistance level despite heightened geopolitical uncertainty.
Market attention has also been drawn to reports currently unconfirmed but circulated by multiple media outlets suggesting the seizure of a previously undisclosed Venezuelan Bitcoin stockpile. Some estimates place the size of this reserve at up to 600,000 BTC (approximately $60 billion)6. While the existence and scale of such holdings remain speculative, the narrative itself has influenced market positioning by reinforcing the idea of Bitcoin as a sovereign-relevant asset class.
Ecosystem sentiment further reflected this optimism, particularly in assets perceived to be politically adjacent to the current administration. President Trump-related tokens such as WLFI and TRUMP advanced approximately 16%10 and 7.5%11, respectively, with TRUMP re-entering the top 100 digital assets by market capitalization. This divergence between policy-shaped assets and neutral digital networks becomes even more pronounced as geopolitical fragmentation accelerates and monetary systems grow increasingly weaponized.
The intervention has drawn explicit opposition from the BRICS-Plus forum, with Brazil, Russia, and China condemning the move as “hegemonic behavior.” This escalating friction reinforces de-dollarization pressures, as nations seek alternatives to the US dollar to mitigate exposure to sanctions and reserve seizures.
Crypto usage remains exceptionally high in regions with systemic instability; for instance, Turkey leads global adoption with 25.6%14 of its internet population owning digital assets, while in Iran, the share of users employing crypto recently rose to 46%15 as a tool used to hedge against high inflation in the country. In Venezuela, nearly 92.5%16 of crypto activity is driven by a critical need for remittances and stablecoin-based value preservation.
Traders on Polymarket, the world’s largest prediction market, are currently pricing a 30% probability17 of the Iranian government collapsing before the end of 2026. This reflects heightened global instability and further underscores the demand for non-fiat, “neutral” assets like Bitcoin as a hedge against catastrophic geopolitical risk.
The contrast between assets shaped by policy control and those that benefit from geopolitical and monetary fragmentation has implications not only for near-term market behavior, but also for forward-looking returns. In an environment defined by inflation sensitivity, reserve weaponization, and fractured trade systems, Bitcoin increasingly trades less like a speculative asset and more like a strategic hedge.
—
Originally Posted January 8, 2026 – What Venezuela tells us about Bitcoin’s strategic role
Footnotes:
Information posted on IBKR Campus that is provided by third-parties does NOT constitute a recommendation that you should contract for the services of that third party. Third-party participants who contribute to IBKR Campus are independent of Interactive Brokers and Interactive Brokers does not make any representations or warranties concerning the services offered, their past or future performance, or the accuracy of the information provided by the third party. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
This material is from 21Shares and is being posted with its permission. The views expressed in this material are solely those of the author and/or 21Shares and Interactive Brokers is not endorsing or recommending any investment or trading discussed in the material. This material is not and should not be construed as an offer to buy or sell any security. It should not be construed as research or investment advice or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security or commodity. This material does not and is not intended to take into account the particular financial conditions, investment objectives or requirements of individual customers. Before acting on this material, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, as necessary, seek professional advice.
Trading in digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, is especially risky and is only for individuals with a high risk tolerance and the financial ability to sustain losses. Eligibility to trade in digital asset products may vary based on jurisdiction.
Stablecoins and Tokenized assets are not legal tender, are not insured by the FDIC or any government agency, and may lose value; they carry risks including issuer insolvency, regulatory changes, operational failures, and potential inability to redeem for fiat currency. By transacting in stablecoins, you acknowledge and accept these risks.
Futures are not suitable for all investors. The amount you may lose may be greater than your initial investment. Before trading futures, please read the CFTC Risk Disclosure. A copy and additional information are available at ibkr.com.
Related Articles
Join The Conversation
For specific platform feedback and suggestions, please submit it directly to our team using these instructions.
If you have an account-specific question or concern, please reach out to Client Services.
We encourage you to look through our FAQs before posting. Your question may already be covered!