Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
“Easy money in crypto is over” is best read as a claim that obvious, outsized gains have become harder to capture—not that crypto has stopped operating or that every opportunity has disappeared. There is also an attribution problem: the closest matching report credits the argument to Fiskantes, Sigil Fund’s CIO, not to Haseeb Qureshi of Dragonfly. The source behind the title’s Qureshi attribution has not been verified.
Who said easy money in crypto is over?
The closest matching account is BeInCrypto’s March 24, 2025 article, “Sigil Fund CIO Reveals 3 Reasons Why Crypto’s ‘Easy Money’ Era Is Over.” It attributes the view to Fiskantes, identified as Sigil Fund’s CIO. A Milk Road podcast index identifies Haseeb Qureshi with Dragonfly, but does not connect him to this particular argument. The available sources therefore do not establish that Qureshi made the statement.
That distinction matters: the reasons below summarize Fiskantes’s reported opinion, not a verified statement from Qureshi and not a settled rule about every crypto market.
Why does Fiskantes think easy gains are harder to find?
Arbitrage opportunities close faster
BeInCrypto describes arbitrage as exploiting price differences for the same asset or product across markets or exchanges. The article reports Fiskantes’s view that retail access to private and public arbitrage opportunities has declined and that opportunities are being captured more quickly. In practice, a price gap is useful only if a trader can identify it, execute in time, and account for fees and other frictions; the reported argument is that those conditions have become less favorable to ordinary participants.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Speculative tokens can expose traders to extraction and loss
The report says some retail participants have moved toward meme coins and low-cap tokens. Fiskantes characterized those venues as vulnerable to bots, cabals, rug pulls, and maximal extractable value (MEV)—value captured by transaction ordering or other activity around blockchain transactions. These are reported risks, not a quantified estimate of how frequently they occur or a claim that every such token is manipulated.
More token supply and faster trend cycles increase competition
Fiskantes also pointed to venture investment in crypto infrastructure and an overhang of token supply as pressures on short-term prospects. He argued that trends are being capitalized on faster, making first-mover advantage harder to sustain. Being early may still matter, but the reported view is that timing alone is less likely to produce a large gain without diligence, effort, and an edge over competitors.
Does “over” mean crypto has no opportunities?
No. The BeInCrypto account presents a warning about easy or outsized gains, not a claim that crypto activity has ended or that every market is efficient. It says Fiskantes viewed crypto as active while suggesting other markets could offer comparable risk-to-reward opportunities. That is his assessment, not evidence that any particular alternative is better for an individual investor.
His broader point is that a crowded market can transfer value from participants seeking fast wealth to those with systems and tools to exploit opportunities. That describes a competitive-market thesis; it does not prove that all crypto assets, strategies, or time periods behave alike.
Are DeFi yields still “easy money”?
Passive lending yield is a separate question from trading arbitrage or token speculation. CoinDesk’s April 7, 2026 report illustrated how a yield can look modest beside traditional cash while still carrying additional risks: it cited Aave USDC deposits at about 2.61% APY and Interactive Brokers idle cash at 3.14% at the time of publication. These are dated comparison figures, not current rate quotes or guarantees.
The same report said yields on several stablecoin lending pools had compressed. Some higher-yield offerings relied on real-world assets, private credit, or other specific strategies, which means the return depends on more than a headline APY. CoinDesk also discussed smart-contract and protocol risks, including exploit losses, and reported that CertiK estimated more than $2.47 billion worth of cryptocurrency was stolen in the first half of 2025. That figure is a broad security context, not proof of the performance or safety of a particular lending pool.
Morpho co-founder Paul Frambot offered one explanation for compressed lending yields: “Undifferentiated lending converges toward risk-free rates because when every depositor shares the same collateral, the same parameters, and the same outcome, there is limited room for specialization and returns compress.” This is Frambot’s explanation, not a guarantee that all lending strategies converge to a particular rate.
What to check before treating a yield as worthwhile
- Source of return: Determine whether yield comes from organic borrower demand, temporary incentives, or off-chain assets such as private credit.
- Return after costs: Account for fees, transaction costs, and any conditions attached to incentives rather than comparing headline APYs alone.
- Risk and counterparties: Understand the protocol, smart-contract, collateral, and any off-chain counterparty exposure.
- Liquidity and exit terms: Check when withdrawals are possible and whether liquidity can be constrained under stress.
- Rate and availability: Verify the rate directly before acting; a published snapshot may be stale, and availability can depend on location or platform terms.
How should a personal-finance reader use this argument?
Separate three questions that the slogan can blur: whether trading edges are more competitive, whether a particular yield compensates for its risks, and whether Qureshi actually made the statement. The reporting supports a summary of Fiskantes’s warning and a dated example of DeFi yield compression; it does not verify the Qureshi attribution or establish that crypto as a whole has run out of opportunity.
For a household decision, the useful test is not whether a market is labeled “easy” or “over,” but whether the potential return, after costs, justifies the possibility of losing principal, facing limited liquidity, or relying on a protocol or counterparty. A past rate or an argument about market competition cannot answer that for an individual investor.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
