Former California Governor and Hollywood star Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he does not invest in bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency, aligning himself with Warren Buffett’s long-held principle of avoiding investments he does not fully understand. In remarks cited from an interview with The New York Times, Schwarzenegger stated plainly that he stays away from crypto because it falls outside his understanding of investable assets.
His comment was direct and notable: “No, I don’t invest in them. I am like Warren Buffett. I don’t invest in things I don’t understand.” The statement places Schwarzenegger squarely within a traditional investment camp that prioritizes clarity, predictability, and familiarity over fast-moving narratives and emerging technologies.
A Buffett-Style View on Risk and Understanding
Schwarzenegger’s position closely mirrors Buffett’s well-known “circle of competence” philosophy. Buffett has long argued that investors should focus on businesses and assets they can reasonably evaluate, rather than chasing opportunities built on hype or complexity. In that framework, understanding comes before allocation, and uncertainty is often a reason to avoid rather than speculate.
That perspective has shaped Buffett’s public criticism of bitcoin for years. In 2018, the Berkshire Hathaway CEO famously described bitcoin as “rat poison squared.” His longtime business partner Charlie Munger had also delivered harsh criticism of the cryptocurrency sector, using similarly dismissive language. Together, the two became some of the most recognizable high-profile skeptics of bitcoin within mainstream finance.
Schwarzenegger’s latest comments suggest that, at least in his case, this skepticism is not rooted in a detailed critique of blockchain technology or monetary theory. Instead, it stems from a simpler rule: if an asset cannot be clearly understood, it does not belong in the portfolio.
A Longstanding Relationship With Buffett
The comparison to Buffett is more than rhetorical. Schwarzenegger has turned to the Berkshire Hathaway chairman for advice on multiple occasions over the years. During his 2003 campaign for governor of California, Buffett served as his senior financial and economic adviser. Schwarzenegger went on to win the special recall election and remained in office until 2011.
The former governor has also spoken highly of Buffett in the past, describing him as “the greatest investor ever, my mentor, and my hero.” He has praised Buffett’s common-sense approach to business and his reputation for integrity, suggesting that these qualities influenced not only his view of investing but also his approach to leadership and public service.
Buffett also reportedly advised Schwarzenegger again in 2016, when the actor hosted The New Celebrity Apprentice. That history helps explain why Schwarzenegger would frame his position on crypto in Buffett-like terms. For him, the message appears to be about discipline and intellectual honesty rather than simply taking a negative stance on digital assets.
Bitcoin Criticism From Berkshire’s Top Voices
The remarks also arrive against the backdrop of repeated criticism of bitcoin from Berkshire Hathaway’s leadership. Earlier in the same month referenced in the source report, Buffett and Munger addressed bitcoin during Berkshire Hathaway’s annual shareholder meeting. Buffett avoided making a detailed direct attack, saying he did not want to upset investors who were long bitcoin. Even so, his historical position on the asset was already well established.
Munger, by contrast, did not soften his language. He said, “I hate the bitcoin success,” and went on to describe the broader trend in deeply negative terms, calling it contrary to the interests of civilization. The contrast in tone between Buffett’s restraint and Munger’s bluntness did little to change the broader message: Berkshire’s top figures remained deeply unconvinced by bitcoin’s rise.
Schwarzenegger’s refusal to buy bitcoin therefore fits within a wider worldview shared by investors who value cash flow visibility, business fundamentals, and understandable economic models over assets whose valuation frameworks are still hotly debated.
Traditional Investing Versus Crypto Adoption
The significance of Schwarzenegger’s comment lies less in market impact and more in what it represents. Bitcoin has become a major topic in global finance, drawing interest from retail traders, institutions, corporations, and public figures. Yet its growing visibility has not persuaded every prominent investor or celebrity to participate. For some, mainstream attention is not enough to overcome the discomfort that comes with uncertainty.
Schwarzenegger’s stance underscores a familiar divide between crypto advocates and traditional value investors. Supporters of bitcoin often argue that the asset represents a new form of scarcity, a hedge against monetary debasement, or a long-term transformation in finance. Skeptics respond that if an asset’s intrinsic value, price behavior, and long-term utility cannot be assessed with confidence, abstaining is the more rational decision.
In Schwarzenegger’s case, the answer is clear: no bitcoin, no crypto, and no attempt to force a view on an asset class he does not believe he understands. That discipline, whether praised as prudence or criticized as conservatism, is consistent with Buffett’s investing doctrine and with the broader principle of staying within one’s area of competence.
As debates over bitcoin continue across financial markets, Schwarzenegger’s position serves as a reminder that adoption is not merely about access or popularity. For many high-profile figures, conviction still depends on comprehension. And for those who follow Buffett’s logic, not understanding an asset is reason enough to stay away.