Covering housing for at least 10 years, Ali Wolf has steadily ascended to the role of chief economist for Zonda, a distributor of housing market data and consulting. A millennial herself, Wolf has personal experience of what her generation is up against, as she lives in southern California, a state that personifies Americas housing shortage and an ensuing generational clash. 

As baby boomers downsize and millennials finally enter the housing market, Wolf says, they are in direct competition for similarly priced and sized homes. 

In todays housing market, Wolf tells Fortune, theres a big overlap between select baby boomers and select millennials. She used the archetype of the empty nester boomer couple and the millennial couple with no or young children. Essentially, the former group is looking for their retirement home and the latter is looking for their starter home, and something has to give. The key difference here is that the baby boomer will likely be able to tap home equity by selling their existing home, allowing them to perhaps make a more compelling offer on the home compared to the millennials, especially if the latter group are still renting.

Theres two things happening with baby boomers, as Wolf explains: Data from AARP shows that most boomers are looking to stay where they are right now, but the National Association of Realtors shows that boomers are the top buyers and sellers right now. And many more boomers are looking to retire soon. The soaring cost of childcare has boomers looking to help out their millennial kids by selling up and moving close to provide extra help rearing the pandemic babies, but thats ironically boxing their kids (and their kids friends) out of the market. Wolf said Zonda has started tracking this dynamic with what she calls the Baby Chaser Index, which tracks the cities where boomers follow their children most dutifully (ending up fueling greater migration patterns in formerly affordable cities like Charlotte, North Carolina). According to Wolf, Zonda data shows that 25% of boomers are relocating to get closer to their grandchildren. Most recently, Zonda found that these baby chasers are often relocating to the Southeast, a market that has become a hotspot due to its relative affordability for home buyers of all ages.

It all leads to an awkward hello to mom when she outbids you at the open house. Boomers have the advantage, while theyre looking for the same smaller house as someone pining for a starter house, and theyre often able to leverage an all-cash bid, explains Wolf. 

By nature of being younger and simply unlucky when it comes to building wealth, millennials have the disadvantage when it comes to getting the house, as boomers are often coming to the market equity rich and less price/rate sensitive. Wolf tells Fortune that one important point just shouldnt be overlooked: Some boomers and millennials are looking for the same home and boomers are often positioned to make more competitive offers. So younger folks looking to get on the homeownership ladder face a big challenge in this overlap with their parents generation.

 At a certain point, the millennials versus boomer battle is more the war between millennials getting help from boomers and boomers themselves. Dealt an arguably easier hand than their children, many parents report making a financial sacrifice to give their children a leg up and help them in the current volatile economic scene. Millennials might be able to expect larger windfalls and generosity when their parents pass, as economist Noah Smith tweets that the generational will see their trajectory change when they hit their 50s and their parents leave them that golden and much fraught over real estate. That being said, even if millennials are to catch up later in life, it is also not a great way of structuring wealth distribution in a society. 

Even the richest of millennials are renting, and those who are buying versus renting wage a different battle, as millennials who own their homes have it a bit easier when it comes to going up against their boomer frenemies.The millennials that are renting are facing the true challenge today because prices are high, mortgage rates are high, and overall housing supply is low, Wolf adds. A larger portion of baby boomers are homeowners, as Wolf points out that 43% of the cohort owns their house without a mortgage. The group also has an advantage given their higher investments in the stock market, she points out. The two combined have allowed many baby boomers to be in a healthy place in terms of total wealth.

On the other side of the coin, many millennials have simply given up on having a home, eschewing the American Dream as something that only existed for a few a long time ago. A Harris poll finds that most (56%) in the generation believe their dream of owning a house to be dead. Recently a bit less pessimistic, Ameriprise Financial finds that about six out of 10 millennials are feeling good about finances, which likely is because 78% are relying on some help from their families in getting by. Things arent looking up for millennials though, as Wolf explains that those who are renting shouldnt expect the market to get much easier in the near-term as supply is still limited and there are buyers who are less sensitive to gouged prices. A recession could turn it around, but Wolf notes that doesnt change the fact that building affordable housing with a vast buyer pool is increasingly difficult. While the housing market might cool, buying an entry-level home will likely remain a challenge for home shoppers for the foreseeable future, she adds.

Her investments returned at some 159% in 2020, but have since been performing far worse than the S&P 500 as tech takes a hit. Whether youre long or short on her controversial investing style, Wood fancies herself the closest thing to a venture capitalist firm on publicly traded markets. She remains bullish on her long-term bets, which include Bitcoin and Teslaand the future of Twitter and ChatGPT.

In a 20 minute fireside chat at Fortunes Most Powerful Women Next Gen conference this week, Wood discussed the future of tech and how A.I. will disrupt everything over the next few years, as well as the ultra-volatile performance of her funds. 

In a conversation ranging from what will happen to the big tech companies like Google in five to 10 years (it depends) to Bitcoin (headed to the moon) to why she thinks Tesla is the best A.I. bet of all with or without Elon Musk at its helm, Wood spoke with conviction and optimism. She also explained how she squared the fact that so many retail investors followed her investmentseven when she gets it really wrong.

Wood noted that she does take to heart people who have lost money. But if they really believe in her strategy, maybe they should buy the Cathie Wood dip: If they liked us at a certain price level, and we are half that now and they really are keeping up with our research, the best way, over time, to overcome what has just happened is to average it and be right.

And, she concluded, she does believe her research is right.

Read the full interview below, which is lightly edited for clarity.

Alyson Shontell: You started ARK Invest in 2014. You are a self-described different duck. By that, I mean, you think of your investing strategies like a VC would, which is different typically from other publicly traded investors. Your companies might be overspending. They might not be operating profitably. But if you think they could be successful on a long time horizon, youre willing to go in. This has made your performance a little volatilevery volatile. 

Cathie Wood: Yes. 

AS: So, incredible 2020 results, 159% returns versus the S&P 500s 16%. But that peaked in February 2021. Now, with high inflation and rate hikes and all that, tech has taken a bit of a beating. In the last two years, performance has not been great. [ARK] is performing far worse than the S&P. Was your initial investment strategy right? Are you tweaking it at all for the current volatile environment?

CW: Our investment time horizon is five years. And were focused on exponential growth trajectories, specifically on five platforms, including multi-omics sequencingthats in the healthcare space. Robotics, not the ones in cages, but the ones covered with sensors that can increase peoples productivity. Energy storage, so think Tesla, electric vehicles, electric transportation period. Artificial intelligencethe biggest catalyst to change, we think, during the next five to 10 years. And blockchain technology. 

Whats interesting about them is they are all on exponential growth trajectories that the market is not paying for right now, because theyre investing aggressively now in order to be in the pole position for many winner-take-most strategies. So A.I. could be a source of winner-take-most, very big markets. So the investing is intense in the beginning, but if they get it right with the right domain expertise, A.I. expertise, and most important, the proprietary datadata that no one else hasthose are going to be the big winners. 

AS: So A.I., as you say, is the center of all of the major trends happening. Its definitely on top of all of our minds. Its impacting all of our jobs, all of our industries. What do you think the A.I. future will look like in 2030? What kind of disruption can we expect? How extreme?

CW: I think the initial disruption is going to be pretty widespread, but in a good way. Its going to help companies and people increase their productivity. That is the biggest use case. I think the knowledge worker industry, globally, is paid $32 trillion. Its one of the most expensive line items in any company. 

AS: When you say knowledge worker, what do you mean?

CW: Well, anyone whos not into manufacturing, heavy-duty. The information age, essentially, is usually in front of a computer, right? So we think that $32 trillion actually could go down and turn into incredible productivity. When people hear that the wages could go down, what we really mean by that is there are going to be people displaced, no question about it. But each person who remains on the job will become highly productive and actually could earn a lot more. 

So the displacement means, yes, well have to do re-education or re-training. But the way the world is working, were all going to become programmers. Thats the big message out of this. What A.I. is and the big breakthroughs, are all around natural language processing. So well all have to become prompt engineers. And youre kind of there, in a way, already, if you use Google search. 

Ive never liked Google search. You have to prompt it in a certain kind of way, and I dont like to play with it. ChatGPT is much easier. And I think it really is going to cause a lot of problems for Google.

AS: So when you say were gonna become programmers, you mean like, if you think it, you can do it with A.I.? [Thats] a big difference from when engineers have been kind of ruling Silicon Valley, building all this. It seems to democratize it, potentially. 

CW: Absolutely. 

AS: So one of your big bets, or one of the companies that youve bet big on is Tesla. And actually a lot of what Elon touches, you bet on. Youve called him the inventor of our age. You have Tesla stock price pegged at, I think, $2,400, up from $170 right now, by 2030. And thats assuming that it really can build this moat of A.I., from what my understanding is. Can you talk a little bit about why you think Tesla could go even further, to the moon? Like, everybodys in the EV space now. Does it really still have an edge? And if A.I. goes away, shouldnt there be no edge for Tesla? Itll be democratized by every car company?

CW: We think that Tesla is the biggest A.I. play out therethe biggest beneficiary. I described the five platforms around which we have centered our research. Tesla is a play on the convergence among three of them. Autonomous vehicles are robots. Autonomous taxi platforms are what were talking about here. They will be electric, and they will be powered by artificial intelligence. 

Think about whats happening there. Each one of these is growing exponentially, and then you have them feeding each other. S-curves feeding S-curves. This could be explosive growth. We believe that globally, the autonomous taxi platform business will grow from nothing today to $8 to $10 trillion in revenue in 2030, or thereabouts. 

Just to put that in perspective, the size of the U.S. economy today is $22 trillion. So were talking about one of the biggest growth engines and growth trajectories in history, and Tesla is in the pole position. It has more data than all of the other auto companies and tech companies touching transportation combined. Orders of magnitude.

AS: Because it has more cars on the road. 

CW: It has four million robots on the road. I have two of them, one in Connecticut, one in Florida. Were getting that covered. And those robots are collecting data continuously. Now, what Tesla is looking forit does not need to ingest all of that data. It needs to ingest, and youll hear this phrase a lot when it comes to A.I., the corner cases. The exception. What causes accidents. And because it has more robots on the roadcertainly here in the United States, but elsewhere as well, it is proliferatingwe think it will be in the pole position to grab, in the U.S. at least, the lions share of the $8 to $10 trillion. The U.S. share would probably be a third of that. 

AS: If youre investing like a VC would, then the CEO is somebody you want to look at really closely.

CW: Without a doubt. 

AS: What is Tesla without Elon? Would you still think its the winner without him?

CW: I think he has set it in motioncertainly the EV side. He calls Tesla a manufacturer of factories that are going to populate, so thats in motion. 

A.I. and autonomous [are] not quite there yet. Actually, he was on CNBC yesterday and gave us a lot of credit for our work. He thought we were too optimistic. Our analystsTasha Keeneys done our autonomous work; Sam Korus, our battery work; Will Summerlin, our AI work[Musk] said they are on the mark. And we say that autonomous is going to take off next year.

AS: Interesting. So there are a bunch of other bets that you have. One of them is crypto, so I want to check in on if you still think that Bitcoin could be headed to the moon. You were recently quoted as saying that you think, in the bull case, it could be $1.5 million per Bitcoin by 2030. I have not heard anyone else speaking like that since before FTX crashed. And, in the worst case scenario, you think it could be pegged around $258,000. 

Meanwhile, regulators seem to want it dead. Like, just, dead. [Securities and Exchange Commission Chairperson] Gary Gensler is like, nope, these things are securities. They should really be treated as such. Maybe Bitcoin is the one that wont be treated as a security, but how could you give it this price point and be so optimistic when theres this regulation, and its real, and its coming for crypto?

CW: Right, well, Bitcoin, it would be nice if the U.S. were leading this movement, but were losing it, and were losing it because of our regulatory system. Its moving abroad. Even Coinbase has established a presence in Bermuda to start a derivatives exchange, and now its Singapore. So Bitcoin is, and each one of these words is very important, its a very big idea. Its the first global privatemeaning no government oversightdigital, rules-based monetary system in the history of the world. 

The closest we came was the gold exchange standard. And my mentor Art Laffer, when he saw our first paper, he said, This is what Ive been waiting for since we went off the gold exchange standard: a rules-based monetary system.

Human beings today have their own rules, and theyre all different. Bitcoins rule is: We are going to mathematically meter the supply of Bitcoin until it hits 21 million units. Its at 19 million right now. So it will soon take on scarcity value. The reason its adopted is, first of all, many people like the idea of a decentralized, transparent, auditable monetary system. It was born out of the 2008/2009 crisis, when people just lost all trust in financial services. 

So here are technology people, we dont know if Satoshi Nakamoto was a person or a number of people, who designed this ecosystem to solve that problem. And, very interestingly, it took another crisistwo crises within the last yearto prove the concept. [Those crises were] FTX, and the regional banking system. FTX failed because it was centralized, opaque, and not auditable. There was fraud there. Bitcoin is the opposite of that.

Regional banks implode and then Bitcoin goes from 19,000 the weekend of the failures of SVB and Signature19,000 to 28,000. Whats that? Thats a flight to safety. Thats like gold. Its like digital gold. And thats a very big market. 

AS: So theres a few other big bets that you have as well outside of crypto. Supersonic flight. Future of robots. You think Amazon will actually be employing more robots than people. Can you talk a little bit about some of those bets?

CW: Well, first of all, supersonic flight is pretty exciting. One of our minority owners is JapaneseNikko Asset Management. So were traveling to Asia quite a bit, and it would be lovely to take a flight for two hours instead of 14 hours, maybe with a transfer somewhere in there. Two hours, that would be a huge increase in productivity. But we believe that the developments in space are moving us towards supersonic flight. And what were learning from SpaceX and reusable rockets and so forth is going to get us there. 

The other big market coming out of this is going to be the connected world. Two to three billion people have no connection to the Internet right now. Starlink, which is SpaceX is beginning to enable that. The supersonic flight marketthat revenue opportunity is $270 billion, and were making very conservative assumptions there. 

The connected world, including RVs and boats and everything, is more like $80 to $85 billion. The second question you asked was? 

AS: One was hypersonic flight, then was robots. Amazon and robots.

CW: Yes, Amazon! If you measure the number of robots per 10,000 people at Amazon, its about 3,300, about one-third. If you do that for the broad-based manufacturing sector, its about 1.4%, so that gives you a sense of how nascent the industrial robotics world is, and the cost declines. And all of our research is focused on, how quickly is the cost associated with this new technology declining? And, as it declines, what new markets will it open up as prices fall? 

We believe, by 2027, industrial robots prices will probably be in the $15,000 to $18,000 range. Competitive with people. But these are robots taking jobs that are very mundane and very boring, freeing people up to become more productive in other ways. And we do have a labor shortage. 

The cost of industrial robots declines for every cumulative doubling of robotsone to two, two to fouris 50%. The costs associated with artificial intelligence, training costs, those are dropping by 70% a year. So youve heard of ChatGPT. Just to illustrate how quickly this is happening, if that model had been trained in 2018, it would cost $800 million. It was trained in 2020, it cost $5 million. Today, the same model would cost $500,000, and itll cost $30 by 2030. So again, massive cost declines. Really transformational. 

AS: I have to ask, with all these trends happening, what do you think is going to happen to the current big tech companies in the next five to 10 years? You own a little bit of Microsoft. Google had a memo leak that said, There is no moat for us. We cannot be the owners of A.I. and what we build. Do you think they will still be standing? Like could we see Google collapse? Could we see Meta collapse? What do you think happens to the big tech titans right now?

CW: It depends what they do, and what their existing business model is. In Googles case, this is a real problem. Google has some of the best A.I. minds in the world and should have been first to market here. Why wasnt it? Theyll say it was the innovators dilemma. They say, oh, were aiming for safety, this is very dangerous. Of course, their underlying business model will disappear. Because these foundation modelsOpenAI, GPT3, GPT4, these are foundation models, they are commoditized. They are free. And thats whats so interesting about this. 

Thats why I say well go back to Tesla and other companies like itthose with the proprietary data can combine that data with all of the data on the internet, which is what these foundational models are about, and come out with customized models that will solve big problems, like get a person from point A to point B as safely and quickly as possible.

AS: So Im going to do one audience Q&A, and then I have one question I have to end on.

Jessie Draper: Hi, Jessie Draper, I run Halogen Ventures. I think what were doing around the retail investor could be a huge unlock for emerging managers and for female managers and venture capital fund managers. And Im curious if you could speak to that at all.

CW: Generally, what were doing is trying to democratize investing. Weve done that already in the ETF world. And when I say democratize, we want people to take the journey with us. We give our research away and invite people to understand what were doing and why were doing it. 

Jessie, you may be talking about our new venture effortsweve partnered with Titan, an Andreessen Horowitz company who has an app, and were the first outside equity fund launched on this app. And people can get into venture capital, our venture companies, and were having incredible success partnering with other VCs who actually want us as part of their deals. And for $500, you can now start participating in the VC space. 

Historically, this has been limited to those with significant income or assets, and it has blocked a lot of young people. And so wed like this to be a platform to be great to showcase for women with businesses. We, with our social media, social marketing, and now, our social distribution strategy, are showcasing companies so that they can attract talent and get ready for their next liquidity event, whether its an IPO or M&A.

AS: Cathie, it sounds very compelling, and all of what you say sounds compelling, youre very smart. Youre very thoughtful about this. There is risk, and theres extreme risk for retail investors. And a reason why they havent been in the venture market is its so risky, and they dont have as much disposable income. 

So this brings me to my final question. Hype is a big problem in business. And overhype can make a lot of people lose a lot of money. And you are so compelling, but how much time do you devote to thinking about like, what if Im wrong? The future is incredibly hard to predict. You might be right about the what, but not the who, or the when, or the how. So, how do you square that, knowing that so many people are following what you say? You have a million Twitter followers, millions of people watch your YouTube videos. Theyre eating up everything you say. Thats a big responsibility.

CW: It is a big responsibility, and we take it very seriously. Our models are very disciplined around something called Wrights Law. That gets us the cost decline associated with each technology, which is pretty predictable and will give us an idea of when new markets will open up because prices are low enough, reaching new demographics. 

Our research, I feel, is the best in the world. And we do want to share our models and have them reality-checked. Look at how wrong it could be. Put your own assumption in if you think ours is going to be mistaken. 

But in terms of timing, some of this is a function of macro factors over which we have no control. Our objective is a minimum hurdle rate of return of 15% at a compound annual rate over five years. We have not achieved that because we have never seen a macro environment like what weve just gone througha 21-fold increase in interest rates over a years time. 

Last year, long-duration assetsand that would be the category were inthat is also the category long-term bonds are in, and bonds are considered safe, but long-term bonds had their worst year since the 1700s. Theres no way in that world that our strategy would do well. 

I feel much better right now, when people think were down and out for goodand thats many people in our own industry, I might add, not the people who really believe in innovation and understand what were doing because they read our research. 

The thing I would say: A lot of our shareholders are young people, and they can afford the time thats necessary for these to play out. We believe that those five platforms are in primetime now, seeds having been planted 30 to 40 years ago1982 through the tech and telecom bubble. Those were the seeds, now theyre flourishing. Back then, people moved in, they flew in. That was a mistake, because the technologies were not ready. The costs were too high. The technologies are ready. The costs are high now. Macro got in the way, but I think were just about on the other side of that. 

And yes, I do take to heart people who have lost money. And of course, if they really believe in what were doing, if they liked us at a certain price level, and we are half that now, and they really are keeping up with our research, the best way over time to overcome what has just happened is to average in and be right.

And we do believe our research is right.