Chamath’s prediction hinged on two linked ideas: (1) that the U.S. inflation spike and excess demand were mostly short‑term, stimulus‑driven and would have “worked [their] way through the system” by fall 2021, and (2) that markets would then revert to the familiar low‑inflation regime where tech/growth leadership resumes.

By fall 2021, the opposite of the first part had happened:

• U.S. CPI inflation was still accelerating, not fading. Year‑over‑year CPI was already above 5% by June–September 2021 (5.39% in both June and September) and then climbed to 6.22% in October, 6.81% in November, and 7.04% in December 2021—its highest annual rate since the early 1980s. (inflation.eu) That is inconsistent with the idea that the short‑term spike had largely “worked through” by fall.
• Policymakers and commentators explicitly abandoned the “transitory” framing by late 2021. Fed Chair Jerome Powell told Congress it was time to “retire” the word transitory and admitted the Fed had expected inflation to be much lower by then but that supply constraints and inflation pressures were far more persistent than forecast. (congress.gov) Analysts and investors likewise warned that U.S. inflation, which hit 6.8% in November 2021, was no longer transitory and was “here to stay” for some time. (localnews8.com)

On the market‑style side, growth/tech stocks did regain leadership over value in the back half of 2021: a Nasdaq/YCharts review notes that value outperformed in the first half of 2021, but in the second half growth outpaced value and finished the year 8.7 percentage points ahead. (nasdaq.com) That aspect of his story (a reversion toward the long‑running pattern of growth leadership) broadly materialized.

However, the clear, falsifiable portion of his prediction was that the inflation and pent‑up demand shock would be mostly over by fall 2021, returning the economy to the prior low‑inflation, normalized‑demand environment. The data show that, by fall 2021, inflation was still rising to multi‑decade highs and was widely recognized as persistent rather than short‑lived. That core macro call was therefore wrong, even though growth stocks did resume outperforming later in 2021.