Bitcoin Forum

In my opinion the only price is the price someone is willing to pay. I see all sorts of valuations from "bitcoin has no value" to "bitcoin is actually worth millions". But when you go to sell, that's when you get your answer.

At the time of writing this the average price across a bunch of exchanges is $2548.98 USD. I would think that is about as close as you can discern. 

From now on, I will work with the following hypotheses:

Therefore, using the Total Discounted Supply Theory of Money, the following expression holds true:

@RodeoX If you read the article, you will see that the fair value I calculate, without making any use of market data at all, coincides with the actual price with a small error. And that is because the fair value of currencies is not an intrinsic fair value, but a compounded one. And its composition, in the case of a monetized currency, is a collection of present variables has more weight than the collection of future speculative variables.

the fair value I calculate, without making any use of market data at all, coincides with the actual price with a small error. And that is because the fair value of currencies is not an intrinsic fair value, but a compounded one. And its composition, in the case of a monetized currency, is a collection of present variables has more weight than the collection of future speculative variables.

I haven't finished reading it, but I have suggestions on what I have read so far:


I think a better term is assumptions.


At this point, the TDSTM has not been stated -- only how it differs from QTM. It might be helpful to state it plainly beforehand so that the reader can see how the expression is true. But as I look more, I see that it is actually QTM in the relational form that you have developed.

That is quite interesting. You may be on to something then.  :)
I find it hard to come up with valid numbers because so much of the BTC economy is speculative. One can come close to predicting the supply needs of say a payment processor like bitpay. But trying to get into the heads of people all over the world who may sell or buy more tomorrow... that is where I give up.

Current variables having more weight than future projected variables may be similar to economists using brownian motion in an attempt to model market forces which cannot be accounted for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_model_of_financial_markets

They're damaged control oriented and attempt to mitigate forces which cannot be measured.

Excellent article man. I'm going to reread this over a drink after I post this, I want to digest the minute details (I grind fine but slowly :) ) My mind melted a bit when I read the 'sum of' sign, LOL :)

Most of the currencies out there are floating currencies, which means the markets dictates their value. Even if there are fixed rate currencies, they are pegged to some major, like the USD, so anyway, the market will dictate their fate.

Bitcoin, to be honest, is purely borne on speculation and manipulation. It doesn't take a very big whale to make a splash on any of these exchanges, as evidenced by the frequency and severity of 'fat finger' errors. The majority of btc traders are novice traders; the volatile reflects this. The price is simply what the majority wants it to be. The value doesn't reflect the cost of production, that is, miner power and maintenance. The lack of a basis of valuation (they are non physical assets, don't correlate to real world assets) makes this essentially monetized knowledge. You can't put a price on knowledge, hence, this.

Serious question, does Steem generate a decent income stream? People were making bank posting fucking recipes,  this is a goddamned thesis and you only have 1.50?

Support this man people. He cares, obviously ;)

A fair value is the price people are willing to pay to own the currency. That's it, simple as that.

Interesting definitely, but I'll admit I'm not academic enough to make use of it. If I understand correctly from comments, you use this model on DASH and find that it's priced way below its fair value - therefore a calculated investment. You also mention hypothesis, so why not gather evidence now, from DASH and a basket of others priced below fair value?

I have to disagree about "fair value being what people are willing to pay". If that were so, fair value of BTC is ~$2,500 on average on exchanges, ~$2,700 in India and ~$3,000++ in some countries? Fair value is not highest bid.

Hello,

May I share wit you an article I have published that explains the Currencies Fair Value rational model I've been working on. I hope you enjoy it and find it useful. You may also download it in PDF format, the link is at the end of the article:

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@pablomp/cryptocurrencies-what-is-the-fair-value-of-a-currency (https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@pablomp/cryptocurrencies-what-is-the-fair-value-of-a-currency)

Please, feel free to ask me any questions you may have.

 :)

Not exactly. The fair value of a currency is the price that humans are actually paying (not willing to pay). You can model it if you understand the categories of the human action and human behaviour with regard to money :)

Buyers and sellers on the exchanges do a fair market valuation for you all day, every day.

All value is based on faith and expectations. There is no model that will describe the value of a currency or anything else for that matter. Supply and demand create the current price.
Anything else is just speculation and bad modeling. Since the financial sector is not based on anything objectively real it cannot be modeled. It's just based on the irrationality of the people.
Would be great if all of this would be more predictable.

I've inserted the [img] tag, but I am not able to get the images displayed directly instead of their link. Does anyone know how to do it?

Interesting approach. I must re-read it because I don't fully understand it still - but I interpret that you compare the transaction number and the (present and future) supply of two currencies to get their fair exchange rate.

So basically: if comparing currencies A and B, the more often the users transact on A with respect to B (and the higher the amounts are), and the less the supply in A (and the higher in B), the higher the "fair price" of currency A measured in B?


I think that is because you are still in the "newbie" category - images cannot be inserted until you get "junior member" status. That will happen when you accumulate 30 posts.

Here you have the BTC/USD fair value and price. Beware that, as I said, I made a simplification in the USD intrinsic variable M: the total USD supply remains remains constant in the future. I have to modify my Python SW in order to extrapolate current USD supply function and use the TDSTM properly.

http://imgh.us/btc_fair_value_usd_1.png

http://imgh.us/btc_fair_value_usd_2.png

As you can see, fair value is dropping and it is the underlying cause for the current market price stagnation.

If you were to use the model as an investment tool, there would be two usage cases in my opinion:

• Finding currency pairs with a high speculation negative bias and buy them (similar to buying low P/E stocks).
• Speculating on the intrinsic variables of a currency pair and finding a speculative fair value. If current price is below your speculative fair value, buy them.

Beware that the first approach can only be used in currency pairs which are not monetized (such as BTC/fiat right now). Don't use it with BTC/crypto, because it is already monetized and won't work.

Thanks for the explanation, this is very interesting that your take on fair value looks a lot closer to what I would have guessed is "reality", which is still below $500 after all these years. I might add to extra caution on currency pairs of crypto/fiat as I find that the majority of alts actually fall and rise in tandem with BTC/fiat, even if they could be expressed as crypto/fiat - or does this not matter at all when taking those values into account?

i have a different opinion on this one, for me a fair value is the one that allow miners to have their profit, any value that is below this threshold is not a fair value for the currency

also the one that say that the fair value is the one that the investors are willing to pay, could be true but it doesn't take into account the heavy fluctuations

the average that investors are willing to pay could be considered better as a fair value

VERY interesting read... thank you for that. I like this part : " currencies do not have an intrinsic fair value. They get their value because

humans use them as a tool to be able to trade every good or service with every other human being. " I am quite interested to hear your

opinion on Crypto currencies with no coin cap, like Ethereum and how that would influence it's value. { I say it is crucial to have a coin cap, like

we have with Bitcoin }  ???

Thank you @Kprawn Smiley I think that one is a key phrase.

With regard to currencies whose supply does not converge to a limit, I am going to show you two interesting solutions for the TDSTM. I have to say in advance that, because of my newbie account in bitcointalk, the images I post show only as a link. Therefore, I will not post formulas as images, but in text format. Let the first case be the one of a currency with a linear supply function such as this one, which starts with an initial supply of 0 units:

S = r*(t-ts) => dS/dt = r

If you integrate the equation for the total discounted supply:

M = r*(t-ts )+ r/i

The result for the total discounted supply has two parts. The first one represents the money in circulation (M0) and, as you can see only gets bigger and bigger with time. The other one is the part that accounts for the money not yet created, and it is a constant term. As time goes by, the second constant term becomes negligible when compared to the first term; which means that with time, the money in circulation becomes the heavy part compared to the money yet to be printed.

Let the second case be the one of a currency with an exponential supply function such as this one, which starts with an initial supply of 1 unit:

S = exp(r*t) => dS/dt = r*exp(r*t)

If you integrate the equation for the total discounted supply, you get two solutions:

M = exp(r*t) + r/(i-r), r<i

M = exp(r*t) + inf, r>=i

The first solution is similar to the one I showed you for the linear supply function, but with the difference that M0 is exponential and the constant term is a bit different. As you can see, the first solution originates when the inflation rate (r) is smaller than the natural interest rate (not the manipulated interest rate, manipulated by the central banks). The second solution is the one that shows up in hyperinflation scenarios. When the government/central bank prints money at a sustained rate (r) higher than the natural interest rate, the total discounted supply get enormous.

In both cases, as opposing to limited supply currencies, M increases with time. Now if you plugged this M in the CFV model, you would see the effect in price. As you've read in my article, prices are relative, so I you were to use CFV, you'd need to compare two currencies. Depending on the properties of the currencies you chose, you would get a different fair value along time curve (ceteris paribus, of course).

I hope I've been able to answer your question.

Regards,

pablompa

The fair value of a currency (any currency) doesn't have absolutely anything to do with the cost of keeping the ledgers, neither with the cost of creating the money, nor with the cost of transferring the money. It just doesn't have anything to do with that.

I recommend you to read the article.

Exactly @Kprawn. Fiat uses an exponential supply curve with an average rate of 6.7% annually. Higher rates are very dangerous, because as you've seen, if the natural interest rate threshold is surpassed, the currency enters the hyperinflation scenario. Also, currencies whose supply is not very predictable are very dangerous.

I don't like inflating currencies because while in the process of injection, some individuals get richer at the expense of the rest of the currency users. Also, such currencies discourage saving. And saving is the most powerful tool for prospering as human beings.

It is a vicious circle. Without control of the currency does not have a stable exchange rate and is not credible, and if the government controls the currency, it is not credible because of distrust of the control.

Since the traders that is the buyers and sellers control the value of bitcoin and no other third party can dominate it's value. Therefore nobody other than the traders can control the value of bitcoin. In this way bitcoin will always remain a secure option for/as a currency with fair value always.

The fair value of a currency (any currency) doesn't have absolutely anything to do with the cost of keeping the ledgers, neither with the cost of creating the money, nor with the cost of transferring the money. It just doesn't have anything to do with that.

I recommend you to read the article.

i know but here it's different, without he miners you don't have bitcoin, therefore if they don't have they minimum profit, you don't have a currency, which make me think by logic that the fair value can't be lower than the one needed for them to have their profit

you can't compare it with fiat for example where there is no mining, and probably you can't compare it with gold either where mining is not that important, beacuse you can make gold from nowhere artificially

That's also not true. If the price of bitcoin dropped, for instance, to 1 USD, miners would charge more BTC for adding transactions to the blockchain. Mining is a service which is payed in bitcoin units, as well as any other service that could be payed with BTC. Mining business profit doesn't have anything to do with the bitcoin price. But if you still don't believe it, you can read the article posted at the beginning of the thread.

miners don't control fee at all, it's the user that decide, they just prioritize the transaction, but they must prioritize some transaction if they want to earn from fee, if they don't prioritize any because they think the fee should be higher, they would get nothing out of it, which is worse

here mining is a crucial part of the bitcoin ecosystem, it's not somethigng that you can leave behind, there is no bitcoin without mining, and fee alone is not enough to sustain the network, and i don't think investors are willing to pay 3x or 4x higher than the current fee which is already very high

also if the value go to $1 like you said, the fee would also suffer from that

We can't provide a fair value to a currency. It is calculated and provided based on the backing commodity. When it comes to bitcoin also the same. The value is purely on the market demand to the supply available. So the price is fluctuatory and I hope anything above $5000 is good.

Fee is set in a market. What the users are willing to pay against what the miners are willing to charge. Both set the price of the fee.

If the price of BTC drops to 1 USD, then the fee will be multiplied by 2620 (at current BTC price in USD). It will be the same fee in USD, not cheaper, neither more expensive, the same.

Nonetheless, this doesn't have anything to do with the title of the topic. What it is presented in this topic is an economic discovery that allows you to find the price of a currency without relying on any market data at all. If you find time to read it, I am sure you'll enjoy it and appreciate it as much as I do.

The fair value of a currency is. When you trade it then you will know what the fair value. Because the value of the currency is floating and can not be mentioned at the level of kewajaranya. I myself am not an expert in this field. But i can mention it. I think the answer is if it is bitcoin. Do the sale then you will know the result. Bitcoin itself has a value that is not fixed. So what could be the answer to your question is. The need for very mathematical calculations. Of course there will be experts in this case. Try to find out to those who better understand about this. That's if you want more details. Because I only give an answer but not based on market analysis. Especially in the trade market

Here you have the BTC/USD fair value and price. Beware that, as I said, I made a simplification in the USD intrinsic variable M: the total USD supply remains remains constant in the future. I have to modify my Python SW in order to extrapolate current USD supply function and use the TDSTM properly.

http://imgh.us/btc_fair_value_usd_1.png

http://imgh.us/btc_fair_value_usd_2.png

As you can see, fair value is dropping and it is the underlying cause for the current market price stagnation.

Are you saying that Dash and Litecoin are fairly valued and that Bitcoin is overvalued? Currently i pay my rent with Bitcoin, I pay my email provider with Bitcoin and I can order food from hundreds of restaurants from my countries biggest food delivery service with bitcoin. I can almost fully live off Bitcoin.

I cant do anything with Dash and Litecoin.

Are you sure your analysis is correct?

I am not the author of the article, but pablomp bases his price calculation on the amount of real transactions that are done.

That you can pay things with Bitcoin (your rent? That's interesting ... ) does not mean that many people are doing that. Only if more people would really transact, the fair value - according to pablomp's formula - would go up. But transaction volume hasn't gone up much since 2016 - price has quadrupled!

Now for the case of Dash and Litecoin, my understanding is this: They are, according to the author, "fairly valued" if the price is measured in Bitcoin, not necessarily if it is measured in USD. However, as Bitcoin is overvalued against the USD - again according to pablomp's theory - that means that Dash and Litecoin are also overvalued, because their transaction volume only is justifying its price when comparing it to Bitcoin's transaction volume, but compared to the USD it would be much smaller.

@pablomp: If you can and are still here, it would be interesting if you do the same exercise comparing Dash and LTC against the USD.

In the case of bitcoin, I don't like the fact that usage is declining. I can buy huge speculative biases only in cases where I think transactions will follow.

Thanks pablomp! That confirms what I was suspecting ...


I think the declining usage you mention has to do with the spam attacks of early 2017 that drove up the transaction fees to much higher values than before (~5-10 cent to ~1-5 USD for fast transactions). Since this time, Bitcoin users (like me) simply avoid unnecessary transactions and try to bundle them - or even, for "small change", use centralized services that don't charge any fees (Bitstamp ;D ). That would explain the slightly declining usage, I don't think it's a real decline (=less interest) but even if the transaction amount was static, it doesn't explain the rally at all.

Many people that speculated on Segwit are waiting now for Lightning network to use BTC again as "digital cash", I think - LN would have to be tracked in your future updates too.

The LTC "undervaluation" against BTC is interesting. Maybe a good investment opportunity - or at least a hedge against the next Bitcoin crash ;)