...5x in five years, is quite well in a kind of 100% per year arena ...
Well, no. 100% annual gains for five years is 32x.
Sure, technically you are correct, but you already likely saw the way that I was explaining, so you are merely trying to throw in some irrelevant technical mumbo jumbo that is not relevant to the point that I was attempting to make. So, I averaged per year after taking the overall gain for that period. These are largely approximations, anyhow, based on my own system of calculation and approximation.
Perhaps, based on my ongoing practices of calculating none of my prior calculations would be correct, but I don't really care.
For example, when I got into bitcoin I had approximated that my equities type investments, largely index funds and some of them within 401k like plans, had averaged about an annual return of 5.5%. I am not sure whether my then calculations were correct or not, but I did not give too much of a shit, because I was making a ballpark calculation for what I thought might be a reasonable average return for BTC over an extended period of time. Therefore, if my return in bitcoin was in the ball park of the return of my traditional investment, then I would be feeling fairly good about my BTC investment.
In sum, even if I am mischaracterizing my return in some sense, I think that i sufficiently described how I arrived I don't give too much shits, except to figure out if I need to make changes to my bitcoin investment as compared with other investments that I have. In the end, I have no other traditional investments that even come close in the ballpark of my BTC returns. Maybe at some point, I may need to reconsider my BTC investments, but I doubt that it really matters too much, especially, there will likely be a time in which I am going to begin to consider periodic withdrawals from my BTC investment too.... although, if BTC does progress in a world money direction, then that kind of a factor might continue to suggest to employ Gresham type principles including continuing to spend what is perceived to be less valuable money first (the money that seems least likely to appreciate or to have decent signs of value stability).
In that regard, I long ago got rid of my bcash shit, even though folks, such as yourself, purport to perceive that it is prudent to make such allocations with your value (banking on some kind of decent future value with that seeming turmoil of crap), and of course, spending dollar based assets first might continue to be a decent spending practice - even though if the BTC price goes shooting up again, in akind of exponential price boom, as it has done historically, then it can be more prudent to cash out a bit larger amounts of bitcoin because of the wave like patterns that come when an asset has higher levels of volatility.
Poll
