...
How much of your portfolio should you put into BTC?
NICE article here on that very subject:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/how-much-portfolio-allocate-bitcoin(TL;DR, it depends)
Me? For a long time (say post 2017, in 2017 I cashed out as well, from 2018 - 2020 I bought), I aimed for +/- 1% of my net in BTC (none in alts). As BTC rose, I would on occasion re-balance my portfolio by selling (or trading BTC for gold). Typically during 2020 (and especially 2021) the BULL MARKET ran away from me so fast that it was hard to balance it back down to 1%. But, that's OK, good, in a bull market. Right now I am roughly 1.5%.
DO keep in mind that even my HODLing 1% (subject to irregular re-balancing) in the past year and a half or so has yielded me well over 1% in my whole portfolio. I will have to do the numbers, but even just a HODLing at 1% has probably grown my portfolio perhaps 4% - 5%, not bad considering I have been trying to keep BTC at 1%...
Edit: Big bull markets make everyone look smart...Seriously, man?
That an investor who does not know much about Bitcoin, allocates only 1% of his portfolio I can understand, but that you, who have been on the forum since 2014, do it, makes me think that you have not learned much.
I agree with one thing the article says:
"The answer to this question varies based on different circumstances in people’s lives."But 1% definitely seems very low to me.
Still, I always advocate that people should be comfortable with the investments they're making so I'm not going to call you wrong.
But he's been on the forum since 2014, that's what doesn't add up for me.
Gosh.. I have had a whole hell of a lot of these same kinds of discussions/arguments with ORO over the years, and he has pretty consistently claimed that the BTC that he has held has historically allowed him to live way better off than he would have been able to do without such investments into BTC.
I do believe that he deserves to be beaten up somewhat regarding how conservative he has been in regards to bitcoin, but he surely seems to be a genuine poster.. and surely not a nocoiner.. just a wee bit of whimpy bitcoiner... even though he proclaims that bitcoin has been bery bery good to him.... hahahahaha nohomo..
And for sure I consider 1% to be a pretty damned low allocation into bitcoin.. especially a more long term investor into BTC, but those are ultimately his allocation and reallocation decisions to make, and he does seem to think through his strategies and his implementations, including personally tailored reasons for why he makes his choices, even if some of us (including yours truly) disagree with him, but he is way the hell in a better position to balance both his finances and his psychology than us keyboard jockies.. that's for sure... even if he is wrong.. hahahahaha
On a personal level, I also have not really followed any significant and aggressive reallocation practices since about 2016. In about mid-2016, I had decided that I should let my winners ride (BTC in that case) was a likely better kind of practice than periodic or overly reallocations.. I had a variety of reasons that I had come to those conclusions, and I have already gone into those details several times in this short thread, aka the WO thread.
I will concede that there may be times when some reallocation might be prudent.., but companies and financial advisors are frequently forced to have to engage in that kind of reallocation nonsense or else they could be held liable for not following industry/financial standards.... So, sometimes institutional investors will try to propound their same nonsense reallocation requirements onto us normies, yet we normies do not have those kinds of handicapping restrictions.. We can think for our lil selfies, even if we might come to dumb conclusions from time to time.. which surely dumb conclusions and practices do take place with a lot of us mere mortal normies... but anyhow, forced reallocation might be imposed on institutions or financial advisors, but we normies can exercise our discretion and come to our own lil choices regarding how we would like to manage our finances and our psychology... and hopefully we do not screw things up too badly.
For example, when the value of my BTC holdings went from 13.5% in late 2015 to around 85% in late 2017, it may have been prudent to reallocate before the BTC holdings went back down to around 45% (in late 2018) .. but then when I just let the BTC portion ride, it seems that the BTC portion went back up to around 90% or more in current times.. ..
So even if now the remaining 10% of my total investment portfolio is still enough to completely support me, there has been a lot of profits in the 90% portion that is in bitcoin, too...
My initial goals was to get to 10% allocation in BTC, but I exceeded that goal, but even if I had reallocated down to 20% several times, I probably would have fucked my lil selfie with a lot of underperforming assets (at least underperforming relative to BTC)
I feel like I am rambling a bit and sometimes it does take some providing of details to really make the arguments against too much reallocations and not allowing your winners to ride, at least somewhat greater than some other investments..
In 2016, had figured out based on my own circumstances that I felt that I did not need to reallocate drastically or regularly.. and largely I decided to barely reallocate anything in terms of my BTC and to largely let it ride.. not 100% of it, but probably something in the nature of 90%-ish of it.. .. and had seemed to me that too much reallocation might just show that a guy would have lacked way too much understanding or confidence in the thing that s/he had been investing into in the first place (in this case bitcoin)... ,
....and in the case of bitcoin, why would a guy/gal want to reallocate out of his/her winners and just leave him/her with mediocre profits from mediocre investments instead of allowing bitcoin profits to compound upon themselves through the years, which is what they have done historically and what they are likely to continue to do.. and sure, if you don't have anything but bitcoin, then surely you might want to establish some other investments too..just for some balance and protections in regards to ongoing and likely inevitable BTC price volatility..
...
Poker Player, Richy_T
I am very happy with my strategy. It has allowed me to grow some extra wealth that I would otherwise have missed out on if it were not for BTC. For a small investment, all in all. Low risk matters. Taking profit matters...
Keep in mind that only a small percentage of people, both US and worldwide, have ever bought into Bitcoin. Hence, a very small number of winners.
I feel like I am a big winner. No regrets. BTC has brought wealth to my grandchildren.
* * *
The following thought might be more appropriate in some other thread, but I have long wondered whether or not BTC gains by all/most of us represent some kind of "Zero Sum Game", looking at the larger view. That is, a win for me (or us) would be a LOSS for someone else?
My inclination is to think "No", that this is not a Zero Sum arena, as it is new technology that has great promise.
Bitcoin does not seem to be any kind of zero sum game play because it is bringing both a kind of innovation into the economy and there are likely a lot of ways that it is making both socially beneficial changes and economy beneficial changes in order to cause other systems to attempt to be more efficient and competitive through various incentives that are built into bitcoin or else bitcoin is going to absorb most if not all of the value of various kinds of asset classes that are being used as storage of value, but they might be better to be used in more normal ways.... for example, houses and real estate have value in and of themselves, but they are sometimes being used as storage of value and they are not very efficient at that task, but bitcoin is much more efficient in the storage of value arena. so bitcoin is a superior storage of value....
So yeah, another example would be that some of the gold guys are going to be losing out.. but overall the pie is just getting bigger in a variety of ways because of the various attributes brought by bitcoin, while the gold guys just picked the wrong asset in which to put their value, so gold still has value, but in the storage of value arena, bitcoin is way better, even though many of the gold guys are not going to know right way that their lunch is in the process of being eaten by bitcoin.. but it is still not a zero sum gam... and gold will still have some use cases, even if its monetary component is driven quite a ways down because bitcoin is likely somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000x better than gold in terms of the storage of value and monetary like features such as transportability, divisibility verifiability, low cost in manage without as many third party issues.. and gold has features that bitcoin does not have, but that is not going to negatively affect bitcoin very much at all.. so there will likely be some retained value with gold because it does not take away from bitcoin in terms of some of those shiny metal features, for example.
Poll
