@jjg...dude, it was all in my original post.
You were referring to 2014 to now and my simple answer is this:
you are talking about investing (dcaing) $47K (nine years) during that period to accumulate 45 btc.
I did not invest anything close to that particular number, but if I take my investments (unevenly spread from 2014-2023) as X and calculate from there, then, in proportion, I got 113-14 BTC accumulated (surely, the actual number is completely different because 47K is a random number as well).
113 is a much bigger number than 45, is it not?
I don't profess an investment acumen, mostly it is due to bulk purchase earlier than later.
People who bristle at mining have no clue about bitcoin. Bitcoin's heart is block validation via mining. Anything else, and it is NOT the same.
You still seem to be fighting the hypothetical... yet you are implying that whatever you did outperformed regular DCA by 150%... and if you are saying that you spent even less dollars, but you still accumulated 150% more BTC? I am having difficulties believing that.. or how it might be applied to normies to be able to accomplish the same (a replicable model).
I think the point Biodom is making is that this isn't applicable to most normies. That's why it's generally not recommended to trade Bitocin. But the idea of a "normie" getting 150% more Bitcoin without DCA is totally believable, whether it be with bulk buying much earlier around 2014 (and not selling) or otherwise a few bulk buys/sells near the highs and the lows, whether it be by skill or luck, or a simple strategy. One example that doesn't take much thought process (or effort), even if a relative amount of stress, would be respecting the 4-year cycle of Bitcoin. It's not something I believe will work forever, but if you had followed this until now you'd have considerably more BTC over the past 8 or so years than DCA. Eventually you'll probably lose some coin over it, but likely it'll also only be excess profit to the satoshis you already made.
I think that you are giving too much benefit of the doubt to Biodom's having had thought through this matter and really grappled with it, and it seems to me that you are having similar kinds of short-comings in terms of your various presumptions that normies are able to figure this out in some kind of systematic way that really beats DCA on a regular basis, and yeah, sure maybe once in a while they are able to beat DCA - and maybe they are even able to beat DCA by 150%.. but those are surely likely to be aberrations rather than really being representative of normies.. including the hypothetical that describes a normie newbie coming into bitcoin in the beginning of 2014 and having a 9 year investment timeline.
Also, your example just asserts in a bare-bones kind of way that it is easy to just look at the charts and recognize the existence of a four-year fractal in order to be able to know how to buy the dip and blah blah blah.. which is a bunch of bullshit. Normie newbies (and even experienced) bitcoiners lack all kinds of confidence (except for LFC bitcoin is probably the ONLY exception that I have seen over the years) in the existence in the 4-year fractal and details in regards to how it might play out.. especially in terms of how far up and how far down and including waves in between. Even LFC
**, as one of the most strict of 4-year fractal conformists, has had quite a few periods of wavering over the years in regards to his confidence and even his getting it right.. so I doubt that he would even deny that... even though, so far, in broad sweeping ways he has been quite right, but when it comes to details not only has he not been right, he has not been able to really call specifics and I doubt that he maintains large levels of confidence, otherwise he would have been selling 100% of his stash at a time, rather than 25%.
**Hate to be spending so much time talking about you LFC, but your historical position on this matter seems applicable here in regards to the points that I am making to rebutt the assertions of both dragonvslinux and Biodom's assertions that normies can experience strong levels of knowledge/feelings in regards to BTC market cycles while going through them. Sure, after the fact they can have all kinds of strong knowledge/feelings in regards to what happened and how the swings "should have been" played.Maybe you (dragonvslinux) should take on the hypothetical.. 9 years from January 2014 and $100 per week of extra income coming in that can be invested into bitcoin... sure, if you are going to change some of the variables, such as starting out with a $100k investment portfolio or describing an income that is $36k per year or some other matters that you might believe to be helpful, then sure.. but sometimes if we add too many variables, then we might be getting too far away from a more pure $100 per week for 9 years attempt at comparison contrast... and the conclusion that the vast majority of normies are better off starting out with DCA.. and sure if you want to get more sophisticated, then you do that from learning and individually tailoring and perhaps even buying on dips and lump sum investing to supplement.. I am not opposed to learning along the way.. but fucking start out with the basics first before glossing over the basics or presuming that normies can (or should) skip the basics... unless you can tell me what the fuck is the system that you are suggesting as the "better" alternative, rather than just merely asserting that you can "think of ways" in which normies will be able to beat DCA and even that they can beat it by 150% blah blah blah .. trading-talk and gambling-talk pie-in-the-sky (and not backed up) bullshit.
For example selling end of 2013 at $740, buying back beginning of 2015 at $319.
We're not talking about that. We are talking about coming into bitcoin and starting investing (or considering investing) in bitcoin in January 2014 with a $100 per week extra coming in.
That would have increased your stash by 131%. But also it's fair to assume that the 4-year cycle theory wasn't really established then first time around
Ok. Fair enough that you come into bitcoin in late 2013 (or even early 2014 for that matter), you surely are able to look at the charts and you can see that the BTC price went up 100x in 2013, so surely you could reasonably determine that there might be a local top. You can also look back and see a few hype cycles already contained therein, but there are ONLY 5 years since bitcoin had come live, and there are ONLY less than 4 years of actual price charts.
, so instead look at 2018 when it was more respected (tried and tested) as well as looking likely to occur.
Well, if we are getting to 2018, then we have already been in bitcoin for about 4 years by that time, if we are going with the hypothetical, and what have we been doing all that time, merely looking at charts? We would surely have had been inspired to invest at various points, and our $100 per week would have gotten us around $20,800 worth of investment cash (208-weeks worth).. might we have deployed it at various points as it come available, or would we have just let our cash build up because we were not sure about how much or when to invest.
That would have been a sell at $13.9K (end of 2017) and a buy at $3.7K (beginning of 2019)
Fuck off with that sell/buy bullshit.. We are not talking about that.
We are talking about ways to buy over the past 9 years, and sure if you want to complicate the matter with selling and buying, then those are different facts. you are changing the hypothetical, since we are talking about buying strategies.. not about trading strategies that even more worsedly complicate matters..including that we should not be presuming that normies are going to be fucking around with trading, especially since in our hypothetical, we have ONLY generated $20,800 in cashflow that is available for investing (presumptively buying BTC).
--- that alone is an increase of 275%. Even the most recent cycle with selling at the end of 2021 at $46.6K and buying back beginning of 2023 at $16.5K would have increased your Bicoin holding by 182%. So with the past two cycles combined, ie since 2014, that would be a cumulative increase of 500%. I'm sure very few achieved this, but I don't doubt that some normies did if they worshiped the 4-year cycle.
You are going into a tangent..
Focus dragonvslinux. The hypothetical is not bringing normie newbies into bitcoin in order to trade. Sure some folks are going to trade and some are going to be good at it, but we are not talking about coming into bitcoin to trade as a base case scenario.. we are talking about getting the fuck off zero... We have around 99% of the world's population that are either no coiners or perhaps low coiners if we might give some benefit of the doubt, so they have to get the fuck off zero before starting to appeal to trading.. or even to be suggesting that trading should be a base case way in which normies get into bitcoin.
Then you get down to when this cycle inevitably breaks, because over time it becomes less reliable. You could lose 50 % of your BTC and still be up 250%. Or even lose 75% and still be up 125%. Either scenario, even one that is a lucky break-even, then clearly you should call it quits. But until a winning strategy fails, there isn't much reason to abandon it. I'm sure there are other relatively simple strategies too that normies have used to increase satoshis (golden crosses & death crosses comes to mind investor wise), this is simply the one that comes to mind as probably the most reliable. Neither trying to sell tops or bottoms, but simply timing the market with time - not price. Like it or lump it, but you don't need to be a hedge fund or trading bot to outperform the market, even if it's generally advised (for good reason) not to do so.
I am not going to deny that there are more conservative ways to trade or that you might be able to trade the BIG swings rather than the smaller levels, but I am not going to concede that any normies should be considering trading (even conservative trading) as their base case scenario in terms of getting into bitcoin.
The base case entrance for normies is to get the fuck off zero first, and then they can make sure that they are comfortable with how much they are investing into bitcoin whether that is 1% to 25% of their investment portfolio or some other amount, so then they have to figure out how to get towards reaching their target level of BTC accumulation through engaging in basic BTC accumulation strategies which would involve DCA, buying on dips, lump sum investing and HODL.. and does not involve trading or fucking around with getting in or out, even if on BIG swings until perhaps sometime down the road when they have really figured out their own individual particulars and gotten some solid understanding/comfort with their portfolio.. and even perhaps being in a status of over-accumulation of BTC. Sure, some people are going to want to trade, but that should not be the base case for overwhelming majority of the normies..and sure people can do whatever the fuck they want, but I am not going to be suggesting that base case starting points should be to employ degenerate gambling strategies into your "BTC investment" approach.. even if perhaps an overwhelming majority of normies are likely tempted to trade and to gamble, they have to overcome those kinds of self-destructive inclinations in order to be more methological in how they manage their BTC investment in terms of figuring out their own financial and psychological particulars around more prudent BTC investment/accumulation strategies (starting out with DCA as amongst the best of starting points to build their BTC position.. and to make progress rather than to find themselves 20 or 30 years down the road and not getting anywhere because they fucked around too much with bullshit such as trading and gambling when they would have remained more focus.. for the good of their own lil normie selfies
- and I am not being patronizing since I am a normie too).
The final reason a normie might not want to DCA per week, or even per month, could be simply based on the effort of transferring funds to an exchange, withdrawing to wallet, maintaining a portfollio/spreadhseet of all buys and sells in order to track progress. Over all, it's a lot of work. Whereas selling and buying only once each per 4 years actually sounds like a lot less effort! Whether it works better or not...
I don't buy it.
For many normies, it can take 20-30 years or more to build up an investment portfolio, and perhaps aspiring to get to fuck you status, and with traditional investments they might not be able to get to fuck you status, even after 30 years or more of prudent/practical investing. BTC has the potential to allow for getting to fuck you status much quicker, but there still is a need to build up the investment portfolio and still that could take a couple of BTC cycles before starting to feel more and more comfortable about the size of the investment portfolio, and I doubt that fucking around with trading is as prudent and/or practical for the vast majority of normies, as compared with starting out with DCA, and then perhaps supplementing with buying on dips and lump sum investing and perhaps adding some more sophisticated strategies as the investment portfolio builds (presumably having BTC in the mix), and surely if it might take 4 years to invest $20k into the investment, it might take more time before there might be some considerations regarding whether to diversify and how to diversify, and trading could be one of the forms of diversification, perhaps, but I still doubt that fucking around with trading to something that most normies should be considering, even though some folks are going to have more interests (and even abilities) to learn trading skills and to spend time on executing (and practicing) such trading skills that they had learned.
Poll
