What category does your strategy belong to?

[slaman29]

<>
Now my DCA is the only patient strategy that works. No timing. No capital. Just patience and routine.

If you really want to do DCA, it also requires a large amount of capital to make purchases gradually
and at a time that you will determine or at least when the price drops drastically or below your last purchase price.
DCA needs more capital because it is constantly buying not just holding back and some right price timing is always looked forward to to getting a cheap price.

Absolutely disagree. In fact DCA works for me for the exact opposite reasons you stated. When I was earning around $30 per week for signatures (starting out), I would save as much as possible if not all of it. And when I was earning even less, then smaller or nothing, more than bigger buys.

Every week, every month, every quarter its up to you, but DCA allows for many levels of income.

You're talking about waiting for drastic price drop but that is actually opposite of DCA, which relies on buying often to ensure you never miss good price, and enjoy low average during ATH. It is trading that is 'buy low sell high', not DCA

[Miles2006]

I think this isn't about what kind of strategy you chose or prefer, but what works for you. And realistically speaking, who does not want the aggressive-growth strategy where we won't miss out any opportunity and maximize our profits, we all want it but the question is, does it work for majority?

That's why majority will only stick to risk-averse strategy, not because its the safest one, but because we don't have choice either, rather than seeing high risk and quick losing of our coins, I guess its better to stick with the safer one instead, and that is risk-averse strategy.

This is true to some extent. What if one has a big enough capital to entertain the risk? Then I think they'll be more inclined to taking more risks to maximize profit, don't you think?

Both strategy can be applied depending on the available capital, so far traders in general intend to choose what they can handle and it seems averse strategy is the only available strategy with less risk compared to aggressive strategy.
The higher our capital gets the more we go for the aggressive strategy, some might not even know the strategy they’re using probably they still think they’re maintaining a low risk pattern but, the moment a trader intend to go more faster without considering the risk, provided that they’re willing to risk more capital tells such trader is into aggressive strategy.
I will always go for the risk averse strategy, the only disadvantage is missing out some good opportunity which is not guarantee, trading is all about risk agree but, some risk can be avoided when given the chance to choose which strategy suits your capital although the risk averse pattern is unpredictable too but, saves losses compared to aggressive growth strategy.

[Stalker22]

What you are describing is timing the dip.  That is actually the complete opposite of how DCA works.  It is just buying small, fixed amounts on a set schedule regardless of price.  ANd no, you do not need "a large amount of capital" for that.

No, I didn't try to predict it because I just bought it gradually with a set price timing or timing.

The whole point of the DCA strategy is to completely eliminate market timing and emotion from the equation.  If you are setting arbitrary price triggers instead of sticking to a fixed schedule, you are still trying to time the market.

Big capital, ok I won't say big capital but enough capital will be needed when the price drops continuously during the DCA Timing.

Cumulatively, yes. Depending on the duration of your accumulation phase, you obviously need enough total cash reserves to sustain your buys through a prolonged bear market.  But theres the beauty of DCA - it can scale to whatever your income can comfortably absorb.

[savetheFORUM]

Both strategy can be applied depending on the available capital, so far traders in general intend to choose what they can handle and it seems averse strategy is the only available strategy with less risk compared to aggressive strategy.
The higher our capital gets the more we go for the aggressive strategy, some might not even know the strategy they’re using probably they still think they’re maintaining a low risk pattern but, the moment a trader intend to go more faster without considering the risk, provided that they’re willing to risk more capital tells such trader is into aggressive strategy.
I will always go for the risk averse strategy, the only disadvantage is missing out some good opportunity which is not guarantee, trading is all about risk agree but, some risk can be avoided when given the chance to choose which strategy suits your capital although the risk averse pattern is unpredictable too but, saves losses compared to aggressive growth strategy.

The truth is that it doesn't matter if you have a lot of money or a very low amount of money; you are going to make some good return without a doubt. I get that we are not going to end up with bad stuff, and we should be considering how this could be something that would benefit us in the long run. I get that it is not something that we would be making a great return on; in the end, you are going to make that kind of money one way or another if you just stay steady and low.

If you do risky stuff, then you are not going to make money, and you are going to mostly lose money because risky stuff in the crypto world means that if it is risky, then in the end you are going to lose money. The risk in crypto is very high whenever you do something risky; it is much more likely to lose it all compared to the fiat world. Which is why doing something risky in the crypto world is not worth it, and you should keep the risk very low, and if you do keep it low, then you will make money.

[jahead]

[...]
The whole point of the DCA strategy is to completely eliminate market timing and emotion from the equation.  If you are setting arbitrary price triggers instead of sticking to a fixed schedule, you are still trying to time the market.
[...]
Depending on the duration of your accumulation phase, you obviously need enough total cash reserves to sustain your buys through a prolonged bear market.  But theres the beauty of DCA - it can scale to whatever your income can comfortably absorb.

True words mate, seriously. To add to that, a huge factor many people underestimate is the time invested when you try to time the dip instead of using DCA. You save a lot of time and, like you said, stress and emotional "rollercoasters". You dont have to worry about anythingat all, just set your buys/orders based on time or price. The lower you set the order, the larger the amount in the order gets. In my opinion said in general, DCA is the best investment strategy, especially for saving your sanity and peace of mind.