Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 02:39:46 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSING...] MOVETO.FUND - MoveTo Growth Fund  (Read 11433 times)
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
July 27, 2012, 05:16:56 PM
 #81

MOVETO.FUND Monthly Report 8/1/2012*
*Report issued 7/27/2012

Portfolio (Using last trade prices as of 7/27/2012 @ 10:00 AM EST)
SYMBOLSHARESPRICEVALUE
TYGRR.BOND-B136010.1211645.721
COGNITIVE20000.791580
FPGA.CONTRACT620.20512.71
BDK.BND59460.1015603.519
PUREMINING32090.21673.89
TYGRR-TECH1532306
GIGAMINING2591.165301.735
NCKRAZZE240012400
BTC0.0338341310.03383413
ABM180.150000012.70000018
TEEK.B1601.09174.4
IBB60.643.84
ZIP.A1390.6995.91
BTC-MINING10.960.96
MPOE.ETF41.14.4

Valuation
Total: 7805.81883431
# Shares before fees: 6675
NAV per share before fees: 1.1694110613
Last HWM: 1.025688372
New HWM: 1.1694110613
Earnings per share: 0.1437226893
Fees per share: 0.0287445379
NAV per share after fees: 1.1406665235
Buyback Price: 1.1292598582
Fees in BTC terms: 191.869790242
Fees in share terms (rounded down): 168
# Shares after fees: 6843

Summary
This month was a great time period for us. The markets rebounded sharply from an oversold condition, creating a large net gain for us. I am quite happy that we finally got some price increases in our stronger assets - namely, in our large holding of COGNITIVE shares - which is what I had expected a long while ago due to its relative undervaluation to other mining assets. Our weakest asset is FPGA.CONTRACT at present, but luckily we own very few shares of it anyway.

I have learned a lot this month about how to operate on the GLBSE, and the differences between that and the S&P500 which is the arena I am more accustomed to. The largest difference, of course, is one of volume: with such light volume, short term trading is essentially impossible, and therefore you must be very careful what you buy - because you're probably going to be stuck with it. The lack of liquidity on the GLBSE is in stark contrast to the S&P500, where I am used to being able to hold a position for only a few days and then exit quickly. On the GLBSE, however, we cannot do this: consider PUREMINING, which was never meant to be a long-term hold for us, but rather had become extremely oversold and thus a great candidate for buying and flipping. However, there are virtually no bids at all in the marketplace, so it is becoming difficult to unload. Luckily, GIGAMINING's upgrade path to ASIC provides a perfect counterbalance to our PUREMINING position: if ASIC delivers, then GIGAGMINING becomes TERAMINING and we gain from that to offset losses in PUREMINING, and vice-versa if ASIC is significantly delayed.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that as the number of assets on the GLBSE increase, it is taking longer and longer for me to pull down data each day. Hopefully the GLBSE APIs will improve in the near future and this won't be an issue. However, depite the huge increase in the total number of securities, it still amazes me how few are truely great long-term investments - that is why we're still fairly concentrated. A few news buys did come up this month, which we're wading into, most notably ZIP.A which is our first asset purchase that is not related to mining or a bitcoin-denominated bond. This type of pure equity represents more risk since currency fluctations can have more of an impact, so I'm being extra careful with this investment.

I will keep you posted. Take care,
-cytokine
1480948786
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480948786

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480948786
Reply with quote  #2

1480948786
Report to moderator
1480948786
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480948786

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480948786
Reply with quote  #2

1480948786
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480948786
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480948786

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480948786
Reply with quote  #2

1480948786
Report to moderator
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 02, 2012, 06:34:14 PM
 #82

Doing some major surgery today, which is exciting! It's time for some changes.

Things have been steady for us for a while, but now we need to rotate a lot of the portfolio out and buy into promising new companies, and sell off some of the old ones that have turned to crap. Except of course for trusty old COGNITIVE, which is probably my favorite asset on the entire GLBSE (it has a great yield, is low risk, is tied to btc value, has increased in value substantially since we bought it, and represents actual ownership of a company rather than just a bond which may be callable later). I've also made some minor tweaks to the model to give us a better look at the overall market.

FYI one of the reasons I like doing monthly updates rather than weekly is because inter-month I don't want to publicly talk about what I'm buying - otherwise others may bid up those shares. It's best that I just do what I need to do each month and then let you know about it after the month is over.

That's all for now Smiley
ErebusBat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560

I am the one who knocks


View Profile
August 02, 2012, 09:27:06 PM
 #83

Doing some major surgery today, which is exciting! It's time for some changes.

Things have been steady for us for a while, but now we need to rotate a lot of the portfolio out and buy into promising new companies, and sell off some of the old ones that have turned to crap. Except of course for trusty old COGNITIVE, which is probably my favorite asset on the entire GLBSE (it has a great yield, is low risk, is tied to btc value, has increased in value substantially since we bought it, and represents actual ownership of a company rather than just a bond which may be callable later). I've also made some minor tweaks to the model to give us a better look at the overall market.

FYI one of the reasons I like doing monthly updates rather than weekly is because inter-month I don't want to publicly talk about what I'm buying - otherwise others may bid up those shares. It's best that I just do what I need to do each month and then let you know about it after the month is over.

That's all for now Smiley
How is COGNITIVE that different from NASTY (other than length of operation) both seem to be the same idea.

░▒▓█ Coinroll.it - 1% House Edge Dice Game █▓▒░ • Coinroll Thread • *FREE* 100 BTC Raffle

Signup for CEX.io BitFury exchange and get GHS Instantly!  Don't wait for shipping, mine NOW!
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 03, 2012, 12:24:16 AM
 #84

How is COGNITIVE that different from NASTY (other than length of operation) both seem to be the same idea.

Shhh...  Wink
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 04, 2012, 06:18:54 AM
 #85

NAV updated to 1.0892598858
Francesco
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
August 04, 2012, 02:12:28 PM
 #86

NAV updated to 1.0892598858

Ahm... what about this nice -4% here? was it a side effect of the "restructuring" you announced?
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 04, 2012, 03:12:43 PM
 #87

NAV updated to 1.0892598858

Ahm... what about this nice -4% here? was it a side effect of the "restructuring" you announced?

This is due to the fact that I use the last trade price for each asset when I do the NAV per share, and GLBSE assets are volatile, especially due to the huge gaps between the bid and the ask. The two main culprits for this particular dip are COGNITIVE and PUREMINING, but nearly all assets were affected somewhat negatively this week, and for obvious reasons:

We were up a huge ~15% last month primarily due to a rally from an oversold condition, so it's entirely normal for the market to mean revert after big moves, especially when the base BTC value has jumped so dramatically in real terms lately (which is strongly deflationary from our perspective, but means the USD value of your shares has greatly increased). Nothing in the markets moves in a straight line; it is the nature of a fund that you are exposed to this volatility. I expect the fund's NAV to vary each week, both up and down, but what I care about is maintaining the long term upward trajectory, not short-term fluctuations which are impossible to avoid.

Finally, it's worth mentioning that the current high water mark is 1.1694110613, so I don't get paid a single bitcent until I beat this level. If my investors aren't making money, I don't make money either.
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 05, 2012, 05:03:01 PM
 #88

Another major change coming this week, or next at the latest...

Thus far, I've been running the system based on actual trading prices, which makes perfect sense for a liquid exchange. However, since the GLBSE is so illiquid, I need to look at market depth - that is, rather than treating each asset as a separate entity for analysis, I need to look at every ask price for every asset as a separate entity, so that we can pick up the best asks every day on the entire GLBSE.

The problem with our current approach is that we end up paying higher prices for good assets, and it would be better to buy these assets when the occasional "dump" occurs; however, the problem with placing bids based on volatility is that it sucks away all the time value of money: sure, we may pick up a great price if we bid well, but all the time waiting for the bid to be hit costs us. So I'd prefer us to be market takers and pay the fees, but have zero time value cost and, of course, the knowledge and advantage of knowing exactly which asks on the GLBSE represent the best investment each day.

I think this will give us a huge leg up once this is implemented. I'll let you know when it is done.
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 07, 2012, 01:15:40 AM
 #89

Ok, so here's how it's going to go down.

I am very happy with all of the assets that we currently own - all of them have a very high positive expectation. We have done a great job of filtering out the "crap" from the GLBSE and picking up the winners. Additionally, I have verified that all of the mining assets we own have ASIC upgrade paths or include the purchase of ASIC equipment as part of their growth plan. So I am not worried about anything that we own, with one exception: PUREMINING*

PUREMINING has a negative long-term expectation, yet was originally purchased because it has hit a strongly oversold level, which often causes a price bounce and thus a mean-reversion trade is possible to perform. On the S&P500, I am used to doing this all the time (it's a key part of how my system operates), yet on the GLBSE there just isn't sufficient liquidity to do this type of trading activity.

I believe it was an operator error on my part to attempt a mean-reversion trade on the GLBSE and thus I am chalking it up to a learning experience, and so I will inject 400 BTC into the fund to compensate for expected further losses from this particular asset for fund investors. Eating losses like this is only something I will do if the error is on my part; if we do the right thing and the investment doesn't work out, then that's a completely different scenario. So I don't expect to eat losses ever again for the fund since I now understand how the GLBSE operates much more clearly, and we will not attempt to perform any short-term trades in the future (unless liquidity vastly improves, but that is likely years away).

I'll get this done this week.

Thanks,
-cyto

*Also FPGA.CONTRACT, but I already liquidated that and we barely owned any shares of it anyway.
Francesco
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
August 07, 2012, 09:44:08 AM
 #90

Ok, so here's how it's going to go down.

I am very happy with all of the assets that we currently own - all of them have a very high positive expectation. We have done a great job of filtering out the "crap" from the GLBSE and picking up the winners. Additionally, I have verified that all of the mining assets we own have ASIC upgrade paths or include the purchase of ASIC equipment as part of their growth plan. So I am not worried about anything that we own, with one exception: PUREMINING*

PUREMINING has a negative long-term expectation, yet was originally purchased because it has hit a strongly oversold level, which often causes a price bounce and thus a mean-reversion trade is possible to perform. On the S&P500, I am used to doing this all the time (it's a key part of how my system operates), yet on the GLBSE there just isn't sufficient liquidity to do this type of trading activity.

I believe it was an operator error on my part to attempt a mean-reversion trade on the GLBSE and thus I am chalking it up to a learning experience, and so I will inject 400 BTC into the fund to compensate for expected further losses from this particular asset for fund investors. Eating losses like this is only something I will do if the error is on my part; if we do the right thing and the investment doesn't work out, then that's a completely different scenario. So I don't expect to eat losses ever again for the fund since I now understand how the GLBSE operates much more clearly, and we will not attempt to perform any short-term trades in the future (unless liquidity vastly improves, but that is likely years away).

I'll get this done this week.

Thanks,
-cyto

*Also FPGA.CONTRACT, but I already liquidated that and we barely owned any shares of it anyway.

Well, after Googling it, what you call "mean reversion" is something I personally do sometimes, and even without sophisticated algorithms is often a good way to make rapid returns on a few BTC ...just not with hundreds (or even tenth, probably) of them.

In truth, I hoped you had noticed already that "extremely low liquidity" means something. However, you've been doing well nevertheless, hopefully you'll be doing even better now that you've adjusted the algorithm, and personally compensating for losses really does show you care about us -so I'm still strongly in  Smiley
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 07, 2012, 04:53:32 PM
 #91

In truth, I hoped you had noticed already that "extremely low liquidity" means something.

Definitely. The position was taken on very, very early on (the very first month of operation), and a lot of things have changed since then both in terms of the markets and in terms of adapting our strategy to the GLBSE.

However, you've been doing well nevertheless, hopefully you'll be doing even better now that you've adjusted the algorithm, and personally compensating for losses really does show you care about us -so I'm still strongly in  Smiley

Thanks! I certainly believe strongly in our approach. Many others have been burned by being too incautious with the GLBSE. In the recent past, it was very easy to make money because you could buy just about anything and make a profit (especially with the BTC/USD price level at $5 for so long), but those days are gone.

In a way, this is good for me because I think after solidifying our strategy we will shine more relative to other banks and funds as it becomes increasingly more difficult to make profits consistently.
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 11, 2012, 04:09:02 PM
 #92

NAV per share updated to 1.17268084

Also, an update:

While working on improving the code that examines the asks, I found another bug that needed to be fixed. The code is becoming spaghetti now and I really need to refactor it, so the ask-examining feature is being postponed until I can clean up my act. It's okay really though, because I already do this by hand through examining all the assets each day, but maybe towards the end of the month I can get this feature in and automate the process.

Also, I cancelled the sell of PUREMINING, because at 0.14 the yield on it is now extremely high, and I think ASIC may be delayed. We own so little that we might as well hold it. Regardless, the 400 BTC has been injected as promised, and due to nice rallies on our other assets, you lucky dogs are now way up this week.

As you probably already know, there has been some drama lately surrounding BTD, REBATE, and ZIP.A with the "disappearance" of JRO. We do own a large holding of BTD, but Alberto seems to be a very honest guy (I had a discussion about this with DeadTerra) so I'm OK with this holding due to the high yield. However, it looks like ZIP.A is likely to have some sort of a buyback, although I don't know what we'll get for it. Regardless of the outcome, it's only about 1% of our portfolio anyway since I was cautious getting into it.

So, in closing: we are firmly back on track now and I look forward to finishing out this month with new highs!

-cyto
Francesco
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 08:52:02 PM
 #93

Pirate closed, funds should start be returned by monday, until then markets are on the loose. Time to ride this beast!  Wink
cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 17, 2012, 09:30:56 PM
 #94

Pirate closed, funds should start be returned by monday, until then markets are on the loose. Time to ride this beast!  Wink

True, true! It's a sad day for sure, but this day was coming for some time. I'm hopeful though that I can raise more capital as a result, yet at the same time I am grateful that I had some time to gain experience with the GLBSE game whilst still small. It will be very interesting to see if many of the "non-pirate" bond offerings wind down as a result as well. It's also possible that bond yields may fall in general... I'm thinking competition for capital was keeping yields high. It could lead to a lot of refinancing/buybacks even for issues that are not directly related to pirate.

Even more interesting is what effect (if any) on the price of bitcoin pirate exiting will have. I'm hopeful that it will steady out for a while now that the pirate bubble is gone, which would be really good for us: the game, as I see it, is to increase the number of coins you have as much as possible before they get too expensive. Of course, that probably depends on what this is.
finkleshnorts
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 09:30:27 AM
 #95

the game, as I see it, is to increase the number of coins you have as much as possible before they get too expensive.

This is exactly how I see things.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 01:03:38 PM
 #96

NAV per share updated to 1.17268084

Also, an update:

While working on improving the code that examines the asks, I found another bug that needed to be fixed. The code is becoming spaghetti now and I really need to refactor it, so the ask-examining feature is being postponed until I can clean up my act. It's okay really though, because I already do this by hand through examining all the assets each day, but maybe towards the end of the month I can get this feature in and automate the process.

Also, I cancelled the sell of PUREMINING, because at 0.14 the yield on it is now extremely high, and I think ASIC may be delayed. We own so little that we might as well hold it. Regardless, the 400 BTC has been injected as promised, and due to nice rallies on our other assets, you lucky dogs are now way up this week.

As you probably already know, there has been some drama lately surrounding BTD, REBATE, and ZIP.A with the "disappearance" of JRO. We do own a large holding of BTD, but Alberto seems to be a very honest guy (I had a discussion about this with DeadTerra) so I'm OK with this holding due to the high yield. However, it looks like ZIP.A is likely to have some sort of a buyback, although I don't know what we'll get for it. Regardless of the outcome, it's only about 1% of our portfolio anyway since I was cautious getting into it.

So, in closing: we are firmly back on track now and I look forward to finishing out this month with new highs!

-cyto

I wouldnt be so sure about Alberto and I would avoid any and all future projects proposed by JRO.

cytokine
Donator
Full Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 01:38:00 PM
 #97

I wouldnt be so sure about Alberto and I would avoid any and all future projects proposed by JRO.

I agree completely. My last post was based on my discussion with DeadTerra, who has a very strong positive opinion about Alberto's honesty. However, based on more recent news and events, I am now in talks with usagi of CPA to insure these bonds ASAP. And yes, I will definitely filter out all future assets associated with JRO by default.

That said, due to the influx of capital from pirate closing down, we'll soon have significantly more holdings, and so this will greatly increase our diversification and dilute the effects of any one asset becoming a problem.

Honestly, I hate this drama shit. All I want to do is run the strategy, but instead I have to run it and investigate every new trade signal to see if it's telling me to buy into a scam or not. It's (almost) making me miss the normal stock market. The GLBSE is awesome and the profit potential is huge, but it's like playing with fire at the same time.

At some point in the near future, I plan on having a little fireside chat with everyone about our goals and solidify a mission statement with the optimal risk/return profile and money management strategy going forward. I'm thinking a good idea right now would be to look for some kind of third party asset auditor (the Starfish perhaps) that could rate things and then have a minimum rating requirement and automatically filter out everything that doesn't meet that standard.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 01:52:19 PM
 #98

I wouldnt be so sure about Alberto and I would avoid any and all future projects proposed by JRO.

I agree completely. My last post was based on my discussion with DeadTerra, who has a very strong positive opinion about Alberto's honesty. However, based on more recent news and events, I am now in talks with usagi of CPA to insure these bonds ASAP. And yes, I will filter out all future assets associated with JRO or Alberto by default.

That said, due to the influx of capital from pirate closing down, we'll soon have significantly more holdings, and so this will greatly increase our diversification and dilute the effects of any one asset becoming a problem.

Honestly, I hate this drama shit. All I want to do is run the strategy, but instead I have to run it and investigate every new trade signal to see if it's telling me to buy into a scam or not. It's (almost) making me miss the normal stock market. The GLBSE is awesome and the profit potential is huge, but it's like playing with fire at the same time.

At some point in the near future, I plan on having a little fireside chat with everyone about our goals and solidify a mission statement with the optimal risk/return profile and money management strategy going forward. I'm thinking a good idea right now would be to look for some kind of third party asset auditor (the Starfish perhaps) that could rate things and then have a minimum rating requirement and automatically filter out everything that doesn't meet that standard.

I just sent 100btc your way and Im slowly liquidating my glbse hioldings for the same reasons . I want to set and forget it as Im getting an ulcer trying to trade  Smiley

DeaDTerra
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 03:22:13 PM
 #99

I wouldnt be so sure about Alberto and I would avoid any and all future projects proposed by JRO.

I agree completely. My last post was based on my discussion with DeadTerra, who has a very strong positive opinion about Alberto's honesty. However, based on more recent news and events, I am now in talks with usagi of CPA to insure these bonds ASAP. And yes, I will definitely filter out all future assets associated with JRO by default.

That said, due to the influx of capital from pirate closing down, we'll soon have significantly more holdings, and so this will greatly increase our diversification and dilute the effects of any one asset becoming a problem.

Honestly, I hate this drama shit. All I want to do is run the strategy, but instead I have to run it and investigate every new trade signal to see if it's telling me to buy into a scam or not. It's (almost) making me miss the normal stock market. The GLBSE is awesome and the profit potential is huge, but it's like playing with fire at the same time.

At some point in the near future, I plan on having a little fireside chat with everyone about our goals and solidify a mission statement with the optimal risk/return profile and money management strategy going forward. I'm thinking a good idea right now would be to look for some kind of third party asset auditor (the Starfish perhaps) that could rate things and then have a minimum rating requirement and automatically filter out everything that doesn't meet that standard.
Very strong is a over exaduration, I said something of the lines he seems legit and as far as I know hes honest xD
I don't go to absolutes anymore after all this mess with JRO and stuff.
//DeaDTerra
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
August 19, 2012, 01:58:31 AM
 #100

With all the pirate funds gone and ZIP.A and BDT under a cloud I think your fund is going to be one of the top 3 assets on GLBSE shortly  Smiley

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!