I used to like this handle and his tweets used to be informative but lately I have noticed hes just tweeting nonsense and mostly self praise and promoting his YouTube channel.
Does his claim beat DCA too???
Hes ignoring that bitcoin isn't a get rich quick scheme anymore; now it's a don't get poor slowly strategy.
https://x.com/100trillionusd/status/1675822934785511426Well of course, we can look at the charts and see that a kind of strategy that involves stocking up around 6 months before the halvening and then selling around 18 months after the halvening is likely to beat DCA (as Phil's various posts show).. .but surely there are a few assumptions contained therein that involve normies really having lump sums that they they are able to move around value like that (meaning in and out of BTC), and then would we end up being rigid in our employing time as a factor.
Of course, the timing of BTC's performance could end up getting manipulated. I don't really like the idea of buying a bunch and selling a bunch and then anticipating being able to buy back lower, even though surely it may well end up paying off.. even though maybe if you do something like this with 25% of your BTC stash, then maybe that would be a kind of compromise approach that is not as objectionable to my own sense of how to manage your BTC holdings by mostly HODLing them rather than fucking around with getting out and anticipating being able to get back in.
Another thing is that playing around with lump sum might make more sense than DCAing after you have already built up you BTC holdings, and how do you build it up in the first place may well better involve some kind of a DCA approach with significant portions of your funds - with the passage of time.
Starting a strategy right now is likely going to depend on what you have going on with your own particulars, so if we assume someone might have a $100k investment portfolio that s/he has built up over 10 years, and then s/he already has $10k that s/he is willing to invest into BTC, but then maybe s/he also has around $1k per month of extra cash that is coming in that s/he is able to invest into bitcoin, so in the next 6 months, s/he has $16k that can go into BTC.
How is such a hypothetical person going to get BTC exposure? maybe 1/3 right away, 1/3 DCA and 1/3 buying on dips would be a kind of practical default rather than just putting $10k into BTC right away .. but the $10k right away and then the $250 per week divided between DCA and buying on dips is not a bad idea either, except spending the $10k available right away into BTC does not leave any dry powder to be able to buy BTC on dips in the event that dips might happen from here.
What would Jesus do?
Ok. .. I take that back..
We are talking about how to proportion our BTC allocations that involve how much to put into BTC right now and is that enough to put $10k in right away in regards to our cashflow coming in that we may or may not choose to put into BTC or maybe just put into our emergency fund since we already bought $10k worth of BTC?
and then are we going to save any of that cash in our emergency funds for the potential of buying BTC on further dips?
I would hate to come into BTC with a plan that assumes that I am buying at the bottom, even if the current BTC price does seem pretty low, including that our current BTC price of $25,900-ish is currently
right around $1,700 below the 200-week moving average, which does already seem to be pretty low, but it seems that it would be foolish of me to presume our current BTC price to be the bottom, even though it may well end up being the bottom..
and by the way, I just noticed that the 200-week moving average is currently ONLY moving up about $11 per day, so over the past few weeks little by little, the UPpity slope of the 200-week moving average is getting less and less steep...
I understand that DCA is mentally attractive, but it is an inferior method, clearly, especially for something that might still be at the exponential growth phase.
It's mentally and financially attractive to engage in DCA rather than lump sum (including practicalities of the real world rather than fantasies about having funds available that are not available), and DCA practices also may well end up allowing someone to be more aggressive in their BTC accumulation as compared with lump summing it, which is more than just mentally comfortable but ends up resulting in the concrete and material buying of more cornz that ends up paying off, if the BTC price ends up going up.
For example, we should be able to conclude that it would be materially and substantially better (even though also mentally better too) (even though not as good in terms of percentage returns) to right now have 100 BTC accumulated and in our private bitcoin wallet at an average price of $1,000 ($100k invested) rather than having had 20 BTC accumulated at an average price of $350 ($7k). Which would you rather have?.. oh and maybe the examples should not be so extreme, but maybe the aggressive DCA-er might have ONLY been able to get around 50 BTC at an average of $1k each (so for $50k), but still I think that the examples show real life abilities to be more aggressive over a period of time that has good chances of resulting in the accumulation of more BTC.
Do you think that I am creating a strawman? to be showing a difference between hypothetically whimpy and hypothetically more aggressive and proclaiming that the DCA approach has allowed for the hypothetically more aggressive to be able to follow through with a more aggressive approach to his/her BTC accumulation as compared to the lump summer who may well be engaging in his/her lump summing because s/he is not as convicted about his/her investment into BTC and s/he is distracted into other investments, and DCA likely results in more potential for ongoing conviction in part that the psychologically comfortable facilitates abilities to be more aggressive that ends up materially and substantially paying off.
