Granted you may be actively trading and planning on stopping out before taking a big loss, sure, but that whole approach is still not really "risk averse" as I would consider the term (in the sense of owning 25% metals, 25% land, etc.)
Correct, because stop losses are losses. They are not diversification.
Anyone who is risk adverse would have a portfolio of something like 25% physical cash, 25% metals, 25% land/rental properties, 25% btc.
Anyone who has more than 25% of their liquid network in crypto (and the rest in instantly illiquid assets such as gold, cash, and land since governments routinely cancel cash, apply capital controls to gold, and can raise taxes egregiously on land causing buyers to run away) at this stage of the imminent global liquidity squeeze as interest rates rise and with the risks of CC failure due to centralization, is either very poor already and gambling with lunch money, or is a high stakes gambler and not a prudent investor.
Stocks and bonds are out of the question right now
US stocks are one of the best and most liquid investments one can make for the timeframe through the end of 2017. You gain the benefit of a US dollar that will rise ~30% over that time frame compounded by a 50 - 200% rise in the stocks as the rest of the world piles into these two safe havens (dollar and US stocks denominated in dollars). The justification was explained in my upthread posts (which link off to the Martin Armstrong thread in the Economics forum which has more detail).
AAA-rated USA corporate bonds are also a similarly phenomenal investment right now for the same reasons. Governments' bonds should be avoided like the plague.
Edit: my subsequent post contemplates that the SLINGSHOT move may be delayed another 1.5 years depending on outcome of BREXIT vote.
Interest rates may or may not matter to Venture Capitalists , but it does matter to individuals that can think and want a profit while keeping their principle intact. 
Only an idiot would believe a checking/savings account is a safe place to keep money right now.
Those so-called idiots outnumber your VCs and they are risk averse.
They will trust their cash in a mattress before BTC.
And they will determine if BTC ever reaches true Utility.
BTC has still got years of Public Relations efforts to go thru before the majority of the public trusts them.
And the governments can clamp down on BTC at any time using capital controls on the exchanges, because if the most of the world doesn't accept BTC unless they can immediately convert it to fiat as has been explained upthread by smooth (e.g. Bitpay, etc), then BTC becomes an illiquid asset once the government issues capital controls. BTC is not immune to government action (especially G20 coordinated action) because BTC is not a widespread unit-of-account.
However, BTC has apparently become the unit-of-account of crypto-gambling, but it is not yet certain if the demand for that will remain if people no longer believe they can cash out to fiat unfettered when they want to, and the risk of CC failure due to centralization is a big factor that would cause speculators to be hesitant about thinking they could HODL/gamble in BTC long-term until capital controls cease.
This is my goal is to fix the centralization problem with my CC design and also I am going to make CC a very popular unit-of-account for social network payments. But first I am creating a new programming language, then I have to create the social network, and then finally the CC, so hell may freeze over before I am done.
Note I also contributed the key technical insight[1] into how to make decentralized exchange work so it can't be jammed.
[1] Find my posts in this thread and note that TierNolan is one of the original inventors of the DE protocol, but it had a jamming flaw until I fixed it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1364951.0