I am not suggesting that conviction in bitcoin needs to be established prior to investing into bitcoin, yet throughout an investment, a person can establish a position size that is commensurate with his level of convictions and he can continue to invest into bitcoin  in order to ongoingly reinforce his conviction, and yeah, if the investment is not ongiong, persistent and consistent, then perhaps some folks might waffle in their level of conviction at various points in time, which surely is on them the extent to which they might need to study more into bitcoin, and surely if bitcoin continues to go up in value (price) yet they end up realizing that they were overly whimpy in their investment practices or that they sat around waiting and pondering over the matter more than ongoingly buying, then they ONLY have themselves to blame for whatever consequences might end up coming from their choices of inaction and/or uncertainty... ..

....and yeah, at the same time, there is nothing wrong with a guy moderating down his position size based on a certain level of skepticism that he has  in regards to bitcoin.  The guys who consistently invested in bitcoin, even in a whimpy way, for the last 10-ish years, did way better then those who sat around and ended up not doing anything in the direction of investing into bitcoin.


Exactly!!!!!   You can moderate the level of your DCA to your conviction level, and you can realize that you could have had invested more in the past, but you chose not to invest more in the past, so you are stuck with the consequences of your earlier actions, and sure you cannot turn back the clock, and you can ONLY figure out the level of your investment from  here on out, and there are always going to be trade offs when any of us had decided to invest in bitcoin and to lock away some of our money that we could have had spent on fun, consumption or even investing in other things, but instead we chose to invest into bitcoin... Trade offs for sure, and we have to live with whatever consequences come from our past allocation choices.  I really doubt that any of us are going to get our allocation completely perfect. 

We just need to do the best that we can with what we have, and even if we want to be aggressive, there are likely practical limitations in regards to how aggressive that we are able to be and to still satisfy various current needs and expenses and surely some of the current expenses are optional, but it may well be better to buy decent quality food today rather than to eat cheap garbage food that might negatively affect our health and/or energy, so there might be areas that we can sacrifice and buy bitcoin and  other areas that are not worth sacrificing.


The guy who invested $100 per week over the past 8 years (two cycles) ended up investing right around $42k and was able to accumulate right in the ballpark of 5 BTC, so surely there have been examples in bitcoin in which persistence of investing has paid off quite handsomely.  Probably the investment size might need to be larger these days, yet guys can ONLY invest as aggressively as they are able to and within their own means. It is not always going to be clear in regards to whether the ongoing investing is going to end up paying off.

Personally, I believe that the guy who had been investing $100 per week for the past 8 years is in pretty good shape with his having had accumulated 5 BTC, and sure maybe he is not quite to fuck you status (since his -=https://bitcoindata.science/withdrawal-strategy?U2FsdGVkX18xT52iwBILyM01+h5gSmLK7tYiiauvtknzsNT7wcCNNWLXBw5QH5/Vcurrent 200-WMA valuation is around $216k and the BTC spot price valuation is right around $521k, but he can perhaps continue to build his BTC stash, and perhaps his income also could have had gone up in the last 8 years, and maybe there could have had been times that he could have increased his allocation into bitcoin, which would have changed his scenario, yet it also may well affect his decision regarding how or whether to continue to invest today in terms of considering what his BTC stack size goals might be.

If his goal might be to get to a point in which he could reasonably start to draw $6,666 per month, then if he chose to not invest any more, then he might get to that status in 4-ish years, just based on his having 5 BTC, yet maybe he wants to continue to stack and to build some cushion, and so maybe he might be able to increase his DCA and perhaps even get close to 6 BTC in the next 3-4 years, to the extent that he even needs to rush any of his DCA, it seems likely that valuation of his stack will continue to grow, especially if he is measuring it based on the 200-WMA..


Yep.  Surely there can be two similarly situated persons, and some guys might choose to be more aggressive, and others might choose to be more whimpy.  I might be deviating a wee bit from the topic, but let me give it a shot.

Let's compare Michael Saylor/MSTR to something that a regular person might have chosen to do.. .. sure a regular person is not going to have as much leverage as MSTR/Saylor, but there are still ways that we can compare situations that regular folks might encounter.

Think about Saylor/MSTR, and remember about a year ago.. perhaps slightly longer than that.  Saylor/MSTR had about 200k BTC and they had an average cost per BTC of about $35k... so their total stash costs were about $7 billion... ..and so perhaps they could have had been happy with a average cost of $35k per BTC.

In recent times, they have gotten their BTC stash up to 450k BTC and their average cost per BTC is $62.7k per BTC, which is costs of $28.2 billion.  so right around 4x costs, but more than double the BTC stash.

The Saylor/MSTR numbers might seem a bit abstract because they are so large, so let's attempt to apply similar numbers to similarly situated individuals and if we might outline that one individual (Hypothetical 1) had a BTC stash of 20 BTC and an average cost of $35k per BTC ($700k in costs)..  yet a BTC value of $865k 200-WMA and spot value of $2.1 million.

Hypothetical 2 had a stash of 45 BTC and an average cost of $62.7k, which therefore costs of $2.82 million, so the value of this stash is  nearly $2million for its 200-WMA value and nearly $4.69 million for its spot price.

Surely the fundamentals of hypothetical 1 is in a better place than the fundamentals of hypothetical 2, especially based on the costs being lower and even that the costs per BTC are lower than the 200-WMA, yet I imagine that many of members of the forum would prefer to be in the position of hypothetical 2 rather than hypothetical 1, even if his finances are more stretched than the finances of hypothetical 1.  He has more than double the quantity of BTC, and he is still in profits, yet even hypothetical 2 might not feel liberated to really be cashing out any of his BTC if their costs are in the ballpark of 50% higher than the 200-WMA.. yet at the same time spot price is right around 140% higher than the 200-WMA, so spot price is still in the ballpark of 66% higher than costs per BTC.

Part of the personal question for either hypothetical 1 or 2 would be whether they believe that they have enough BTC, yet or not?  I personally believe that the costs of each of them is still quite high, but costs per BTC might not be as BIG of a question as their own considerations about whether they have enough BTC or not.

 If we believe that the comparison of the two is too abstract as compared with our own situation, then we could cut the size of their BTC stashes down by 1/2 or even by some other quantity if we want to figure out if there might be circumstances in which hypothetical 2 might have enough BTC, yet hypothetical 1 had not quite reached a sufficiently enough size of a BTC stash in accordance with his own standard of living expectations.

I personally consider that it is much more comfortable to have my costs per BTC below the 200-WMA, yet there still could be circumstances in which a person is still able to feel that he is sufficiently at his goals in order to not be deterred in regards to his actions to potentially start to sell BTC even prior to his costs being below the 200-WMA.  Also if the person considers that he has enough or more than enough BTC, then he still might consider entering into some kind of a sustainable withdrawal practice, yet the guy with the higher costs per BTC might want to make sure that he is not selling BTC at a loss or maybe he has to establish sell parameters for himself, since his profit cushion is not as great as hypothetical 1, who already has his costs per BTC right around 23% lower than the 200-WMA.   

I also consider that if there is still considerations about whether the BTC stack size is large enough, a person could still enter into some kind of an acceptable sustainable withdrawal practice at a more moderated rate (of withdrawal (perhaps 4% per year) so that the BTC stash value would likely continue to grow faster than the withdrawal rate, which I would still be looking at the growth of the 200-WMA in order to start to feel more comfortable when my own costs are lower than the 200-WMA.. yet surely none of us would be currently selling any BTC at the 200-WMA, especially since currently the BTC price is right around 141% higher than the 200-WMA.


You are all over the place George Edward. It's like you hardly have a clue, and you are saying that bitcoin's price could go up or it could go down or it could go sideways and no one knows.

Well, if no one knows, then what are you going to do about your own reaction and your own position in light of the "no one knows" situation?  Don't you ave to figure out whether you are going to take a position and what that position is going to be?   If you have no clue, then you are going to end up in a place in which you likely have no clue how you got there, which may well be that you end up as a low coiner or a no coiner, and I doubt that would be a good place to end up, even if you are proclaiming that no one knows what bitcoin is going to do.

It seems that even if you believe that no one knows what bitcoin is going to do, there are some folks who are actually actively forming a view about bitcoin and accordingly taking some kind of a bitcoin position based on their view. .and their view is not likely all over the place.

Only you are responsible to both figure out what your view is going to be and whether your view is going to result in action or merely just throwing up your hands and proclaiming "who knows?"  I surely would not want to be in the "who knows?" camp, but maybe that's just me?


I doubt that I am even wanting to get into the level of particulars as you, Scarlett_23 - especially since my main insinuation in my response to Odohu was to suggest that if he had not even been through a whole cycle, then he has ONLY been through bitcoin's up period.. .especially since we have largely just seen UP from late 2022 until present.. Sure, we had a bit of a pause in the UP between March 2024 and October 2024. but still there was no major correction during that period.. .. and sure we did not know if the BTC price was going to end up breaking up or down, but still the fact that it ended up breaking up just ends up resulting in our current period being erroring on the side of UP.. so it can be difficult to appreciate the feedback of a person having ONLY positive ideas about their investment experiences to date if the BTC price had mostly been going up the whole time.

Other aspects about how to deal with our BTC stash after getting through a whole cycle or even figuring out what our options might be may well also depend on how the person dealt with his first whole cycle, and surely a person who had been accumulating the whole time might be in a different position from someone who did not, yet even if we might consider that Odohu might be getting through his first whole cycle towards the beginning of 2027, we might need to see where he is at at that time (or at least I might be interested to hear from him about his assessment of his status at that point and perhaps how he might have had dealt with both the UPs and the DOWNs that might still be coming between now and then), and sure maybe some guys will be in a fairly solid place to reassess his situation and to change his previous approach, and other guys might consider that they have at least a whole half of a cycle before they might start to feel that they are getting into a financial and/or psychological position where it might be justified for them to change their approach.


Personally, I have a difficult time considering how a person might come into bitcoin with an intended investment timeline of less than 4 years and to be considered as a investor rather than a trader, even if he might be coming to bitcoin with perceptions of fundamentals.. Sure there could be some reasons that a person is not able to commit to at least 4 years due to health conditions and/or age, so it might be advisable for such person to not get into bitcoin, except to the extent that they might consider themselves to be potentially trading rather than investing.  Sure, I concede that I might be being a bit too strict on what is an investor, yet it seems to me that your level of liberally calling short term folks investors ends up causing an error of labelling traders as investors...even if those traders have all of the lovey dovey good intentions of an investor, from my way of thinking about bitcoin fundamentals, they are still a trader if they are coming in with a less than 4-year timeline.

By the way, I will also grant you that there could be some investors that come to bitcoin with a 4-10 year or longer timeline, but shit happens in life and they might have health circumstances that end up causing them to have to cut their investment short, so they end up selling out early, even if they had intended to be an investor, their cashing out may have caused them to end up being a trader by circumstances beyond their original intentions...nothing wrong with that.. since sometimes bad shit happens to good people.


Frequently lump sums are not really available as an option either..., yet even a person who had been investing into bitcoin for 4-10 years of longer, might end up having some circumstances during their investment period in which lump sum amounts come available to them.. so some kind of a bonus, or inheritance or some unforeseen fortuitous circumstances, and for example if a person had been investing around 50% of his discretionary income into bitcoin for more than 4 years, which resulted in right around $22k invested into bitcoin, and then all of a sudden, they received a gift (or ended up selling a property or a business or some joint ownership situation resulted in extra cash for them), and if the amount ended up being $20k, then they have a choice to double their investment into BTC on the spot or they choose to invest that money into bitcoin, yet they still could choose from two other options to DCA and/or to buy on the dip... 

The person does not have to choose any one and they could actually choose a combination of 1 or 2 of them or all three of them, and the receipt of the lump sum need not affect the ongoing regular DCA of $100 per week, yet receiving the lump sum gives options that were not previously available so they could consider altering their current DCA during the period that they are dealing with the lump sum, so the $100 per week would be an amount that is $2,600 per half year or $5,200 per year, so is also presumed to be potentially part of any formula consideration in regards to how a person might choose to deal with an extra lump sum that came in that was more or less the equivalency of their previous 4-years of DCA investing into BTC. Surely it is great when any of us get these kinds of lump sum options, since it frequently can allow us to review several aspects of what we are doing and to consider from a perspective of having increased options in regards to how to deal with having a bunch of extra cash suddenly available to us.