Is it compulsory that the dca amount must be a fixed amount? If yes that means investing can be burdensome and can make investors to use part of the money that they should have use to solve their expenses to completely their routing fixed amount of money for DCA at whenever their expenses becomes more larger than the previous week or month, for those that have a stable source of income probably a permanent job having a fixed amount for DCA can help to become more discipline in fact it can even become automated in a considerable way that it will not have a negative influence in sorting out their other needs, but for those that doesn't have a stable source of income maintaining a fixed amount for DCA will definitely become more difficult because of irregularities in their income flow, that is to say DCA amount shouldn't or must not be compulsorily a fixed amount for flexibility.
It is not compulsory that that the DCA amount must be fixed amount,an investor can decide to be using a fixed percentage of his discretionary income let says %70 to be doing DCA or more and this fixed percentage is not a fixed amount it varies with the investors discretionary income.An investor can decide to increase or decrease his DCA amount as per his level of discretion.however as long as DCA is concerned the investor must maintain buying bitcoin at regular intervals and holding for a longer time.An investor DCA strategies should be able to suit there income flow and long term goals.
As you can see the definition of the dollar-cost averaging (DCA) by Google, it involves investing an equal amount of money consistently so even if your discretionary income increases and you also want to increase you DCA amount, it must be done equally at regular intervals. An investor who has reserved funds can still decide to be investing all their discretionary income in buying bitcoin because the reserved can still stand for miscellaneous expenses that you didn't bargain for, so even if you use all your discretionary amount, it won't be a problem for you.
Dollar-cost averaging (DCA) is an investment strategy where you invest a fixed amount of money at regular intervals, regardless of the market's fluctuations, aiming to reduce risk and potentially achieve a lower average purchase price over time.
LinkYou are reading that definition (which is an AI construction) too strictly, since DCA can vary based on exact time and also in terms of exact amount and still be DCA. You could choose to invest 70% of your discretionary income into bitcoin, or maybe you can choose some amount that fluctuates based on some other matters that you consider to be priorities for you.
I know that Google definition is based on interpretation of an AI but however, i might sound too strict or take the definition too seriously but it doesn't mean that anyone cannot also apply their own best practices and still refer to it as the dollar-cost averaging strategy and it still work perfectly for them. I thought a discretionary income is a left over amount after one must have attended to other basic things needed which means that an investor can choose to go all in with his discretionary income and invest in bitcoin since he already have other income to take care of any other issues that may come up later on. This means that the DCA amount is also part of the discretionary income hence one can still plan it in a way that they can maintain same amount of their discretionary income each time they want to DCA.
Of course, I find it problematic to be relying on Google AI definitions around bitcoin, around investing or around DCA'ing, and so many of the longer term bitcoin investors are able to describe the parameters of bitcoin investing in much better ways than Google AI - even though Google AI still might give some reasonable parameters, it still seems that if we are going to post Google AI, or any other outside source for our definitions, we might also want to jump in and characterize where those outside sources might be correct and might be incorrect, and surely that was part of the reason that I responded to any kind of general reliance on Google AI or any other outside information source that might not be very enlightened in regards to how to consider bitcoin in the context of DCA or even the role of discretionary income and maintaining strong cashflow management practices.
Regarding discretionary income, surely any bitcoin investor is able to invest into bitcoin with up to 100% of his discretionary income yet for a variety of reason it could be problematic to be being so aggressive with our bitcoin investment, since if we have little to no cushion and we are on the edge of believing that we are being as aggressive as we can be, we still make mistakes, so trying to be as aggressive as we can in a too soon kind of a way could end up resulting in being overly aggressive and even causing us to make some fairly BIG mistakes, especially if we might not have yet gotten used to managing our bitcoin investment and building up an adequate emergency fund, cash reserves and/or gotten good at managing any month to month cashfloats that we might have going on in our particular situation.
I would agree that some practices are more strict and consistent DCA, yet I would also argue that individuals have a lot of discretion regarding how aggressive or how whimpy that they would like to be. The more aggressive they are, then the more organized and strict they are going to need to be in their cashflow management systems. If they are going to be more whimpy, then they might not even place a very high priority on DCA buying into bitcoin, and almost any amount will work, which would still meet the definition of DCA investing, yet it would be very whimpy in terms of how high of a priority is given to bitcoin...
So surely, whimpiness or aggressiveness are somewhat sliding scale concepts and the AI definition bots are not talking about those kinds of ways of considering your bitcoin investment. They are also likely not even considering how bitcoin differs from other investments, including that DCA should not be applied to shitcoins, but the AI doesn't know that, since it does not even know what a shitcoin is. Surely, you have options to choose your level of aggressiveness and how much you might vary your own whimpy or aggressive approach to DCA buying of bitcoin based on your own financial and psychological circumstances, including how much you might learn along the way, and sure in the beginning of your bitcoin investment you might purposefully choose to be more whimpy in your investment while you are figuring out your cashflow management and other factors you consider to be relevant towards your bitcoin investing, yet as you become more confident in
your own finances and other individual factors, you may well choose to increase the level of your aggressiveness in investing into bitcoin.
I know that Google which you refer to as an AI doesn't have the ability to express the concept of bitcoin investment to a practical reality of how someone who is using the DCA strategy will choose to go about their investment but in is also important to note that every investment needs orderliness and not some random method of investing therefore the DCA strategy of investing same amount at regular intervals have to be adhered to but it do not mean that you can't still make some changes along when your cashflows and your discretionary income increases but there is still need to maintain same orderliness even though at some point you may likely meet some irregular DCA moments due to either a fluctuation in your earnings or your discretionary income. I am not trying to say that the discretionary income should be a fixed amount but since it is an amount you can do away with, it won't be problematic to go aggressively knowing too well that it won't affect your continuous DCAing since it will always be available upon when your income arrives.
It still think it is problematic to be overly relying on some of the outside sources for your definitions of what is DCA and what is not DCA, and sure, you are ultimately correct to be attempting to tailorize your approach - and I still think that your earlier post was a bit misleading and overly reliant on an inadequate definition of what is DCA and how to employ it.
[edited out]
That is why those who understands bitcoin won't joke with it, they make use of every opportunity to accumulate and hodl, because of the good profit it will offer in the future.
I still think that it is better to suggest that it is quite likely that investing into bitcoin is likely to put the bitcoin investors in a much better place (and with more options) as compared with those who chose not to invest into bitcoin. Even though profits are implied, I still don't really like framing that "better position" in terms of profits, since it seems to me that describing profits, suggests that there is some kind of a goal to cash out of bitcoin and/or to take profits, which truly would not be a very good practice for anyone who spent 10-15 years or longer building a decently good sized bitcoin stash, it seems that such person is likely going to be much better off to be mostly hanging onto his bitcoin and spending other resources first, rather than expecting that he will be needing to employ practices of cashing out all or large amounts of his bitcoin for potentially inferior places to put such cashed out value.
Long term investment presumes profits and being in a better position for having had built the investment. and mostly keeping the investment and potentially just cashing out various sustainable withdrawal amounts based on price and/or time and likely by mostly cashing out other cash sources prior to spending bitcoin... to the extent that the person has any other cash sources (presuming that at some point he would also be quitting any kind of job that he does not want to have since he had ended up reaching a kind of financially independent status... which also is a way of having more options.