By this logic a "neutral" allocation would be 99.9% in fiat (denominated assets). By choosing bitcoin at much more than 0.1% of your assets you are already actively managing. A lot.
Correct. So if an individual doesn't have at least 0.1% of their investment portfolio in crypto, then they are underweight. Which means most people are underweight. And this is why I think the Winklevoss ETF will have a large impact. Why not risk at least 0.1% if the pay off is potentially 100X +?
In round numbers:
Crypto = 10, 000,000,000 USD
World Total assets 1,000,000, 000,000,000 USD.
Crypto = 1/100,000 = 0.001% of all assets.
So actually for a median person with $100k in total assets, the neutral allocation would be to buy BTC0.002 for $1.
It is very difficult to convince anyone to do so, they typically insist on going way overweight with the overweight leverage coefficient of 1,000 to 10,000. And then have agony over minuscule price movements that only matter to them because they first decided to go 10000 times more long than is necessary
TL;DR: If you are reading this and don't have bitcoins, BUY THEM. No matter how little. And don't sell until they are more than 50% of your total assets.