james22

$606 From $480 when swooned after the ETF launch to just recently at $700. Took me some time to get comfortable with the position sizing (I'd been uninterested in BTC before the ETF approval, and I'm somewhat risk-averse since retired). Just seems a pretty unique opportunity - not often a new asset class comes around. Still seems early enough to get in (before BTC hits its ATH). And it's unlikely the entry point will matter much in the long run anyway. BTC will most likely do either really, really well or really, really poorly.

Check the MSTR thread. Since the Bitcoin ETFs approval, I've come around.

35% BRK 15% MSTR 15% IT (VITAX) 15% SV (VSIAX) 10% Energy/Utilities (VELX) 10% ITT (VFIUX)

You'll buy BTC at the price you deserve, Luca.

As I believe I mentioned in the MSTR thread, maybe it helps to think of the ETF approval as the Bitcoin IPO? It was certainly uninvestable for me before then. But even better, because we can see how it's performed despite the difficulty acquiring and holding, the off-putting cultism, the naive hype, the Fudd resistance, the threat of being outlawed, the bad actors, the fraud, etc. - all the fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

There certainly was awareness during the last run-up. But less so this time.

This thread pretty good evidence we're still very, very early? Value investor or not, this is still an individual investment forum, one that recognizes "special situations." If BTC has no interest here (yet), imagine how far behind most index investors are. Unacceptable Topics Greater Fool Investing Strategies Eventually, one runs out of greater fools. - Burton Malkiel Discussions of investment strategies based on securities or physical assets that have no underlying value or negative expected long term returns are prohibited. Examples include: cryptocurrencies; lottery tickets; tulip bulbs; Ponzi, pyramid, and multi-level marketing schemes; affinity frauds; and market manipulation schemes. https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/rules LOL

Anyone else change their mind? I'm now convinced and at 10%, planning to go to 15% tomorrow. Not often a new asset class is created.

It's easy to overthink this, Cigarbutt. Which institutions? Not the financial institutions that fought the government to create the product. They aren't in wait-and-see mode, they are looking to sell that product (and other financial institutions as well as soon as they can satisfy the due diligence requirements). The government institutions may be in wait-and-see mode, but the financial institutions didn't spend billions to bring the product to market to easily give it up. That seems unlikely. Best hope is forcible reform as voters grow increasingly unhappy as they become increasingly aware. Krüger painted a compelling picture where individuals, previously unexposed to cryptocurrency, will begin to view Bitcoin as an integral component of their retirement planning strategy. He believes that the asset will likely be included in millions of 401(k) plans. This inclusion could lead many to align their views on financial dissatisfaction with the realization that Bitcoin offers an exceptional alternative to traditional financial systems. https://ambcrypto.com/binances-net-balance-brings-cheer-to-investors-as-bnb-crosses-300/ I'd respectfully disagree. Whatever the reason for its existence, it's not what's driving price action today (FOMO). Seems enough to recognize the supply/demand imbalance. That said, my copy just showed up and I'm looking forward to reading.

In a 2022 paper published by BlackRock titled "Asset Allocation with Crypto," the investment management corporation suggests that the optimal Bitcoin allocation for a well-diversified portfolio is 84.9%. This significant allocation highlights the growing recognition of cryptocurrencies as an essential asset class for investors seeking to maximize returns and diversify their portfolios in the ever-evolving financial landscape. https://www.binance.com/en/feed/post/2023-07-25-according-to-a-2022-blackrock-paper-optimal-bitcoin-allocation-is-84-9-855701

Sorry, should have said: Not Dave, but I'll try to answer. demand > supply = numbergoup

Not Dave, but I'll take the bait. Descriptive in Bitcoin's case, rather than predictive, no? Or don't you take EFT approval as acceptance? https://www.google.com/search?q="cantillon+effect"+bitcoin https://www.google.com/search?q="nakamoto+effect" As opposed to what other investment?

In an election year?

Great, great essay, but I'll probably wait and borrow from the library. "Heart-wrenching" is a little much for me.

Why would institutional adoption be so much slower than (surveyed) RIA adoption? Especially the institutions that brought the ETFs forward? Fidelity won't market its Bitcoin ETF as an advantage over Vanguard?

Fair enough (shouldn't expect RIAs to be chomping at the bit in 60 days or whenever they can recommend an allocation), but a couple quarters of underperformance should encourage adoption, yeah?

At first, I thought class was about money. https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/social-class-on-tv-shows

I'd think they can't risk sitting out if it goes up another (well-publicized) amount? As long as the music is playing, you've got to get up and dance. 75% is more than sufficient. But they'll ultimately respond to what their customers want. One way or another.

Once investment advisors are cleared to recommend making bitcoin an allocation, there won't be a race to secure their clients that allocation?

Thought there'd be more reaction to this? RIAs manage $8T. 75% of them plan to allocate an average of 2.5% to the bitcoin ETFs. That's $150B demand. And doesn't include the wirehouses, regional broker-dealers, or institutions (Blackrock alone manages $9T).

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/02/14/bitwise-matt-hougan-dacfp-ric-edelman-growing-adoption-of-spot-bitcoin-etfs.html

Yes, please.