One thing I've learned the hard way in life is when something goes on for years that I don't quite understand, and yet it keeps growing and getting more popular, usually I'm the one that's wrong.
Cope is the single worst, dumbest argument you can possibly deploy because it means nothing other than you are unable to or uninterested in refuting any points levied.
It's a strongly left-curve argument to engage with your meme.
While the truth is, if you'd invested in TQQQ the majority of time over the last 5 years you'd have had a better return than BTC. I could make the same exact cope argument about that, but of course, that's a worthless argument.
Every single day you're missing out on an investment that performs just as well as any crypto investment. Investment opportunities are like a bus route: there's always another one coming down the pike.
Let's focus on the facts instead?
I'm led to believe this isn't r/Bitcoin.
[edit] remember: right + broke, and wrong + wealthy are both completely valid outcomes.
If you set your risk-reward profile to "sweet mother of Jesus" in traditional markets you can achieve the same returns with less risk.
I wouldn't pitch anyone on putting their net worth in bitcoin or whatever, but I don't think this is true. If you talk to some quant and the quant tells you to scale your allocations to various assets based on their volatility, then if the underlying assets are not very volatile then you end up really levered and can be wiped out in "out-of-model" events, but if the underlying assets are very volatile then you don't have this issue, and you make a bit of money by rebalancing. Your quant will also tell you, if your plan is to buy and hold a "3x long daily return" ETF, that it is the nature of such ETFs to go to zero, and they can say this much more confidently about the ETF than about bitcoin.
I've also found that one can generate returns similar to the returns historically generated by being 1x long BTC with a really conservative risk-reward profile. My current work is to operate a fund based on this finding.
This is a common trope, and it is in fact demonstrably wrong. TQQQ is up 160X from 10 years ago. UPRO is up like 60X in the same time period.
Leveraged ETFs "go to zero" in the event the index they track bounces around a mean value or stays dead flat. In the event the index exhibits positive directionality, they do the opposite of going to zero, and instead outperform the sticker leverage.
Over its history the UPRO 3X leveraged S&P 500 ETF has actually tracked about 5X the index.
So their confidence is misplaced, and instead, as I mentioned demonstrates their tendency towards low-risk capital preservation strategies. If you believe in the positive directionality of the NASDAQ moving forward, I doubt there's a better risk-reward profile than TQQQ as it caps your loss on downside while simultaneously exposing you to a lot more than 3X the upside.
[edited for tone not reading as friendly as intended] This doesn't look like going to zero to me ;) [1] Could it? Sure. It's risky.
I'd love to see your fund's performance analysis replacing BTC with TQQQ!
I don't think that people commonly buy TQQQ futures at annualized premiums of like 40% one day then sell them at annualized premiums of like 20% the next day, so it's harder for us to use TQQQ as the underlying.
The thing is that crypto is the only one which doesnt have a huge barrier to entry.
In any event you are right, the only thing that matters is your confidence on what is gonna happen, then even if the movement in price isn't as big as crypto then if you are absolutely sure you can use leverage and make the same amount.
> right + broke, and wrong + wealthy are both completely valid outcomes
True but man, must be great to be individual with the lowest IQ in the hood and have the biggest house.
The happiest people on Earth are the people who succeed out of pure luck, but they are so self confident that they are not aware of that.
Have you met Robinhood?
> True but man, must be great to be individual with the lowest IQ in the hood and have the biggest house.
> The happiest people on Earth are the people who succeed out of pure luck, but they are so self confident that they are not aware of that.
Now that I agree with you on :)
Before us, uncountable incredibly smart people got mistaken. As Elon said, the most entertaining outcome is the most likely. And guess what, entertaining outcomes are unpredictable. He might be wrong, which ironically illustrates what I've just said.