...
Don't put all your money in 1 basket, this is what i remember.
Don't put all your money in 1 basket, this is what i remember.
There is no reason to diversify for the mere sake of diversifying. Maybe you heard that idea of diversifying from a shitcoiner? or perhaps from someone who was trying to sound smart, or sell you something? Do you believe everything that you hear?
Surely if you have accumulated a year or more of income/expenses worth of investments/savings, it might start to make sense to diversify.. but the mere proposal to diversify for the mere sake of it, just because it sounds good (or smart) does not make a whole hell of a lot of sense, especially for someone who might be in his earliest stages of building his investment portfolio or if he has a small disposable income and he is only investing $10 a week or some small amount (even $100 per week is not very much), then you want him to divide that $10 per week into smaller lots.. .. think about how dumb that sounds as a blanket statement... .but yeah, once you get to a certain size, then some diversification might start to make sense, and perhaps adding one asset at a time.. maybe every 1 or 2 years add a new asset.. .
but no need to rush into diversifying into anything that might not make sense (especially something like shitcoins, which would be gambling rather than investing, but some folks might consider shitcoins to be amongst the only practical things to buy, which might not be a good idea.. but people have to decide for themselves)... but yeah the traditional assets of property, equities, bonds, commodities, cash/cash equivalents, seem to be part of what you are doing.. which is not necessarily wrong, but not necessarily a good idea for everyone depending on the totality of his investment portfolio and how it might already be divided up.
Ok at least this guy is talking about different asset classes. The best shitcoiners are those who talk about diversification while they mean to not put everything into BTC, but diversify across several cryptocurrencies, which in 99% of the time (if not 100%) is of course bullshit. The hope probably is to catch this one mystic cryptocurrency that does not dive as hard when BTC dives a lot. But I am sure everyone who tried that couple of times should know by now that it doesn't work out unless someone gets lucky for some reason. Problem then is that they think they outplayed other market participants instead of just being lucky.
Quote
think about how dumb that sounds as a blanket statement...
That is the issue. Doing something for the sake of doing something, this makes me smile because there are indeed people (maybe everyone knows one guy) who'd rather drinking water for the same of drinking water, yet you got to remind them of drinking a glass of water when they once again complain about a headache because they don't drink enough. I think some people in a very similar fashion follow these blanket statements. However, especially when it comes to investing, the list of individual factors to consider could be very long.
If someone is in a position that allows them to take risks because there are barely any other obligations, in my opinion a lot depends on how well that person understands the asset. If someone - let's say a technical geek - in 2010 had a very deep conviction that BTC has a bight future, I don't see a reason why that person should diversify a lot at all. Maybe that someone has no clue about real estate. I think then either learn a lot about real estate or stick to the assets you understand (or believe to understand, nobody's getting this perfect all the time).
But since this thread is more about the DIPS and HODLING, I am wondering how many BTC gamblers (not HODLers) are shitting their pants that we will soon see 20k again and they are trying to gamble instead of hold. It looks like some action for the newcomers and the daytraders, but the long term HODLers here probably don't even care for a second when BTC goes from 70k to 55k.
