If you ask me, it's more about use about 10% of monthly salary to DCA, then save the rest. Because if we are lucky, and a golden opportunity comes again - it might be a good time to be irresponsible and use up to 90% of your savings to buy the DIP.
Using 10% of monthly salary by salary earners is not a bad idea, I consider this one of the best approach when it comes to DCA, cause one would still have reserve funds as a leverage to take advantage of the market when their's a massive dip for instance about weeks ago when Bitcoin fell below $50k. This is the more reason why it's advised that people shouldn't loan money to go into Cryptocurrency, imagine if someone made entry with a loaned money at $60k plus and
the market declined below $50k they'll end up being in a big mess cause I wonder how they'll pay off the debt, investing on Bitcoin especially when someone is using the DCA method is meant for those who got a stable income and not some jobless person trying to alleviate themselves with the little funds they got through Bitcoin.
This is merely my personal opinion, but that DIP was NOT the actual DIP. Follow and study the price and its relationship with the 200-Weekly Simple Moving Average. If you haven't made a lump sum purchase with your savings yet, then it's probably better to DCA 10% of your salary and continue saving the rest while waiting for a crash near the level of the 200-Weekly SMA.
You have not yet learned your lesson from your waiting to buy in October 2023 (around $27k) when you were waiting for lower $20ks that did not end up happening? Another thing is that historically, the 200-WMA is o.k. to use as a measurement when we finally get back into a bear market, yet we are still currently in a bull market, so you might be being a bit too greedy when you are holding back so much waiting to get close to the 200-WMA that may well not end up happening until much later... and yeah, I will concede that whether we are in a bear market or a bull market tends to be a lagging indicator, so sometimes, we can end up getting back into a bear market and perhaps the touching on the 200-WMA could be a sign that we are back in a bear market.
Or if you believe that 10% is too small to DCA, make it 20% monthly divided into weekly purchases - 5% of your monthly salary each week. Although that might be too high for those people who have families to support.
Your naming of percentages of gross income is really confusing, even though it could be a decently good starting point to overall consider how much income you want to attempt to target for investing/saving... .. The more accurate way to go about these matters is to start from your discretionary income, and in that regard the discretionary income is the total amount of income that you have available for investing, since it is what is left after you have subtracted out expenses, and most people are not even close to investing 100% of their discretionary income since they are using some of their discretionary income to consume or even to save for consumption purposes, and so there might be confusion or even disagreement about what is consumption and what is expenses, since sometimes they overlap too... and some kinds of consumption expenses are needed to have a normal happy life or even to keep family happy by taking them out for dinner once in a while, even if it costs more.
So you could take from your discretionary income and even the quantity that you have already allocated towards investing into bitcoin, and you could decide how much of that to DCA and how much to save for buying on dips, and my suggestion has frequently been that newbie bitcoin investors, especially those who are generally struggling to invest into bitcoin, maybe only able to spare $10 to $50 per week into bitcoin, they should probably allocate almost all of their BTC allocated amount to just DCA buying bitcoin every week and don't be fucking around trying to figure out whether there is a dip or not, and maybe any of the BTC newbies in that category may well have to spend a whole cycle or even more than their first whole cycle to just DCA buy BTC every week and not be screwing around trying to figure out whether there is a dip or not or how much of a dip there might be in the future.
The more discretionary income that you have and the more that you are able to allocate towards bitcoin and also the more BTC that you have already accumulated, then the more you might be able to set aside some money for buying on dips to supplement your DCA amount. So for example if you have $100 per week that you could invest into bitcoin, and now you choose to ONLY invest $10 DCA and save $90 for buying on dips (more dips from here), that seems retarded and even gambling... but maybe buying $70-$80 per week and saving $20-$30 per week for dips could be more reasonable, yet these calculations would likely only apply for those who have already accumulated a decent amount of DCA rather than for those who are still in their first BTC cycle of accumulation and they really have not even accumulated very much bitcoin in comparison to their income and/or expenses.... Many times, I have already mentioned that someone who is ONLY able to invest around 10% of his income per year into bitcoin, it is going to take him 10 years before he has invested an equivalent of a whole years salary into bitcoin, and even then salaries are increasing too in order to keep up with the debasement of the currency. and perhaps some people are going to be receiving promotions and increases in their salaries which may well also contribute to their increasing in their standard of living and how much they perceive that they need to have to live.
Surely, we hope that the appreciation of bitcoin keeps up with increases in the standard of living and even keeps up with the likely ongoing debasement of the dollar (or whatever fiat currency is being used), but there are no guarantees that bitcoin is going to appreciate in value greater than the increases in the standard of living and/or the debasement of the currency.
[edited out]
You would be surprised about how many old people prefer to die with a lot of money in the bank and under their pillow instead of buying watches, cars or go on a cruise. Many of them own a house or two because they prefer to be independent. But the main reason is what once you reached a target you worked towards for many years because you always thought you want pure luxury all day long, there is something going on with many people that keeps them from sending their money without thorough consideration.
I believe that bitcoin is such an asset. Sure if you are a whale and you are sitting on a bag of 30,000 BTC like Tim Draper, selling some wouldn't hurt you, but often times even these people keep this asset. Draper bought at just over $600 and still holds 29,600 BTC. Why? Why wouldn't someone who bought for a little less $18 million not sell for $18 billion? It's a question someone should ask themselves before they consider getting rid of their holdings because they feel like buying a new car.
Wow. You don't need to use any such extreme examples of someone who might well be set for life with bitcoin and potentially leading a relatively modest life, and even someone who is sitting on 100 BTC and with hardly any other assets may well have put himself into a position of being somewhere close to a whale in terms of potentially being able to live off the bitcoin with anywhere between $5k and $10k per month worth of spending (withdrawing that much from the bitcoin holdings every month - or the equivalent monthly amounts on a quarterly or yearly basis), and also it would quite likely be the case that the bitcoin value in terms of dollars would be growing in value faster than his withdrawal of the BTC and also faster than the rate of the debasement of the dollar, so even if he is living off of his bitcoin at such rate of between $5k to $10k per month, he could reassess where he is at every few years to decide whether he might be at liberty to increase his income and still have a BTC stash that is sufficiently sustaining its value. So sure, there could be lifestyle considerations and also considerations if he is ONLY supporting himself or if he is also submitting an family, and of course, where he is at in the world will likely affect his expenses, too.
The example wasn't meant to be a suggestion or anything. Of course everyone can do as they please. But I think there is this misconception that everyone thrives for a target and then blows up all savings on a luxury life. I have seen quite a few people where I wondered why they live that modest lifestyle despite being very wealthy. And I had the pleasure to talk to some of them and it was always the same: when they are young, they think once they have the first million, it must be the Ferrari immediately. Of course some do buy a Ferrari then, but many do not.
As you mentioned before, targets are something people set to have a goal they are thriving for, but that doesn't mean once that target is reached they will instantly change their course of action.
Of course, the worse course of action after reaching the target would be to switch from buying and then into immediately selling it all.. .but surely people do those kinds of things, and yeah, maybe they are using bitcoin to save for something like a house or a car.. so they could have some consumption or investment good or something that could be considered a combination of the two.
In relation to bitcoin it could be price or quantity.
I think that we should be attempting to measure based on both, and some people do want to continuously increase their BTC until reaching their target level and others might be searching for a dollar value of their stash, and others might want the BTC stack to be worth a certain quantity of years of expenses, and surely in the last several years, my own valuations of my stash have been trying to consider its value in terms of the 200-WMA, yet at the same time, any of us know that if we make actual sales of bitcoin, we would be selling them at spot price, yet if we are mostly holding them, we still can consider valuing the ones that we are holding in terms of some kind of a more stable indicator rather than ONLY bouncing around with the spot price.
I did not miss the points that you were making, and in some sense, we were making different points. Your points are surely valid, and there can be some value in terms of seeing what "whales" are doing.
You likely could see that I try to consider more in terms of what each of us can do in order to become our own version of a whale, which is my example of a person with 100 BTC pretty much being set for life if he knows how to manage his BTC.... Surely someone with thousands of BTC is even more of a whale, yet I have my doubts if they are participating in threads like these. but yeah, maybe some of them might from time to time.. yet at the same time, someone with thousands of BTC may well have various other income streams but even if we were to take someone like the draper example, and if you might suggest that over 10 years his 30k BTC stash went down to 29,500-ish, and so over the last 10 years, he might have had lived off of and/or spent 500 BTC for his personal consumption (if maybe we were to assume that the 30k BTC were to be the ONLY thing that he has, which with Draper many of us already knows that he is a venture capitalist, so he has other investments besides merely the 30k BTC that he bought in 2014 during the fed auction.
I think those are important indicators for the small guys around here. They may not do that research, read from someone that smart money is leaving the market and then they slowly get into a panic mode and decide to sell immediately at or below their target as if it was a smart decision and a relief. But when you look at the hard facts, bitcoin is doing amazing. Rhetorics about it are changing in all parts of society. Politics, banks, many institutions, former critics and so on. This may not immediately be reflected by price, but I believe it will. Bitcoin has a very strong pull effect as it is brutally resilient.
I cannot argue with any of this, and yeah more and more BIG money is getting drawn into bitcoin, while at the same time, some of the smaller players and those accumulating bitcoin can get distracted by bitcoin's volatility, so each of us surely need to keep some kind of an ongoing BTC accumulation strategy including potentially having several BTC accumulation targets along the way, so it may be a bit unrealistic for a brand new investor who ONLY has a budget of $100 per week for bitcoin to be expecting that he is going to reach 1 whole bitcoin any time soon, and with that kind of a budget, he may well not even reach 1 whole bitcoin in 10 years, unless he is expecting increases in his bitcoin budget and/or possible abilities to invest more at periodic times in the coming 10 years, and I am not even suggesting that there is a need to focus on 1 bitcoin, since the need is more likely to focus on however much BTC that each of us is able to accumulate within our own financial and psychological means.
I would like to point out that during last few years there was big change in population that owns BTC. Few years ago the most owners of BTC wallets were individuals, but now with ETF funds more and more BTC becomes ownership of the banks, trusts and other organisations.
https://river.com/learn/who-owns-the-most-bitcoin/Of course, the ETFs are buying bitcoin to represent the ETF share ownership of individuals, institutions and/or governments who are buying such ETF shares, and yeah, of course, it is not the same as directly owning the BTC... which can be a bit problematic in regards to bitcoin's being used for direct transactions, which is what brings power to BTC and power to individuals who hold BTC... and surely some might even consider ETFs and other forms of third party interference with BTC direct ownership to be attacks on BTC.. which is not completely untrue.