Quote
Volume is more easily manipulated than marketcap.
This.
If I get a current $1,000 vol. coin that's like 90th in market cap a quarter of a million $$ in volume will you think it matters and give me 5BTC for making such an awesome coin?
Topic: coins must be judged by VOLUME not marketcap (Read 1363 times)
This.
If I get a current $1,000 vol. coin that's like 90th in market cap a quarter of a million $$ in volume will you think it matters and give me 5BTC for making such an awesome coin?
I do not ideologically judge a coin at all - I judge its market value best reflected by its volume. I do not care whether it's called Dogecoin or Bitcoindark or Laudacoin, whether it is premined or not or this or that, I care whether it is traded at a high volume or not. [...] You must understand that your entire point is of ideological nature, hence completely useless to me. If it's able to increase my capital, it is good. Capital is important to me, not ideology.
[ ... ]
p.s. bitcointalk-account status does not correlate with knowledge of cryptocurrency markets. why so arrogant?
[ ... ]
p.s. bitcointalk-account status does not correlate with knowledge of cryptocurrency markets. why so arrogant?
On your latter point, I tend to agree that is true in most cases but in this particular instance, you post an unsupported simplistic assertion as the topic of a bitcointalk thread and you received some negative feedback because of that. Why so thin-skinned?
If you are so convinced of the primacy of this factor, why don't you simply code up your assertion as an algorithm, hook it up to your bank account, sit back and watch your wealth accumulate? Because, despite your strenuous assertions, that's not how you as an individual assess an altcoin. You cannot rely on casual introspection to produce reliable information about your own mental processes:
Quote
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
By Nisbett, Richard E.; Wilson, Timothy D.
Psychological Review, Vol 84(3), Mar 1977, 231-259.
Abstract
Reviews evidence which suggests that there may be little or no direct introspective access to higher order cognitive processes. Ss are sometimes (a) unaware of the existence of a stimulus that importantly influenced a response, (b) unaware of the existence of the response, and (c) unaware that the stimulus has affected the response. It is proposed that when people attempt to report on their cognitive processes, that is, on the processes mediating the effects of a stimulus on a response, they do not do so on the basis of any true introspection. Instead, their reports are based on a priori, implicit causal theories, or judgments about the extent to which a particular stimulus is a plausible cause of a given response. This suggests that though people may not be able to observe directly their cognitive processes, they will sometimes be able to report accurately about them. Accurate reports will occur when influential stimuli are salient and are plausible causes of the responses they produce, and will not occur when stimuli are not salient or are not plausible causes. (86 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
By Nisbett, Richard E.; Wilson, Timothy D.
Psychological Review, Vol 84(3), Mar 1977, 231-259.
Abstract
Reviews evidence which suggests that there may be little or no direct introspective access to higher order cognitive processes. Ss are sometimes (a) unaware of the existence of a stimulus that importantly influenced a response, (b) unaware of the existence of the response, and (c) unaware that the stimulus has affected the response. It is proposed that when people attempt to report on their cognitive processes, that is, on the processes mediating the effects of a stimulus on a response, they do not do so on the basis of any true introspection. Instead, their reports are based on a priori, implicit causal theories, or judgments about the extent to which a particular stimulus is a plausible cause of a given response. This suggests that though people may not be able to observe directly their cognitive processes, they will sometimes be able to report accurately about them. Accurate reports will occur when influential stimuli are salient and are plausible causes of the responses they produce, and will not occur when stimuli are not salient or are not plausible causes. (86 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A more likely context is that you (in common with other laypersons) are probably mostly oblivious to the cognitive biases (wikipedia entry) operating within your mental model and this has led you to construct some quite profound misperceptions which you may find compelling but others simply don't.
Cheers,
Graham
Bitcoindark/cloak/stellar are very bad
This statement is nonsense [let me add that I have nothing to do with these three particular coins]. Volume defines what is 'good' at a given time as it's traded among people's money. I could care less about a coin that has $100M marketcap but a very low daily volume. It's completely irrelevant to me, hence not good.
I do not share your ideological thinking. I see things through a capitalistic rather than ideological lens, you see.
Erm, capitalism is an ideological concept.
Sorry, OP, but 24 hour volume is damn near meaningless. And it is close to impossible to find the more meaningful 30 day volume stats on altcoins in one handy place.
Alt traders need a better information clearinghouse. Too much information asymmetry.
I have been experimenting with a couple of index concepts for alts that exclude BTC and represent the alt market. The only two indexes I have seen include BTC, which comprises 93% of the index movement. For my indexes, I am utilizing a selection process that includes BOTH cap AND volume. Indexes rebalance every two weeks because of the volatility. They have just over 30 coins that meet requirements right now.
Alt traders need a better information clearinghouse. Too much information asymmetry.
I have been experimenting with a couple of index concepts for alts that exclude BTC and represent the alt market. The only two indexes I have seen include BTC, which comprises 93% of the index movement. For my indexes, I am utilizing a selection process that includes BOTH cap AND volume. Indexes rebalance every two weeks because of the volatility. They have just over 30 coins that meet requirements right now.
But the shills for the pump-and-dump coins don't like it when you bring up volume. Especially since they love to scream about how Litecoin is dead/dying, yet it consistently does 10x the daily volume of the pump-and-dumps.
Lol, coins must not be judged by 1 factor only. You should do some research before investing in a coin. Are the devs trustworthy and delivering as promised? Is the coin premined? How does the logo look like? What are the benefits of the coin? And even then it's not a guaranteed success.
of course agreed with this,
many factor to judge a coin, i have experience with dev factor.
I had ever bought coins with high market,
but after I bought a lot of coins, the price was dropped to -270%.
I am very frustrated to lose a lot of btc.
and I seek to know the information from that coin forum. I get the news, there is a dev with problems, takes away a lot of coins, also spread FUD and dump all the coins. The price is dropped.
talk about volume coin,
coins with large amounts, millions, billions.
very difficult to rise the price.
The highest volume you are ever likely to see in any market comes during a crash - when everyone wants to sell.
High volume indicates that the marketcap is likely to be a more accurate indiciation of the coin's real (financial) value, but on its own it tells you nothing.
High volume indicates that the marketcap is likely to be a more accurate indiciation of the coin's real (financial) value, but on its own it tells you nothing.
As said by others, it also pays off to have a look at forums of different projects.
Cloak is surely not being abandoned I can assure you of that. They have 8 devs and are always available in the IRC and are coming out with new updates weekly.
Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
That's nice to hear. Then someone was misinforming people and that caught my eye as well.Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
Misinformation is an experienced traders best friend.
Traders love FUD, it creates dynamics and dynamics creates profits.
Stellar, for example, is extremely popular and has a high volume, a great market for trading.
What worries me about Stellar trading is that it's so new it's only on about three exchanges. One of the first two exchanges is only a few months old and I am still worried it could just disappear overnight and steal the huge volume of coins on there. Maybe they are completely legit, but it's always a risk with new exchanges.
I admit a few old ones like MtGox are untrustworthy, but more brand new exchanges seem to steal user's coins than the older exchanges.
Popular new coins are often only traded on a few small obscure exchanges to begin with. These are not always great markets for trading.
I would have never imagined to find ripple in the third position, it's value has increased alot since a couple of months ago, what happened?
Cloak is surely not being abandoned I can assure you of that. They have 8 devs and are always available in the IRC and are coming out with new updates weekly.
Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
That's nice to hear. Then someone was misinforming people and that caught my eye as well.Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
Misinformation is an experienced traders best friend.
Cloak is surely not being abandoned I can assure you of that. Thay have 8 devs and are always available in the IRC and are coming out with new updates weekly.
Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
That's nice to hear. Then someone was misinforming people and that caught my eye as well. Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
This statement is nonsense [let me add that I have nothing to do with these three particular coins]. Volume defines what is 'good' at a given time as it's traded among people's money. I could care less about a coin that has $100M marketcap but a very low daily volume. It's completely irrelevant to me, hence not good.
I do not share your ideological thinking. I see things through a capitalistic rather than ideological lens, you see.
You knowledge of the cryptocoins is very limited then. Bitcoindark was created to try and steal some fame of Darkcoin, failed utterly.I do not share your ideological thinking. I see things through a capitalistic rather than ideological lens, you see.
Looks like cloak was/is being abandoned.
Stellar is just stellar, if you read enough in the past days (probably, hell most likely did not) you would have known.
The volume just shows where the whales are having their fun.
Let me add that I had cloak and sold it at the recent high.
Cloak is surely not being abandoned I can assure you of that. Thay have 8 devs and are always available in the IRC and are coming out with new updates weekly.
Just saying.
Disclaimer. I own a lot of cloak.
Thanks for pointing this out. Many people seem to be confused by inflated market caps...
Volume means a lot. But you can't evaluate a coin only on that aspect.
This is one of the first thing I look at, but you can't evaluate short term trends as it's been said, shit coins can get there with a few days hype, or pumps. However, if you look at the big picture, and see a constant flow of money in a coin, yes it does mean a lot.
Just don't take it as the main and only factor.
This is one of the first thing I look at, but you can't evaluate short term trends as it's been said, shit coins can get there with a few days hype, or pumps. However, if you look at the big picture, and see a constant flow of money in a coin, yes it does mean a lot.
Just don't take it as the main and only factor.
Daily volume is pretty much meaningless. Shitcoins often get to top 5 volume , for one or several days, then drop off, never to be seen again. Average volume over a month would be a more useful metric.
It would be nice even to do homework before stepping into a specific currency as you could be burned by a click. 
Lol, coins must not be judged by 1 factor only. You should do some research before investing in a coin. Are the devs trustworthy and delivering as promised? Is the coin premined? How does the logo look like? What are the benefits of the coin? And even then it's not a guaranteed success.
The highest volume you are ever likely to see in any market comes during a crash - when everyone wants to sell.
High volume indicates that the marketcap is likely to be a more accurate indiciation of the coin's real (financial) value, but on its own it tells you nothing.
High volume indicates that the marketcap is likely to be a more accurate indiciation of the coin's real (financial) value, but on its own it tells you nothing.
marketcap is not a good factor to judge a coin's worth. volume, obviously, is the important factor.
THIS is the REAL list:
I agree, especially consistant volume please. THIS is the REAL list:
Jump to: