Cathy Wood says..btc could be at 1.5mil by 2030 (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5NB8MHe3Nw), which is almost 40X in 7 years.
This assumes that btc growth rate in the next 7 years would be roughly the same as in the last 7 (as bitcoin is roughly 40X from 7 years ago).
All by itself, it is EXACTLY what means that the asset is in an exponential growth phase (and not log-log).
Personally, I feel that chances for this, without rampaging inflation, are maybe 20-30%, but I favor a much smaller number, maybe 500-600K by 2030 (that would still mean 42-47% average yearly ROI, which is at least 3X that of Nasdaq).
O.k. I will bite.
The actual number from the 200-week moving average is that in November 2016 it was $389 and in November 2023, it was $29,049 - which is about a 75x increase over the last 7 years not a 40x.
As far as the future 200-WMA,
my chart shows $146,825 for November 2030, which is about a 5x increase over the next 7 years.
Both you and I have agreed that my future numbers from that chart seem to be fairly conservative, but I personally am not willing to adjust them up.
And, by the way, I don't know how any of us can be or should be relying upon spot price in order to make predictions. Yeah, sure we want to know what the BTC spot price is going to do, but the BTC spot price has tended to be all over the place, and whether we rely upon the 20-week moving average (6 months-ish), or 50-week moving average(1 year-ish), 100-week moving average (2 years-ish) or the 200-week moving average (4 years-ish), the more weeks (or the longer the timeframe) the more accurate it is likely to be in terms of weeding out a lot of the noisy and short-term spikey movements.
Another thing is that historically the BTC price has mostly been above the 200-week moving average, and sometimes BTC spot price has gone up 15x higher than the 200-week moving average (such as in 2017); however in 2021, it had only gone up around 4.5x higher than the 200-WMA.... so maybe in the end, we are saying similar things (you can quickly look up the difference between BTC spot price and the 200-WMA for any particular date in the last 13 years
(back to mid-2010) on
this site.)
Edited: added link to look up the difference between BTC spot price and the 200-week moving average.
She did not say the word "average" and neither did i...and today is not November 2023..haha, but I get your point.
Maybe you are both wrong then?
If you want to quibble about the date, we can easily look up today's date, versus 7 years ago versus 7 years into the future, even though my chart about the future does not exactly do that, but with the average I can still extrapolate between the numbers in the chart.. since they are every 6 months... and maybe you are partly making my point, since if we use your system to go by spot price we might get very different numbers based on which dates we choose (maybe that is part of the reason that your asserted 40x increase is so different from the reality of 75x) and so you seem to be partly making my point that one of the advantages of using the 200-week moving is that the amounts are not going to vary as much depending on which day we pick or if we might pick a month or two later...
With
my own entry-level fuck you status chart, I already had been a bit concerned about so much data when I list 6 month increments for both the past and the future, yet if we want to get the past numbers, we can specifically get it from this tool
https://bitcoindata.science/withdrawal-strategy... but yeah, there is a bit of a conundrum when figuring out for the future, and part of my reason for making my future calculations to be more conservative (twice in the past 6 months or so) was because I would rather error on the side of more conservative numbers... and sure we can adjust along the way, and if it starts to appear that my future numbers are way off based on ongoing strong performance, then maybe I can tweak them up a bit on a short term basis or maybe even end up tweaking them into the future to be less conservative, but even the idea of tweaking too much makes me nervous even though many of us likely realize that there is a kind of compounding effects that make really large differences, even based on base numbers, but then when the numbers are carried forward the difference between 15% and 25% can really show a lot of difference especially once compounded over and over and over... but even with my future projection, I have two years of the rate of increase going up and then two years of the rate of increase coming down and over a passage of time, they start to meet each other to become a lot less variance.... which even my chart going out to 2074 the convergence has not even yet occurred by then.. but surely, whatever happens between 2024 and 2054 could end up affecting how the forward projection is depicted since there are not too many folks who believe that the 4 year cycle is going to continue that far into the future, even though I am somewhat keeping the 4 year cycle as a kind of base underlying assumption that we cannot speculate when it will go away.. even though we still have ONLY had 4 halvenings, so we will just be going into our 5th 4-year cycle in late-April-ish..
It's just different styles...I focus on a spot price (since I don't engage in buy/sell "campaigns") and you focus on averages since you like to do it in small increments.
Oh gawd Biodom.
You seem to be mixing up ideas in order to spin some lame ideas in regards to my supposed objectives regarding why I consider the 200-week moving average to be so important as both a value indicator and a bottom indicator, and it is not really as much about trading as you seem to be wanting to make it out to be, but instead about trying to figure out BTC value in the sense that if we have already accumulated enough BTC, then we can start cashing out, but we might not want to be cashing out as much when the spot price is close to the bottom as compared when it is future away from the bottom. So even if technically you could consider this as trading, it really isn't... especially if a person actually is considering cashing out models rather than accumulation models.
Now, sure I do talk about accumulation models too, and yeah sure maybe any of us could be more aggressive in his/her BTC accumulation based on the 200-week moving average in order to orient ourselves where we are at.
But yeah if you are also mixing up the idea of raking on the way up, which is also a different concept that does not really account for the 200-week moving average, but a person could still decide both his raking threshold points based on considerations of how far the spot price is from the 200-week moving average; however, that seems a bit more messy than merely figuring out how many BTC you might have and then how much in profits you are and then consider the rake points without necessarily involving the 200-week moving average in any kind of way... referring to
my HypoMyth spreadsheet. linked google version enabled by fillippone. Suffice it to say, it is entirely possible that bitcoin will be both $600K and $147K, as per your chart, during late 2030-early 2031 (~7 years).
If I would be selling a snippet, I would prefer to do it at 600K and not 147K (in about seven years)
.
I think that was the part in which I largely agreed with you, in that my $147k is not any speculation of actual price but instead speculation of the then likely bottom, and who the fuck is going to want to be selling at the bottom. Makes no sense, so in that sense any of us who have been in bitcoin for a while, and even someone coming brand new into bitcoin now may well have something like a 7-year investment time horizon, and they may well want to structure some sales that they make around tops during that time rather than bottoms and even if they cannot figure out any kind of meaningful top, they may well want to assure that they are some meaningful amount higher than the 200-week moving average rather than being close to it, at it or even below it.. and if there is some kind of objective to start to systematically start to shave off,
my sustainable withdrawal tooldesigned by bitmover might be helpful.. to the extent that it will still exist in some kind of similar state, 7 years from now.
EDIT: BTW, although it is entirely possible that bitcoin would be at $147K in 2030-2031, we all expect at least doubling of the ATH this time around (to ~$140K) and that would mean a major bitcoin depression or two somewhere between 2025 and 2031 and possibly even no new ATH in 2028 or 2029. I would "hate" to see this.
If events play out as you suggest, then I will feel a lot better about my 200-week moving average projections being as conservative as they are, even though the possible above-scenario that you suggest could end up dragging the 200-week moving average quite a bit lower than my current projections.. so we would have to see if such a thing is even possible - and currently sounding like a long-shot scenario, including that bitcoin may not end up correlating as much to fiat system liquidity as you seem to be taking for granted based on quite a bit of limited data that may not play out like you are expecting.. which justifies keeping my projections as they are and dealing with any deviations (whether to the upside or to the downside) as they unravel in the coming years, to the extent that either I or such sustainable withdrawal tool is still available at that time.
😝 🫣 
