Top bitcoin sites, Anonimous altcoins list, Buy bitcoin ...

Philly's Weekly Watchlist [LONG]

Since a few people appreciated my list last week figured I'd drop it again for everyone not just the few people that I constantly chat with
8/2 WEEKLY WATCHLIST
[P.S. Only enter positions you feel the most comfortable with. Your money is your soldier only send him into the battle you think you'll win. Some of these I have taken positions. Some I am looking to take positions. I've posted how many shares I own of what multiple times ]
💸PENNIES💸
[💎-Long time gold][⁉️-Could go both ways][🚀Rocket Emoji-I think this is gonna shoot up][🔥-This is a HOT pick][⚠️-Already ran a bit be careful][👀-Watching this one closely]
🚀💸PENNYS💸🚀
$AMTX - Golden triangle. Looks to still have fuel in the rocket. $1.10-$1.15 imo isn't a bad entry. $1.12 is the WEEKLY support. Overall support is a freefall to $0.80 I expect a $1.40-$1.45 run. PR on Tuesday⚠️👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$BNGO - Big virtual booth Aug 4-5th. Huge biotech upcoming company. Support at $0.74 & $0.65. Resistance at $0.82 than $0.95. This could rip up with the right volume👀🔥 [Rocket Emoji]🚀
$AIM - Web conference Monday 1:30EST. I honestly see this hitting $5 in the long future but should run up Friday into Monday. About 70% shareholders are breakeven or at a loss. Decent support at $2.72. Godly support at $2.44. Resistance at $3/$3.35.💎🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$ATNM - Balance sheet shows easily enough money for another quarter without an offering. Earnings Aug 7th. [Estimated 56% growth]. Sabby is playing with this[scary] but this monster "should" RIP UP! Support is $0.52-$0.54. Weak support at $0.57. Resistances at $0.61/$0.64/$0.68🔥👀[Twitter pumping this too]
$BKYI - African Contracts need to be finalized and this is gonna ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM! Had a single buyer with a 200k share bid at $0.75. Looks like it made a new support at $0.69 off old resistance levels. Seems to be rough resistance at the $0.71-$0.74 range . After that could run $0.77-$0.82🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $BIOC - Insider buys 7/14 of 20k shares. Bullish uptrend. Decent support at $0.68, $0.63 $0.60. DEC 7th until for compliance. So decent amount of time still. I'm bullish AF to $0.80 Maybe $1. Broke $0.725 resistance. Talks of a RESPLIT THOUGH! 6/25 Golden Cross![Chart if you wanna see just ask]
$CHEK - 70% of shareholders at a lose. Mad support at $0.53 area. Above $0.61 I'd be super bullish. I see an ascending triangle. This baby wants to break out.Macd is setup perfectly. Volume Friday smacked it up. This company is REALLY dedicated to pushing for $1 for conpliance!🔥💎👀
$IZEA - AUG 18th Webinar. Tiktok partnership RUMOR?!?! Insane Support at $1.02. Small resistance at $1.47 I see resistances at $1.66👀🔥⚠️[Rocket Emoji]🚀🚀🚀
$SXTC - 99% Shareholders breakeven or at loss. Had Insane support at $0.40-$0.40 and broke down. New support is $0.36. Something tells me this is an EASY gap up to $0.42-$0.44 Low float🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$JFU - UNGODLY OVERSOLD 90% Shareholders breakeven or at a loss. MACD setup on daily. Should EASILY gap up to $2.40-$2.60. BITCOIN PLAY🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$MARA/$RIOT -BTC Plays. Mara imo is the better option. They are debt free vs RIOT 200m debt👀🔥⚠️ [Rocket Emoji]🚀
$ENZ- Has FDA approval noone else has this test. Monopoly. Schools testing. State colleges already buying them.98% shareholders are breakeven or loss! REVENUE UP 121% IN 2019. Looks to be at support at $2.35 beyond that around $2.08. Resistainces sitting at around $2.55 and $2.70.👀
$MYT - $0.40 Offering price. I wouldnt mind getting it around $0.38-$0.42. US store in trial phase.
$DLPN - FORSEE a HUGE gap up here! Support at $0.82 than a freefall to $0.49. SMALL resistance at $0.91. Than resistance at $1/$1.07. Had an offering at $1.05 2months ago.Only scarey thing is they might split due to compliance👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$LPCN - FDA Approval Aug 28th. This has been a CONSTANT RUNNER 💎🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$BOXL - Offering closed Friday. PR is imminent. 99% Shareholders are at a LOSS! Chart looks like a BULLISH pennant.$2.20 is OKAY support. $1.70 is pretty strong support. $2.30 looks like the first soft resistance. $2.45 gets broken we could see a $3 Run👀
$ONTX - Made compliance on Friday. Massive support at $1.12. Dropping Twitter PR like wildfire. Resistance seems to be in $0.05 invervals starting at $1.20. Afte $1.45 Its a straight RIP up to $2.65👀[Rocket Emoji]
$IDEX - Looks like old$1.38-$1.40 Support is being rebuilt. Bullish as hell if this breaks $1.51. Earnings August 11th🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 💰HONORABLE MENTIONS💰 : $VERB - [Offering at $1.10 good around that price]$NAK $UAVS $MVIS $GAU[Gold mine]🔥 $PZG[Gold mine]🔥$JAN🔥👀
💰Non-Pennys💰
$MGM - EPS was BETTER than projected. Revenue in the gutter. Didn't have the sell off i thought. Still a good price LONG. MGM is 1/3 casinos with liscensing in Japan. By 2030 this should be a $40-$45 ticker💎🔥⚠️👀 [Rocket Emoji]🚀
$CZR aka $ERI - COME BACK KING! Hasnt been this cheap since 2017. THIS SHOULD RUN UP to $35-$38 shortly. Biggest casino/hotel chain in the WORLD after buying out caesars. Should be $70-$100 ticker by 2030-2035💎🔥⚠️👀 [Rocket Emoji]🚀
$O - MONTHLY dividend. [5% yearly] GREAT LONG term investment. 💎
$JMIA - Monthly MACD Setup so perfectly for this, Has been running lately but no where near pre-rona levels. HOPING FOR A SELL OFF TO TAKE A POSITION. Offering at $8.59 BUT its a shelf offering which means they don't have to sell it currently. This could drop down to that or continue its run until the offering block is dropped.👀⚠️🔥
$CNTG - Around 80-90% shareholders BREAKEVEN or at a LOSS!600 USA school+3 german airports so far.US mobile semi truck lab. So oversold its asking for change!🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$WIMI - $8 OFFERING. I LOVE OFFERING plays without mass dillution<3 🔥💎 👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀
$SPAQ - Tons of pre-orders aka free revenue without advertising. This should take off like NKLA did eventually. 4hr chart approaching oversold. 94% Of shareholders at breakeven or loss! $10.60 is a strong af support. $13.95 is the first real resistance. If this breaks the $12.45/50 range SUPER bullish. Fisker dropping mad PR Hints on twitter 🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀
🔥🌾Gold/Silver🌾🔥
$AGC - 2x silver. Aka silver -1% AGC -2%. This is a day or swing trade. Depreciates🔥
$SLV - Long term silver hold🔥 $JNUG - 2x Gold/Silver Junior Miners 🔥
$NUGT - 2x Gold/Silver Miners🔥
$GLD - Long term gold holds👀🔥
🔮BET AGAINST THE MARKET🔮
$SPXS - 3X Inverse of SPY [The overall market] Spy +1% SPXS -3%. Spy -3% SPXS +9%
$VXX - Fear index/Volatility Index. This goes up with market feaunsurity. USUALLY inverses $SPY🚀🚀
Newfilter.io [USE THIS SITE, LOVE THIS SITE, BEFRIEND THIS SITE] It gives live news [1-5mins delayed]. I refresh the FDA approval constantly and the latest news pretty often
PS. I have CALLS for $VXX [I believe market volatility/unsurity is going to SPIKE high as hell this week the longer the feds take with unemployment stimulus and the stimulus in general]
I have put spreads on $SPY I believe $SPY is going to drop for the above reason
submitted by Philly19111 to pennystocks [link] [comments]

FAANG Stalls Trannies Surge

For Trading MAY 27TH
ALL 11 S&P Sectors Higher
Today’s market was up after 2 days of strength in the futures markets, including Monday night while we were closed. There was also move vaccine news out of NVAX, which was +11 to $56.50 but could only manage a close of +2.06 (4.47%). The DJIA was dragged higher by the financials as rates rose. After opening +550 or so the DJIA rallied to +710 before a last hour slide back to +529.95 (2.17%), NASDAQ +150 at the open but slide down to barely higher at +15.63 (.47%), S&P 500 opened +65 but could only manage +36.32 (1.23%) while the Russell was +37.54 (2.77%) and the biggest winner was the Transports +425.52 (5.02%). Market internals were strong on the NYSE at 5:1 while the NASDAQ was just 2.2:1 and volume was just average. The DJIA was 24 up / 6 down and the upside was led by financial with GS +110 DPs and BA and JPM +49 AND 43 respectively while the only double-digit losers was AAPL -15 DPs. Also, a major new piece from Mr. Trump’s very great personal friend with whom he has a perfect relationship Premier Xi, was quoted as saying that “China is going to increase preparation for military combat in Hong Kong. I’m fairly sure with all the good will, like Phase one of the Trade infamous trade agreement under which NO SALE of our agricultural goods have actually been consummated, that Mr. Trump will have no problem sending us another few dozen positive tweets from his perfect, most favorite, great friend President Xi. Asia was +1.5% and Europe was up .7% -1.5% on the news that Germany is relaxing it eurozone travel ban. Consumer confidence came out at 10:00 and was a disappointing 86.6 vs. 88.5% expected.
Our “open forum” on Discord, which allows me to interact with subscribers and others to allow direct questions and chart opinions on just about any stock, continues to grow with more participants every day. It is informative and allows me to share insights as the market is open and moving. The link is: https://discord.gg/ATvC7YZ and I will be there and active from before the open and all day. It’s a great place to share ideas and gain some insights, and we’ve grown to almost 1900 members. I also did this video titled “How to survive being an options trader and not blow up your account,” over the long weekend. I think it’s very informative as a guide to stock selection and option choices. The link is https://youtu.be/Y7H9RpWfLlo Enjoy!!
Tonight’s closing comment video https://youtu.be/fkb7EemPHI0
SECTORS: The news couldn’t have been either more positive or well timed. MRK with 2 announcements on a COVID-19 corroboration and another anti-viral project and opened +2.40, but finished +.89 (1%), NVAX $56 +989 (19%) but closed only +2.06, and JPM was lauded by it’s CEO at a conference about their fortress balance sheet and their ability to make money regardless of conditions. Airlines were higher and commodities were mixed with the oil hitting a new recovery high at $34.81, while the gold got slammed -$30. And the Bonds were down 1¼.
FOOD SUPPLY: was HIGHER with TSN +2.68, BGS +.55, FLO -.12, CAG +.61, MDLZ +.10, KHC +.42, CALM +.43, JJSF +4.79, SAFM +3.57, LANC +5.51, GO -.54 and PBJ $30.75 +.15 (.49%).
BIOPHARMA was LOWER with BIIB -7.53, ABBV -1.17, REGN -31.90, ISRG -1.71, GILD -.29, MYL +.41 TEVA + .44, VRTX -14.96, BHC +.39, INCY -.59, ICPT -3.16, LABU -3.70 and IBB $131.02 -2.32 (1.74%).
CANNABIS: This group was HIGHER with TLRY +.58, CGC +.67, CRON -.05, GWPH +4.23, ACB -.39, PYX +.13, NBEV -.06, CURLF +.14, KERN +1.20 and MJ $14.38 +.35 (2.49%).
DEFENSE: was HIGHER with LMT +6.38, GD +2.01, TXT +.14, NOC +5.70, BWXT +.15, TDY +6.22, RTX +2.30, and ITA $153.34 +3.27 (2.18%).
RETAIL was HIGHER with M + .96, JWN +1.10, KSS +1.98, DDS +3.00, WMT -.29, TGT -2.34, TJX +1.89, RL +8.66 (11.89%), UAA +.56 (6.71%), LULU +5.27, TPR +.70, CPRI +2.07 (14.28%) and XRT $40.36 +1.18 (3.01%).
FAANG and Big Cap: were LOWER after being much higher with GOOGL +10.02, AMZN -16.67, AAPL -1.99, FB -2.51, NFLX -15.32, NVDA -11.82, TSLA +2.82, BABA +2.26, BIDU +4.96, CMG -35.88, CAT +5.53, BA +7.24, DIS +3.32, and XLK $97.00 +.51 (.53%).
FINANCIALS were HIGHER with the creep up in interest rates with GS +16.37, JPM +6.53, BAC +1.63, MS +3.68, C +4.20, PNC +5.19, AIG +2.26, AXP +5.07, V +2.68, and XLF $23.14 +1.22 (5.57%).
OIL, $34.35 +1.10. Oil was higher today with the close mid-range. I thought that the most recent downside break occurred from just under $29.00 and may stop this move too, but as we saw, it went right through that level. On the rally we bought the US0 6/5 25 puts @ $ .91 and closed them out at $1.29 for a 40%+ gain. The stocks on my list were mostly lower with XLE $39.65 +1.12 (2.91%).%).
METALS, GOLD: $1,705.60 -29.90. After trying to break to new highs Gold failed to follow-thru and opened slightly lower and fell all the way back to trade $1,700. There is good support from here to $1,685 and I’d expect a renewed move higher.
BITCOIN: closed $8785 -390. After breaking down from just over 10,000 and trading 8,220 we started back up and traded all the way back, it failed to make a new recovery high. We broke all the way back to trade 8815 today but managed a move to close just over $9000. We added 350 shares of GBTC last Wednesday @ $10.02 to our position of 400 @ $8.06, bringing our average price to $8.97. GBTC closed $10.18 -.48 today.
Tomorrow is another day.
CAM
submitted by Dashover to OptionsOnly [link] [comments]

License to Kill – Bond(s) explained

The below is the text from my latest blog post about bonds, if you want to see the original with pretty pictures, charts, graphs etc then click on this link.
Ok, the title is an obvious dad joke, but as it happens it still fits in with my naming convention for posts so happy days! On to more serious stuff.
The most common proposed asset allocation for people pursuing FIRE seems to involve having absolutely as much invested in equities (or to a lesser extent property) as possible, and reducing every other asset class to as little as possible. Which is certainly one way of doing things, and given the great performance of shares and property over the last 20 years or more there is an argument to be made for doing things this way.
It’s certainly not the only way of doing things though, and I will be trying to show why there is a case to be made for investing some money in other asset classes, in particular Fixed Income aka Bonds.
So what are bonds?
Bonds are a type of debt that is issued by governments, semi-government organisations, and corporations, so basically you’re lending them money. In Australia we also have what are called hybrid securities, but they’ve got some big enough differences that I’ll talk about them in a future post (probably).
Bonds are also one of those fun areas where there is an exception to every rule, so although what I’ve written below is broadly accurate there is always going to be some type of bond or a specific issue that breaks one of the rules.
So please don’t be an internet hero and “well ackshually” me about premium redemption/issue bonds, soft calls, hard calls, investor puts, floaters, PIK notes and all the rest of it because broadly speaking it isn’t going to make much difference for the purposes of explaining bonds. Basically play nice readers!
Talk numbers to me…
Bonds are all about math. As I’m sure regular readers of this blog can imagine this makes me very happy, and probably explains in part why I spent a large part of my career working in an area where understanding bonds was crucial, although to make things more interesting we added on a bunch of other stuff like equity options, credit derivatives, FX etc.
The main numbers to think about are the price you paid for the bond, the coupon on the bond, the yield on the bond, the time to maturity, and the maturity value of the bond. From those main numbers we also derive a bunch of other numbers I’ll talk about later.
Bonds are normally issued at a price of 100, with a fixed coupon (interest payment based on the maturity value of the bond) and a fixed maturity value at a known maturity date. So that’s 4 of the numbers covered already, happy days!
A lot of the time though you’re not going to be buying that bond when it is issued, you’ve buying it when it’s already trading in which case chances are pretty good you didn’t pay 100 for the bond. Buying it along the way doesn’t affect the coupon or the redemption amount at maturity or when it matures.
What it does affect though is the yield. There are a bunch of different yield measures but I’m going to go with yield to maturity, ie what yield (return) will you get if you hold the bond to maturity.
It’s not a perfect analogy, but one way to think about bonds is that they’re like a term deposit where the amount that you can buy it for moves around. If you buy a bond for $10,000 that is going to mature in a year and it has a 2% coupon and redeems for $10,200 (redemption price plus coupon payment), then your yield (2%) is the same as your coupon (2%).
But if interest rates have changed and so the price of the bond has changed and you buy that bond for $9,900 or $10,100, then your yield will be different from your coupon, either 3% or 1% respectively. Hopefully that makes sense? BTW I’ve rounded the numbers here to try and keep it nice and simple.
Most bonds pay interest on a semi annual basis (I used an annual payment in the example above to make things easier) so to figure out how much interest you get when it gets paid it’ll be the coupon divided by two.
Hopefully all of that makes sense, if not let me know in the comments.
Issuers of Bonds
As I said above the main issuers of bonds are governments, semi government organisations, and corporations.
Debt issued by governments is generally the safest type, because so long as they control the printing press then they can always print more money to pay you back. The Eurozone is a bit of an exception to this (understatement of the year) but in most of the other major sovereign bond markets like the US, Australian, the UK etc it’s true.
Emerging markets are a bit different because they often issue debt in USD, which means that if things go pear shaped then they can’t just print more money to pay off bondholders.
There can also be issues with getting your money back from sovereigns if they have too much debt, such as when they either don’t control the printing press (Greece) or the bond is issued in a different currency (Argentina) but for the most part if you lend money to a developed country in their own currency then you can pretty reliably count on getting your money back.
There are also bonds issued by semi government organisations like the World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development etc, these are slightly less safe for the most part but you’re still not taking on much risk of not getting your money back.
Debt issued by corporations is riskier, partly because businesses obviously can’t just print more money to pay you back, and because corporations can and do go bust. Sure it doesn’t seem likely that Telstra or Woolworths or the big banks are going to blow up any time soon, but there are plenty of other bond issuers out there with much more fragile finances.
As you would expect the more risk you are taking on the more return you want in order to be compensation for doing so. This is because unlike a term deposit the value of your capital isn’t protected. If you put $10,000 into a term deposit for a year with an interest rate of 2%, then you know that in a year’s time you will get back that $10,000 plus $200 in interest.
If for some reason the bank you invested that money through goes bust, the government will make you whole (up to the value of $250,000 per entity per approved deposit institution.
If you invest in a corporate bond and the company goes bust, well you’re probably not going to get all or maybe any of your money back. The good news is that you’re more likely to get money back than equity holders, but if the debts of the company are a lot more than the assets then you’re going to be in trouble.
There’s a clear framework for what happens if a company goes bust and who gets paid first and in how much etc, the short version of this is that equity holders are absolutely last in line but depending on what type of bonds you own you may not be a meaningful better position either.
And unlike a stock, when you own a bond you don’t own a piece of the issuer of the bond, you just own part of their devt. So if the company does great and starts making a fortune, you as a bondholder don’t get paid any more than what the terms of the bond state. Basically you can get a fair chunk of the downside and none of the upside beyond the terms of the bond. On the plus side this doesn’t happen particularly often, most of the time you’ll get what you were promised
Bond ratings
Now obviously some companies are more secure and stable than others. If you take a bond from the biggest company in the ASX200 which is CBA, then it’s more likely to fulfil the terms of the bond than whatever the 200th company is. That’s not to say the 200th company won’t, just that there is more risk. The actual degree of this risk is quantified in a couple of different ways.
First of all there are ratings agencies out there who will assign a rating from anywhere to super safe (AAA) to D (in default) with a bunch of graduations in between. Anything rated from AAA to BBB- is what is called Investment Grade (IG), everything below that is called High Yield (HY) or less politely Junk.
Just because a bond is IG doesn’t guarantee it will pay off, likewise something which is HY isn’t guaranteed or even likely to fail. For the most part though the different ratings given tend to play out that way in the real world, with far less defaults for bonds rated AAA vs bonds rated BB for example.
The big three ratings agencies are Standard & Poors (S&P), Moodys, and Fitch, and between them they’ll rate most of the bonds and/or issuers. They tend to be fairly backward looking in my opinion, and they were hugely and obviously wrong on rating mortgage backed securities back in the GFC. Still, they will generally give you a reasonable idea of the creditworthiness of the bond issuer.
Because bonds are also traded in the marketplace you can take the yield offered on a bond with a particular maturity, compare it to an equivalent government bond, and using some fun math (yeah baby!) back out a credit spread which that bond trades over treasuries (or swaps but I’m not going to get into that). The higher the spread, the higher the perceived risk of the bond, and vice versa of course.
Are bonds safe?
Well it kinda depends on what you mean by safe. If you mean are the bonds likely to deliver what the issuer of the bonds promised, then generally yes. As I said with government and semi government bonds you will almost certainly get all your coupons and the maturity value of the bonds delivered on time. Yeah, there are some exceptions to this but you’re unlikely to run into trouble with Australia, the US, the UK, the more economically sensible members of the Eurozone etc.
Similarly with corporates the vaast majority of the time you will get your money back on investment grade bonds, and it’s pretty rare to not get your money back on high yield bonds as well. That’s not to say it doesn’t happen, but it doesn’t happen much.
If you mean am I going to get back what I put into the bond, well no they’re not necessarily safe, particularly if you sell before maturity. Remember when I said bonds are kinda like term deposits that can trade? Well when they trade those prices move around, and they can move around a lot!
Why do bond prices move?
There are a bunch of reasons why bond prices move around, the main ones are changes in the interest rate environment, changes in economic conditions, and changes specific to the issuer of the bond.
We’ll talk about interest rates first. Bond prices have an inverse relationship with bond yields, which is a fancy way of saying if interest rates (yields) go down then bond prices go up.
How much do they go up? Well that depends on the magnitude of the change in rates, and a bunch of factors involving the bond. Basically the longer till maturity on the bond, and the lower the coupon on the bond, the more sensitive it will be to changes in interest rates. This is measured using modified duration and convexity.
Modified duration takes into account the timing of the cashflows of the bond (so coupons and maturity) and gives you a number which is typically a little less than that number of years to maturity, the higher the coupon the more it decreases the modified duration. If you multiply that modified duration by the change in interest rates in percentage terms, it will tell you how much the bond price will move by (in theory at least).
So if you have a modified duration of say 7.117, then for every 1 percent move in interest rates the bond price will change by 7.117 points. So if your bond price was previously 100 and rates moved down by 1%, then your bond should now be worth 107.117. Happy days! Conversely if rates moved up, well your bond is now worth 92.883. Not so happy days.
I’ve used the [ASX bond calculator](http://%20https//www.asx.com.au/asx/research/bondCalculator.do) to give a couple of examples using the current Aussie 10 year bond. You can hopefully see below that by changing the yield on the bond from 1.5% to 1% the market price has gone from 116.87 to 121.83, roughly a 4.25% change in price for a 0.5% change in rates, so presumably the modified duration on the bond is about 8.5.
To make things slightly more complex, that relationship isn’t fixed due to something called convexity. Instead of being a linear relationship, it’s actually a changing one (a curve rather than a line). Basically the more bonds prices move away from where they were issued the more that relationship will change.
Then there are things like GDP numbers, employment numbers, consumer sentiment surveys, PMI surverys, and all sorts of other economic news which will potentially move bond yields around, generally pretty slightly but it really depends on how important that economic number is and how much of a change from expectations it is.
On top of that for corporations changes in their own situations will have an effect on what their credit rating/spread is which will affect prices as well. If a company goes from being loss making to suddenly making a profit, then that’s going to be good for their credit and the bond price is likely to go up. Bad news like a profit warning will potentially mean a higher credit spread and lower price for the bond.
There is also general investor appetite for risk, so if investors are happy to take on more risk in their asset allocation (risk on) then they will likely sell off lower risk assets like bonds and buy higher risk assets like equities and to a lesser extent property. If things change and they want to go risk off, then the reverse happens and money tends to come out of equities and into bonds.
What happens to bonds if the stock market crashes or we have another GFC?
A stock market crash is actually one of the more compelling reasons to invest in bonds. This is because when stock markets crash investors tend to put their money into asset classes where they feel a lot safer ie, bonds. The rationale is that getting your money back is now hugely important, and even more important is not losing all your money as you will in those horrible equities which you knew you should never have invested in but that horrible financial adviser talked you into.
People. Are. Not. Rational. People panic. People sell assets which are going down in value even though they know they should be holding on for the long term. This applies not just to retail investors, but also to professionals who should know better.
In the GFC I spent plenty of time talking to institutional investors with a long term time horizon (ie 5 or 10 years etc) who suddenly decided they had to get out because of bad one month performance. People will bail out if the proverbial is hitting the fan. I wrote a bit about my experiences with the GFC here, and believe me there are a lot of people who are not going to be as cool calm and collected as they think they will be.
It’s very very very very (extra very for emphasis) important to note here that at this point in time investors will not be thinking that all bonds are much the same. When they are looking for somewhere to put their money that they now have after panic selling out of equities, they will park it in the safest place they can find, ie government bonds (aka treasuries). This will cause the price of those bonds to rise because of supply and demand.
If they still want to take on some amount of risk then they might put some into investment grade bonds, again this will push the price up a bit. They will almost certainly not put money into high yield bonds, because those are risky and in a crisis will behave pretty similarly to equities, ie they will fall in value. If anything they will more than likely try to pull money out of HY bonds, pushing the price down.
This excellent post really shows this in the below graph which shows the average performance of different types of bonds for a 10% or greater fall in the stock market (all of this is for the US but the same principle applies to Australia).
It doesn’t work in every case, as shown below (same source), but in almost all cases of a big crash in equities, treasury and to a lesser extent IG bonds gave you a big positive return to help out. HY, not so much and in some cases actually gave you a worse performance than equities themselves.
Please believe me when I say it is a huge help psychologically to have some of your investments going up when the others are going down, which to me at least is a great reason to have some money invested in bonds.
You’ve convinced me, how much should I have in bonds?
Ok so I’m probably being slightly optimistic here given the number of posts I see on reddit about how VDHG would be so much better if Vanguard got rid of that terrible 10% that’s invested in bonds and put it all in equities instead.
It would be nice to think though that some people are now realising that come the next crash they too might not behave entirely rationally, and it sure would be nice to own some assets that are going to zig when the stock market zags, so to speak.
On the off chance that I have actually convinced people, well it really comes down to your particular risk profile. This is going to be hard to believe for some people, but in the US the default portfolio for most investors is 60% stocks and 40% bonds.
Looking at Oz , the default balanced investment option for most super funds over here are supposed to have something like a 70:30 split between growth assets (shares and property) and defensive assets (bonds and cash) although the reality is a long long way from that if you actually look into how they invest (that’s a discussion for another time though). So that maybe provides a useful starting point.
I know that the average FIRE portfolio that gets talked about particularly from younger bloggers (who have likely never experienced a sustained down market) is pretty much 100% equities and property, maybe even leveraged up. Which is fine if you can hold on through the downturns, but not everyone can do this because it is extremely difficult to do psychologically. I wish them all the best of luck, but I am pretty sure that at least some of them will decide that it’s all too much and sell whenever we have the next crash.
There are exceptions to the rule though. One of my favourite bloggers, and someone who I know thinks deeply about this sort of stuff, is the FI Explorer who has about 15% in bonds and 15% in defensive alternatives (gold and bitcoin) as per his latest portfolio update.
Whilst I don’t like Bitcoin myself, or gold for that matter, he writes a good explanation about why he holds both here. I still don’t like either asset myself, but I recognise that I am not infallible, I could well be wrong about this, and certainly historically they have worked well as hedges.
In any case the more important point here is that there is basically a 30% allocation to what would be regarded as defensive type assets. This is actually a bit over his actual target of 25% in defensive assets, but he probably sleeps just fine at night.
I’m a little more aggressive in only having about 21% of my assets (excluding PPoR) in cash and bonds, but it’s not a huge difference. Both of us have been invested through stock market crashes and hopefully have come to realise that we are not the hyper rational investors that economists believe we are, and therefore it’s best to have a bit invested in stuff that will go up or at least hold it’s value when everything else is crashing.
How do I buy bonds?
You can buy bonds individually, but you tend to need to have a fair amount of money to do so and you can run into a lot of problems with liquidity, big bid/ask spreads etc, it’s hard to build up a diversified portfolio etc.
I buy bonds the same way I buy stocks, ie via an ETF. Most of the major ETF providers have some variety of index ETFs tracking Treasury only or Treasury plus Investment Grade bonds, or you can buy HY stuff if you want. Personally I just use one ETF which has about 75% in treasuries and the rest in IG. There are also some actively managed bond funds out there, either as ETFs or managed funds.
For the reasons I outlined above about bonds being a psychological safe harbour I personally would (and do) only invest in bonds which are likely to up in a crisis, but different strokes for different folks applies as always.
Any more questions?
I’ve only really scratched the surface here of talking about bonds, but at the same time I feel like it’s an overwhelming amount of information. If you have more questions then as always I’m happy to answer them in the comments!
Do you invest in bonds? If you enjoyed this post and would like to read more like it then please subscribe!
submitted by AussieHIFIRE to fiaustralia [link] [comments]

Tips and Tricks for New and Old PMC's alike

Hey guys recently I've been seeing a bunch of new players coming into the community asking questions for some tips on how to get better or tricks to give some QOL improvements so I've decided to make a generalized list to help them out, this list isn't just for new players, hopefully for the more experienced PMC's you can learn something as well. Each category will be separated as to lessen what you might want to read and not completely overwhelm new players, the start of each section will focus on more beginner friendly tips while the end of some contain more obscure tips. Feel free to comment any tips or tricks I may have missed/messed up or forgot about down below to help the community out.

Map Knowledge and Movement:
Gear and Ammo:
Inventory management:
Quick Cash:
Links:

Note: All of this information is valid in patch .11

Thank you all for reading this,if i referred to you/your content in this post or if you have any critiques/questions or concerns please feel free to leave a comment down below or dm me, I'll try to keep this as up to date as i can. Thank you all so much for reading through this, hope this helps out some of you cheeki's out.
submitted by TheViperTooth to EscapefromTarkov [link] [comments]

Your Guide to Monero, and Why It Has Great Potential

/////Your Guide to Monero, and Why It Has Great Potential/////

Marketing.
It's a dirty word for most members of the Monero community.
It is also one of the most divisive words in the Monero community. Yet, the lack of marketing is one of the most frustrating things for many newcomers.
This is what makes this an unusual post from a member of the Monero community.
This post is an unabashed and unsolicited analyzation of why I believe Monero to have great potential.
Below I have attempted to outline different reasons why Monero has great potential, beginning with upcoming developments and use cases, to broader economic motives, speculation, and key issues for it to overcome.
I encourage you to discuss and criticise my musings, commenting below if you feel necessary to do so.

///Upcoming Developments///

Bulletproofs - A Reduction in Transaction Sizes and Fees
Since the introduction of Ring Confidential Transactions (Ring CT), transaction amounts have been hidden in Monero, albeit at the cost of increased transaction fees and sizes. In order to mitigate this issue, Bulletproofs will soon be added to reduce both fees and transaction size by 80% to 90%. This is great news for those transacting smaller USD amounts as people commonly complained Monero's fees were too high! Not any longer though! More information can be found here. Bulletproofs are already working on the Monero testnet, and developers were aiming to introduce them in March 2018, however it could be delayed in order to ensure everything is tried and tested.
Multisig
Multisig has recently been merged! Mulitsig, also called multisignature, is the requirement for a transaction to have two or more signatures before it can be executed. Multisig transactions and addresses are indistinguishable from normal transactions and addresses in Monero, and provide more security than single-signature transactions. It is believed this will lead to additional marketplaces and exchanges to supporting Monero.
Kovri
Kovri is an implementation of the Invisible Internet Project (I2P) network. Kovri uses both garlic encryption and garlic routing to create a private, protected overlay-network across the internet. This overlay-network provides users with the ability to effectively hide their geographical location and internet IP address. The good news is Kovri is under heavy development and will be available soon. Unlike other coins' false privacy claims, Kovri is a game changer as it will further elevate Monero as the king of privacy.
Mobile Wallets
There is already a working Android Wallet called Monerujo available in the Google Play Store. X Wallet is an IOS mobile wallet. One of the X Wallet developers recently announced they are very, very close to being listed in the Apple App Store, however are having some issues with getting it approved. The official Monero IOS and Android wallets, along with the MyMonero IOS and Android wallets, are also almost ready to be released, and can be expected very soon.
Hardware Wallets
Hardware wallets are currently being developed and nearing completion. Because Monero is based on the CryptoNote protocol, it means it requires unique development in order to allow hardware wallet integration. The Ledger Nano S will be adding Monero support by the end of Q1 2018. There is a recent update here too. Even better, for the first time ever in cryptocurrency history, the Monero community banded together to fund the development of an exclusive Monero Hardware Wallet, and will be available in Q2 2018, costing only about $20! In addition, the CEO of Trezor has offered a 10BTC bounty to whoever can provide the software to allow Monero integration. Someone can be seen to already be working on that here.
TAILS Operating System Integration
Monero is in the progress of being packaged in order for it to be integrated into TAILS and ready to use upon install. TAILS is the operating system popularised by Edward Snowden and is commonly used by those requiring privacy such as journalists wanting to protect themselves and sources, human-right defenders organizing in repressive contexts, citizens facing national emergencies, domestic violence survivors escaping from their abusers, and consequently, darknet market users.
In the meantime, for those users who wish to use TAILS with Monero, u/Electric_sheep01 has provided Sheep's Noob guide to Monero GUI in Tails 3.2, which is a step-by-step guide with screenshots explaining how to setup Monero in TAILS, and is very easy to follow.
Mandatory Hardforks
Unlike other coins, Monero receives a protocol upgrade every 6 months in March and September. Think of it as a Consensus Protocol Update. Monero's hard forks ensure quality development takes place, while preventing political or ideological issues from hindering progress. When a hardfork occurs, you simply download and use the new daemon version, and your existing wallet files and copy of the blockchain remain compatible. This reddit post provides more information.
Dynamic fees
Many cryptocurrencies have an arbitrary block size limit. Although Monero has a limit, it is adaptive based on the past 100 blocks. Similarly, fees change based on transaction volume. As more transactions are processed on the Monero network, the block size limit slowly increases and the fees slowly decrease. The opposite effect also holds true. This means that the more transactions that take place, the cheaper the fees!
Tail Emission and Inflation
There will be around 18.4 million Monero mined at the end of May 2022. However, tail emission will kick in after that which is 0.6 XMR, so it has no fixed limit. Gundamlancer explains that Monero's "main emission curve will issue about 18.4 million coins to be mined in approximately 8 years. (more precisely 18.132 Million coins by ca. end of May 2022) After that, a constant "tail emission" of 0.6 XMR per 2-minutes block (modified from initially equivalent 0.3 XMR per 1-minute block) will create a sub-1% perpetual inflatio starting with 0.87% yearly inflation around May 2022) to prevent the lack of incentives for miners once a currency is not mineable anymore.
Monero Research Lab
Monero has a group of anonymous/pseudo-anonymous university academics actively researching, developing, and publishing academic papers in order to improve Monero. See here and here. The Monero Research Lab are acquainted with other members of cryptocurrency academic community to ensure when new research or technology is uncovered, it can be reviewed and decided upon whether it would be beneficial to Monero. This ensures Monero will always remain a leading cryptocurrency. A recent end of 2017 update from a MRL researcher can be found here.

///Monero's Technology - Rising Above The Rest///

Monero Has Already Proven Itself To Be Private, Secure, Untraceable, and Trustless
Monero is the only private, untraceable, trustless, secure and fungible cryptocurrency. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are TRACEABLE through the use of blockchain analytics, and has lead to the prosecution of numerous individuals, such as the alleged Alphabay administrator Alexandre Cazes. In the Forfeiture Complaint which detailed the asset seizure of Alexandre Cazes, the anonymity capabilities of Monero were self-demonstrated by the following statement of the officials after the AlphaBay shutdown: "In total, from CAZES' wallets and computer agents took control of approximately $8,800,000 in Bitcoin, Ethereum, Monero and Zcash, broken down as follows: 1,605.0503851 Bitcoin, 8,309.271639 Ethereum, 3,691.98 Zcash, and an unknown amount of Monero".
Privacy CANNOT BE OPTIONAL and must be at a PROTOCOL LEVEL. With Monero, privacy is mandatory, so that everyone gets the benefits of privacy without any transactions standing out as suspicious. This is the reason Darknet Market places are moving to Monero, and will never use Verge, Zcash, Dash, Pivx, Sumo, Spectre, Hush or any other coins that lack good privacy. Peter Todd (who was involved in the Zcash trusted setup ceremony) recently reiterated his concerns of optional privacy after Jeffrey Quesnelle published his recent paper stating 31.5% of Zcash transactions may be traceable, and that only ~1% of the transactions are pure privacy transactions (i.e., z -> z transactions). When the attempted private transactions stand out like a sore thumb there is no privacy, hence why privacy cannot be optional. In addition, in order for a cryptocurrency to truly be private, it must not be controlled by a centralised body, such as a company or organisation, because it opens it up to government control and restrictions. This is no joke, but Zcash is supported by DARPA and the Israeli government!.
Monero provides a stark contrast compared to other supposed privacy coins, in that Monero does not have a rich list! With all other coins, you can view wallet balances on the blockexplorers. You can view Monero's non-existent rich list here to see for yourself.
I will reiterate here that Monero is TRUSTLESS. You don't need to rely on anyone else to protect your privacy, or worry about others colluding to learn more about you. No one can censor your transaction or decide to intervene. Monero is immutable, unlike Zcash, in which the lead developer Zooko publicly tweeted the possibility of providing a backdoor for authorities to trace transactions. To Zcash's demise, Zooko famously tweeted:
" And by the way, I think we can successfully make Zcash too traceable for criminals like WannaCry, but still completely private & fungible. …"
Ethereum's track record of immutability is also poor. Ethereum was supposed to be an immutable blockchain ledger, however after the DAO hack this proved to not be the case. A 2016 article on Saintly Law summarised the problematic nature of Ethereum's leadership and blockchain intervention:
" Many ethereum and blockchain advocates believe that the intervention was the wrong move to make in this situation. Smart contracts are meant to be self-executing, immutable and free from disturbance by organisations and intermediaries. Yet the building block of all smart contracts, the code, is inherently imperfect. This means that the technology is vulnerable to the same malicious hackers that are targeting businesses and governments. It is also clear that the large scale intervention after the DAO hack could not and would not likely be taken in smaller transactions, as they greatly undermine the viability of the cryptocurrency and the technology."
Monero provides Fungibility and Privacy in a Cashless World
As outlined on GetMonero.org, fungibility is the property of a currency whereby two units can be substituted in place of one another. Fungibility means that two units of a currency can be mutually substituted and the substituted currency is equal to another unit of the same size. For example, two $10 bills can be exchanged and they are functionally identical to any other $10 bill in circulation (although $10 bills have unique ID numbers and are therefore not completely fungible). Gold is probably a closer example of true fungibility, where any 1 oz. of gold of the same grade is worth the same as another 1 oz. of gold. Monero is fungible due to the nature of the currency which provides no way to link transactions together nor trace the history of any particular XMR. 1 XMR is functionally identical to any other 1 XMR. Fungibility is an advantage Monero has over Bitcoin and almost every other cryptocurrency, due to the privacy inherent in the Monero blockchain and the permanently traceable nature of the Bitcoin blockchain. With Bitcoin, any BTC can be tracked by anyone back to its creation coinbase transaction. Therefore, if a coin has been used for an illegal purpose in the past, this history will be contained in the blockchain in perpetuity.
A great example of Bitcoin's lack of fungibility was reposted by u/ViolentlyPeaceful:
"Imagine you sell cupcakes and receive Bitcoin as payment. It turns out that someone who owned that Bitcoin before you was involved in criminal activity. Now you are worried that you have become a suspect in a criminal case, because the movement of funds to you is a matter of public record. You are also worried that certain Bitcoins that you thought you owned will be considered ‘tainted’ and that others will refuse to accept them as payment."
This lack of fungibility means that certain businesses will be obligated to avoid accepting BTC that have been previously used for purposes which are illegal, or simply run afoul of their Terms of Service. Currently some large Bitcoin companies are blocking, suspending, or closing accounts that have received Bitcoin used in online gambling or other purposes deemed unsavory by said companies. Monero has been built specifically to address the problem of traceability and non-fungibility inherent in other cryptocurrencies. By having completely private transactions Monero is truly fungible and there can be no blacklisting of certain XMR, while at the same time providing all the benefits of a secure, decentralized, permanent blockchain.
The world is moving cashless. Fact. The ramifications of this are enormous as we move into a cashless world in which transactions will be tracked and there is a potential for data to be used by third parties for adverse purposes. While most new cryptocurrency investors speculate upon vaporware ICO tokens in the hope of generating wealth, Monero provides salvation for those in which financial privacy is paramount. Too often people equate Monero's features with criminal endeavors. Privacy is not a crime, and is necessary for good money. Transparency in Monero is possible OFF-CHAIN, which offers greater transparency and flexibility. For example, a Monero user may share their Private View Key with their accountant for tax purposes.
Monero aims to be adopted by more than just those with nefarious use cases. For example, if you lived in an oppressive religious regime and wanted to buy a certain item, using Monero would allow you to exchange value privately and across borders if needed. Another example is that if everybody can see how much cryptocurrency you have in your wallet, then a certain service might decide to charge you more, and bad actors could even use knowledge of your wallet balance to target you for extortion purposes. For example, a Russian cryptocurrency blogger was recently beaten and robbed of $425k. This is why FUNGIBILITY IS ESSENTIAL. To summarise this in a nutshell:
"A lack of fungibility means that when sending or receiving funds, if the other person personally knows you during a transaction, or can get any sort of information on you, or if you provide a residential address for shipping etc. – you could quite potentially have them use this against you for personal gain"
For those that wish to seek more information about why Monero is a superior form of money, read The Merits of Monero: Why Monero Vs Bitcoin over on the Monero.how website.
Monero's Humble Origins
Something that still rings true today despite the great influx of money into cryptocurrencies was outlined in Nick Tomaino's early 2016 opinion piece. The author claimed that "one of the most interesting aspects of Monero is that the project has gained traction without a crowd sale pre-launch, without VC funding and any company or well-known investors and without a pre-mine. Like Bitcoin in the early days, Monero has been a purely grassroots movement that was bootstrapped by the creator and adopted organically without any institutional buy-in. The creator and most of the core developers serve the community pseudonymously and the project was launched on a message board (similar to the way Bitcoin was launched on an email newsletter)."
The Organic Growth of the Monero Community
The Monero community over at monero is exponentially growing. You can view the Monero reddit metrics here and see that the Monero subreddit currently gains more than 10,000 (yes, ten thousand!) new subscribers every 10 days! Compare this to most of the other coins out there, and it proves to be one of the only projects with real organic growth. In addition to this, the community subreddits are specifically divided to ensure the main subreddit remains unbiased, tech focused, with no shilling or hype. All trading talk is designated to xmrtrader, and all memes at moonero.
Forum Funding System
While most contributors have gratefully volunteered their time to the project, Monero also has a Forum Funding System in which money is donated by community members to ensure it attracts and retains the brightest minds and most skilled developers. Unlike ICOs and other cryptocurrencies, Monero never had a premine, and does not have a developer tax. If ANYONE requires funding for a Monero related project, then they can simply request funding from the community, and if the community sees it as beneficial, they will donate. Types of projects range from Monero funding for local meet ups, to paying developers for their work.
Monero For Goods, Services, and Market Places
There is a growing number of online goods and services that you can now pay for with Monero. Globee is a service that allows online merchants to accept payments through credit cards and a host of cryptocurrencies, while being settled in Bitcoin, Monero or fiat currency. Merchants can reach a wider variety of customers, while not needing to invest in additional hardware to run cryptocurrency wallets or accept the current instability of the cryptocurrency market. Globee uses all of the open source API's that BitPay does making integrations much easier!
Project Coral Reef is a service which allows you to shop and pay for popular music band products and services using Monero.
Linux, Veracrypt, and a whole array of VPNs now accept Monero.
There is a new Monero only marketplace called Annularis currently being developed which has been created for those who value financial privacy and economic freedom, and there are rumours Open Bazaar is likely to support Monero once Multisig is implemented.
In addition, Monero is also supported by The Living Room of Satoshi so you can pay bills or credit cards directly using Monero.
Monero can be found on a growing number of cryptocurrency exchange services such as Bittrex, Poloniex, Cryptopia, Shapeshift, Changelly, Bitfinex, Kraken, Bisq, Tux, and many others.
For those wishing to purchase Monero anonymously, there are services such as LocalMonero.co and Moneroforcash.com.
With XMR.TO you can pay Bitcoin addresses directly with Monero. There are no other fees than the miner ones. All user records are purged after 48 hours. XMR.TO has also been added as an embedded feature into the Monerujo android wallet.
Coinhive Browser-Based Mining
Unlike Bitcoin, Monero can be mined using CPUs and GPUs. Not only does this encourage decentralisation, it also opens the door to browser based mining. Enter side of stage, Coinhive browser-based mining. As described by Hon Lau on the Symnatec Blog Browser-based mining, as its name suggests, is a method of cryptocurrency mining that happens inside a browser and is implemented using Javascript. Coinhive is marketed as an alternative to browser ad revenue. The motivation behind this is simple: users pay for the content indirectly by coin mining when they visit the site and website owners don't have to bother users with sites laden with ads, trackers, and all the associated paraphern. This is great, provided that the websites are transparent with site visitors and notify users of the mining that will be taking place, or better still, offer users a way to opt in, although this hasn't always been the case thus far.
Skepticism Sunday
The main Monero subreddit has weekly Skepticism Sundays which was created with the purpose of installing "a culture of being scientific, skeptical, and rational". This is used to have open, critical discussions about monero as a technology, it's economics, and so on.

///Speculation///

Major Investors And Crypto Figureheads Are Interested
Ari Paul is the co-founder and CIO of BlockTower Capital. He was previously a portfolio manager for the University of Chicago's $8 billion endowment, and a derivatives market maker and proprietary trader for Susquehanna International Group. Paul was interviewed on CNBC on the 26th of December and when asked what was his favourite coin was, he stated "One that has real fundamental value besides from Bitcoin is Monero" and said it has "very strong engineering". In addition, when he was asked if that was the one used by criminals, he replied "Everything is used by criminals including the US dollar and the Euro". Paul later supported these claims on Twitter, recommending only Bitcoin and Monero as long-term investments.
There are reports that "Roger Ver, earlier known as 'Bitcoin Jesus' for his evangelical support of the Bitcoin during its early years, said his investment in Monero is 'substantial' and his biggest in any virtual currency since Bitcoin.
Charlie Lee, the creator of Litecoin, has publicly stated his appreciation of Monero. In a September 2017 tweet directed to Edward Snowden explaining why Monero is superior to Zcash, Charlie Lee tweeted:
All private transactions, More tested privacy tech, No tax on miners to pay investors, No high inflation... better investment.
John McAfee, arguably cryptocurrency's most controversial character at the moment, has publicly supported Monero numerous times over the last twelve months(before he started shilling ICOs), and has even claimed it will overtake Bitcoin.
Playboy instagram celebrity Dan Bilzerian is a Monero investor, with 15% of his portfolio made up of Monero.
Finally, while he may not be considered a major investor or figurehead, Erik Finman, a young early Bitcoin investor and multimillionaire, recently appeared in a CNBC Crypto video interview, explaining why he isn't entirely sold on Bitcoin anymore, and expresses his interest in Monero, stating:
"Monero is a really good one. Monero is an incredible currency, it's completely private."
There is a common belief that most of the money in cryptocurrency is still chasing the quick pump and dumps, however as the market matures, more money will flow into legitimate projects such as Monero. Monero's organic growth in price is evidence smart money is aware of Monero and gradually filtering in.
The Bitcoin Flaw
A relatively unknown blogger named CryptoIzzy posted three poignant pieces regarding Monero and its place in the world. The Bitcoin Flaw: Monero Rising provides an intellectual comparison of Monero to other cryptocurrencies, and Valuing Cryptocurrencies: An Approach outlines methods of valuing different coins.
CryptoIzzy's most recent blog published only yesterday titled Monero Valuation - Update and Refocus is a highly recommended read. It touches on why Monero is much more than just a coin for the Darknet Markets, and provides a calculated future price of Monero.
CryptoIzzy also published The Power of Money: A Case for Bitcoin, which is an exploration of our monetary system, and the impact decentralised cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Monero will have on the world. In the epilogue the author also provides a positive and detailed future valuation based on empirical evidence. CryptoIzzy predicts Monero to easily progress well into the four figure range.
Monero Has a Relatively Small Marketcap
Recently we have witnessed many newcomers to cryptocurrency neglecting to take into account coins' marketcap and circulating supply, blindly throwing money at coins under $5 with inflated marketcaps and large circulating supplies, and then believing it's possible for them to reach $100 because someone posted about it on Facebook or Reddit.
Compared to other cryptocurrencies, Monero still has a low marketcap, which means there is great potential for the price to multiply. At the time of writing, according to CoinMarketCap, Monero's marketcap is only a little over $5 billion, with a circulating supply of 15.6 million Monero, at a price of $322 per coin.
For this reason, I would argue that this is evidence Monero is grossly undervalued. Just a few billion dollars of new money invested in Monero can cause significant price increases. Monero's marketcap only needs to increase to ~$16 billion and the price will triple to over $1000. If Monero's marketcap simply reached ~$35 billion (just over half of Ripple's $55 billion marketcap), Monero's price will increase 600% to over $2000 per coin.
Another way of looking at this is Monero's marketcap only requires ~$30 billion of new investor money to see the price per Monero reach $2000, while for Ethereum to reach $2000, Ethereum's marketcap requires a whopping ~$100 billion of new investor money.
Technical Analysis
There are numerous Monero technical analysts, however none more eerily on point than the crowd-pleasing Ero23. Ero23's charts and analysis can be found on Trading View. Ero23 gained notoriety for his long-term Bitcoin bull chart published in February, which is still in play today. Head over to his Trading View page to see his chart: Monero's dwindling supply. $10k in 2019 scenario, in which Ero23 predicts Monero to reach $10,000 in 2019. There is also this chart which appears to be freakishly accurate and is tracking along perfectly today.
Coinbase Rumours
Over the past 12 months there have been ongoing rumours that Monero will be one of the next cryptocurrencies to be added to Coinbase. In January 2017, Monero Core team member Riccardo 'Fluffypony' Spagni presented a talk at Coinbase HQ. In addition, in November 2017 GDAX announced the GDAX Digit Asset Framework outlining specific parameters cryptocurrencies must meet in order to be added to the exchange. There is speculation that when Monero has numerous mobile and hardware wallets available, and multisig is working, then it will be added. This would enable public accessibility to Monero to increase dramatically as Coinbase had in excess of 13 million users as of December, and is only going to grow as demand for cryptocurrencies increases. Many users argue that due to KYC/AML regulations, Coinbase will never be able to add Monero, however the Kraken exchange already operates in the US and has XMfiat pairs, so this is unlikely to be the reason Coinbase is yet to implement XMfiat trading.
Monero Is Not an ICO Scam
It is likely most of the ICOs which newcomers invest in, hoping to get rich quick, won't even be in the Top 100 cryptocurrencies next year. A large portion are most likely to be pumps and dumps, and we have already seen numerous instances of ICO exit scams. Once an ICO raises millions of dollars, the developers or CEO of the company have little incentive to bother rolling out their product or service when they can just cash out and leave. The majority of people who create a company to provide a service or product, do so in order to generate wealth. Unless these developers and CEOs are committed and believed in their product or service, it's likely that the funds raised during the ICO will far exceed any revenue generated from real world use cases.
Monero is a Working Currency, Today
Monero is a working currency, here today.
The majority of so called cryptocurrencies that exist today are not true currencies, and do not aim to be. They are a token of exchange. They are like a share in a start-up company hoping to use blockchain technology to succeed in business. A crypto-assest is a more accurate name for coins such as Ethereum, Neo, Cardano, Vechain, etc.
Monero isn't just a vaporware ICO token that promises to provide a blockchain service in the future. It is not a platform for apps. It is not a pump and dump coin.
Monero is the only coin with all the necessary properties to be called true money.
Monero is private internet money.
Some even describe Monero as an online Swiss Bank Account or Bitcoin 2.0, and it is here to continue on from Bitcoin's legacy.
Monero is alleviating the public from the grips of banks, and protests the monetary system forced upon us.
Monero only achieved this because it is the heart and soul, and blood, sweat, and tears of the contributors to this project. Monero supporters are passionate, and Monero has gotten to where it is today thanks to its contributors and users.

///Key Issues for Monero to Overcome///

Scalability
While Bulletproofs are soon to be implemented in order to improve Monero's transaction sizes and fees, scalability is an issue for Monero that is continuously being assessed by Monero's researchers and developers to find the most appropriate solution. Ricardo 'Fluffypony' Spagni recently appeared on CNBC's Crypto Trader, and when asked whether Monero is scalable as it stands today, Spagni stated that presently, Monero's on-chain scaling is horrible and transactions are larger than Bitcoin's (because of Monero's privacy features), so side-chain scaling may be more efficient. Spagni elaborated that the Monero team is, and will always be, looking for solutions to an array of different on-chain and off-chain scaling options, such as developing a Mimblewimble side-chain, exploring the possibility of Lightning Network so atomic swaps can be performed, and Tumblebit.
In a post on the Monero subreddit from roughly a month ago, monero moderator u/dEBRUYNE_1 supports Spagni's statements. dEBRUYNE_1 clarifies the issue of scalability:
"In Bitcoin, the main chain is constrained and fees are ludicrous. This results in users being pushed to second layer stuff (e.g. sidechains, lightning network). Users do not have optionality in Bitcoin. In Monero, the goal is to make the main-chain accessible to everyone by keeping fees reasonable. We want users to have optionality, i.e., let them choose whether they'd like to use the main chain or second layer stuff. We don't want to take that optionality away from them."
When the Spagni CNBC video was recently linked to the Monero subreddit, it was met with lengthy debate and discussion from both users and developers. u/ferretinjapan summarised the issue explaining:
"Monero has all the mechanisms it needs to find the balance between transaction load, and offsetting the costs of miner infrastructure/profits, while making sure the network is useful for users. But like the interviewer said, the question is directed at "right now", and Fluffys right to a certain extent, Monero's transactions are huge, and compromises in blockchain security will help facilitate less burdensome transactional activity in the future. But to compare Monero to Bitcoin's transaction sizes is somewhat silly as Bitcoin is nowhere near as useful as monero, and utility will facilitate infrastructure building that may eventually utterly dwarf Bitcoin. And to equate scaling based on a node being run on a desktop being the only option for what classifies as "scalable" is also an incredibly narrow interpretation of the network being able to scale, or not. Given the extremely narrow definition of scaling people love to (incorrectly) use, I consider that a pretty crap question to put to Fluffy in the first place, but... ¯_(ツ)_/¯"
u/xmrusher also contributed to the discussion, comparing Bitcoin to Monero using this analogous description:
"While John is much heavier than Henry, he's still able to run faster, because, unlike Henry, he didn't chop off his own legs just so the local wheelchair manufacturer can make money. While Morono has much larger transactions then Bitcoin, it still scales better, because, unlike Bitcoin, it hasn't limited itself to a cripplingly tiny blocksize just to allow Blockstream to make money."
Setting up a wallet can still be time consuming
It's time consuming and can be somewhat difficult for new cryptocurrency users to set up their own wallet using the GUI wallet or the Command Line Wallet. In order to strengthen and further decentralize the Monero network, users are encouraged to run a full node for their wallet, however this can be an issue because it can take up to 24-48 hours for some users depending on their hard-drive and internet speeds. To mitigate this issue, users can run a remote node, meaning they can remotely connect their wallet to another node in order to perform transactions, and in the meantime continue to sync the daemon so in the future they can then use their own node.
For users that do run into wallet setup issues, or any other problems for that matter, there is an extremely helpful troubleshooting thread on the Monero subreddit which can be found here. And not only that, unlike some other cryptocurrency subreddits, if you ask a question, there is always a friendly community member who will happily assist you. Monero.how is a fantastic resource too!
Despite still being difficult to use, the user-base and price may increase dramatically once it is easier to use. In addition, others believe that when hardware wallets are available more users will shift to Monero.

///Conclusion///

I actually still feel a little shameful for promoting Monero here, but feel a sense of duty to do so.
Monero is transitioning into an unstoppable altruistic beast. This year offers the implementation of many great developments, accompanied by the likelihood of a dramatic increase in price.
I request you discuss this post, point out any errors I have made, or any information I may have neglected to include. Also, if you believe in the Monero project, I encourage you to join your local Facebook or Reddit cryptocurrency group and spread the word of Monero. You could even link this post there to bring awareness to new cryptocurrency users and investors.
I will leave you with an old on-going joke within the Monero community - Don't buy Monero - unless you have a use case for it of course :-) Just think to yourself though - Do I have a use case for Monero in our unpredictable Huxleyan society? Hint: The answer is ?
Edit: Added in the Tail Emission section, and noted Dan Bilzerian as a Monero investor. Also added information regarding the XMR.TO payment service. Added info about hardfork
submitted by johnfoss69 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

25 Tools and Resources for Crypto Investors: Guide to how to create a winning strategy

Lots of people have PM'd me asking me the same questions on where to find information and how to put together their portfolio so I decided to put a guide for crypto investors, especially those who have only been in a few months and are still confused.
This is going to be Part 1 and will deal with research resources, risk and returns. In Part 2 I'll post a systematic approach to valuation and picking individual assets with derived price targets.

Getting started: Tools and resources

You don't have to be a programmer or techie to invest in crypto, but you should first learn the basics of how it functions. I find that this video by 3Blue1Brown is the best introduction to what a blockchain actually is and how it functions, because it explains it clearly and simply with visuals while not dumbing it down too much. If you want a more ELI5 version with cute cartoons, then Upfolio has a nice beginner's intro to the blockchain concept and quick descriptions of top 100 cryptocurrencies. I also recommend simply going to Wikipedia and reading the blockchain and cryptocurrency page and clicking onto a few links in, read about POS vs POW...etc. Later on you'll need this information to understand why a specific use case may or may not benefit from a blockchain structure. Here is a quick summary of the common terms you should know.
Next you should arm yourself with some informational resources. I compiled a convenient list of useful tools and sites that I've used and find to be worthy of bookmarking:
Market information
Analysis tools
Portfolio Tracking
Youtube
I generally don't follow much on Youtube because it's dominated by idiocy like Trevon James and CryptoNick, but there are some that I think are worthy of following:

Constructing a Investment Strategy

I can't stress enough how important it is to construct an actual investment strategy. Organize what your goals are, what your risk tolerance is and how you plan to construct a portfolio to achieve those goals rather than just chasing the flavor of the week.
Why? Because it will force you to slow down and make decisions based on rational thinking rather than emotion, and will also inevitably lead you to think long term.

Setting ROI targets

Bluntly put, a lot of young investors who are in crypto have really unrealistic expectations about returns and risk.
A lot of them have never invested in any other type of financial asset, and hence many seem to consider a 10% ROI in a month to be unexciting, even though that is roughly what they should be aiming for.
I see a ton of people now on this sub and on other sites making their decisions with the expectation to double their money every month. This has lead a worrying amount of newbies putting in way too much money way too quickly into anything on the front page of CoinMarketCap with a low dollar value per coin hoping that crypto get them out of their debt or a life of drudgery in a cubicle. And all in the next year or two!
But its important to temper your hype about returns and realize why we had this exponential growth in the last year. Its not because we are seeing any mass increase in adoption, if anything adoption among eCommerce sites is decreasing. The only reason we saw so much upward price action is because of fiat monetary base expansion from people FOMO-ing in due to media coverage of previous price action. People are hoping to ride the bubble and sell to a greater fool in a few months, it is classic Greater Fool Theory. That's it. We passed the $1,000 psychological marker again for Bitcoin which we hadn't seen since right before the Mt.Gox disaster, and it just snowballed the positivity as headline after headline came out about the price growth. However those unexciting returns of 10% a month are not only the norm, but much more healthy for an alternative investment class. Here are the annual returns for Bitcoin for the last few years:
Year BTC Return
2017 1,300%
2016 120%
2015 35%
2014 -60%
2013 5300%
2012 150 %
Keep in mind that a 10% monthly increase when compounded equals a 313% annual return, or over 3x your money. That may not sound exciting to those who entered recently and saw their money go 20x in a month on something like Tron before it crashed back down, but that 3X annual return is better than Bitcoin's return every year except the year right before the last market meltdown and 2017. I have been saying for a while now that we are due for a major correction and every investor now should be planning for that possibility through proper allocation and setting return expectations that are reasonable.

Risk Management

Quanitifying risk in crypto is surprisingly difficult because the historical returns aren't normally distributed, meaning that tools like Sharpe Ratio and other risk metrics can't really be used as intended. Instead you'll have to think of your own risk tolerance and qualitatively evaluate how risky each crypto is based on the team, the use case prospects, the amount of competition and the general market risk.
You can think of each crypto having a risk factor that is the summation of the general crypto market risk (Rm) as ultimately everything is tied to how Bitcoin does, but also its own inherent risk specific to its own goals (Ri).
Rt = Rm +Ri
The market risk is something you cannot avoid, if some China FUD comes out about regulations on Bitcoin then your investment in solid altcoin picks will go down too along with Bitcoin. This (Rm) return is essentially what risk you undertake to have a market ROI of 385% I talked about above. What you can minimize though is the Ri, the aset specific risks with the team, the likelihood they will actually deliver, the likelihood that their solution will be adopted. Unfortunately there is no one way to do this, you simply have to take the time to research and form your own opinion on how risky it really is before allocating a certain percentage to it. Consider the individual risk of each crypto and start looking for red flags:
  • guaranteed promises of large returns (protip: that's a Ponzi)
  • float allocations that give way too much to the founder
  • vague whitepapers
  • vague timelines
  • no clear use case
  • Github with no useful code and sparse activity
  • a team that is difficult to find information on or even worse anonymous
While all cryptocurrencies are a risky investments but generally you can break down cryptos into "low" risk core, medium risk speculative and high risk speculative
  • Low Risk Core - This is the exchange pairing cryptos and those that are well established. These are almost sure to be around in 5 years, and will recover after any bear market. Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum are in this class of risk, and I would also argue Monero.
  • Medium Risk Speculative - These would be cryptos which generally have at least some product and are reasonably established, but higher risk than Core. Things like ZCash, Ripple, NEO..etc.
  • High Risk Speculative - This is anything created within the last few months, low caps, shillcoins, ICOs...etc. Most cryptos are in this category, most of them will be essentially worthless in 5 years.
How much risk should you take on? That depends on your own life situation but also it should be proportional to how much expertise you have in both financial analysis and technology. If you're a newbie who doesn't understand the tech and has no idea how to value assets, your risk tolerance should be lower than a programmer who understand the tech or a financial analyst who is experienced in valuation metrics.
Right now the trio of BTC-ETH-LTC account for 55% of the market cap, so between 50-70% of your portfolio in low Risk Core for newbies is a great starting point. Then you can go down to 25-30% as you gain confidence and experience. But always try to keep about 1/3rd in safe core positions. Don't go all in on speculative picks.
Core principles to minimize risk
  • Have the majority of your holdings in things you feel good holding for at least 2 years. Don't use the majority of your investment for day trading or short term investing.
  • Consider using dollar cost averaging to enter a position. This generally means investing a X amount over several periods, instead of at once. You can also use downward biased dollar cost averaging to mitigate against downward risk. For example instead of investing $1000 at once in a position at market price, you can buy $500 at the market price today then set several limit orders at slightly lower intervals (for example $250 at 5% lower than market price, $250 at 10% lower than market price). This way your average cost of acquisition will be lower if the crypto happens to decline over the short term.
  • Never chase a pump. Its simply too risky as its such an inefficient and unregulated market. If you continue to do it, most of your money losing decisions will be because you emotionally FOMO-ed into gambling on a symbol.
  • Invest what you can afford to lose. Don't have more than 5-10% of your net worth in crypto.
  • Consider what level of loss you can't accept in a position with a high risk factor, and use stop-limit orders to hedge against sudden crashes. Set you stop price at about 5-10% above your lowest limit. Stop-limit orders aren't perfect but they're better than having no hedging strategy for a risky microcap in case of some meltdown. Only you can determine what bags you are unwilling to hold.
  • Diversify across sectors and rebalance your allocations periodically. Keep about 1/3rd in low risk core holdings.
  • Have some fiat in reserve at a FDIC-insured exchange (ex. Gemini), and be ready to add to your winning positions on a pullback.
  • Remember you didn't actually make any money until you take some profits, so take do some profits when everyone else is at peak FOMO-ing bubble mode. You will also sleep much more comfortably once you take out the equivalent of your principal.

Portfolio Allocation

Along with thinking about your portfolio in terms of risk categories described above, I really find it helpful to think about the segments you are in. OnChainFX has some segment categorization to think about:
  • Currency
  • General Purpose Platform
  • Advertising
  • Crowdfunding Platform
  • Lending Platform
  • Privacy
  • Distributed Computing/Storage
  • Prediction Markets
  • IOT (Internet of Things)
  • Asset Management
  • Content Creation
  • Exchange Platform
I generally like to simplify these down to these 7 segments:
  • Core holdings - essentially the Low Risk Core segment
  • Platform segment
  • Privacy segment
  • Finance/Bank settlement segment
  • Enterprise Blockchain solutions segment
  • Promising/Innovative Tech segment
This is merely what I use, but I'm sure you can think of your own. The key point I have is to try to invest your medium and high risk picks in a segment you understand well, and in which you can relatively accurately judge risk. If you don't understand anything about how banking works or SWIFT or international settlement layers, don't invest in Stellar. If you have no idea how a supply chain functions, avoid investing in VeChain (even if it's being shilled to death on Reddit at the moment just like XRB was last month). Buffet calls this "circle of competence", he invests in sectors he understands and avoids those he doesn't like tech. I think doing the same thing in crypto is a wise move.
What's interesting is that often we see like-coin movement, for example when a coin from one segment pumps we will frequently see another similar coin in the same segment go up (think Stellar following after Ripple).
Consider the historic correlations between your holdings. Generally when Bitcoin pumps, altcoins dump but at what rate depends on the coin. When Bitcoin goes sideways we tend to see pumping in altcoins, while when Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down.
You should set price targets for each of your holdings, which is a whole separate discussion I'll go in Part 2 of the guide.

Summing it up

This was meant to get you think about what return targets you should set for your portfolio and how much risk you are willing to take and what strategies you can follow to mitigate that risk.
Returns around 385% (average crypto market CAGR over the last 3 years) would be a good target to aim for while remaining realistic, you can tweak it a bit based on your own risk tolerance. What category of risk your individual crypto picks should be will be determined by how much more greed you have for above average market return. A portfolio of 50% core holdings, 30% medium risk in a sector you understand well and 20% in high risk speculative is probably what the average portfolio should look like, with newbies going more towards 70% core and only 5% high risk speculative.
Just by thinking about these things you'll likely do better than most crypto investors, because most don't think about this stuff, to their own detriment.
submitted by arsonbunny to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Crypto Investing Guide: Useful resources and tools, and how to create an investment strategy

Lots of people have PM'd me asking me the same questions on where to find information and how to put together their portfolio so I decided to put a guide for crypto investors, especially those who have only been in a few months and are still confused.
Many people entered recently at a time when the market was rewarding the very worst type of investment behavior. Unfortunately there aren't many guides and a lot of people end up looking at things like Twitter or the trending Youtube crypto videos, which is dominated by "How to make $1,00,000 by daytrading crypto" and influencers like CryptoNick.
So I'll try to put together a guide from what I've learned and some tips, on how to invest in this asset class. This is going to be Part 1, in another post later I'll post a systematic approach to valuation and picking individual assets.

Getting started: Tools and resources

You don't have to be a programmer or techie to invest in crypto, but you should first learn the basics of how it functions. I find that this video by 3Blue1Brown is the best introduction to what a blockchain actually is and how it functions, because it explains it clearly and simply with visuals while not dumbing it down too much. If you want a more ELI5 version with cute cartoons, then Upfolio has a nice beginner's intro to the blockchain concept and quick descriptions of top 100 cryptocurrencies. I also recommend simply going to Wikipedia and reading the blockchain and cryptocurrency page and clicking onto a few links in, read about POS vs POW...etc. Later on you'll need this information to understand why a specific use case may or may not benefit from a blockchain structure. Here is a quick summary of the common terms you should know.
Next you should arm yourself with some informational resources. I compiled a convenient list of useful tools and sites that I've used and find to be worthy of bookmarking:
Market information
Analysis tools
Portfolio Tracking
Youtube
I generally don't follow much on Youtube because it's dominated by idiocy like Trevon James and CryptoNick, but there are some that I think are worthy of following:

Constructing a Investment Strategy

I can't stress enough how important it is to construct an actual investment strategy. Organize what your goals are, what your risk tolerance is and how you plan to construct a portfolio to achieve those goals rather than just chasing the flavor of the week.
Why? Because it will force you to slow down and make decisions based on rational thinking rather than emotion, and will also inevitably lead you to think long term.

Setting ROI targets

Bluntly put, a lot of young investors who are in crypto have really unrealistic expectations about returns and risk.
A lot of them have never invested in any other type of financial asset, and hence many seem to consider a 10% ROI in a month to be unexciting, even though that is roughly what they should be aiming for.
I see a ton of people now on this sub and on other sites making their decisions with the expectation to double their money every month. This has lead a worrying amount of newbies putting in way too much money way too quickly into anything on the front page of CoinMarketCap with a low dollar value per coin hoping that crypto get them out of their debt or a life of drudgery in a cubicle. And all in the next year or two!
But its important to temper your hype about returns and realize why we had this exponential growth in the last year. The only reason we saw so much upward price action is because of fiat monetary base expansion from people FOMO-ing in due to media coverage. People are hoping to ride the bubble and sell to a greater fool in a few months, it is classic Greater Fool Theory. That's it. Its not because we are seeing any mass increase in adoption or actual widespread utility with cryptocurrency. We passed the $1,000 psychological marker again for Bitcoin which we hadn't seen since right before the Mt.Gox disaster, and it just snowballed the positivity as headline after headline came out about the price growth. However those unexciting returns of 10% a month are not only the norm, but much more healthy for an alternative investment class. Here are the annual returns for Bitcoin for the last few years:
Year BTC Return
2017 1,300%
2016 120%
2015 35%
2014 -60%
2013 5300%
2012 150 %
Keep in mind that a 10% monthly increase when compounded equals a 313% annual return, or over 3x your money. That may not sound exciting to those who entered recently and saw their money go 20x in a month on something like Tron before it crashed back down, but that 3X annual return is better than Bitcoin's return every year except the year right before the last market meltdown and 2017. I have been saying for a while now that we are due for a major correction and every investor now should be planning for that possibility through proper allocation and setting return expectations that are reasonable.
How to set a realistic ROI target
How do I set my own personal return target?
Basically I aim to achieve a portfolio return of roughly 385% annually (3.85X increase per year) or about 11.89% monthly return when compounded. How did I come up with that target? I base it on the average compounded annual growth return (CAGR) over the last 3 years on the entire market:
Year Total Crypto Market Cap
Jan 1, 2014: $10.73 billion
Jan 1, 2017: $615 billion
Compounded annual growth return (CAGR): (615/10.73)1/3 = 385%
My personal strategy is to sell my portfolio every December then buy back into the market at around the beginning of February and I intend to hold on average for 3 years, so this works for me but you may choose to do it a different way for your own reasons. I think this is a good average to aim for as a general guideline because it includes both the good years (2017) and the bad (2014). Once you have a target you can construct your risk profile (low risk vs. high risk category coins) in your portfolio. If you want to try for a higher CAGR than about 385% then you will likely need to go into more highly speculative picks. I can't tell you what return target you should set for yourself, but just make sure its not depended on you needing to achieve continual near vertical parabolic price action in small cap shillcoins because that isn't sustainable.
As the recent January dip showed while the core cryptos like Bitcoin and Ethereum would dip an X percentage, the altcoins would often drop double or triple that amount. Its a very fragile market, and the type of dumb behavior that people were engaging in that was profitable in a bull market (chasing pumps, going all in on a microcap shillcoin, having an attention span of a squirrel...etc) will lead to consequences. Just like they jumped on the crypto bandwagon without thinking about risk adjusted returns, they will just as quickly jump on whatever bandwagon will be used to blame for the deflation of the bubble, whether the blame is assigned to Wall Steet and Bitcoin futures or Asians or some government.
Nobody who pumped money into garbage without any use case or utility will accept that they themselves and their own unreasonable expectations for returns were the reason for the gross mispricing of most cryptocurrencies.

Risk Management

Quanitifying risk in crypto is surprisingly difficult because the historical returns aren't normally distributed, meaning that tools like Sharpe Ratio and other risk metrics can't really be used as intended. Instead you'll have to think of your own risk tolerance and qualitatively evaluate how risky each crypto is based on the team, the use case prospects, the amount of competition and the general market risk.
You can think of each crypto having a risk factor that is the summation of the general crypto market risk (Rm) as ultimately everything is tied to how Bitcoin does, but also its own inherent risk specific to its own goals (Ri).
Rt = Rm +Ri
The market risk is something you cannot avoid, if some China FUD comes out about regulations on Bitcoin then your investment in solid altcoin picks will go down too along with Bitcoin. This (Rm) return is essentially what risk you undertake to have a market ROI of 385% I talked about above. What you can minimize though is the Ri, the aset specific risks with the team, the likelihood they will actually deliver, the likelihood that their solution will be adopted. Unfortunately there is no one way to do this, you simply have to take the time to research and form your own opinion on how risky it really is before allocating a certain percentage to it. Consider the individual risk of each crypto and start looking for red flags:
  • guaranteed promises of large returns (protip: that's a Ponzi)
  • float allocations that give way too much to the founder
  • vague whitepapers
  • vague timelines
  • no clear use case
  • Github with no useful code and sparse activity
  • a team that is difficult to find information on or even worse anonymous
While all cryptocurrencies are a risky investments but generally you can break down cryptos into "low" risk core, medium risk speculative and high risk speculative
  • Low Risk Core - This is the exchange pairing cryptos and those that are well established. These are almost sure to be around in 5 years, and will recover after any bear market. Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum are in this class of risk, and I would also argue Monero.
  • Medium Risk Speculative - These would be cryptos which generally have at least some product and are reasonably established, but higher risk than Core. Things like ZCash, Ripple, NEO..etc.
  • High Risk Speculative - This is anything created within the last few months, low caps, shillcoins, ICOs...etc. Most cryptos are in this category, most of them will be essentially worthless in 5 years.
How much risk should you take on? That depends on your own life situation but also it should be proportional to how much expertise you have in both financial analysis and technology. If you're a newbie who doesn't understand the tech and has no idea how to value assets, your risk tolerance should be lower than a programmer who understand the tech or a financial analyst who is experienced in valuation metrics.
Right now the trio of BTC-ETH-LTC account for 55% of the market cap, so between 50-70% of your portfolio in low Risk Core for newbies is a great starting point. Then you can go down to 25-30% as you gain confidence and experience. But always try to keep about 1/3rd in safe core positions. Don't go all in on speculative picks.
Core principles to minimize risk
  • Have the majority of your holdings in things you feel good holding for at least 2 years. Don't use the majority of your investment for day trading or short term investing.
  • Consider using dollar cost averaging to enter a position. This generally means investing a X amount over several periods, instead of at once. You can also use downward biased dollar cost averaging to mitigate against downward risk. For example instead of investing $1000 at once in a position at market price, you can buy $500 at the market price today then set several limit orders at slightly lower intervals (for example $250 at 5% lower than market price, $250 at 10% lower than market price). This way your average cost of acquisition will be lower if the crypto happens to decline over the short term.
  • Never chase a pump. Its simply too risky as its such an inefficient and unregulated market. If you continue to do it, most of your money losing decisions will be because you emotionally FOMO-ed into gambling on a symbol.
  • Invest what you can afford to lose. Don't have more than 5-10% of your net worth in crypto.
  • Consider what level of loss you can't accept in a position with a high risk factor, and use stop-limit orders to hedge against sudden crashes. Set you stop price at about 5-10% above your lowest limit. Stop-limit orders aren't perfect but they're better than having no hedging strategy for a risky microcap in case of some meltdown. Only you can determine what bags you are unwilling to hold.
  • Diversify across sectors and rebalance your allocations periodically. Keep about 1/3rd in low risk core holdings.
  • Have some fiat in reserve at a FDIC-insured exchange (ex. Gemini), and be ready to add to your winning positions on a pullback.
  • Remember you didn't actually make any money until you take some profits, so take do some profits when everyone else is at peak FOMO-ing bubble mode. You will also sleep much more comfortably once you take out the equivalent of your principal.

Portfolio Allocation

Along with thinking about your portfolio in terms of risk categories described above, I really find it helpful to think about the segments you are in. OnChainFX has some segment categorization but I generally like to bring it down to:
  • Core holdings - essentially the Low Risk Core segment
  • Platform segment
  • Privacy segment
  • Finance/Bank settlement segment
  • Enterprise Blockchain solutions segment
  • Promising/Innovative Tech segment
This is merely what I use, but I'm sure you can think of your own. The key point I have is to try to invest your medium and high risk picks in a segment you understand well, and in which you can relatively accurately judge risk. If you don't understand anything about how banking works or SWIFT or international settlement layers, don't invest in Stellar. If you have no idea how a supply chain functions, avoid investing in VeChain (even if it's being shilled to death on Reddit at the moment just like XRB was last month).
What's interesting is that often we see like-coin movement, for example when a coin from one segment pumps we will frequently see another similar coin in the same segment go up (think Stellar following after Ripple).
Consider the historic correlations between your holdings. Generally when Bitcoin pumps, altcoins dump but at what rate depends on the coin. When Bitcoin goes sideways we tend to see pumping in altcoins, while when Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down.
You should set price targets for each of your holdings, which is a whole separate discussion I'll go in Part 2 of the guide.

Summing it up

This was meant to get you think about what return targets you should set for your portfolio and how much risk you are willing to take and what strategies you can follow to mitigate that risk.
Returns around 385% (average crypto market CAGR over the last 3 years) would be a good target to aim for while remaining realistic, you can tweak it a bit based on your own risk tolerance. What category of risk your individual crypto picks should be will be determined by how much more greed you have for above average market return. A portfolio of 50% core holdings, 30% medium risk in a sector you understand well and 20% in high risk speculative is probably what the average portfolio should look like, with newbies going more towards 70% core and only 5% high risk speculative.
Just by thinking about these things you'll likely do better than most crypto investors, because most don't think about this stuff, to their own detriment.
submitted by arsonbunny to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Why you don't HODL crypto

remember this?
Since this is a trading sub, I'm likely preaching to the choir here, but I got banned from /bitcoin for making some bearish warning posts back in December near the ATHs when I cashed out all my BTC holdings at 17.3k. My strategy is very simple, I buy when google trends are increasing and crypto has lost almost all mention in the media, and I sell when google trends peak and it's all over the media and my Uber driver is bragging to me about how much more money he's making from his bitcoin holdings vs his day job.
This is of course not a strategy to perfectly time the tops and bottoms, but overall, it seems to crush buy & hold since crypto is an asset class that isn't really backed by many fundamentals, mostly oscillates between extreme fear and extreme greed. Right now we are in dead man's zone inbetween the two extremes which is too risky for me to go long or short. I will buy in the 1-3k zone which will be preceded by a few more months of crypto losing daily relevance. Of course, there is no guarantee that it goes to 1-3k zone, but if it does, the risk/reward will once again favor the bulls.
This medium-term trading strategy also frees up my time from having to watch crypto charts 24/7 and I find it to be a good compromise between day/swing trading and buy & hold. Typical holding period is 6 months - 1 year.
submitted by pyrrhotechnologies to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Long Response to Scott's Tax Posts

I've been reading the series of posts about these tax cuts and the associated discussion with great interest. I think it has been a very good, civil discussion, and there have been many enlightening viewpoints given. I also think a bunch of the discussion is based on a number of misunderstandings and/or misconceptions held by people on both sides of the debate, our own dear correspondent included. To respond properly to these misconceptions requires a post a bit longer than a traditional comment, hence this post. I hope that this can serve as another contribution to what I feel has been a productive discussion.
 
First off, some background on myself, since I am a newcomer to this forum. I work in finance, so while not being an economist, I am at least economist adjacent. I would self-describe my economics knowledge as roughly in line with someone who graduated from an upper tier college with an undergrad degree in economics, or maybe a first year grad student. (I myself have a Masters in Finance, and seven years work experience in various finance roles under my belt) All this to say that I at least have a working knowledge of most of the relevant theories, and a capacity to examine most underlying assumptions in various plans.
 
Let's also get another point out of the way; I think this particular tax bill, as drafted, is an absolute dog. This article, in the "Fun with Taxes" Section does a decent job of explaining why. In particular, the number of distortions and inefficiencies that this bill creates is at least as large as the number of inefficiencies it removes. The Pass-through income provision strikes me (and the author of the linked article) as particularly egregious, and seems, to me, to be a blatant giveaway to anyone rich and/or savvy enough to take advantage of it, while also creating massive loopholes that it purports to be removing. So, that's out of the way; I'm not going to try to defend this tax bill on its substance, because I think that's a losing battle. However, I am going to try to defend it on its principles. I think the best way to try that is to just walk through our dear correspondent's posts up to this point, and try to correct some of the more glaring issues I see with them.
 
THE TAX BILL COMPARED TO OTHER VERY EXPENSIVE THINGS
 
Before Scott accepts any of the numbers that he used on his chart at face value, I would encourage him to re-read his post, Considerations on Cost Disease. It's laughable to suggest that the U.S. Government could solve homelessness for $23B / year, truly. We spent $70B in 2016 on Food Stamps alone, you seriously think we could end homelessness for 1/3 of that budget? Similarly, Bernie's estimated $47B/ year for free college tuition for all relied on some, ah, dubious assumptions. This is before we even get into the current discussion about whether all that college is even worth it. When Scott says we could fund the Apollo Program nine times over, he conveniently forgets that the cost of the Apollo Program in 2017 dollars was $110B, and that's before we take into account the fact that everything the government does costs 5x as much as it should and no one knows why. Now is also a good time to mention that SpaceX runs on ~$1B per year, providing a bit of perspective on the relative efficiency of government vs free enterprise. Obviously, vast technology gains have been made since the 1970s, but it's pretty reasonable to suggest that a similar operation to SpaceX, but funded by the government, would be at least an order of magnitude more expensive. The numbers quoted for solving world hunger and universal healthcare don't ring particularly true to me either.
 
There are two numbers on there that seem pretty accurate, and unsurprisingly they are also the least inflammatory: the Bush Tax Cuts, and the Obama Stimulus. Incidentally, I, who voted for Obama precisely zero times, thought those stimulus measures were a good, even great, idea. I also think that a hypothetical, actually effective version of this bill would be a good idea. Furthermore, the majority of the complaints about this bill have not been of the form "Why can't we just do the Obama stimulus again? That would be so much more effective than this tax cut!" They have largely been in keeping with the tone Scott adopts here, which is "Why can't we do [thing that the government cannot accomplish], instead? That would be so much better!" Well, yes, solving homelessness for $23B would be better than this tax cut. It would also be nice to give everyone a $25k Universal Basic Income for the same price tag as the tax cut. Unfortunately, reality dictates that we would only be able to pay for a much smaller UBI for the same price. We need to focus on comparing to realistic expectations for the current government, rather than what might be possible if huge efficiency gains were made.
 
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS: THE TAX BILL IS STILL VERY BAD
 
I have less of a problem with the substance of this post, but more of a problem with the underlying assumptions Scott uses to arrive at his arguments. Again, let's reiterate that I think the bill is poorly drafted, and that I even think the alternative Scott suggested would be better than the current bill. Unfortunately, that's not so much a ringing endorsement of Scott's plan as it is a repudiation of the many problems with this bill. Part of the response was going to be essentially point 1 and 2 that Scott acknowledges at the beginning of his next post, so I won't elaborate on that any further than to say that the current regime of corporate taxation in America is extremely inefficient, and any plan that improves that state of affairs is a definite positive. There's a number of other points that I think are worth expounding upon however.
 
Scott points out the disconnect between economic growth and the fortunes of the majority of people in the last few decades. He's right, there definitely is something at work that is causing the most productive people to accrue the lion's share of economic gains in recent history. I think that topic is hugely complex, and it's clear that tax policy is, at best, a mere subset of the many causes of the phenomenon. (For my two cents, I think the two biggest causes are increased globalization, and increased scalability of new technology. Henry Ford was limited by how many cars he could produce, and largely by the American market. Mark Zuckerberg has no such limits on either front. I also think both globalization and scalable technology are net positive forces that have the drawback of exacerbating inequality.) I am not the artist that Scott is when it comes to medical related similies, but curbing inequality through tax policy seems to me like treating cancer with morphine. It may make you feel better, but you aren't addressing the underlying condition.
 
Scott then performs a surprisingly strong worded and vitriolic diatribe for someone who admits a layman's understanding of the issue at hand. Frankly, it was off putting and out of character. I won't get into that any further, however. What I want to address is what seems to be an underlying assumption that drove most of the rest of his post. Namely, he treats things that he considers to be important as terminal values for the government.
 
The most revealing sentence, I think, was this: [If the tax bill works, investment increases and turbo charges the economy, and poor and middle class people get more money] "then the good thing that happens is that poor and middle-class people have more money" (emphasis my own.) With all due respect, Scott, I think that spending money on investment and turbo-charging the economy, are noble goals in and of themselves. Of course, it would be better if they also resulted in the average person improving their economic station. Similarly, I think that on an isolated basis, a straight tax cut to the lower and middle class would be one of the most efficient ways to fulfill the goal "improve the economic station of the lower and middle class" in the short term. However, I think a more effective method of fulfilling that goal would be to take a longer term view and try to address the actual cause of the problem, which is more complicated and unrelated to tax policy.
 
I think that often, criticisms of the government allow perfect to be the enemy of good. If a program only increases spending on investment and turbo charges the economy, but doesn't help lower and middle class people, then it is suddenly an unacceptable option. The U.S. political system serves many interests, and many of those interests are often competing. As long as a particular policy is, on the balance, a net positive, then it should at least be considered a viable option (of course, there are many examples of seemingly net positive policies that are not good ideas for any number of reasons.) Scott seems to be making this sort of argument, while also not acknowledging that there are other perspectives on this issue that have different priorities.
 
TAX BILL 3: DON’T MESS WITH TAXES
 
I'm not going to disagree with his first point. I agree that I don't think the bill as drafted will stimulate growth very much. It doesn't do all that much to eliminate inefficiencies, and it creates quite a few, so it's at best a wash. I think this point is correct.
 
I very strongly disagree with the second point though. In fact, I think the viewpoint that Scott advocates in support of this concept is perhaps the biggest contributor to the mess we have found ourselves in. There's going to be some math in this but I will try to keep it as simple as possible.
 
Let's take the exact same town, with 1000 people, the effective altruist Alice, and the demon-cursed Bob. Let's throw in a few more details. Before Bob was cursed by the demon, everyone in town made $1000 per year, and paid $200 in taxes. The GDP of the town was $1 million per year, with $200,000 going to taxes to pay for various frivolous services that the townsfolk deem necessary to live their frivolous lives (per Scott's opinion.) To make the math easier, let's say that the demon curses Bob to destroy 5x the wealth he pays in taxes. After the curse, there's only $999,000 in GDP, which results in $199,800 in tax revenue. The demon has basically removed Bob from the town, economically speaking. All the contributions he makes are nullified by the effect of the demon's curse.
 
Now Scott gets elected president of the town. As promised, he takes the taxes on Alice down to $0. To make up for the lost revenue, he raises the taxes on everyone else by $0.20. Sure, Bob's curse destroys another $1 from the town's wealth, but that's an easy trade! We just paid $1 of frivolous wealth from frivolous people to accomplish $200 of stuff that matters. I'd do that every day and twice on Sunday.
 
A few thing happen after this however. First, the demon curses ninety nine more people, each also named Bob. The GDP of the town now drops to $900,000, and the effect of the tax is now $100 in lost wealth. That's not good, but the tax cut is still a good idea. $200 is way bigger than $100. In fact, even more good news is that seeing the tax cut inspires another ninety nine people to take up Alice's cause! Scott gleefully cuts their taxes too. We just created $20,000 in real, tangible progress, and all it cost was $10,000 of destroyed wealth.
 
Of course, the non-Alice townsfolk are less happy. They should have taken home $900k last year, $720k after tax. (Remember that there are now 100 Alices) They also should have had $200k dollars to pay for the governmental programs that they find important. After the demon's curse, that $900k decreased to $810k, the $720k decreased to $650k, and the $200k decreased to $180k. To add insult to injury, Scott's tax cut destroyed another $10,000, and raised the taxes on them even further. After Scott's tax cut, they now earn $800k, and take home $620k, but still have the same $180k of government spending. Their take home wages are down almost 20% in one year, and they are flipping mad.
 
Next year, Moloch runs against Scott in the local election. He says "Vote for me, and I will cut your taxes. I will make everyone who votes for Scott pay for it." The vote is split 800 - 200 for mathematical convenience, with all the Alices and Bobs voting for Scott, and everyone else voting for Moloch. In order to fund the tax cut to his favored consituents, Moloch raises the taxes on Alice and Bob to 100%. Alice is now not only unable to donate to her favored cause, but also unable to eat. Meanwhile, since the Bob's face a combined tax burden of $100k, they wipe out half of the GDP of the town through the demon's curse. The townspeople, being unaware that their taxation of Bob is the cause of this sudden decrease in their GDP, turn their hatred outward, blaming outsourcing or the decline of their favored industry for the town's sudden decrease in fortune. Moloch rules the town with an iron fist, and the GDP never recovers.
 
The point of this is that if you can direct money towards a favored constituency, then so can the opposition. And as long as you two continue trading power back and forth, then you will continue to break off pieces of the pie for your ingroup, while hurting everyone bit by bit. The purpose of a tax policy, therefore, not be to decide where we raise the funds from, but rather it should be to raise the appropriate amount of funds in the most efficient manner possible. To invite efficiency losses in the service of raising money from the "right" places is to invite ruin. How we spend the money that we raise can and should be an open and separate question. Unfortunately, these two questions are also frequently conflated. Nonetheless, when we are thinking about taxation, the operative question should be "What is the most effective way of doing this?" We should then set the level of taxation at a level commensurate with the level of spending that we deem necessary, subject to the deficit. "Necessary" spending is a whole different topic that really shouldn't be mixed with taxation, as it is complex enough as it stands.
submitted by azerusa to slatestarcodex [link] [comments]

FCoin Sharing Session Q&A — 07/23/2018

FCoin Founder Mr. Zhang Jian Addressed the Most Controversial Questions about FCoin since its Launch.
(July 23, 2018) FCoin held an online media Q&A session on Monday with its founder, Mr. Zhang Jian replying the most controversial questions on FCoin, a digital asset trading platform that was launched barely two months ago but has already become the most talked about phenomenon in the industry.
These controversial topics include FCoin’s efforts in token-reforming, the general concept of token economy, the fluctuation of FCoin price and response to the recent negative comments and accusations made by Binance on FCoin. A complete Q&A could be found as below:
Q1: We have seen many new announcements issued by FCoin with lots of new concepts. Could you first elaborate on FCandy? Why do you start to return in FCandy instead of FT, what’s the strategy behind it? What do you think is the true value of FCandy and what is your expected price for it?
Answer1: Regarding FCandy, we mentioned before in our announcement that it is an assert pool in which all kinds of assets could be placed in. We actually have placed lots of FTs during the first round. What do we mean by “placing”, basically it’s equivalent to donation and what is its true value? I think it could benefit our entire community through our donation. It is clearly stated in our announcement that any digital assets could be placed in FCandy and FCandy will be issued according to a certain proportion, but to guarantee the real asset value of FCandy. However, the assets placed in FCandy pool no longer belong to those who place the assets but to the entire community which makes FCandy vitally different from the other asset pools or various products. We designed a lot of ways to give out FCandy to our community members. It doesn’t mean that we no longer return in FT, 100% transaction fee is still returned in FT, this is our set rule which will never be changed. Which are some of the situations where we will not return in FT? Anything but “Trans-fee mining” mechanism. Because all the other mechanism is simply activities. Like our referral programs, incentive programs and etc. These are community activities with the aim to motivate the communities and bring more benefits, so these are the responsibility that FCandy should assume. I do not need to elaborate on the value of FCandy. I encourage everyone to see the front page of FCandy in which the amount of assets are clearly indicated. In the future, a large number of project participators will place their assets into this pool. We will also initiate voting system and community members could vote on whether we should sell part of the assets and these sold asserts will belong to FCandy holders, similar to the concept as dividends. But this will be a plan in the far future, not to be realized recently. Regarding the price of FCandy, I cannot comment on this. Based on the asset pool, everyone can gauge its reasonable price range.
Q2: What’s the latest listing rules? Is the new FOne trading zone transferring the token-listing right to the certified organizations? What’s the FCoin’s standard in selecting a certified organization? What’s the difference in the responsibilities and rights of these certified organizations compared to the ones in the Stock market?
Answer 2: Some adjustments were made on the listing rules with the launch of FOne. What made us launch FOne? Actually, we have encountered some problems when doing GPM, i.e there is a long list of projects waiting to be listed which is far beyond the capacity of the platform itself. Most importantly, we encounter the problems of verifying its authenticity. Hence, in order to make the entire mechanism work better, the essence of FOne is to let FCoin certified organizations to screen quality projects. Every certified organization has its own zone that has the right to list tokens and set its own listing rules. We provide service and technical support to various certified organizations. This relationship will guarantee a healthy growth of FOne. As for the rights and responsibilities, these are vitally important as well. Since these trading zones are opened by certified organizations, they have the responsibility to guarantee the quality of its listing projects. FCoin retains the rights to review and verify the performance of these certified organizations and details will be released soon. We really hope that good projects could stand out from this innovative mechanism and this will help motivate the entire industry. Regarding the selection standards for the certified organizations, these are mainly the mainstream token fund in the industry. Easy to get in but difficult to get out. First of all, these organizations need to have certain reputation in the industry. We welcome them to join us as our certified organizations in the beginning but more strict standards will be launched later. In addition, we will also have control over the organization list and eliminate those who are not up to our standards. We will soon announce the list of our second batch of certified organizations. The entire crypto industry is not yet mature and it’s currently a mix of everything. We are trying to introduce step by step some mature models to break through the mess. We are on our way to a revolutionary future
Q3: Is FOne the trial zone of token-reforming for FCoin? What is the difference about listing rules and circulation mechanism between Main Board A & B? As a mature product or company, what are the necessary steps for token-reforming and what are the biggest difficulties and challenges during the process? Are there any successful cases on token-reforming before? To a mature community, the compliance and legitimacy of listing can be a sensitive topic, is this going to be a key obstacle for the improvement of token-reforming trial zone? How will you solve this problem? In your opinion, which industries will make progress first during Coin-reforming trial zone?
Answer 3: The answer to the first question is NO. It has clearly been stated in the announcement that token-reforming is not made by FOne. Token-reforming is in main Board C, right now we have main Board A & B; the mature blockchain projects are in main board A, and emerging projects in board B, while the token-reforming projects are in board C. FOne is the successor of the previous Innovation Zone on GPM with the aim to support startup projects. After the upgrading of the overall positioning, GPM will focus on supporting the long-term projects while the startup projects will move to FOne. FOne will transfer the listing power to certified organizations in order to attract more quality projects to get in in the early stage. As a matter of fact, token-reforming is not all that easy. We have just released an announcement on which a new project was applying to get listed on our main board C, of course there are many other projects doing so as well. We have to consider the project in a comprehensive manner, from the preparation, the qualification of the projects to the business model or the maturity of the business Situations(applications). There might be two ways for reforming, such as QOS, the one project that we have been observing and providing the technical support. It has applied to get listed on our main board C. QOS is a typical blockchain project with mature business applications and massive users, along with a solid preparation process. This kind of project is well prepared, that’s why it can enter the final verification and listing schedule stage very soon; as for some other projects, although they come from a mature company, they do not really understand the token economy, the listing process might take longer. In my opinion, we have to go through an important process to acknowledge the token economy, token and coin; Second, about how reforming can make a great influence, and connect its previous- designed products with business module, aligned them well and solve its previous conflicts of interest. That’s why reforming is quite difficult and challenging. To sum up I think there are two biggest difficulties for reform. First is the whole design of token economy model — it means completely different for different products or companies, even with different approaches , thus, quite challenging. Second is the overall interest arrangement. A mature product must face mature interest arrangement, including shareholder structure, existing resources and how to solve these problems. It requires of massive communication as well as knowledge and determinations to get all these problems solved. These two are the most difficulties we currently face. For the sensitive question about compliance, I think all innovations will face a certain kind of risk, the more subversive the innovation, the higher risk it may face, especially like token economy, as its target and core is to change the market relationships. It’s quite subversive and will meet lots of challenges never that have never been met before. Why people like to talk about the first person who eat the crab? If there is no challenges, people would just repeat doing things they have done like a hundred times before, but it’s not the case here. If you are willing to seize the opportunity of the new economy, you need to take risks and accept the challenges. I think it’s a trend for the future and it’s unstoppable. In addition, I don’t think it’s a key obstacle for a product or a company that are determined to explore in this direction. What I mentioned before are quite essential, firstly it has to be in the internet industry and financial industry, or the combination of these two, such as the finance technology. There are lots of opportunities within, so are in some other industries.
Q4: There are several institutions dabbling in Blockchain+Insurance model, however, this model has still not been widely applied. Therefore, will this new Insurance community FInsur just a publicity stunt? Is “Insurance is mining “ just some benefits to attract users, or is it a mutual insurance based on blockchain technology? How does this model work?
Answer 4: FInsur for sure is not publicity stunt. A lot of people doubted about FCoin when it first came out, is FCoin a publicity stunt? With the concept of “Trans-fee mining” being widely spread and recently became a trend, it is obvious that we are not a publicity stunt, otherwise it won’t show such a strong vitality. Therefore, the concept of “insurance is mining “is quite simple. I would like to repeat it again, it’s similar to FCoin essentially. What is the concept of “Trans-fee mining”? Clients and users of an exchange are the traders. As the core concept of token economy, I think the main targets of business service, is like the relationship between an exchange and its users, which is in opposite relationship. We hope that after the reforms by token economy, it can be an untied relationship, even for the sake of common interest. So let the traders be the shareholders of FCoin, that is the essence of “Trans-fee mining”. Likewise, let the insurance applicant become the shareholder of an insurance company, or at least make their interest consistent rather than conflicting (money-making vs money-losing), which is a long-term target for us, and also my initial intention. It’s hard to image vehicles on road without insurances. That’s why there is compulsory insurance like Compulsory Traffic Insurance and commercial insurance that we must pay. It also applies to ourown digital currencies & assets. Therefore, I don’t think FInsur is a publicity stunt, but will be a benchmark for innovation in this industry and bring in massive benefits.
Q5: How about the operation of stabilization funds launched by FCoin? Is this stabilization funds really effective on regulating the dramatic market fluctuation and keeping the price of FT stable?
Answer 5: We have just wrapped up a one-month life cycle of the Stabilization fund Phase I and it is already in the process of balancing, not running any more. I am not the one who has proposed the concept of stabilization fund. I have repeatedly said that for an emerging trading product or an emerging market, especially when it has great innovations, nobody knows how to price it correctly in the early stage. It will also suffer from all kinds of malicious attacks and various rumors under such a complicated market situation. Hence, the market fluctuations will be very dramatic in the short term. The stabilization fund was launched in this context. Can this fund really keep the market volatility stable? This mainly depends on the factors of market volatility and various other situations. The stabilization fund will certainly ease the dramatic fluctuations of the market. But will the price stop to fluctuate with the funds? Or will the price not rise and fall sharply? This is uncertain. Since the market price, especially short-term market behavior, is very complicated and thus very difficult to predict. So the fund can only ease the dramatic fluctuations. As some unstable factors are gradually eliminated, or as the platform matures, these unstable factors will be disappearing slowly. Say, there are huge trust issues in the earlier stages, however, as the platform continues to grow, these problems will be reduced accordingly. Now everyone feels that FCoin is a very reliable platform which has been working so hard to make the platform, the community and the whole ecosystem bigger. In this case, those difficulties that we encounter before won’t exist anymore. Our risk control in the early stage might not be that sharp, leading to the existence of some malicious short-selling and other hostile situations. With the gradual improvement and maturity of our backend monitoring system, I believe there will be less risks in this aspect. Therefore, the whole market will gradually become more healthy in the long run.
Q6: You mentioned that the explosive effect of FCoin is a victory for the “tokenomics.” Can you share with us your understanding of the “tokenomics”? What is its strong driving force? What distinguishes it from the traditional business model and incentive mechanism?
Answer 6: It is very hard for me to talk about my understanding of the tokenomics, since this topic is too big. But I can talk about some key points, such as what I just mentioned, “What is the strong driving force?” I just mentioned that the distinguished difference between the structure of the tokenomics design and the traditional business model and incentive mechanism is the reversal of the production relationship. How to reverse? As mentioned earlier, producers and consumers are a pair of relationships. The common form of the Internet is the relationship between the platform and its user. In fact, they are all similar. That is, the relationship between a service provider and a client, or the relationship between a product provider and a consumer. Under the traditional business model, this group of relationships must be antagonistic at the level of interests. Because the mission of a commercial organization is to make money. They earn money from consumers or users. Under the traditional business model, you buy any goods, or you consume any service, the only relationship between you and the service provider and the producer of the goods is that you pay him. Let us think about the reason why this commercial system can exist. It is because these users are paying so that the commercial system can exist. In other words, these consumers and users are the basis for the existence of this commercial system. But if this commercial system develops bigger, then it has nothing to do with the users which are the basis and premise of the existence of this commercial system. I think this is the problem of the traditional business model, and it will definitely face a big upgrade in the future. The big upgrade has started slowly now, and I think its solution is tokenomics. FCoin is such a practice of tokenomics. We found that as FCoin grows and matures, traders gradually become shareholders of FCoin. The trader not only becomes a user of the platform, but also contributes fees and transactions. At the same time, he can also get 100% return of the exchange’s “shares” FT. The returned FT can enjoy FCoin’s income distribution forever, and it is 80% of the income distribution. This is unimaginable in the traditional capital market. Let me give you an example. In the traditional capital market, basically everyone does not pay attention to dividends because they are so little. There are too many companies that don’t pay dividends all along the year. Everyone can check the dividends of the traditional market which are so little and nobody concerns about the dividends. The timeliness of dividends distribution is also executed poorly. As the price of crypto currency fluctuates dramatically, users do not feel the power of our model in the early stages. With the maturity of FCoin, they feel that our model of income distribution is extremely revolutionary. Firstly, its proportion of dividends distribution is so large. How about the traditional listed companies? They distribute neither revenues nor profits. It is possible that the companies might need to keep enough cash for development, so they do not distribute dividends. FCoin directly distribute income to users, the vast majority 80% of our revenues on a daily basis. This is an absolutely revolutionary concept in the traditional capital market. Because the entire concept of the so-called financial system and finance of the crypto industry has not yet been established, and it is still relatively chaotic, the crypto industry is still at a very early stage for the pricing and cognitions. The creation and power of FCoin and FT takes time to show, as I always say “let the bullets fly for a while.” The same is true for FInsur. I hope that in the future, various new models based on the creation of the tokenomics or the transformation of the original model will have the power to make our customers consistent with our interests . I have to say one more thing. I think that this power is actually much underestimated. Because once the production relationship changes, once the service provider and the client are in the same interests, the whole decision-making process, the starting point and mentality of decision-making, all community-based architecture and all future mechanism design and gameplay will change. I am appreciating this in a more in-depth sense now. Therefore, the future of the tokenomics will definitely show great vitality. It will have a huge impact on the original business model, commercial design and corporate system. This is my judgment on the future.
Q7: Many exchanges are allegedly using bots wash trading and their users are mostly zombie users who have no practical effect. Could you please tell us about how would FCoin gradually increase the number of real users so as to make the platform grow in a more healthy manner?
Answer 7: Time will prove everything. We are constantly upgrading and innovating. Everything we do is to make our various mechanism work in a more robust way. The number of FCoin users and daily transactions continue to grow and FCoin is definitely on the right track. Many people are still accusing us of hiring bots to do wash trading. As our platform matures, there is more Quantitative transaction going on which provides real benefits for our community members. If you pay attention to our recent changes on the platform, you could definitely feel it.
Q8: What has FCoin revolutionized the industry in terms of the rules, both the unspoken rules and the apparent rules?
Answer 8: First, I will talk about the unspoken rules. The biggest difference between FCoin and all the other exchanges is that when you open our front page, you could clearly see that almost all our data are transparent and as we continue to develop our products and enhance users experiences, the level of our transparency will only be elevated accordingly. This is something you cannot imagine in traditional industries. No company, in our times, would announce its revenue because they do not need to distribute their profits to their users. But we are different, we cannot fake our data. If you are a black box i.e a company that does not need to disclose data to the public, you actually have the opportunity to fake data. I’ve said many time before that it was ridiculous to accuse FCoin of bots wash trading. We simply cannot fake any data as otherwise we will not have enough funds to be distributed to our users. All our data is real and transparent which brings the first revolutionary change of rules in the industry. About the apparent rules. Many users said that FCoin still made a lot of money after they saw the platform had used all kinds of algorithms. But what I want to point out is that why not take a look at other exchanges that make huge amount of money but still give back nothing to its users? On our side, FCoin distribute 80% of daily revenues to its users and for quite a long period of time, even 100%. After the launch of FCandy, we spend a majority of platform’s daily revenue to buy back FTs which later on are distributed to its community members. I hope you can look further with FCoin. FT certainly has its market cap, but so long as you hold FTs even for just a day, you will be able to get your daily dividend from that day. That’s just the beginning of how FCoin is going to revolutionize this industry. Stay tuned!
Q9: Mr Zhang, you always say that the market will eventually see the value of FT, but the price of FT has been dropping drastically non-stop. Why is there a vast difference between what you see in the value of FT and what the market see it?
Answer 9: FCoin has just been launched for less than 2 months. It’s way too early to talk about the value of a new born thing. For instance, a lot of people asked me about Bitcoin many years ago, at a time when the price of Bitcoin kept dropping from 8,000 RMB to 900RMB. I told them that the value of Bitcoin needed to be evaluated in a 4-year full circle, not just for a few months. If you use a 4-year full circle to draw the candlestick of Bitcoin, what will you see? The short-term price is unpredictable and is being influenced by many factors in the short term, like the market supply, all kinds of different judgments, disapprovals of new things in the early days and even rumors, but in the long run, the price is surely determined by its value. I have some data in FCoin’s front page, our dynamic P/E ratio is 0.56 as of today. You can go to any A-share market to check their P/E ratio, especially those innovative internet companies or high tech companies and judge by yourself. As I mentioned earlier, we have upgraded our Incentive programs, it is now returned with FCandy instead of FT. Because FCandy is highly linked with any activities that benefit the entire community members. This will be our future principles. In the meantime, transaction fee is still returned 100% as in FT and this is some ething, I have reinforced many times, that we won’t change. Why? Because this is our basic model, everything that FCoin is based on which is to make traders as the shareholders of FCoin.
Q10: Mr. Zhang, my questions might come across as a bit of sharp. Two days ago, FCoin announced on its website that the price of FT has been fluctuating drastically and later on, some media reported that the price was being manipulated by a professional team called “Ghost in the Dark” and implied that it had something to do with Binance. Miss He Yi from Binance accused FCoin of paying for media to write negative articles about Binance. Do you have any comments on this? In addition, Mr. Zhao Chang Peng (CZ) from Binance remarked during a media Q&A session in Seoul that “FCoin won’t last long as it is constantly selling new tokens but the price of them keep on dropping.” Do you have anything to say to his remarks?
Answer 10: Your so called sharp questions are actually not sharp at all. First of all, we announced officially on our website that the price of FT encountered abnormal fluctuations because we had found malicious attack from a team that was deliberately short-selling FT and we have proof of it. That’s why some immediate action has been taken to limit the sales order in 3 trading pairs which effectively destroy the botting programming designed by that professional team. As for the media report, I do not want to comment on it, but they did report the same to us through their investigations. About CZ’s comments? Actions speak louder than words. Why does he keep on talking about me if I am not threatening him? This is weird, let the fact speak for itself.
Q11: FCoin has been launched for only 2 months but developed really rapidly with trading volumes topping the chart while it took Binance 3 months to become №1 with real trading volumes. FCoin is very strong with ecosystem, but users’ experience is really bad. No trading depth and the webpage get stuck all the time. The launched app version (still in beta) is even worse than a third-party app while it takes forever to launch an official version. My question is, as a digital trading platform, shouldn’t Trading experiences be respected and focused?
Answer 11: Your question is quite sharp. Trading, in many industries are indeed not well respected, but for FCoin, we have been trying our best to perfect it. There is a process for everything to grow in maturity. If it is something great, it is bound to be less mature in the early stage. More patience please and we welcome everyone to supervise and support us.
[More to the question] — My question of trading not being respected has another sense to it in terms of users’ experience. This should always be put in the priority but with FCoin, it is not the case. It seems that there are always be put in the priority but with FCoin, it is not the case. It seems that there are always things far more important than users’ experience but shouldn’t it be the core for any exchanges?
Answer 11: Apologies for my misunderstanding of part of your question. As for the priority, if you have to choose between platform’s security/stability and users’ experience, which one would you choose? We are still in the initial stage and have been developing really fast. Therefore, we have to contribute tremendously to the security and stability of the platform. The core of a mature exchange is not only about users’ experience. As we all know, we cannot really see an exchange model with the traditional capital market. When you are trading in stock exchanges, it’s the brokers that you see, not the exchanges. That’s why I think currently for us the main focus is still to improve our core strength and in the meantime, to perfect the trading experiences along the way.
submitted by FCoinOfficial to FCoin_Official [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Cash Explained ( BTC vs BCH ) - YouTube BYBIT vs PHEMEX - WHICH IS THE BEST BITCOIN LEVERAGE TRADING EXCHANGE?? [DETAILED REVIEW] PayPal to Perfect Money - YouTube Bitcoin - What You NEED To Know Before Investing in ... This Will Change Your Mind On Bitcoin. MASSIVE Amounts of Money Pouring In! Plus FedNow Coin

There is no bitcoin vs blockchain technology because without bitcoin the blockchain system would be insecure. Anyone can create a new blockchain but it would not be secure without a network of computers that are incentivized to protect and maintain it. Bitcoin was the first and is still the largest, most secure and decentralized network, making it the healthiest blockchain in existence. Bitcoin’s huge swings make it risky as an investment and difficult as a day-to-day payment method. But it’s slowly changing. As more money flows into bitcoin, it’s becoming less volatile ... A good topic of conversation lately has been the old bitcoin vs gold argument. I like it. The question is not whether philosophically one is better than the other. The only question we need to care about is which one can make us more money. That’s why we’re in the market and that’s the only reason why we’re in the market. Here’s an arithmetic chart of Bitcoin relative to Gold so you ... “Altcoin vs Bitcoin cap now two weeks into being tested on its 6.5 year support line. Weekly RSI is more oversold than its entire history (has been since July!)” The story of global alt markets in a series of charts… Altcoin vs Bitcoin cap now two weeks into being tested on its 6.5 year support line. Weekly RSI is more oversold than its entire history (has been since July!) pic.twitter ... Bitcoin halving charts that show what happened in 2012, 2016, and what could happen to BTC in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[index] [47651] [7163] [32102] [35406] [50610] [48737] [3491] [25596] [16535] [49772]

Bitcoin Cash Explained ( BTC vs BCH ) - YouTube

Follow mOE at: ☻http://www.twitch.tv/m0e_tv ☻https://www.facebook.com/m0etv ☻https://twitter.com/m0E_tv ☻https://instagram.com/m0e_tv Intro By PubFX http... 🟩 BITCOIN BLUEPRINT 🟩 🚀 Over 1000 Members 🚀 ... that leverage trading is very risky and around 70% of people who leverage trade over a period of time may lose money. Keep this in mind ... Bitcoin has been all over the news. But should you be investing in Bitcoin or buying bitcoin? Well, here are 4 things you need to know before buying or inves... Start trading Bitcoin and cryptocurrency here: http://bit.ly/2Vptr2X Bitcoin is the first decentralized digital currency. All Bitcoin transactions are docume... TAKE A LOOK! At the charts with Fez. He shares his thoughts on the charts for Bitcoin and Ethereum and explains why they are going to dump and why it good for price action over the next few months ...

#