An alt has the veneer of scarcity within its own system. But that mirage evaporates when it is viewed outside its border.
If an alt then lacks scarcity outside of its own confines, its only value stems from two sources: its use case as a speculative vehicle and the minimum amount necessary to be held at any one time to achieve its demanded utilization.
Remember this chart if anyone dares tell you there is scarcity in alts; ~7,500 alts are listed on CMC alone (more than 2x the count from 1 year ago), with 2x+ that number unlisted and floating in the ether.
One alt threatens the scarcity of BTC. Many alts only ossify it.
When you stop and think about the fact that owning a basket of alts has performed the same from a pure return perspective as holding BTC while exposing yourself to orders of magnitude more risk, you may be compelled to rethink your investment strategy.
I think about this tweet sometimes. I find it to be true over a long enough horizon and especially compelling for non-traders/market timers.
/1 The first difficulty adjustment post-halving is indicative of an ~15% hash power ratchet down.
/2 This is somewhat in line with the model mix assumed by @BlockwareTeam's report in March (blockwaresolutions.com/research-and-p…) where S9's were seen at 38.6%. That number probably trended down as miners positioned into the halving and upgraded equipment.
/3 A material difficulty adjustment downwards can be understood as a bloodletting of the weakest mining participants. Parri passau, these miners are obligated to sell the largest % of rewards to cover costs. Lower cost miners could also sell all inventory, but are not mandated.
/1 At the risk of looking like a fool by Monday, I want to make the case for why I am a buyer of Bitcoin at the $8,500-$8,600 level, near 20% off the recent local high. In a sea of shorts frothing about a continued plunge, it seems like the contrarian position to adopt.
/2 Beginning with a broad macro perspective, after 7 days of rarely seen bloodshed in global equity markets, and in particular US equities, bidders have finally stepped in today with a rally off the capitulation notched in the overnight spoos markets.
/3 Gold is down the most since 2013, possibly sold to cover margin calls - this is a further sign of an emotional and capitulatory macro environment. In all of this, Bitcoin has held, losing less on the day than gold(!).
/1 We are witnessing a resurgence in Chinese demand for cryptocurrencies. This trend in the making comes after more than a year of relative quiet, a reminder of the time when Chinese volumes were king.
/2 What is behind this sudden risk appetite? The Hang Seng index has driven up 20% since the end of 2018 (HSCEI below), while margin trading volumes have nearly doubled from December of last year.
/3 Important to understand - Chinese equity markets are much more retail-centric, with the archetypal Mom and Pop investors accentuating price reflexivity. We may now have turned a corner on the enormously damaging price effects of forced deleveraging in Chinese assets.
1/ The only difference between Binance $BNB and a chop shop is that CZ is breaking down his customers instead of autos.
/2 CZ learned the craft from the best at OKCoin (blockchaintransparency.org) and then honed wash trading techniques at Binance, adding another innovation, charging projects listing fees to pad revenue
/3 He managed to sell the entire space on a perpetual money machine known as Binance Coin $BNB that allows him to continuously liquidate a token through a burn mechanism that he would otherwise not have a market for. (
/1 We've seen a lot of torrid automatic rallies in beaten down names, that have, so far, been sold off virtually as quickly as they came.
Yet the overall market capitalization has wallowed.
/2 There is no inflow of new money, just greasy chips being pushed around by the remaining players who, like heroin addicts, can't do anything but what they've been conditioned to.
Volatility has collapsed. The thrill of the casino is muted.
Prospect Theory offers a satisfying explanation. The chart below plots utility based on gains and losses.
/2 There are 2 key underpinnings to the theory: one, losses hurt more than gains (the lower end of the S-curve is more extended than the upper), two one becomes desensitized/experiences diminishing margin returns/costs (why it is an S-curve).
/3 Applying the general theory to trading, a PnL of -$1000 has a greater absolute emotional effect than a gain of $1000, even though they are equivalent on an absolute basis. We are prone to seek to avoid losses due to this. When a trade begins to show a loss, we feel pain.