Baron's Crypto Trading Journal

[virtusa]

Let's just look at the facts of your reply. I agree the calls were poor, but there was a shit ton of macro stuff that dragged crypto down. You might say you saw it in the charts, but surely you must agree that even you don't get it right 100% of the time.

There is always an explanation why something goes up or down. The job of the trader/investor is to master his position as good as possible. He knows the risks and should know how to manage them.
If BTC goes down it is the fault of external factors. If BTC goes up, the trader/investor showed that he is a genius. That's the explanation that is always used by crypto diehards.
Reality is that the trader/investor is the only one responsible for profits or losses. He manages everything. He is the only one to blame or to congratulate. All excuses are just BS.

It is 100% true that he doesn't lose any money until he sells. As an experienced trader, you have to understand the validity of this. Perhaps with stocks once something goes down 75% or more its dead, but crypto has proven this to not be the case. Does it suck to have a 75% or higher drawdown? Of course, but its not a loss until it is sold.

You claim that his ego prevents him from admitting bad calls, but I think your ego or perhaps dishonesty prevents you from showing us any stats to back up your wild claims of expert trading. Seriously, if you're doing shit that nobody has ever looked at, trading in a mythical, magical way, the onus is on you to back this up. Baron has been 100% transparent with his calls and the only thing you can dig up is that he hasn't said that you were right to not buy at the highs. What exactly have you offered in terms of transparency?

As an experienced trader I know that it is BS.
Funds and publicly traded companies always have to put investments at MTM in their balances. So that shows clearly that your "he doesn't lose any money until he sells" is BS.
In accounts is mentioned REALIZED P&L, but also OPEN P&L. Why do they mention both? Because at that moment the value of the investment is reduce by the amount that is in an open loss. The words says clearly OPEN PROFIT or OPEN LOSS.

A fund calculates its NAV by determining the CLOSING or LAST QUOTED PRICE of all securities in its portfolio along with the total value of any additional assets the fund holds. Examples of additional assets a fund might hold include cash and liquid assets, receivables such as interest payments, and accrued income.

When the real estate market in the US crashed and values of houses went down hard, banks asked additional garantees from people who took in past a mortgage to buy that house. People who could not add the required amount lost their house in a bank foreclosure. Why did the bank ask more money? These people did not sell their house, so as long as they did not sell, they did not lose anymoney while prices went down 30 to over 50%?

All these crypto diehards speak all the time about BTC is going to 100K or even 100 million. And many apparently made a lot of money. Show me proof of that. And when you have that proof I will show my 1,000% returns. As long as crypto diehards cannot proof what they post all the time, they are doing exactly as I do. Except that I have already proof but don't want to show it until crypto diehards proof their statements.
Baron said that from the get go he had 0% drawdown. He never showed any proof either. So you should make the same remark towards him. But apparently what he tells is accepted as true, because he says so. I am sure he never made 77K profit before in BTC, and I am sure he cannot proof he did. He is doing what your are accusing me from.

Baron has been 100% transparent with his calls and the only thing you can dig up is that he hasn't said that you were right to not buy at the highs. What exactly have you offered in terms of transparency?

He said when he bought. And I said twice that it was completelly wrong to buy at these levels. So from both sides the same transparancy.
The first time I said that I had a short signal on the weekly charts. So that is very transparant.
And the second time I said that we were close to a new short signal again. That was also very transparant.

 

[semperfrosty]

There is always an explanation why something goes up or down. The job of the trader/investor is to master his position as good as possible. He knows the risks and should know how to manage them.
If BTC goes down it is the fault of external factors. If BTC goes up, the trader/investor showed that he is a genius. That's the explanation that is always used by crypto diehards.
Reality is that the trader/investor is the only one responsible for profits or losses. He manages everything. He is the only one to blame or to congratulate. All excuses are just BS.



As an experienced trader I know that it is BS.
Funds and publicly traded companies always have to put investments at MTM in their balances. So that shows clearly that your "he doesn't lose any money until he sells" is BS.
In accounts is mentioned REALIZED P&L, but also OPEN P&L. Why do they mention both? Because at that moment the value of the investment is reduce by the amount that is in an open loss. The words says clearly OPEN PROFIT or OPEN LOSS.

A fund calculates its NAV by determining the CLOSING or LAST QUOTED PRICE of all securities in its portfolio along with the total value of any additional assets the fund holds. Examples of additional assets a fund might hold include cash and liquid assets, receivables such as interest payments, and accrued income.

When the real estate market in the US crashed and values of houses went down hard, banks asked additional garantees from people who took in past a mortgage to buy that house. People who could not add the required amount lost their house in a bank foreclosure. Why did the bank ask more money? These people did not sell their house, so as long as they did not sell, they did not lose anymoney while prices went down 30 to over 50%?

All these crypto diehards speak all the time about BTC is going to 100K or even 100 million. And many apparently made a lot of money. Show me proof of that. And when you have that proof I will show my 1,000% returns. As long as crypto diehards cannot proof what they post all the time, they are doing exactly as I do. Except that I have already proof but don't want to show it until crypto diehards proof their statements.
Baron said that from the get go he had 0% drawdown. He never showed any proof either. So you should make the same remark towards him. But apparently what he tells is accepted as true, because he says so. I am sure he never made 77K profit before in BTC, and I am sure he cannot proof he did. He is doing what your are accusing me from.



He said when he bought. And I said twice that it was completelly wrong to buy at these levels. So from both sides the same transparancy.
The first time I said that I had a short signal on the weekly charts. So that is very transparant.
And the second time I said that we were close to a new short signal again. That was also very transparant.

He showed purchases in 2012 and 2013 where BTC would have been below $100.

Even at 75% drawdown today,my chart shows it is up 18,475% since inception.

For an investor with conviction in their trade idea,the ATH was a nice spike and occurred for many reasons-none of them magical,and the recent drop is a pain in the arse and also occurred for many reasons-none of them magical.

 

[Baron]

He showed purchases in 2012 and 2013 where BTC would have been below $100.

Yeah, if you go back to April 2012 and look up the BTC chart for that time frame (which is not that easy because most charts don't go back that far) you'll see that the price of Bitcoin was around $5. See the bottom left corner of the chart below:

 

[Pekelo]

I think Baron just smartly chilling and enjoying the view generating posting frenzy here.

the most brilliant minds in the world have interest and investment in crypto.Is your almighty intellect prepared to take the other side of their trade ideas? Do you think your understanding of finance,pyschology and history matches theres?

This post reminds me John's post about a year ago. Somehow SBF came up with FTX and John reminded me that I wasn't a billionaire, thus between me and SBF he had to be right by default.

Same thing when I predicted a year ago BTC going to 20K after the SB, but the Winklewii were billionaires, so they must know better! I should tattoo on my forehead, rich people never lose money!!! [Elon Musk has entered the chat]

The point is (apparently I always have to spell it out) that this logical fallacy is called appeal to authority/wealth. Look it up, you will be smarter. Until then, I will ask Cathie Wood on a date...

 

[Pekelo]

He showed purchases in 2012 and 2013 where BTC would have been below $100.

Highly irrelevant to this journal. If you reread the very first post he said:

" I'm starting fresh as if we were jumping into crypto trading for the very first time together."

 

[NoahA]

There is always an explanation why something goes up or down. The job of the trader/investor is to master his position as good as possible. He knows the risks and should know how to manage them.
If BTC goes down it is the fault of external factors. If BTC goes up, the trader/investor showed that he is a genius. That's the explanation that is always used by crypto diehards.
Reality is that the trader/investor is the only one responsible for profits or losses. He manages everything. He is the only one to blame or to congratulate. All excuses are just BS.



As an experienced trader I know that it is BS.
Funds and publicly traded companies always have to put investments at MTM in their balances. So that shows clearly that your "he doesn't lose any money until he sells" is BS.
In accounts is mentioned REALIZED P&L, but also OPEN P&L. Why do they mention both? Because at that moment the value of the investment is reduce by the amount that is in an open loss. The words says clearly OPEN PROFIT or OPEN LOSS.

A fund calculates its NAV by determining the CLOSING or LAST QUOTED PRICE of all securities in its portfolio along with the total value of any additional assets the fund holds. Examples of additional assets a fund might hold include cash and liquid assets, receivables such as interest payments, and accrued income.

When the real estate market in the US crashed and values of houses went down hard, banks asked additional garantees from people who took in past a mortgage to buy that house. People who could not add the required amount lost their house in a bank foreclosure. Why did the bank ask more money? These people did not sell their house, so as long as they did not sell, they did not lose anymoney while prices went down 30 to over 50%?

All these crypto diehards speak all the time about BTC is going to 100K or even 100 million. And many apparently made a lot of money. Show me proof of that. And when you have that proof I will show my 1,000% returns. As long as crypto diehards cannot proof what they post all the time, they are doing exactly as I do. Except that I have already proof but don't want to show it until crypto diehards proof their statements.
Baron said that from the get go he had 0% drawdown. He never showed any proof either. So you should make the same remark towards him. But apparently what he tells is accepted as true, because he says so. I am sure he never made 77K profit before in BTC, and I am sure he cannot proof he did. He is doing what your are accusing me from.



He said when he bought. And I said twice that it was completelly wrong to buy at these levels. So from both sides the same transparancy.
The first time I said that I had a short signal on the weekly charts. So that is very transparant.
And the second time I said that we were close to a new short signal again. That was also very transparant.

What is it that you are after? Your explanations of markets and company reporting guidelines are great, but I know nothing more about your trading. You are saying Baron made a horrible trade, fine, I agree, we can all see the crypto winter in progress. But where is your trading brilliance and proof? Baron shows dozens of entries, and all you talk about is a weekly sell signal. If you have been around as long as you have, there should be millions in your accounts, but you can't even produce one screen capture of a trade fill.

I really want to believe you but you need to give me more proof. Make some great calls for next week and we can give you the praise you are seeking.

 

[themickey]

The bros attend the crypto church and sing from the same sheet, outsiders can't enter the sanctuary as they are deemed unclean and speak like heretics.

 

[Darc]

If Baron could now harness that talent for identifying unappreciated growth Assets and apply it to Stocks he wouldn't have to babysit all of us.

The similarities between what he did with Bitcoin and what is required for identifying great Stocks early on is striking in hindsight.

 

[virtusa]

What is it that you are after? Your explanations of markets and company reporting guidelines are great, but I know nothing more about your trading. You are saying Baron made a horrible trade, fine, I agree, we can all see the crypto winter in progress. But where is your trading brilliance and proof? Baron shows dozens of entries, and all you talk about is a weekly sell signal. If you have been around as long as you have, there should be millions in your accounts, but you can't even produce one screen capture of a trade fill.

I really want to believe you but you need to give me more proof. Make some great calls for next week and we can give you the praise you are seeking.

I told you when I will show them. Reread my post slowly and try to understand it. If you don't understand it, ask somebody to explain it to you in simple words.

I don't need any recognition from anybody. I want the same rules for everybody. Each person should show hard proof of what he says, not only me. I still have no hard proof (statements from Baron) that he has no loss since the get go. Even not from the 2012 and 2013 trades (which are not included in his statement like Pekelo correctly wrote above). Since the "get go" there were 23 trades with a 77K loss, so not at all a zero drawdown. I posted the complete fully detailed list.

It is typical that Baron tries to manipulate the conversation by adding things that are not included in the discussion, or twist facts to make them fit his story. It looks like the way Russians try to manipulate losses in a war into victories.

Just like he needed statements before he could confirm that johnarb was lying about me. If these statements would be given he would find a new reason to not confirm the lies from johnarb. That's typical Baron.

I indicated two times in writing on ET that these two buys were just the opposite from what I would do. That is hard proof for these two trades. I knew that if my weekly charts go short it would be for long and deep. And it is already very long and very deep.
I posted since 2004 several signal for trades that all went like I predicted. They were even confirmed by other ET members on ET. Just reread all my posts, but I am sure you even did never read even 10% of my posts. I am not going to scroll over 10,000 posts to try to find them.

 

[semperfrosty]

I think Baron just smartly chilling and enjoying the view generating posting frenzy here.



This post reminds me John's post about a year ago. Somehow SBF came up with FTX and John reminded me that I wasn't a billionaire, thus between me and SBF he had to be right by default.

Same thing when I predicted a year ago BTC going to 20K after the SB, but the Winklewii were billionaires, so they must know better! I should tattoo on my forehead, rich people never lose money!!! [Elon Musk has entered the chat]

The point is (apparently I always have to spell it out) that this logical fallacy is called appeal to authority/wealth. Look it up, you will be smarter. Until then, I will ask Cathie Wood on a date...

Your reply has neither addressed the content of my post or showed that you understood it.

To be clear,in no way did I say somewhere that the rich are right.In fact I said that billionaire Alan Sugar was WRONG in the example I provided.

It's ironic that you appeal to people to be smarter.

Lets just say that I find it encouraging that your position is on the other side to mine.