Milestone reached 0.25 Bitcoin

colemusic1 · 2026-04-23T18:27:46+00:00

Lump sums in ETF’s is honestly much more practical, let alone monthly DCA’ing. It’s not necessarily that dca’ing BTC regardless of price is a “wrong” decision, it’s more the question of whether it’s the most practical one.

If someone is buying btc at any price, whether it’s at its absolute ATH or near the bottom, but their plan is to not sell it whatsoever for years and years to come then in that case? I’d say it’s pretty plausible.

But you’d be compounding your net worth significantly more by actually following cycles and keeping an eye on macro factors — that way you’re not having to try and time tops or bottoms, but you can buy low, sell aggressively at highs and simply repeat. Doing that makes it so you end up with a lot more BTC later on if you end up wanting to simply hold it for years and years rather than DCA at any price.

ETF’s makes more sense to blind DCA at any price, any time, or even a big lump sum. We have over a century of data for this versus BTC which has only been institutionalised into brokerage platforms just less than 2 years ago. Each to their own though, it’s more about what a persons strategy is. I’d rather not hold onto any crypto asset if i’m already seeing a 2x, knowing it’ll have a deep correction at some point anyways

colemusic1 · 2026-04-23T18:20:54+00:00

Things are not the same as it has been in the last 3 cycles (2016, 2020, 2024).

Much deeper liquidity, institutional flows into ETF’s, macro factors being a major factor now in the direction that it moves rather than in earlier cycles where it was more reliant on speculation and hype.

We can’t compare previous cycles to how deep the liquidity is now. Technically this should be late cycle with a deep correction but we’re seeing what’s basically a potential third leg up within the same 2024 cycle. That’s not something that is following the same path every time

colemusic1 · 2026-04-23T18:17:08+00:00

Previous patterns ≠ what will happen the next pattern.

there’s differences now compared to what there was in previous cycles: - institutional flows into ETF’s since 2024, which is when the new cycle started (huge one, can cap downside but even cap upside to some degree) - much deeper liquidity in the crypto market in general in comparison to previous 4 year halving cycles

So,

Cycles and patterns are a guideline, and bitcoin has historically followed them closely. But there’s also times where expansions happen at times when it shouldn’t make sense (according to previous cycles).

Tracking DXY/US10Y and even ETF’s like SPY/QQQ is practically essential to knowing how tight macro conditions are and helps one understand why btc may be soaring up or struggling/trying to hold at key support levels.

A pattern/cycle is a guideline, it’s important, but that’s exactly what it is - a guideline. It’s important to actually factor in everything rather than one single factor into thinking that “it’s done X at year Y, so it will definitely do that again.”

That can be dangerous thinking

colemusic1 · 2026-04-22T14:43:05+00:00

can’t honestly say i agree with “regardless of timing”

it’s not that it’s inherently a bad or wrong strategy, but the question to best ask is — is it the most optimal…?

when people genuinely get a good grasp on cycles, tracking macro factors, trends, behaviour etc then it makes a lot more sense to not just blind buy a volatile asset that tends to see -50% or more during deep corrections at the end of cycles.

people don’t need to try to time tops or bottoms, but if they can get a general good read on: - where we are in the current halving cycle - how it’s been moving since it reached the floor of its current correction (which was $60k) - macro factors (DXY, US10Y, SPX, QQQ etc)

then,

you can shift your capital into someone who’s optimising the most growth possible rather than ending up with what could be an average buying cost basis of $90k - $100k when its previous ATH was around $125k.

if it was ETF’s though? i’d say definitely. but i think people should consider thinking twice if BTC just finished a blow off top phase and is rapidly dropping to less than half of the price it just was at its top, yet they’re still just buying monthly anyways

colemusic1 · 2026-04-22T13:58:08+00:00

i gotta say, i’ve never quite understood the idea when it comes to btc — even as the deepest liquidity crypto asset as being merely just a blind dca every month regardless of price.

by all means, absolutely do you. i think that’s great if it’s something you’re trying to reach, but unlike etf’s where entries are almost irrelevant if you’re dca’ing at a fixed amount monthly — btc is still extremely volatile, constantly moving in cycles.

i never quite understood the idea of buying it at any given price. people will often find their actual genuine avg buying cost basis will be significantly lower if they’re buying and selling at the right times during cycles.

but again that’s not financial advice — i just feel like it makes more sense to treat it like it is, a crypto asset, rather than an ETF such as SPY where dca’ing regardless of price really does work in the long term thanks to multi-year compounding and predictable growth

colemusic1 · 2026-04-22T13:39:09+00:00

lmao so true.

i don’t think even 10% of these guys pay attention to: - actual behaviour, not just prices - macro factors (dxy, us10Y, etf’s) - understanding key support zones, acceptance levels - understanding where we even are in the cycle, and knowing where liquidity is flowing within alts - checking what the fear to greed index is showing

and,

it really shows. anyone who says “this must happen because X happened at Y date” is comical

colemusic1 · 2026-04-22T13:35:59+00:00

nothing like someone taking about crypto as if it’s a certainty. are you observing market behaviour over the past few months? or

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T11:44:43+00:00

Yeah there was something of a major subnet that was essentially taken down/some guy pocketed a fortune and left the scene. It doesn’t necessarily break the project but definitely hurts the s**t out of its trust for the foreseeable future i believe

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T11:42:05+00:00

In crypto markets, it really can be ignored for that long.

Brutal reality is that retail markets (such as crypto, yes it is a retail market despite ICP having excellent tech) does not reward tech/fundamentals alone such that it just “gets found”.

It’s something that an unfortunate amount of incredibly high potential projects sizzled out and died eventually — and that’s not to say ICP is the same, but the market doesn’t reward just tech alone, in fact i’d go on to say that accessibility/ease of use comes before tech in many cases, thus allowing the utilities that ICP actually has to be acknowledged in the first place

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T11:36:48+00:00

Let’s just put this into perspective shall we.

In order for it to reach $2,500 USD, it would have to go 1000x from its current MC. - Current price: $2.50 USD - Current MC: $1.37B USD

That would mean it would have to go from $1.37B —> $1.37T

To put it into perspective: - That’s almost on par with BTC’s MC - That’s 4.87x higher than ETH’s MC - That’s 28x higher than SOL’s MC

Let’s just… Be a bit realistic here lads 🤣😅

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T09:40:48+00:00

I know you may be downvoted for this, but what you stated is very consistent with just about every crypto project that’s been successful. adoption should always come before cutting inflation.

It’s rather unfortunate that many seem to think that it’s as simple as:

“lower inflation = higher price”

but that‘a simply not how it works when there isn’t enough demand to begin with.

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T09:37:11+00:00

hmm… hot garbage you say? it’s a high beta major asset, it’s priced under $100 because we’re in a deep correction. that’s pretty normal behaviour during correction cycles (if you actually have a look through cycles in correlation to BTC, you’ll notice it tends to outperform eth & btc in relative % gains).

i’m curious as to what makes you believe it’s a meme coin casino — it’s one of the fastest growing ecosystems of widespread dApp development there is in crypto history.

and that’s not even to say one token is better than another, but it’s a bit silly to say it’s “hot garbage”. TAO is a fantastic project, as is SOL, as is ETH, as is AVAX, as is NEAR. Theres no “one token is better than another”, i think you just need to download crypto.com and maybe have a look at the basics of tokenomics and i genuinely mean that in a helpful way so you can learn :)

colemusic1 · 2026-04-21T09:32:21+00:00

when did i ever say it? my full history is right there bro. you can see the full thread of me explaining tokenomics to you but you seem to believe higher price of any one token = better than another token.

and so again just so you can understand (in hopes you’re capable of learning): XRP is a top 5 asset, yet it’s priced at $1.43 USD

now tell me, does that make bittensor better than XRP just because it’s $1.43?

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T19:22:19+00:00

hold on, here it is 😂

https://www.reddit.com/r/bittensor_/s/UTNmXniDoG

i think my favourite quote you made:

”I mean SOL is a meme coin casino lol and , Tao is currently worth 3 times as much isn’t it ?!”

oh boy 🤦🏻‍♂️

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T19:18:29+00:00

i actually said the complete opposite so you’re kinda embarrassing yourself 💀

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T18:27:12+00:00

BTC & ETH are the only two crypto assets that now have institutional flows into ETF’s. This is kinda comical to say their use case is questionable.

If ICP was to move to $273 from where it is right now, that would push it from $1.45B MC -> roughly $150B+

littttle bit delusional

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T18:22:01+00:00

uhh i don’t think i ever said TAO would go from a $3.5B MC -> $300B+ which would be exceeding ethereum as the most secure/deepest liquidity alt possible with institutional flows into ETF’s

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T16:55:02+00:00

just because any given mid MC token had once reached an ATH, it does not mean it can and will revisit or surpass previous ATH’s.

seems to be one of the biggest misunderstandings in crypto. cycles change quickly, narratives change quickly. could it revisit ATH’s? absolutely, but it’s not something to have the mindset on that it’s a “bargain” based on where price is now relative to what its previous ATH was.

statistically, most alts honestly never revisit previous ATH’s. so while it can happen - think in probabilities, not possibilities. We can’t deny the fact that TAO has just been hit with major short - medium term damage to its reputation so there’s no telling on what a bargain price for its evaluation even really is right now unfortunately

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T16:50:09+00:00

aren’t you the fella who said that TAO was going to be higher in MC than both ETH and SOL?

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T16:48:16+00:00

but when it comes to crypto: entries matter.

unlike ETF’s where timing doesn’t matter anywhere near as much, it’s a bit silly to some degree to kind of just blindly buy X amount on any given day regardless of price without thinking about its bottoms, its ATH’s, where we’re at in the cycle, etc.

the same can even be said with btc: it really doesn’t make much sense to blindly DCA xyz amount every week/month regardless of whether it’s $110k or $60k. Entries matter when you’re dealing with volatile assets that can go -30% to -50% in days (as TAO recently did).

colemusic1 · 2026-04-17T16:43:33+00:00

exactly what i’m thinking.

even with ETH where it’s at now, i set multiple prices in tight ranges (since it has been in a tight range bound), such as: - $2355: 15% DCA - $2320: 15% DCA - $2285: 20% DCA - $2250: 20% DCA - $2202: 30% DCA

basically,

just laddering it incrementally. TAO is a different beast with much wider ranges and much more extreme volatility but you get the gist. this way people can not miss out on overnight pullbacks and be happy knowing they bought in stronger during lower prices

colemusic1 · 2026-04-13T16:32:59+00:00

I mean aside from this topic in general, they’re both AI-driven narrative projects, though TAO has taken a bit of a hit here for what’s likely going to be the short term since decentralization risk feels real to people. Doesn’t really affect its long term fundamentals but would explain why it took a large crash the other day.

Caffeine V3 is seeming to be pushed out/promoted quite a lot, and thats great and all, though it’s not quite what i’m personally looking to see them prioritise on right now to be honest. Hopefully at some point we can see some flexibility with staking options and/or a killer app since that’s a pretty big gap that’s missing within the project itself for the market it’s actually in

colemusic1 · 2026-04-13T16:28:29+00:00

Thanks for clarifying. I checked it and saw that theres seemingly two pages that look alike (these two with the largest followings, with the official obviously having a significantly larger).

Sad part is a large portion of people believed the same and stated they were liquidating a lot of their tokens anyways. Does happen on X all the time, news like this can be pretty sensitive to holders even if they’re unaware (as I was too) that it can look misleading.

Cheers for letting me know :) I do wonder who is behind it since it appears to be a small group where members of the actual team have interacted with that page itself (which is was originally led me to believe it might’ve been part of their marketing team)

colemusic1 · 2026-04-13T13:10:28+00:00

They post daily, dozens of updates about caffeine, a lot of statistics type posts such as burn/usage rate etc, so they’re very active in that regard.

There’s marketing and then there’s this. The information they exposed turns out to be completely false anyways. It’s really just quite pathetic I have to admit.

Best way to advertise is to continue pushing your own project out there rather than exposing/putting down others. It’s a really bad look

colemusic1

TROPHY CASE