#比特币投资配置 Recently, I came across the investment advice from Itaú Bank in Brazil, which is quite thought-provoking. They recommend allocating 1-3% of your portfolio to Bitcoin, arguing that in times of geopolitical tension and changing monetary policies, there is a need for an asset with low correlation to traditional assets. I strongly agree with this approach.
But the key is to understand the logic behind it—what does 1-3% really mean? It’s not about putting the majority of your capital into Bitcoin, but about using a small proportion to hedge risks that traditional assets cannot cover, on the premise of a solid foundational allocation. Just like Brazilian investors experienced this year—when the real appreciated and caused losses—an asset with low correlation can serve as a balancing factor.
Honestly, Bitcoin’s volatility is indeed significant. From 95,000 at the start of the year, dropping to 80,000, then rising to 125,000, such fluctuations can be quite challenging for your mindset. But that’s precisely why position sizing matters—you should only allocate what you can afford to lose. I’ve always believed that true prudence isn’t about avoiding risk altogether, but about understanding risk and responding with a reasonable proportion.
Regardless of how traditional institutions view it, the key question is: what proportion of my overall assets does this represent? Can I accept its fluctuations calmly? If the answers are all yes, then moderate allocation might be worth considering. In the long run, what matters is never chasing every rise and fall, but maintaining a clear and rational mindset.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
#比特币投资配置 Recently, I came across the investment advice from Itaú Bank in Brazil, which is quite thought-provoking. They recommend allocating 1-3% of your portfolio to Bitcoin, arguing that in times of geopolitical tension and changing monetary policies, there is a need for an asset with low correlation to traditional assets. I strongly agree with this approach.
But the key is to understand the logic behind it—what does 1-3% really mean? It’s not about putting the majority of your capital into Bitcoin, but about using a small proportion to hedge risks that traditional assets cannot cover, on the premise of a solid foundational allocation. Just like Brazilian investors experienced this year—when the real appreciated and caused losses—an asset with low correlation can serve as a balancing factor.
Honestly, Bitcoin’s volatility is indeed significant. From 95,000 at the start of the year, dropping to 80,000, then rising to 125,000, such fluctuations can be quite challenging for your mindset. But that’s precisely why position sizing matters—you should only allocate what you can afford to lose. I’ve always believed that true prudence isn’t about avoiding risk altogether, but about understanding risk and responding with a reasonable proportion.
Regardless of how traditional institutions view it, the key question is: what proportion of my overall assets does this represent? Can I accept its fluctuations calmly? If the answers are all yes, then moderate allocation might be worth considering. In the long run, what matters is never chasing every rise and fall, but maintaining a clear and rational mindset.