Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Julius Wong who wrote (179415)	10/17/2021 3:04:46 AM
From: TobagoJack	10 Recommendations Recommended By Arran Yuan dvdw© ggersh Haim R. Branisteanu Julius Wong and 5 more members Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217857

Re <<big day>>, we received an unexpected e-mail this day. We were not aware of the existence of such rarified type of e-mails because I certainly do not belong in the club and doubt my wife (generally better than I) belongs to such a club. Coconut did not do as well on the other four Advanced Placement subject tests (math, history, etc etc) she took, scoring mere 5 out of 5s, but on her AP English she took down 5 out 5 with distinction - literal perfect score of “absolutely-nothing-wrong” :0)

To: Julius Wong who wrote (179415)	10/18/2021 7:17:19 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217857

Re <<"We’ve had a long-standing thesis that China will use battery-electric vehicles as the medium to become a significantly more powerful player in the industry," says RBC Capital Markets analyst Joe Spak on the developing trend.>> ... sounds correct. In then meantime, far more energised given distilled / concentrated speculative fevering underway ... zerohedge.com What Bitcoin's New Exchange (Day) Traded Fund MeansSubmitted by @bit_hedge, [url=][/url] While nobody has missed the discussion surrounding a possible Bitcoin ETF this year and the subsequent 40% rally this month as prospects materialized, discussion in some circles has already turned to doubt in the success of what has now become the first approved crypto ETF by the SEC - one investing in Bitcoin futures. [url=][/url] Following SEC Chair Gensler’s apparent nod towards a Bitcoin ETF operating within the bounds of CME traded futures, giants such as ProShares, VanEck, and now Cathie Wood quickly threw their hats into the ring for a chance at getting approval for such a product. This week, speculation hit a fever pitch as CME Bitcoin futures saw their largest jump in open interest since last year and Bitcoin options stretched to all time high volumes, culminating finally in the confirmation of approval for ProShares’ filing as the following Bloomberg headlines hit on Friday afternoon: PROSHARES BITCOIN FUTURES ETF LAUNCH REVEALED IN SEC FILING PROSHARES SIGNALS BITCOIN FUTURES ETF LAUNCH AS SOON AS MONDAY [url=][/url] So with with the ETF going live as soon as today, questions are flying as to whether it will measure up to current vehicles such as the Grayscale Bitcoin Fund which is pushing $40B in assets under management, and if inflows into futures contracts will have as much of an impact as they’d have going into spot. The good news is that there certainly is a mechanism for futures inflows to lift the price of Bitcoin. Via the popular ‘basis trade’ allowing directionally neutral firms to net double digit APY in a yield starved world by buying spot Bitcoin and selling CME futures against it, a renewed premium on Bitcoin CME futures would serve to attract more traders towards this strategy and hence more spot Bitcoin would be bought. There is no doubt that such a relationship between futures buys and spot buys would be less than 1:1, but nonetheless the effect does exist. [url=][/url] The bad news is that the efficiency of a futures-based ETF in an asset which typically trades in brutal contango (forward prices higher than spot) needs to be questioned. Per ProShares’ prospectus, ‘The Fund generally seeks to invest in “front month” CME Bitcoin futures contracts. “Front month” contracts are the monthly contracts with the nearest expiration date. CME Bitcoin Futures are cash settled on their expiration date unless they are “rolled” prior to expiration. The Fund intends to “roll” its CME Bitcoin Futures prior to expiration. Typically, the Fund will roll to the next “nearby” CME Bitcoin Futures. The “nearby” contracts are those contracts with the next closest expiration date.’ And while many have expressed concerns, no one has offered a quantification of the problem until now. Simulated by mirroring the fund’s 0.95% management fee, and by holding the front month CME Bitcoin futures contract until rolling to the next on the Monday prior to expiration, the hypothetical performance of such a product (shown since roughly the launch of CME Bitcoin futures, which coincidentally? debuted at the top of the 2017/18 mania) would look like this: [url=][/url] An investment in such a product at the start of 2018 would have lost almost a quarter of its value against Bitcoin since. [url=][/url] Looking at this underperformance, it becomes apparent that in the long run a futures based ETF in a contango-heavy product has an expected value of zero. So if Bitcoin fails to continue posting staggering returns, the chart of this ETF will eventually look like that of many other futures-based ETFS: down and to the right. [url=][/url] United States Oil Fund vs. front month crude oil contract Which makes it painstakingly obvious that the approved ETF is not suitable for long term investment, and serves only as yet another way for day traders to partake in the exact ‘highly speculative’ activity that Gary Gensler regularly criticizes. And since ‘ uber-wealthy’ Gensler, ex-Goldman Sachs, (how else would he have gotten his current position) knows all too well how this contango effect plays out, one has to wonder what exactly his angle is in approving such a product.