I tried an improved dollar-cost averaging method, and it's quite interesting. The basic idea is still to buy a fixed amount, but with a bit of flexibility—keeping an eye on the moving average.



Once the price falls below the moving average, I increase the investment—perhaps 1300 yuan that month; conversely, if the price rises too sharply, I pull back and might invest only 700 yuan. It seems simple, but this approach actually automatically captures low points.

Backtest data is quite intriguing: this method has over a 60% chance of outperforming regular dollar-cost averaging. It maintains discipline while leveraging the mean reversion characteristic to buy low and sell high within market swings. Instead of being completely passive, it's better to leave some room for proactive adjustments.
View Original
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.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
AirdropHunter9000vip
· 19h ago
60% chance of feeling good, but afraid that the reality will slap us in the face after the backtest.
View OriginalReply0
GasGuzzlervip
· 23h ago
60% chance to beat? How did they get this data? Is it from real backtesting or an ideal scenario... But the approach is indeed much more flexible than pure dollar-cost averaging.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidationWatchervip
· 01-05 02:24
Awesome, isn't this just an advanced version of dollar-cost averaging, a trick for smart people? --- The moving average strategy has been played out for a long time. How did you come up with your backtest data? Is it real backtesting or ideal conditions? --- Adding positions at lows and reducing volume at highs sounds easy in theory but hard to implement in practice. The mindset is the key hurdle. --- A 60% win rate sounds good, but how about long-term stability? Is the sample size sufficient? --- It's basically dollar-cost averaging with some active timing added. It seems logical but in reality, it's still a gamble on the market direction. --- Good idea, but I'm worried about losing discipline when executing. I'm the type who can't hold on. --- The mean reversion theory has been drilled into us so much that we're numb to it. How many actually make money from it? --- Wait, are you just mechanically following the moving averages, or are you adding your own judgment in between? Don't fall back into FOMO again.
View OriginalReply0
NervousFingersvip
· 01-05 02:22
Hey, I've tried this approach before. This set of moving averages is indeed much more enjoyable than pure dollar-cost averaging. It's a bit like betting on mean reversion, but if the 60% win rate data is real, it can definitely be effective. I'm just worried that backtesting might be overly optimistic; whether it can be reproduced in live trading is another matter entirely.
View OriginalReply0
gas_fee_therapistvip
· 01-05 02:21
This moving average strategy sounds good, but a 60% win rate depends on how much backtesting data you have, as short-term fluctuations can be very deceptive.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)