Fifteen trading days separate bitcoin's 225% gain from an 11% loss, Grayscale finds

"Investors waiting for volatility to subside or the outlook to become clearer may find that much of the repricing has already occurred," Pandl wrote ^[7]. He framed the result as opportunity cost. For an asset as volatile as bitcoin, he argued, being out of the market is a risk in itself ^[8].

The lost return is spread across all 15 sessions. A dollar held through the three years became $3.25 ^[13]. Remove the five best days and it ends at $1.95, a 95% gain ^[5], so those five sessions together multiplied the money by about 1.67 ^[14]. The next five were worth about 1.54 times, leaving $1.27, and the five after that a smaller 1.43 times, leaving 89 cents ^[15].

Against the Nasdaq-100 the two assets swap places. Bitcoin finished the window 116 percentage points ahead of the index ^[16]. Strip each asset of its own 15 best days and bitcoin finishes 32 points behind ^[17].

There are two ways this could read differently. First, the test as reported removes only best days ^[2]. A timer who sits out volatile stretches could also miss some bad days. If bitcoin's worst sessions fall close to its best ones, the net cost of timing is smaller than the 15-day figure suggests. Cryptopolitan's account of the note does not include a worst-days run. Second, the window is a single draw. Three years ending Sept. 23 ^[1] is one period, and a different end date would pick a different set of best days.

I think the finding holds for the investor Pandl's quote describes, the one holding cash until the outlook clears. That investor has no rule for leaving before bad days, only a reason to stay out until things look calmer, and Pandl's argument is that the repricing comes first ^[7]. The case for staying in is wrong if a worst-days run on the same data shows bitcoin's losses as bunched as its gains, and close enough in time that one exit skips both.