You're reading Crypto Long & Short, our weekly newsletter featuring insights, news and analysis for the professional investor. Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Wednesday.
Note: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CoinDesk, Inc., CoinDesk Indices or its owners and affiliates.
Welcome to our institutional newsletter, Crypto Long & Short. This week:
CoinDesk will be attending the Digital Asset Yield Summit in Singapore on October 6th. This is an invite only private capital conference focused on digital assets. Learn more if you are interested in joining us at the event!
Holding rules: what allocators should know about adding bitcoin to a balanced portfolio
by Gregory Mall, chief investment officer, Lionsoul Global
This is part two of Gregory Mall’s case that crypto allocation’s real question is size, not selection. You can read part one here.
Investors who treat crypto as too speculative to touch tend to frame the decision as binary. The more practical framing concerns dosage and implementation: how much bitcoin a balanced portfolio can carry and under what rule it should be held.
We tested this directly. Starting from a conventional 60/40 portfolio of global equities and core bonds, we introduced spot bitcoin at 2.5% and 10% weights with monthly rebalancing across January 2021 to March 2026. The headline results are intuitive. Adding bitcoin lifted returns and Sharpe ratios (a standard measure of return relative to risk) in strong crypto years, while the traditional core cushioned weaker ones. A small sleeve changed the shape of outcomes while leaving the portfolio’s 60/40 identity intact. Higher weights also brought more volatility and deeper maximum drawdown, and that trade sits at the heart of the sizing question.
We then repeated the exercise with a rules-based trend sleeve in place of spot bitcoin, one that toggles between bitcoin and cash on trend signals. This is the same logic behind systematic tools like the CoinDesk Bitcoin Trend Indicator, which signals the direction and strength of bitcoin momentum from CoinDesk Data. The trend version moderated extreme years in both directions. It landed between the plain 60/40 and the spot mix on risk and return, improving drawdown behavior at the cost of some upside.
Splitting the window into bull, bear and sideways markets by the 200-day moving average sharpens the picture considerably. In bull regimes both approaches beat the plain 60/40, though the trend version retained much of the upside on a more controlled path. Bear regimes produced the widest gap. Spot exposure transmitted more of crypto’s drawdown into the broader portfolio, while the trend sleeve, designed to step away from persistent downtrends, kept losses shallower and the ride more survivable.
Sideways markets deserve more attention than they usually receive. Range-bound conditions, where prices churn without a clear direction, offer no strong trend to reward conviction and no clean rebound to rescue poor timing. Through those stretches, direct bitcoin exposure struggled to justify its added volatility, while the rules-based sleeve had a better chance of avoiding risk without reward. Real portfolios spend a great deal of time in exactly these noisy, indecisive transitions.
Source
This article is syndicated for educational reading. For the latest updates, visit the original publisher.
Read on coindesk.com
