While some scoff at factor investing, branding it as a marketing gimmick camouflaged with intricate mathematics to mask its inconsistent results, factors still provide a somewhat reasonable framework for understanding financial markets. As George Box, the statistician, famously stated, all models are flawed, but some are useful.
More Read
Nevertheless, there’s a notion that emerges, appearing somewhat absurd: Over the past fifteen years, cryptocurrency has morphed into a fully-fledged asset class with numerous liquid tokens. However, the majority of crypto allocations remain heavily tilted towards Bitcoin. We suggest that employing proper asset-pricing models could assist investors in diversifying beyond Bitcoin. By adapting traditional equity “factor investing” to crypto, we formulate a Four-Factor Model encompassing crypto market, size, momentum, and intangible value factors. These factors have historically yielded excess returns and can be implemented in simple long-only crypto portfolios.
Yet, let’s pause for a moment of disbelief… Alright, with that aside, let’s delve into the recent report by Kai Wu of Sparkline Capital, known for his insightful research and prior contributions to a $32 million value ETF that integrates intangibles. However, his recent assertions might raise eyebrows.
On January 10, 2024, crypto achieved a significant milestone with the approval of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for listing on US stock exchanges. This led to billions being traded, indicating a notable influx of net inflows. These Bitcoin ETFs democratize access to the asset class, allowing spot crypto ownership within traditional brokerage accounts, catering to both retail investors and sophisticated financial advisers.
However, it’s crucial to recognize that major financial institutions’ involvement, such as BlackRock, Fidelity, JPMorgan, and NYSE, is primarily driven by profit motives rather than genuine belief in the asset’s intrinsic value. Their entry underscores the potential for monetization rather than ideological conviction.
Returning to Wu’s paper, his attempt to systematically categorize everything tradable reflects a common tendency among quantitatively inclined individuals. Yet, his effort to fit intangible assets into a framework designed for equity investing prompts skepticism.
Wu excludes mainstream factors like traditional value and quality, citing the intangible nature of cryptocurrencies. However, this overlooks the fundamental question of whether crypto tokens possess clear value beyond speculative demand. His identification of an intangible value factor as the best-performing “crypto factor” raises further doubts about the viability of such an approach.
Ultimately, Wu’s analysis suggests that amidst the multitude of cryptocurrencies, certain factors have demonstrated superior performance since 2017. However, this revelation hinges on significant assumptions and disregards inherent uncertainties, casting doubt on the efficacy of applying traditional factor investing principles to the crypto market.
In conclusion, while the concept of a “smart crypto beta ETF” may be in development, skepticism remains warranted amidst the complexities of the crypto landscape.
Disclaimer
Be forewarned that the content within our website is presented in utmost sincerity and intended for informational purposes only. Any course of action undertaken based on this information is solely at the reader’s discretion, assuming full responsibility for their decisions. This content also does not seek to persuade or advise anyone to invest, as it does not offer financial or trading guidance. We urge you to exercise caution and conduct thorough research, seeking guidance from a skilled financial advisor, before engaging in cryptocurrency or securities investments.
