Crypto DCA Calculator
Dollar-cost averaging into crypto means buying a fixed amount on a fixed schedule regardless of price. It buys more units when prices are lower, which lowers the average price paid. It reduces the range of outcomes rather than raising the expected one.
Regular buying versus one purchase
Assumes a steady path between the start and end price. Real paths are not steady, which is the point of the comparison.
This uses the arithmetic mean price along a steady path, which slightly understates the real result — buying a fixed amount actually pays the harmonic mean, and that is always lower. The comparison against a single purchase is the part that matters.
Runs entirely in your browser. Nothing you type is sent anywhere or stored.
How the number is built
Buying a fixed amount of money’s worth — rather than a fixed number of units — means the number of units varies inversely with the price. Low prices buy more, high prices buy fewer.
Units bought = amount ÷ price, each time. Value at the end = total units × final price.
That is the entire mechanism, and it is genuinely real. It is also frequently oversold, which the rest of this page is about.
A worked example
Take the defaults: 50 a week for 52 weeks, from 30,000 to 45,000 along a steady path.
Total invested is 2,600.
The average price paid is 37,500 — the midpoint, because the path was steady and the purchases were evenly spaced.
Value at the end is 3,120, a gain of 20%.
And the same 2,600 invested at the start would be worth 3,900. A 50% gain, because all of it was exposed for the whole rise rather than arriving gradually.
That comparison is the finding, and it is not the one usually presented. In a rising market, spreading purchases out is worse — necessarily so, because the average purchase price is above the starting price. Regular buying wins when the market falls first and recovers, and loses when it rises steadily.
What it actually does
It narrows the range of outcomes rather than improving the middle of it. You will not buy everything at the top; you will also not buy everything at the bottom. On an asset as volatile as crypto, that narrowing is substantial.
And the larger benefit is behavioural. A standing instruction converts an ongoing judgement call into a decision made once. The alternative in practice is not a well-timed lump sum — it is sitting on cash waiting for a better price, which is a forecast dressed as prudence.
None of it works on a short horizon. Regular buying is a method for accumulating over years, and over months it is mostly just buying.
The case where it wins
Regular buying loses in a straight rise and wins when the price falls first, so it is worth running the case it was actually designed for.
Take the same 2,600 over the same 52 weeks, but on a path that falls from 30,000 to 15,000 and then recovers to 30,000. The average price paid works out at about 21,600 rather than 30,000, because the purchases in the trough bought roughly twice as many units each.
At the end the price is exactly where it started, so a lump sum is worth 2,600 — no gain at all. The regular buyer ends with about 3,616, a gain of 39.1%, from a market that went nowhere.
That is the entire trade. Regular buying converts volatility into an advantage in a market that goes down and comes back, and it converts a rise into a smaller gain than a lump sum would have produced. Which one you get depends on the path, and the path is the thing nobody knows in advance.
Written that way the choice is honest. A lump sum has the higher expected value because markets rise more often than they fall. Regular buying has the narrower distribution and the lower chance of a badly timed entry — and for most people the second one is worth more than the first.
What it costs
Every purchase pays a fee, so 52 purchases pay it 52 times. On this site’s shared series a round trip is 2% of a median bar’s range; on a crypto venue with a percentage fee, weekly buying at 50 each can lose a meaningful share of a small position to costs alone.
The fills are not the problem. Small orders in the largest two coins execute without moving anything. The fee schedule is the problem, and monthly rather than weekly buying is the usual fix.
And the accumulated position still has to be held somewhere. A year of weekly buying leaves a balance on an exchange unless you have decided otherwise, which is a custody decision made by default.
The original data
Of the 24,971 unique videos in research/search-study-corpus.jsonl, zero have an
instruction-shaped title about crypto dollar-cost averaging. DCA generally appears in 53
instruction-shaped titles at a median of 9,803 views across 47 channels, and crypto in 217 at 30,027.
The counts come from site/rank_tools2.py.
53 videos on the method and none applying it to the asset class where it is most discussed. DCA is the default advice in crypto communities and the arithmetic comparing it to the alternative is not being shown — probably because the comparison is not flattering in a rising market.
The answer to the question on that chart is that a falling market is the condition the method was chosen for. Six months of decline means six months of buying more units per payment, which is exactly the mechanism working. If a fall makes you stop, the plan was a bet on prices rising and it was never dollar-cost averaging.
When it fails
It offers no protection against an asset that simply keeps falling. Buying more units of something on its way to zero produces more of a worthless thing, and the method contains no mechanism for noticing. The narrowing of outcomes it provides is around whatever the asset actually does — if that is a permanent decline, regular buying makes the loss larger rather than smaller, and the discipline that makes it work in a recovery is the same discipline that prevents you stopping.
The second failure is treating it as higher-returning. In a rising market it is not, and this page’s own example shows 3,120 against 3,900.
A third is buying too frequently. Fees are per purchase, and weekly buying at a small amount can lose several percent to costs.
A fourth is stopping during a fall. That converts the method into an ordinary market-timing strategy at the worst point.
A fifth is a short horizon. Over months this is just buying, and the smoothing has no time to operate.
And a sixth is leaving custody undecided. A year of accumulation on an exchange is a counterparty position you did not consciously take.
Related
Dollar-cost averaging covers the method in general and the evidence against it in rising markets. Crypto is the asset class and where the volatility this smooths comes from. And bitcoin is the asset most of these schedules actually buy.
The honest case for this is behavioural rather than mathematical. In a rising market a lump sum wins, and most markets rise most of the time. What regular buying does is make the decision once instead of every week, and remove the situation where you are sitting on cash trying to pick a moment — which is where most people simply never buy at all.
— Michael Whitman
This page is educational, not financial advice. Test every idea on your own charts before risking money. Some links on this page earn a commission if you buy through them. It costs you nothing and it does not decide what appears here or in what order — how these pages are made is set out in our methodology.