Accompanying a friend to look at houses, the price is 66 million. I honestly said it might drop to 30 million in three years, but he still insists on buying. This made me think of an investment principle: real estate itself does not appreciate in value; the key is to view it with an investment perspective.
If you really compare, a house and stocks like NVDA, BNB, BTC placed together have completely different return curves. The real estate cycle is long, liquidity is poor, and various taxes and fees must be paid, so the opportunity cost is actually quite high. Although crypto assets are volatile, they have obvious advantages in growth potential and liquidity.
Conversely, rather than being tangled up in real estate, it’s better to diversify within a broader asset pool—traditional finance, tech stocks, crypto assets—this is the true approach to asset protection and appreciation. While houses have residential attributes, from a pure investment perspective, it’s really a matter of doing the math.
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.
11 Likes
Reward
11
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
BakedCatFanboy
· 01-01 22:41
Buy a house for 66 million? My friend did the same, and ended up losing a lot. It's really better to go all in on crypto; the liquidity is way better.
View OriginalReply0
HappyMinerUncle
· 2025-12-30 04:21
66 million to buy a house? Bro, your friend is just playing the old tricks of traditional finance. He's really stubborn.
View OriginalReply0
BloodInStreets
· 2025-12-30 04:20
Ha, yet another person brainwashed by the house. 30 million is still an overestimate.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketHustler
· 2025-12-30 04:15
Buying a house for 66 million is not as good as going all in on BTC. If it drops to 30 million in three years, that's a conservative estimate. I think it's risky.
View OriginalReply0
PumpBeforeRug
· 2025-12-30 04:11
Buying a house for 66 million is not as good as going all in on BTC. This friend probably hasn't experienced the baptism of a bear market.
View OriginalReply0
ProxyCollector
· 2025-12-30 04:09
Buying a house for 66 million is not as good as going all in on BTC; poor liquidity is just an IQ tax.
Accompanying a friend to look at houses, the price is 66 million. I honestly said it might drop to 30 million in three years, but he still insists on buying. This made me think of an investment principle: real estate itself does not appreciate in value; the key is to view it with an investment perspective.
If you really compare, a house and stocks like NVDA, BNB, BTC placed together have completely different return curves. The real estate cycle is long, liquidity is poor, and various taxes and fees must be paid, so the opportunity cost is actually quite high. Although crypto assets are volatile, they have obvious advantages in growth potential and liquidity.
Conversely, rather than being tangled up in real estate, it’s better to diversify within a broader asset pool—traditional finance, tech stocks, crypto assets—this is the true approach to asset protection and appreciation. While houses have residential attributes, from a pure investment perspective, it’s really a matter of doing the math.