The idea is simple; if the future is trading above the underlying asset (Bitcoin) today, we buy the asset and sell the future, thus receiving cash and locking in a profit. Then on the delivery date, we sell the bitcoin to cover the costs of settling the futures contract. For the deal to be profitable, the price difference has to be large enough to cover interest between today and the delivery date as well as all costs fees.
and other factors. Thus, to the extent a Fund invests in swaps that use an ETF as the reference asset, that Fund may be subject to greater correlation risk and may not achieve as high a degree of correlation with its index as it would if the Fund used only swaps on the underlying index. The Advisor, under the supervision of the Board of Trustees, is responsible for determining and monitoring the liquidity of the Funds’ transactions in swap agreements.
The SEC staff also has acknowledged that, while a board of trustees retains ultimate responsibility, trustees may delegate this function to an investment adviser. The Board of Trustees has delegated this responsibility for determining the liquidity of Rule 144A restricted securities that may be invested in by a Fund to the Advisor. It is not possible to predict with assurance exactly how the market for Rule 144A restricted securities or any other security will develop. A security that when purchased enjoyed a fair degree of marketability may subsequently become illiquid and, accordingly, a security that was deemed to be liquid at the time of acquisition may subsequently become illiquid. In such an event, appropriate remedies will be considered in order to minimize the effect on the Fund’s liquidity.
For each intervening holiday in the applicable foreign market that is not a holiday observed by the U.S. equity markets, the redemption settlement cycle will be extended by the number of days of such intervening holiday. In addition to holidays, other unforeseeable closings in a foreign market, including due to regulatory action, may also prevent a Fund from delivering securities within the normal settlement period.
With the increased use of technologies such as the Internet and the dependence on computer systems to perform necessary business functions, the Funds and the digital assets that underline the bitcoin futures contracts in which the Funds invest are susceptible to operational and information security risk. The digital nature of bitcoins and the irreversible nature of bitcoin transactions makes bitcoin an attractive target for theft, hacking and other cyber-attacks. In general, cyber incidents can result from deliberate attacks or unintentional events. Cyber-attacks include, but are not limited to gaining unauthorized access to digital systems for purposes of misappropriating assets such as bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies or gaining access to sensitive information, corrupting data, or causing operational disruption. Cyber-attacks may also be carried out in a manner that does not require gaining unauthorized access, such as causing denial-of-service attacks on websites. Such events have historically correlated with a drop in the price of bitcoin, which may adversely affect your investment in a Fund. Cyber security failures or breaches of a Fund’s third party service provider (including, but not limited to, index providers, the administrator and transfer agent) or the issuers of the bitcoin futures contracts in which the Funds invest, have the ability to cause disruptions and impact business operations, potentially resulting in financial losses, the inability of a Fund’s shareholders to transact business, violations of applicable privacy and other laws, regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs. In addition, substantial costs may be incurred in order to prevent any cyber incidents in the future. The Funds their service providers, counterparties and other market participants on which the Funds rely could be negatively impacted as a result. While the Funds have established business continuity plans and systems to prevent such cyber-attacks, there are inherent limitations in such plans and systems including the possibility that certain risks have not been identified.
The Administrator pays all fees and expenses that are directly related to the services provided by the Administrator to the Funds; each Fund reimburses the Administrator for all fees and expenses incurred by the Administrator which are not directly related to the services the Administrator provides to the Funds under the service agreement. Each Fund may also reimburse the Administrator for such out-of-pocket expenses as incurred by the Administrator in the performance of its duties. For these services each Fund that was operational for the period indicated paid the Administrator and Citi the amounts set forth below. Because the New Fund was not operational at the end of the Trust’s last fiscal year, information on fees paid to the Administrator and Citi on behalf of the New Fund is not included in this SAI.
Distributions of Shares shall be made to DTC or its nominee, Cede & Co., as the registered holder of all Shares. DTC or its nominee, upon receipt of any such distributions, shall credit immediately DTC Participants’ accounts with payments in amounts proportionate to their respective beneficial interests in Shares as shown on the records of DTC or its nominee. Payments by DTC Participants to Indirect Participants and Beneficial owners of Shares held through such DTC Participants will be governed by standing instructions and customary practices, as is now the case with securities held for the accounts of customers in bearer form or registered in a “street name,” and will be the responsibility of such DTC Participants. The Trust has no responsibility or liability for any aspects of the records relating to or notices to Beneficial owners, or payments made on account of beneficial ownership interests in such Shares, or for maintaining, supervising or reviewing any records relating to such beneficial ownership interests or for any other aspect of the relationship between DTC and the DTC Participants or the relationship between such DTC Participants and the Indirect Participants and Beneficial owners owning through such DTC Participants.
This course by the ChartGuys “covers topics ranging from market psychology to executing a trade”, as the ChartGuys themselves say. This is a paid course ($149) – however, even The Merkle thought that it is worth its money. It covers long term as well as short term investment strategies, and the psychology of investing as well. Click here to visit the course.
ZagTrader platform is probably the only platform known that has a complete turnkey offering for Crypto trading that covers front ends all the way to the accounting, custody and allocations -- all integrated and under one roof. Add to this, the global markets offering along with the algos, market making, and real-time structured products creation and pricing.
As an example: if you have Quarterlies contracts that you made profits on over the weekend, then this profit needs to be withheld because of the risk of socialised losses. By Friday, however, this profit is available to be withdrawn and the positions are all rebalanced. Technically this is not a "settlement", because if you are holding an open Quarterlies contract when the weekly settlement occurs, your position will remain open, it will just experience a step-up in cost-basis and the unrealised Pnl is applied, so that socialised losses can be handled.
CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC AND ITS AFFILIATES (COLLECTIVELY, “CREDIT SUISSE”) DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY AND/OR THE COMPLETENESS OF THE INDEX, OR ANY DATA INCLUDED THEREIN AND CREDIT SUISSE SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INTERRUPTIONS THEREIN. CREDIT SUISSE MAKES NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED BY LICENSEE, OWNERS OF THE PRODUCT, OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FROM THE USE OF THE CREDIT SUISSE INDEXES OR ANY DATA INCLUDED THEREIN. CREDIT SUISSE MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE WITH RESPECT TO THE CREDIT SUISSE INDEXES OR ANY DATA INCLUDED THEREIN. WITHOUT LIMITING ANY OF THE FOREGOING, IN NO EVENT SHALL CREDIT SUISSE HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOST PROFITS), EVEN IF NOTIFIED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
That includes institutional investors, who are increasingly interested in the benefits that crypto could offer their portfolios — to a degree that might have been unthinkable even six months ago. These investors, who have $130 trillion of assets under management worldwide, could have a huge impact on the crypto market, whose market cap remains under $300 billion.
cooperatives) is a record holder of a Share in a Fund that recognizes “excess inclusion income,” then the Fund will be subject to a tax on that portion of its “excess inclusion income” for the taxable year that is allocable to such shareholders at the highest federal corporate income tax rate. The extent to which this IRS guidance remains applicable in light of the December 2006 legislation is unclear. To the extent permitted under the 1940 Act, each Fund may elect to specially allocate any such tax to the applicable CRT, or other shareholder, and thus reduce such shareholder’s distributions for the year by the amount of the tax that relates to such shareholder’s interest in the Fund. The Funds have not yet determined whether such an election will be made.
In general, the Code defines (1) “short-term capital gain dividends” as distributions of net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses and (2) “interest-related dividends” as distributions from U.S. source interest income of types similar to those not subject to U.S. federal income tax if earned directly by an individual foreign shareholder, in each case to the extent such distributions are properly reported as such by a Fund in a written notice to shareholders.
Were Centra's tokens securities? Well, yes, obviously. We talked last week about the Securities and Exchange Commission's enforcement action against Munchee, an initial coin offering vaguely similar to Centra's in that it featured "utility tokens" to be used in a blockchain ecosystem that did not yet exist, sold on promises of speculative returns. The SEC brusquely and correctly dismissed the notion that such "utility tokens" were not securities, and I suspect any court will agree. Also, while Centra occasionally remembered to call its tokens "utility-based tokens" and "not securities, shares or investments," it often forgot. From the complaint:
Jump up ^ "Bitcoin: The Cryptoanarchists' Answer to Cash". IEEE Spectrum. Archived from the original on 4 June 2012. Around the same time, Nick Szabo, a computer scientist who now blogs about law and the history of money, was one of the first to imagine a new digital currency from the ground up. Although many consider his scheme, which he calls “bit gold,” to be a precursor to Bitcoin
Bitcoin is a relatively new type of currency—a digital or cryptocurrency secured through cryptography, or codes that can’t be read without a key. Traditional currencies are made up of paper bills and coins. Unlike traditional currencies, the bitcoin is not issued by any central government. Rather, a computer algorithm determines how many bitcoins are produced and added to the economy. This is much different than a traditional currency, where central banks typically determine how much money to print.
Disclaimer: This is a personally owned web site, reflecting the opinions of its author(s). It is unaffiliated with any FINRA broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion & entertainment purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities. DATA INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THE USERS "AS IS." NEITHER BitcoinFuturesGuide.COM, NOR ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY THIRD PARTY DATA PROVIDER MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND REGARDING THE DATA INFORMATION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE.Copyright BitcoinFutursGuide, BTCFutures 2015-2016
Nelson Peltz of Trian Fund Management waged a proxy fight to get himself on the board of Procter & Gamble Co. that ended at P&G's annual meeting in October, when Peltz lost out to management nominee Ernesto Zedillo by about 6.2 million votes. Or did he? In November, an independent recount of the votes found that Peltz had beaten Zedillo by 42,780 votes, or about 0.0016 percent of the shares outstanding. Or did he? On Friday the final official count of the votes came in, finding that Zedillo actually won by 498,312 votes, or about 0.019 percent of the shares outstanding. It is a little disappointing that Zedillo's margin in the third count, though less than his margin in the first count, was bigger than Peltz's margin in the second. I was hoping that not only would the victor alternate with each count, but also that the margin would get narrower and narrower, until eventually we'd find out that the two sides were exactly tied except for a single ballot for a single share written in a special ink that says "Peltz" under fluorescent light and "Zedillo" under natural light. I was hoping that P&G would count the votes again and again forever.
In a futures market, if the price is $500/BTC, an investor needs to buy 50 futures contracts, each worth $10. If an investor wishes to open a positive position then he goes long with “buy" contracts, and if he decides to open a negative position, he goes short with “sell” contracts. An investor’s position can be either positive or negative for the same instrument. (For more, see: Bitcoin Mass Hysteria: The Disaster that Brought Down Mt. Gox.)
The method by which Creation Units are created and traded may raise certain issues under applicable securities laws. Because new Creation Units are issued and sold by the Trust on an ongoing basis, at any point a “distribution,” as such term is used in the 1933 Act, may occur. Broker-dealers and other persons are cautioned that some activities on their part may, depending on the circumstances, result in their being deemed participants in a distribution in a manner which could render them statutory underwriters and subject them to the prospectus delivery and liability provisions of the 1933 Act. For example, a broker-dealer firm or its client may be deemed a statutory underwriter if it takes Creation Units after placing an order with the Distributor, breaks them down into constituent Shares and sells some or all of the Shares comprising such Creation Units directly to its customers; or if it chooses to couple the creation of a supply of new Shares with an active selling effort involving solicitation of secondary market demand for Shares. A determination of whether a person is an underwriter for the purposes of the 1933 Act depends upon all the facts and circumstances pertaining to that person’s activities. Thus, the examples mentioned above should not be considered a complete description of all the activities that could lead a person to be deemed an underwriter. Broker-dealer firms should also note that dealers who are effecting transactions in Shares, whether or not participating in the distribution of Shares, are generally required to deliver a prospectus. This is because the prospectus delivery exemption in Section 4(3) of the 1933 Act is not available in respect of such transactions as a result
• an officer of an investment company, or a person that would be an investment company but for the exclusions provided by sections 3(c)(1) and 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act, having the same investment adviser or principal underwriter as the Trust or having an investment adviser or principal underwriter that directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the Advisor or principal underwriter of the Trust;
The first timestamping scheme invented was the proof-of-work scheme. The most widely used proof-of-work schemes are based on SHA-256 and scrypt. The latter now dominates over the world of cryptocurrencies, with at least 480 confirmed implementations. Some other hashing algorithms that are used for proof-of-work include CryptoNight, Blake, SHA-3, and X11.
The foregoing discussion is primarily a summary of certain U.S. federal income tax consequences of investing in a Fund based on the law in effect as of the date of this SAI. The discussion does not address in detail special tax rules applicable to certain classes of investors, such as, among others, IRAs and other retirement plans, tax-exempt entities, foreign investors, insurance companies, banks and other financial institutions, and investors making in-kind contributions to a Fund. Such shareholders may be subject to U.S. tax rules that differ significantly from those summarized above. You should consult your tax advisor for more information about your own tax situation, including possible other federal, state, local and, where applicable, foreign tax consequences of investing in a Fund.