Why I Do Not Discuss My Positions Publicly

I write about method and I do not publish what I hold or in what proportion. That is deliberate and the reason is not modesty.

What stating a position does

Public commitment creates consistency pressure. Having said something out loud, you become motivated to behave in ways consistent with having said it.

For an investment position, that pressure operates in exactly the wrong direction. It makes exiting harder, because exiting is visibly changing your mind. It makes adding easier, because adding is consistent with what you said.

Both effects push toward holding more of something for longer than the evidence supports.

What I have watched

People who publicly hold a position defend it long past the point where their private reasoning would have led them out. Not through dishonesty. Through the ordinary human difficulty of reversing in front of an audience.

I have done it myself, in a small way, in a group chat years ago. I held something for perhaps three months longer than I would have, because I had argued for it and the reversal felt like an admission.

Three months, on a small position. The mechanism scales.

The second problem

Once you hold something publicly, every piece of news about it arrives with an implicit question about whether you were right.

That changes how you read. Supporting evidence is more salient. Contradicting evidence prompts a defensive reading. This is unavoidable to some extent and it is considerably worse when the stakes include being seen to be wrong.

What I publish instead

Method. Position sizing rules, rebalancing schedules, what counts as evidence, how I handle drawdowns.

All of that is useful to someone else and none of it commits me to a particular asset. If I exit a position entirely next quarter, nothing I have written becomes false.

The exception

I write about mistakes after they are resolved, including the one position I exited permanently. That is publishable because it is finished, and because a record of being wrong is more useful to a reader than a record of being right.

The advice I would give

If you hold something meaningful, consider not announcing it.

The cost is that you cannot discuss it, which is a real loss because discussion is useful. The benefit is that your future decisions are made by the part of you that assesses evidence rather than the part that protects a stated view.

For most people most of the time, that trade favours silence.

The operational arrangements can be discussed freely, because they commit you to nothing. Where the working balance sits, what it is sized for, why cold storage is separate: all useful, all publishable, none of it a claim about an asset. Mine sits at the exchange I have used since 2021 and is sized to cover a quarterly rebalance, which is a fact about process rather than about conviction.