Does Nasdaq recommend buying crypto for retirement?

Yesterday, an article was published on Nasdaq official website that seems to explicitly recommend buying crypto for retirement.

The article is part of the “News and Insights” section of the site and was written by Evan T. Beach, CFP and AWMA, on behalf of Kiplinger.

It is not clearly identified as a sponsored news or feature article, so it should be interpreted as an organic article.

However, it is not an article written by Nasdaq authors, so the so-called publisher appears to be Kiplinger.

Summary

• Who is Kiplinger?
• The Nasdaq
• Nasdaq: Crypto as a Retirement Investment
• Bitcoin, not crypto, says Nasdaq

Who is Kiplinger?

Kiplinger is an American publisher specialising in business forecasting and financial advice, so not only is the article organic, but the source itself is authoritative, albeit not Nasdaq.

Kiplinger Washington Editors was even founded by the Kiplinger family in 1920, although it was later sold to British media company Dennis Publishing in 2019.

In 2021, Dennis Publishing was acquired by Future plc, which now effectively owns Kiplinger.

Kiplinger’s best-known publications are The Kiplinger Letter, a weekly business and economic forecast magazine, and Kiplinger’s Personal Finance, a monthly magazine.

With this in mind, the article should be analysed with caution.

The Nasdaq

Although many people know the Nasdaq as the US technology stock index, it is actually a traditional stock exchange (National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation).

It was founded in 1971 as the world’s first fully electronic stock exchange.

Nasdaq is owned by the company of the same name, Nasdaq Inc, which also owns nasdaq.com.

It is therefore possible to say that the publisher of nasdaq.com is Nasdaq Inc, which in turn owns the American stock exchange of the same name.

It is not known why Nasdaq agreed to publish an article by Kiplinger on its official website.

What is clear is that the article was not written by Nasdaq, so much so that they explicitly state at the bottom:

“The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.”

Then they add that Kiplinger is a Washington-based publisher of economic forecasts and personal financial advice.

This is not a Nasdaq article, but it is worth considering.

Nasdaq: Crypto as a Retirement Investment

Kiplinger’s article explores the possibility of buying cryptocurrencies to hold indefinitely until retirement.

The title, with its question mark, makes it clear that this is not really financial advice, but an analysis of a hypothesis.

However, at the end of the text, the author explicitly writes:

“I am optimistic that the future will bring purchase, storage and estate simplicity, along with more predictable investment results. At that point, BTC may play a bigger role in my clients’ plans.”

In other words, Beach is not saying that he would recommend investing in cryptocurrencies today as if they were an alternative form of supplementary pension, but he is saying that Bitcoin could become one in the future.

In fact, there is a clear disclaimer at the bottom of the text, stating that the article is published for information purposes only and not as an investment recommendation, partly because past performance is not indicative of future results.

Investing in bitcoin is described as “highly speculative” and risky, and suggestions are referred to the reader’s personal financial advisor.

Also within the article, Beach explicitly states:

“This is notinvestment advice If you wantinvestment advice speak to your adviser.”

But then he goes on to analyse bitcoin, and what he writes is particularly interesting.

Bitcoin, not crypto, says Nasdaq

The first thing to notice is that while the headline mentions cryptocurrencies in general, Beach’s article is actually talking specifically about bitcoin.

Unfortunately, bitcoin is all too often confused with other cryptocurrencies, whereas bitcoin is a unique asset that is distinctly different from altcoins.

The fact that Beach only talks about bitcoin as a possible alternative form of supplementary pension shows that the analyst has done his homework.

What’s more, he also states that his firm works mainly with retirees with incomes between $2 million and $10 million, so on the one hand he appears to be an experienced analyst in this area, but on the other hand his reasoning applies mainly to this type of person.

The first interesting thing Beach reports for this type of investor is the idea of limiting exposure to BTC to 5% of one’s portfolio, or even less.

He says that the correlation between BTC and the S&P 500 is much lower than that of more common asset classes, which means that adding a little exposure to BTC increases portfolio diversification.

Beach then goes on to insist on the secure storage of BTC, as the type of investor he is targeting is certainly not known to have a great ability to maintain the high level of security of a crypto wallet.

At one point, however, the analyst writes that the main unknown is that it is difficult to understand how to assess the risk and return of bitcoin. It is precisely because of this difficulty that he writes, between the lines, that he does not recommend investing too much in BTC at the moment.

In the end, the initial hypothesis is considered plausible at the moment, but only in a limited form and with a large margin of uncertainty. However, it cannot be ruled out that things will change in the future.

Source