Travis Kling

Low sample

@Travis_Kling · Unclaimed · 90 days · 4 hours horizon How it’s ranked

Host - @thingshiddenio. Founder - @ikigai_fund. God exists.

Coverage 5 May 2026 – 10 Nov 2026

Window

Horizon

Calls

0 pending · 0 unresolved

Hit rate

—

0 correct / 0 incorrect · 0 neutral

ROI

—

Average return per call: what following every call with an equal stake returned

Max drawdown

—

Worst peak-to-trough of following every call, as a share of the stake

Streak

Right calls in a row, newest first; neutral results are skipped

Coverage

189d

5 May 2026 – 10 Nov 2026

Portfolio

Every token @Travis_Kling has called, most recent first. The badge is their latest call on it. 1 token, all time.

BTC▼ Bearish
Last called 27 Jun 2026 · 4 calls since 24 Jun 2026
2 bullish · 2 bearish

By month resolved · 4 hours horizon

Not enough history in this window for a trend.

▲ Bullish0 calls · 0 directional—

▼ Bearish0 calls · 0 directional—

90 days · 4h

1 records · every scored call links to its source post and price evidence

Posted (UTC)	Call	Asset	Direction	Price at post	Horizon	Price at horizon	Return	Status
13 Aug 2026, 01:19	“NFA. I think BTC has a Saylor problem, a quantum problem and a paper Bitcoin problem. The first two need to be worked through. I don't think there's really anything you can do about #3, but it's def damaging to the value proposition of BTC. I still think the price of BTC can go up a lot even with a paper BTC problem, but it's highly unlikely to "run away" to the upside. Too much paper BTC that can be sold (an infinite amount). Saylor is directionally doing the right things now (eg, selling BTC; not buying any BTC; raising cash; issuing MSTR; not issuing STRC), but he still owns waaaay too much BTC IMO. He has $50bn. He needs to sell at least half that to clean up "the Saylor problem". He's been selling $100mm/week. At that rate, it would take him 5 years of continuous selling to sell half the stack. Not great. Quantum risk preparedness has made progress this year. It's now being taken seriously, which it really wasn't at the beginning of the year. You want to see continued progress being made, and hope there's no big leap in quantum capabilities. That's been the fear in the market since March when Google moved their quantum migration date up to 2029. That was the signal that this is a major issue for BTC. Because what if Google moves it up to 2027?”

Think your calls are better?

Get ranked on the same rules, or challenge @Travis_Kling head to head.