How to Decide Which Crypto to Sell When You Want to Buy Something New

Every trader knows the feeling. Something new catches your eye — a project with real momentum, a narrative gaining traction, a token at a price that feels like an entry point you'll regret missing. You want in. But your capital is already deployed.

Why Most Traders Get This Decision Wrong

The instinct when you want to fund a new position is to look at your portfolio and find the loser. The red one. The one that's down 40% and causing you pain. That feels logical — cut the underperformer, deploy capital into something with more momentum. The problem is that this is backwards.

A position being down does not make it a bad hold. A position being up does not make it a good one. The only question that matters is: at today's price, with today's information, would you buy this position if you didn't already own it?

The Five-Criteria Framework

Product quality and appeal. Mainstream breakout potential. Return vs your target. Social reach and momentum. Tokenomics and supply health.

A Worked Example — Scoring ARB

Product quality scores 8 out of 10. Mainstream breakout potential scores 6 out of 10. Return vs target scores 7 out of 10. Social reach scores 6 out of 10. Tokenomics scores 5 out of 10. Composite conviction score: 64 out of 100.

Using the Score to Make the Decision

Score the new opportunity using the same five criteria. Compare that score against every score in your existing portfolio. The position at the bottom of your leaderboard is the one that should make way for the new entry.

What Changes When You Do This Consistently

You stop holding positions because you are waiting to get back to even. You stop missing opportunities because you could not decide what to sell.

The Crypto Conviction Scoring Framework — How to Score Every Position From 1 to 100

Most traders evaluate positions in isolation. The conviction scoring framework gives every position a number comparable across assets, sectors, and time.

How the Framework Works

Five criteria each rated 1 to 10. Average multiplied by 10 gives a composite score out of 100. 75 plus means high conviction up to 15 percent allocation. 55 to 74 moderate conviction maximum 7 percent. 35 to 54 low conviction maximum 3 percent. Below 35 exit.

Criterion One — Product Quality and Appeal

Does this project solve a real problem for a real audience? Score 8 to 10 for measurable traction. Score 5 to 7 for credible use case with early adoption. Score 2 to 4 for theoretical or narrative-driven. Score 1 for pure speculation.

Criterion Two — Mainstream Breakout Potential

Is there a credible path to audiences beyond crypto-native traders? Score based on concrete evidence of mainstream transition.

Criterion Three — Return vs Your Target

At the current price is your target return multiple realistically achievable given the market cap required?

Criterion Four — Social Reach and Momentum

Is the community growing with real organic engagement or large but stagnant?

Criterion Five — Tokenomics and Supply Health

FDV to market cap ratio below 2x scores 8 to 10. Between 2x and 4x scores 5 to 7. Between 4x and 8x scores 2 to 4. Above 8x scores 1.

A Worked Example — Scoring Solana

Product quality 9 out of 10. Mainstream breakout potential 8 out of 10. Return vs target 6 out of 10. Social reach 8 out of 10. Tokenomics 6 out of 10. Composite conviction score 74 out of 100.

Using the Framework Consistently

The decision journal tracks which criterion was most predictive and which was most misleading turning a scoring framework into a genuine edge.