Maker DCA Backtest
Daily-close data from 23 July 2020 to 15 September 2025 (62 months). Last updated 15 September 2025.
Quick answer
Maker DCA Backtest — $100/month in MKR since 2020 — $6,300 invested, now $9,581 (+52%)
As of 15 September 2025 · Source: MKRUSDT daily closes (Binance)
At the current exchange rate, $100 ≈ ₹9,405 — totals below are USD-denominated so the historical math stays exact.
Total invested
$6,300
Value today
$9,581
Total return
+52%
Annualized (on contributions)
8.3%
Monthly buys
63
Average buy price
$100.00
| Price | |
|---|---|
| Cheapest buy | $514.00 |
| Most expensive buy | $4,786.41 |
About this metric
Dollar-cost averaging (DCA) invests a fixed amount on a fixed schedule regardless of price, removing the stress of timing entries. This simulation buys at the first daily close of every month and values the position at the latest close. It ignores trading fees and taxes, and past performance — especially in an asset with this volatility — does not predict future results.
Methodology
- Data: daily closes from the MKRUSDT market on Binance (public REST API).
- Window: 23 July 2020 — 15 September 2025; pages recompute at most every 6 hours.
- All figures are calculated by CoinCrypTick from that raw data — nothing is quoted from third parties.
- Not financial advice. Crypto assets are volatile; read the drawdown page before the returns page.
Track MKR in your dashboard
Free account — alerts, portfolio tracking and historical analytics on this coin and 200+ more.
Frequently asked questions
What if I invested $100 in MKR every month?
Since 23 July 2020, that plan would have invested $6,300 across 63 monthly buys and would be worth $9,581 today — +52% overall.
What average price did a monthly DCA get in MKR?
The simulation's average buy price is $100.00, versus the current price of $1,813.70.
Does DCA beat lump-sum investing in MKR?
That depends entirely on the entry date — the whole point of DCA is that you don't have to guess. This page shows the mechanical outcome of steady monthly buying; compare it with the yearly returns table to see how lumpy the alternative would have been.