Many people have struggled with this question: when you urgently need funds for investment or financial management, should you directly sell your assets for cash or use them as collateral to borrow money? The underlying logic behind these two choices differs greatly, and the decision essentially depends on three core variables.

**First is your long-term judgment of the collateral.** For example, if you believe BTC will rise in the future, borrowing against it is more cost-effective than selling — you can obtain cash flow while continuing to hold an appreciating asset. It's like using a lottery ticket as collateral to borrow money; the ticket remains in your hand, and if it increases in value, you profit. If you sell it outright, you completely miss out on the potential appreciation.

**Second is cost comparison.** Many people only see the interest rate on the loan but overlook a bigger cost — the opportunity cost of selling the asset. The future gains you forgo are the real "hidden costs." Currently, loan market interest rates are extremely low; some platforms have borrowing costs as low as around 1%. If you judge that your asset can outperform a 1% return in the long run (which is quite easy), then borrowing is a profitable deal.

**Finally, don't forget the tax implications.** In many regions, selling assets triggers taxable events, requiring you to pay taxes. However, collateralized borrowing usually does not create taxable events, which is important for tax planning.

In simple terms, think of this decision as: borrowing at an annual interest rate of 1% to invest, and if the expected return exceeds 1%, or if the avoided selling loss exceeds 1%, then borrowing is worthwhile. In this low-interest-rate era, the opportunity to access cheap funds has indeed increased significantly compared to the past.