BearBreakerDollar cost averaging buys a fixed amount on a fixed schedule. It is a calendar rule. Rules based rebalancing buys and sells based on the relationship between what you paid and what the market currently offers. It is a state rule. Both remove emotion, but they remove it in different places, and they behave very differently through a drawdown.
The strength of dollar cost averaging is that it requires no judgement at all. You buy on the first of the month whether the market is euphoric or terrified. The weakness is that it ignores price entirely. It buys the same amount at the top of a run as it does at the bottom of a panic, and it has no mechanism for taking anything back off the table when a position becomes unusually large relative to what you paid for it.
Divergence-driven rebalancing responds to the gap instead of the calendar. When current value sits meaningfully below the recorded cost basis, the system expands toward the midpoint of that gap. When value sits meaningfully above, it contracts toward the same midpoint. Nothing happens while the gap stays inside the threshold, which means quiet markets produce quiet weeks rather than pointless activity.
The trade-off is real. A schedule cannot run out of discipline, but it also cannot run out of capital, because you fund it from income. A divergence system deploys from a fixed pool, so it needs ceilings, cooldowns and an honest cost basis to stop it from spending everything early in a long decline. That is exactly what the TCB ledger and the capital limits exist to enforce.
Neither approach predicts anything and neither guarantees an outcome. The honest way to choose is to decide whether you want your rule tied to the date or tied to price, then hold yourself to whichever one you picked.