Mostly Voices [0:00]

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. A different drummer.

Mostly Mary [0:18]

And now, coming to you from dead center on your dial, welcome to Risk Parity Radio, where we explore alternatives and asset allocations for the do-it-yourself investor. Broadcasting to you now from the comfort of his easy chair, here is your host, Frank Vasquez.

Mostly Uncle Frank [0:37]

Thank you, Mary, and welcome to Risk Parity Radio. If you are new here and wonder what we are talking about, you may wish to go back and listen to some of the first episodes where we did our introductions of the various topics. And those episodes are episode 1-3, 5, 7, and 9. And so if you go back and listen to those, it will get you up to speed. But now, on to Episode 136. Yes! Today on Risk Parity Radio, it's time for our weekly portfolio reviews of the seven sample portfolios that you can find at www.riskparityradio.com on the Portfolios page.

Mostly Voices [1:25]

But before we get to that, I'm intrigued by this, how you say, emails. First off, first off, we have an email from Mark B.

Mostly Uncle Frank [1:33]

And Mark B writes, Hey Aunt Mary, hey Uncle Frank.

Mostly Mary [1:37]

The folks at GBTC claim to be dead set on converting their fund into a proper ETF as soon as old Gary gives the all clear. I roll, Sonia, any predictions? As you can see, I've got several here, a really big one here, which is huge. I don't doubt their intention, but we certainly can't count on it. If I bought today at a discount of 15%, am I correct in assuming the discount would be close to zero in the event that the fund is converted to an ETF and I'd stand to gain that 15%? I'm not trying to win the discount game. Just trying to make sure I don't get screwed and I'm trying to decide what's worse, the lag of BITO or the uncertainty of discount premium of the trust style crypto funds. I assume competition and precedence would likely force BITW to follow GBTC in converting to ETF if such a thing is allowed by the SEC. P.S. 1. I will do my best to keep dropping sound bites in the Choose a FI Facebook comment section. 2. If your show were a pot roast, clearly you'd be the beef. I think sound bites are the potatoes, deeply necessary and filling, and the calming voice of Aunt Mary is the salt which enhances the flavor and brings harmony and balance to the dish. 3. Your unapologetic refusal to entertain requests to do more things for this cause has become one of my favorite things about the show. It feels akin to a bird pushing its hatchling out of the nest, or keeping your code open source, over Lake Washington refusing a third term. Cheers and all the best this holiday season, Mark B.

Mostly Voices [3:17]

Well, first of all, you can't handle the pop roast. Oh, my God, that is so funny. You made it come out of my nose.

Mostly Uncle Frank [3:25]

Thank you for this email. I'm glad you appreciate what goes on here, including the various and sundry shenanigans.

Mostly Voices [3:34]

You are talking about the nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind.

Mostly Uncle Frank [3:42]

But as to your question, yeah I think you're probably correct that GBTC, which currently trades like a closed-end fund, so it could trade at a discount or a premium to its actual holdings, and it's trading at a discount now, if that were converted into an ETF, it would eliminate that premium discount anomaly that goes on with closed-end funds and it would trade in accordance with its actual holdings. And so there would be a gain of 15%. But it wouldn't happen when it actually converted. It would happen upon the notice or announcement of the conversion. And before that, you would see various speculations on whether it's getting close or not. to having that announcement that there'll be a conversion. So there's a lot of guessing and speculation that would go on in that kind of a trade. I definitely would stay away from that BITO ETF that is based on the Bitcoin futures that is really volatile and really unpleasant looking these days. You can see how the decay in the options causes it to lose money probably perpetually. even if the price of Bitcoin goes up just because of the role on the futures and options contracts in there. As I mentioned in a recent podcast, the way I've gone to looking at Bitcoin for buying and holding at least is to buy it through Interactive Brokers, which has an arrangement now with Paxos where you can buy it at a 0.18 a transaction fee. and that seems to be about the best you can do these days. But that is a very recent development, and I expect that there'll be more reductions in fees on holding these sorts of things over time. Now, as for my unapologetic refusal to entertain requests to do more things... It's not that I'm lazy. It's that I just don't care. I suppose it's not so much that I'm lazy, but I do want to keep this podcast in perspective for the rest of my life. Many of you may be familiar with a parable that's called the Parable of the Mexican Fisherman, which I will summarize very briefly here. An American businessman goes on a vacation to Mexico. He's staying in a little port city, enjoying the life there. Meets a Mexican fisherman, they talk. He asks him how the fisherman spends his days. He says, I go out fishing in the morning, And then I, you know, hang out the rest of the day with my friends. We play music and have a nice time. And the businessman suggests to him, well, maybe you should develop your fishing operation more, get some more boats, get some more people, really expand it. And then you could have a little mini fishing empire and make lots of money. Now, there's only one use for money, and that's to make more money. and the fisherman says to the businessman, well, after you did that for however long it took you to do that, then what would you do? He said, well, then you could retire and you could go hang out with your friends and play music and have a good time. And so appreciating that little anecdote, I would rather just be the fisherman to begin with, since I'm already retired and do not have a need or reason to create a large-scale business out of this podcast.

Mostly Voices [7:09]

Forget about it!

Mostly Uncle Frank [7:12]

The purpose is, of course, to enlighten and leave something for my children, which was Jim Collins' purpose when he started his blog that ended up becoming the Simple Path to Wealth book. And then also just to have some fun and enjoy a little community which you have graciously formed for this podcast. And I thank you very much for doing that because it makes it all worth doing.

Mostly Voices [7:35]

Yeah, baby, yeah!

Mostly Uncle Frank [7:39]

And so thank you again for that email and your support.

Mostly Voices [7:42]

I got this inkling, I got this idea for a business model. I just want to run it past you. Here's how it would work. You get a bunch of people around the world who are doing highly skilled work, but they're willing to do it for free and volunteer their time, 20, sometimes 30 hours a week. Oh, but I'm not done. And then what they create They give it away rather than sell it. It's going to be huge.

Mostly Uncle Frank [8:10]

Second off, we have an email from Matt. Hi, Frank. I love the podcast.

Mostly Mary [8:17]

As a former federal employee, I have access to the Thrift Savings Plan. I'm curious whether you would consider the TSP's G Fund as a cash equivalent or bond fund for the purpose of constructing a risk parity portfolio. Thanks for all you do.

Mostly Uncle Frank [8:33]

So the G Fund, eh? You know you won G.

Mostly Voices [8:36]

What was? Well, the G Fund is in fact a short-term bond fund.

Mostly Uncle Frank [8:40]

And I will link to a description of that in the show notes so you can see that. So it would be analogous to a fund like SHY, which is also a short-term treasury bond fund, or the Vanguard version of that is VGSCH. which is also a short-term treasury bond fund. And so to the extent you have one of those kind of allocations, you could use it for that purpose. And by that kind of allocation, I do mean something, as you mentioned, that is essentially equivalent to a savings account, something that is low risk, low reward, low volatility. Hopefully that answers that and thank you for that email.

Mostly Mary [9:37]

Now, our next email comes from Kevin, and Kevin writes, hi Frank, love the podcast and have been binge listening. In episode 118, your synthetic ETF was 70% stock, 90% bonds. This led to a back test with a fairly high drawdown. Wouldn't a 30 or 40% drawdown mean the options would simply expire worthless, leaving a 10% drawdown of the stock component? Maybe I'm fundamentally misunderstanding this, but it would line up more closely with the actual performance during COVID Thanks in advance, Kevin M. P.S. Love the sound clips. Please fit in Bruce Dickinson as played by Christopher Walken. There just has to be a use case somewhere in your podcast. I gotta have more cowbell, baby.

Mostly Uncle Frank [10:19]

Well, your wish is my command.

Mostly Voices [10:23]

Guess what? I got a fever and the only prescription It's more cowbell.

Mostly Uncle Frank [10:29]

And as to your questions about this ETF Swan, SWAN, you'll also want to listen to episode 123 where I did a correction on that, that although that ETF is designed to perform like a 70% stock and 90% bond portfolio, it ends up performing more like something like a 40% stock and 85% treasury bonds. And so I'm wondering how stable it actually is, but I re-ran that in episode 123. In terms of how it works internally, that has a option component that are six month spider options on the S&P 500. And so those are rolled over. I'm sure they don't take them all the way out to the end and let them expire. but roll them over at some point during the middle of it. There's always one that's about six months ahead and one that's about a year ahead. So you're never actually going to have an option held to expiration in that circumstance. There's always going to be an earlier rollover. And that's going to prevent that kind of a dislocation, at least if the thing's properly managed. I can't speak for exactly what they're doing there, but that's what I would do if I were in charge of managing that situation. if you do go and look at what that ETF SWAN did during COVID I think it dropped from 30.33 to 27.63 during that February-March timeframe. So the drawdown was only 8.9% and so you'd have to say it was well managed, which may be different than what those synthetic things looked like since we were trying to construct it not as it is, but using Portfolio Visualizer to take other things to approximate it. The other limitation you have with Portfolio Visualizer is it's only giving you monthly data. It's not giving you the day-to-day data. So if you were going to use that ETF SWAN in some kind of portfolio, you would need to study it more closely and figure out exactly how you would want to use it. I actually don't find it that interesting precisely because I'm not sure that it is managed in such a way that you can approximate it as this many treasuries and this much stock component. And I would rather just hold those two things individually in most circumstances if the fund is not really approximating what it says it's supposed to be approximating. I suppose the other issue with respect to March 2020 was that if you were approximating this thing with an intermediate treasury bond fund like VBIX that is not going to have as nice an effect as a long-term treasury bond fund like TLT because at least in that period, March 2020, the intermediate treasury bond funds were up 10 to 15%, whereas the long-term treasury bonds were up more like 25%. So you're getting a lot more bang for your diversification buck if you're in the long-term treasuries and not the Intermediate Term Treasuries. That's just another observation there. And thank you for that email. And our next email is from Arun. And Arun writes, hello, Uncle Frank.

Mostly Mary [13:56]

Thank you for your wonderful podcast. My wife and I are in our mid-30s and hit our coast FI status earlier this year. I am the finance guy in the family. I have a system in which any extra money, like balance after monthly budget or bonuses, etc. Goes into a savings account and once that reaches five figures, I would open a taxable brokerage account and invest them. Recently, I created our first portfolio outside 401k and IRA, modeling the Leverage Golden Ratio. I chose LGR because I may need the money in three to five years. While doing so, I was thinking that instead of parking my money in a savings account until it reaches $10,000, why not invest every time there's some extra money? What would be your advice for someone who is looking to set up a portfolio with excess money each month and may withdraw within three to five years? A thought came across my mind. If you are interested, it will greatly help me and others in the accumulation phase in setting up this accumulation style portfolio. Since you are making monthly withdrawals from your existing seven portfolios, Would you be interested in setting up a new portfolio with the withdrawal money? This would resemble what I'm trying to do, and I'm sure that I, and others who are in the accumulation stage, will learn a lot from such a portfolio. I am curious to learn how balancing is done. Where does the new money go each month? Does the new money go to the lowest performing asset class each month, or do you divide the money based on the existing ratio? Cheers, our own.

Mostly Uncle Frank [15:30]

All right, thank you for this most excellent example of somebody taking this information and implementing it into their own lives.

Mostly Voices [15:37]

I think I've improved on your methods a bit too. But let's talk about what's going on here.

Mostly Uncle Frank [15:42]

What you're saying about investing every time there's extra money, that is exactly the way our eldest son uses one of these portfolios and he's using the regular golden ratio portfolio for this purpose. So he lets his checking account build up to how much he wants to have in his emergency fund essentially. And then every time he looks at it and there's more money in there than he needs, it sloshes over out of that bucket into the Golden Ratio intermediate term savings bucket. And it might be a couple hundred bucks, it might be 500 bucks, it could be anything. And then that will get invested in whatever is the worst performer in that portfolio at that particular time. Now he is using Fidelity for this purpose, which is convenient because it has no fee trading and you can buy fractional shares of ETFs. So even if it's a few dollars, it can go in without any fees into where it needs to go. Now I should also comment as to your choice of a levered version of the Golden Ratio portfolio for this purpose. The reason our son picks the Golden Ratio for this purpose is that its projected maximum drawdown is about 20%. in depth and about three years in length at a maximum. If you use a leveraged version of that, you need to be aware that its maximum depth of drawdown is going to be greater. It's going to be more like 30% because the leverage in the leverage golden ratio is 1.6 to 1, which is the golden ratio, by the way. Now the length of the drawdown ought to be similar. But again, since that portfolio is using leveraged funds that are of relatively recent vintage, what I'm talking about is in theory, since we haven't had this around for decades to practice it. Whereas the Golden Ratio portfolio, those components of it have been around for very, very long periods of time, and we have more confidence in that. I just want to make you aware that there's certain risks here that you're taking that you need to be aware of that you're taking. I realize that you're hoping to get more return out of it, which is fine, and I think this should work theoretically. But I always caution when using leveraged versions of things that there's a chance something unpredictable is going to happen and it won't be good. That being said, I think it's really cool. You have a gambling problem.

Mostly Voices [18:18]

Cool.

Mostly Uncle Frank [18:22]

But so yes, go ahead and put it in the lowest performers whenever you have something additional to put into it. And that way you can just keep truing it up to its target allocation as you go. It doesn't matter whether you do it on a schedule, whether you have a particular amount of money, just go ahead and put it in there and buy whatever is the lowest. then you'll have to do fewer sales of it, and there'll be fewer tax consequences. Now, as to me setting up an additional portfolio using the money that we're distributing out of the sample portfolios, you need to realize something that I am retired and I am spending that money. So after the last distribution, one of the things I bought was a three liter bottle of Chianti from Trader Joe's. Groovy, baby! And that used up the $36 distribution from the All Seasons portfolio, which I thought was a pretty good investment, although we haven't opened that bottle yet. Merry Merry, why you buggin'? We will certainly be making Merry this holiday though. Merry Merry, I need your huggin'! So I am probably going to resist the temptation to be setting up anymore. sample portfolios. Forget about it. That being said, I can tell you this has worked very well for our eldest son in terms of saving money for a down payment for a house, and now he may be buying another property in the future. But thank you for that email. Last off.

Mostly Mary [20:05]

Last off, we have an email from Danny, and Danny writes, Hi Frank, just started listening in on the podcast, very informative and helpful. Thank you for putting all this information together. I have been using Portfolio Visualizer as you do too. I think this tool is helpful, but like anything, it has some issues. Specifically, I like to look at the max drawdown for portfolios I review. This max drawdown number is technically not the actual maximum drawdown for any period. I believe it tracks the monthly returns versus the actual loss that was experienced. For example, if you look at the S&P 500 during March 2020, the tool shows a max drawdown of -19.63%. But the actual drawdown is closer to -33%. That's a big difference when trying to determine what kinds of losses actually occurred with any given portfolio.

Mostly Uncle Frank [20:55]

I know other tools give the actual drawdowns, but I do like this tool. Perhaps I'm using this the wrong way. Any thoughts? Thanks. Well, what you're seeing there is the consequences of using monthly data in the data set that's there at Portfolio Visualizer. It does not use daily data. It uses monthly data. So in a month like March 2020, you could have some discrepancies like you describe. That being said, that may be the only month like that. In decades. Because usually when there is a serious drop in the stock market, it goes on at least for a few months and you do not have that kind of immediate rebound. So I have to say, you are doing it the right way.

Mostly Voices [21:42]

You are correct, sir, yes.

Mostly Uncle Frank [21:46]

But you have discovered a discrepancy in the data. Now, I will link to a article from Portfolio Charts in the notes that talks about what happened in March 2020 specifically and looks at all of the sample portfolios in their database from a total stock market portfolio going up to a risk parity style portfolio like the Golden Butterfly. And you'll get a better sense of the comparative performance in that time period that's based on daily stock prices. and the prices of other assets. And what you'll see from that is that a total stock market portfolio was indeed down over 30% in that time period, whereas something like the Golden Butterfly was down less than 15% and something like the All-Seasons Sample Portfolio was down 10% or less. But it is kind of similar to what we see going on in the markets today where there is a lot of turmoil, a lot of volatility week to week in the stock market, whereas our risk parity style portfolios, and you'll see this week's results, have moved less than a percent. So if anything, this observation you've made shows you why it's even more important if you're looking for lower volatility to have a much more diversified portfolio. This is also why I say that the best use of the tools like Portfolio Visualizer is to compare two portfolios over a same period of time. Because if you're using different time periods, you're going to get different comparisons. And if you want to drill down and use the absolute performance for a portfolio, you would have to take it down to the daily level, if that's of interest to you. So the tools are best used for the comparison of two things in terms of relative performance. But thank you for that email. And now for something completely different. And the something completely different is our weekly portfolio reviews of the seven sample portfolios that you can find at www.riskparityradio.com on the portfolios page. But just taking a look at what the markets did last week, it was another tumultuous week. The S&P was down 1.94%. The Nasdaq was down 2.95%, so it was the worst performer. Gold was up 0.87%.

Mostly Voices [24:19]

I love gold!

Mostly Uncle Frank [24:23]

And long-term treasuries did what they were supposed to do. You hope they do. When the stock market is down, they were up 1.32%. That's TLT we're using for that. REITs represented by the Global Fund R E E T were down 0.81%. Commodities represented by the fund PBDC were down 0.77% and preferred shares represented by the fund PFF were actually up 0.23%. So how did this affect our sample portfolios? Well, they were pretty docile. Going first to our most conservative one, the All Seasons. This one is only 30% in stocks. It is 55% in treasury bonds. with the remainder in gold and commodities. It was up 0.02% for the week and is up 12.4% since inception in July 2020.

Mostly Voices [25:19]

I'm putting you to sleep.

Mostly Uncle Frank [25:22]

We really are putting people to sleep with that one. And now moving to our three more bread and butter portfolios that are of similar risk reward to a 60/40. The Golden Butterfly, this one is 20% in gold, 40% in stocks divided into a total stock market fund and a small cap value fund, and then 40% in treasury bonds divided into short and long term. It was down 0.44% for the week, and it is up 21.92% since inception in July 2020. Next is the Golden Ratio. This one is 42% in stock funds. It is 26% in long-term treasuries. 16% in gold, 10% in REITs, and 6% in cash for distributions. And it was down 0.32% for the week. It is up 23.71% since inception in July 2020. And then our next portfolio is the Risk Parity Ultimate. I won't go through all the funds that are in that. We'll talk about that a little bit later here. And it was down 0. 72% for the week. It is up 23.09% since inception in July 2020. And now moving to our experimental portfolios involving the leveraged funds. The first one is the Accelerated Permanent Portfolio. This one is 27.5% in a leveraged bond fund, TMF. 25% in a leveraged stock fund, UPRO. And then it's got 25% in PFF, a preferred shares fund, and 22.5% in Gold GLDM. It was down 0.45% for the week. It is up 28.13% since inception in July 2020. And you can see how the diversification between the stocks and bonds really muted the results for this. Now looking at the aggressive 5050, this is our most leveraged portfolio and usually our most volatile one. This one is 33% in the UPRO that leveraged stock fund 33% in TMF, the leveraged bond fund, then the remainder is divided into a intermediate treasury bond fund, VGIT, and preferred shares fund, PFF. It was down 0.89% for the week, so less than a percent, and it is up 36.51% since inception in July 2020. And then finally, our newest portfolio, the levered Golden Ratio. This one is 35% in a composite fund, an S&P and Treasury Bond fund mixed that is leveraged. It is called NTSX. It's got 25% in gold, GLDM, 15% in a REIT, realty income, which is ticker symbol O. And then it's got two other leveraged funds in there. 10% in TMF, a leveraged treasury bond fund, 10% in TNA, which is a leveraged small cap fund based on the Russell 2000. And then in the final 5%, it has a volatility fund, VIXM, and two Bitcoin funds or crypto funds, BITQ and BITW, at 1% each. It was down 0.05% for the week. So also pretty much flat. It is up 2.86% since inception this past July, July 2021. Now we are going to do something extremely fun. And the extremely fun thing I thought we would do is go through the components of the Risk Parity Ultimate Portfolio, because I think this is a good illustration as to how very volatile components of a very well diversified portfolio can result in a relatively smooth ride for the portfolio overall. So this portfolio is kind of our kitchen sink portfolio. It has 14 different funds in it. We will go through them from worst to best last week. And so bringing up the rear were the crypto related funds, BITQ, Just 1% of this portfolio was down 8.3% for the week. BITW was down 7.65% for the week. And I think this illustrates why you don't want too much of this kind of fund in your portfolio because of its severe volatility. And if you have a lot of it in your portfolio, it will tend to dominate the overall performance of your portfolio. But if you can keep it down to a small portion, in this case, 2% for those two funds, it's not going to have that large an effect, particularly when it's negative. The next worst performer after the Bitcoin funds was the leveraged stock fund, UPRO, which is 5% of this portfolio. It was down 6.02% for the week. So it was performing as advertised since the S&P itself was down about 2% last week. The next worst performer was the Vanguard Large Cap Growth Fund, VUG, which has a lot of FANG stocks and other popular things in it. It was down 3.28% for the week, so it did it even worse than the Nasdaq last week. Then we get to the Vanguard Small Cap Value Fund, which was down 2. 49% for the week. Now I should say that the large cap growth and small cap value funds do make up 12.5% each of this portfolio overall so are together are a quarter of this portfolio. The next worst performer was the Chinese A shares fund, our international component, KBA. It was down 2.34% for the week. It is 5% of this portfolio. And then we get to a very interesting fund called USMV. USMV is an iShares fund that invests in minimum volatility stocks. So it does rotate periodically from different holdings. But if you look inside of it, you'll see a variety of things. You've got some tech in there like Microsoft and Google. You've got some pharmaceutical companies like Eli Lilly and then you've got some consumer type things like Procter and Gamble, Pepsi, McDonald's. But it tends to hold up in tumultuous times a bit better than some of these other stock funds. And over time yields about the same thing as the S&P 500. At least that's what it's designed and advertised to do. Anyway, it comprises 5% of this portfolio. It was only down 0.10% for the week and actually hit a high for the year, I think on Thursday. So this is one of those things when you say people are rotating into lower volatility and quality stocks. This is the kind of thing they're rotating into and that's why it is there in this portfolio. Now I did miss a couple of things that were down last week. One was the REIT component, REET. Which is 5% of this portfolio is down 0.81% for the week. And then we have this trend following commodities fund, C-O-M, which is also 5% of the portfolio. It was down 0.57% for the week. And then we get to the funds that were up last week. Extremely fun. And in this portfolio we have the preferred shares fund, PFF, which is 10% of this portfolio. It was up 0.23% for the week. Now, ordinarily you would expect that to be down when the stock market is down, but it is also bond-like in some respects, so sometimes it does go up. Generally, you'll find it has a very muted performance compared to anything else. It's really there to produce some income and not move around too much. Next up, we have gold, which was up 0.87% for the week. We're using GLDM for that.

Mostly Voices [33:43]

Gold, Jerry, gold.

Mostly Uncle Frank [33:47]

Gold tends to behave in a completely uncorrelated way to either the stock market or the bond market, but does well when people get nervous. And then we move to our best performers for the week, which are negatively correlated with the stock market. First we have TLT, the long-term treasury bond fund. That one was up 1.32% for the week. And then we have a leveraged version of that, TMF. that is supposed to be three times TLT and it did perform as three times TLT last week. It was up 4.02% for the week. So in this portfolio we have 15% in TLT and 5% in TMF, which performs overall like having 30% in TLT. And you can see how that balances out the fund. And then we also have this very small component in VIXY, which is this volatility fund. And that was our big winner last week. It was up 5.77% for the week. It is only 3% of this portfolio and you don't want it to be a very large component because it does tend to go down over time. But it is insurance essentially and it did perform like insurance in this circumstance. So what did this look like overall for the past week? Well, what it looked like was you had nine components that went down for the week, most fairly substantially, over 2% and up to 8%. And then you had five components that were up for the week, a couple very substantially, over 5% or over 4%, I should say. And that all works out to a decline of 0.72% for the entire portfolio for the week. which is very nice when you had a week where the stock market was down almost 2% in the S&P and almost 3% in the NASDAQ. It's much more pleasant to hold something like this. But I just wanted to go through that because that illustrates how diversification is supposed to work. If you have a truly diversified portfolio in any given time period you're going to be seeing some things going up and some things going down in your portfolio. If everything is always going up together and going down together, that is a reflection that your portfolio really isn't that well diversified. And over time you'll see that in its correlation numbers between two funds. That if they have a negative correlation, that means one's going up when the other one's going down. If it's close to zero, they could be moving randomly as to whether they're both going up or down at the same time. And then if they're positively correlated, they're most likely to be going up or down together at the same time. And hopefully that somewhat long-winded discussion did not put you all to sleep.

Mostly Voices [36:36]

Stranger, I feel drowsy. It's only mid-afternoon, ah. Well, I'm putting you to sleep. You old fool. Is there an antidote? Of course there is. Right here. Well, it'll cost you a guinea, unless that was your goal. But now I see our signal is beginning to fade. We've had quite a number of emails pile up recently.

Mostly Uncle Frank [37:03]

I don't know whether that's because people are taking off for the holidays and they're listening to more podcasts or they're getting towards the end of the year and thinking more about their portfolios. But in any event, we will be attending to those. in our next episode, at least some of them. If you have comments or questions for me, you can send them to frank@riskparityradio.com that email is frank@riskparityradio.com or you can go to the website www.riskparityradio.com and fill out the contact form there and I should get your message that way. If you haven't had a chance to do it, please go to where you get your podcast and like, subscribe, Give it some stars, a review, all that nice stuff. That would be great. Okay. Thank you once again for tuning in. This is Frank Vasquez with Risk Parity Radio signing off. Babies, before we're done here, y'all be wearing gold-plated diapers.

Mostly Voices [38:06]

What does that mean? Never question Bruce Dickinson. I gotta have more cowbell. I gotta have my cowbell. The Risk Parity Radio Show is hosted by Frank Vasquez.

Mostly Mary [38:17]

The content provided is for entertainment and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, tax, or legal advice. Please consult with your own advisors before taking any actions based on any information you have heard here, making sure to take into account your own personal circumstances.