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 [0:19]

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 have just stumbled in here, you will find that this podcast is kind of like a dive bar of personal finance and do-it-yourself investing. Expect the unexpected. There are basically two kinds of people that like to hang out in this little dive bar. You see in this world there's two kinds of people my friend. The smaller group are those who actually think the host is funny regardless of the content of the podcast. Funny how? How am I funny? These include friends and family and a number of people named Abby. Abby someone. Abby who? Abby normal.

Mostly Voices [1:25]

Abby Normal.

Mostly Uncle Frank [1:32]

The larger group includes a number of highly successful do-it-yourself investors, many of whom have accumulated multimillion dollar portfolios over a period of years. The best, Jerry, the best. And they are here to share information and to gather information to help them continue managing their portfolios as they go forward, particularly as they get to their distribution or decumulation phases of their financial life.

Mostly Voices [2:04]

What we do is if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do? Put it up to 11. Exactly.

Mostly Uncle Frank [2:12]

But whomever you are, you are welcome here.

Mostly Voices [2:16]

I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.

Mostly Uncle Frank [2:20]

But now onward, episode 335. Today on Risk Parity Radio, it's time for our weekly portfolio reviews of the seven sample portfolios you can find at www.riskparityradio.com on the portfolios page. And it looks like it was the worst week of the year for the most popular stocks, including the large caps and the tech. Uh, what? It's gone.

Mostly Voices [2:45]

It's all gone. What's all gone? The money in your account. It didn't do too well. It's gone.

Mostly Uncle Frank [2:52]

But our favorite alternative asset did hold up. Gold fingers.

Mostly Voices [2:59]

He's the man. The man with the mightiest touch. A spider's touch. But before we get to that, I'm intrigued by this, how you say, emails.

Mostly Uncle Frank [3:20]

And? First off, we have an email from Anderson.

Mostly Voices [3:29]

Yeah, the American pesticides don't work anymore because of the hippie environmentalists, so I drove down to Mexico and got some good old-fashioned DDT.

Mostly Uncle Frank [3:38]

And Anderson writes, Uncle Frank,

Mostly Mary [3:41]

thank you for all your input. I've decided to move forward with the following. I'm going to cash out refinance my house. Rates are great right now and invest everything in a margin account. Grabbing speed. I'll use the margin to invest in the following. I'll call this the Uncle Frank portfolio. I don't think it means what you think it means. 20% Fidelity Target Date 2070 Fund, VSVNX. 10% inverse leveraged S&P 500, SPXU. 10% leveraged S&P 500, UPRO. 10% truth social. I can't even say this. 10% truth social, DJT. 10% Cannabis ETF, MJ 10% Volatility Fund, SVOL 10% Dogecoin, DOGE 10% Tips Fund, STIP 10% Inverse Leveraged Long-Term Treasuries, TMV I think I'll also hire a financial advisor at a 2% fee to help keep me invested. However, when I plug all this into Portfolio Visualizer, it just spits out that I am a moron. Johnny, the truth is they're morons.

Mostly Voices [5:00]

I thought maybe you could give me your thoughts on my new long-term portfolio.

Mostly Mary [5:04]

Thank you for all you do. I would have never gotten to this portfolio without your help.

Mostly Voices [5:11]

And you're getting high in the middle of the afternoon off some weed.

Mostly Uncle Frank [5:19]

Well, I believe we are crossing a threshold here, or the emailers are more entertaining than the host. Surely you can't be serious. I am serious. And don't call me Shirley. I appreciate you sending this email in and it is in fact April 20th or unofficial cannabis day when I'm recording this.

Mostly Voices [5:40]

Weed.

Mostly Uncle Frank [5:43]

So I did bring in a friend, Steven A. Smith to help me here.

Mostly Voices [5:47]

Stay off the weed.

Mostly Uncle Frank [5:51]

I particularly enjoy the fact that you are going both long and short on the S&P 500 at the same time.

Mostly Voices [5:58]

Who are you, Snoop Dogg in a green room?

Mostly Uncle Frank [6:02]

And while that's kind of a silly example, you do find people's portfolios sometimes that have inconsistent positions or positions that either work against each other or a false diversification where they have two things they think are different but they're actually the same thing.

Mostly Voices [6:18]

You wanna sit there and stay on the weed?

Mostly Uncle Frank [6:22]

Although I do wonder what you were smoking when you put this thing together.

Mostly Voices [6:26]

Millions of dollars and you can't stay off the weed.

Mostly Uncle Frank [6:31]

I can imagine you sitting around with Elon Musk smoking a big spliff, talking about what kind of crypto you thought should go into this.

Mostly Voices [6:42]

He ain't getting busted for using weed. Weed.

Mostly Uncle Frank [6:46]

And then somebody's saying, yeah, let's get the Dogecoin or the Doggy coin. And of course, that resulted in several minutes of laughter about that and an allocation of 10% to it.

Mostly Voices [6:59]

What's next? I don't know. Codeine, weed, alcohol. What's next?

Mostly Uncle Frank [7:06]

But now here's the funniest thing. I did go put this portfolio into portfolio visualizer and I'll link to it in the show notes. And some of these things have only existed for a year or two, so it only goes back to 2022. But it actually has an extremely high compounded annual growth rate of something like 29%. And the reason for that all has to do with the performance of the Dogecoin and the Truth social stock for the first three months of this year. You couldn't stay off the weed. Now, of course, Portfolio Visualizer only does monthly, so it ends on March 31st, which was a high point for both of those things and they've since collapsed.

Mostly Voices [8:00]

All three of y'all say, oh, it's mine. The weed was mine. Ah, I wanna hear that.

Mostly Uncle Frank [8:07]

Reminds me of those spurious stock picking games that still often go on in elementary or junior high school, where the person that wins does pick some random thing that happens to explode in the time period that they're doing the contest. But I thought it's a really excellent illustration of this principle that so much of what happens in the short term in the stock market is really random noise or luck. and that anybody throwing darts at a board could come up with a portfolio that performs spectacularly or terribly just out of the luck factor on it, especially if it's a short time period.

Mostly Voices [8:48]

I mean, what are we gonna do? We gonna encourage kids to do it now?

Mostly Uncle Frank [8:52]

But it also illustrates that the financial media and most do-it-yourself investors are in fact way too myopic in their approach. to portfolio construction in that this is a couple of years that's obviously noise, but people like Fama and French would say that even a decade of performance is largely just noise. And I heard a statistic recently, I think it was a interview of Ken French, it might have been a Meb Faber's podcast, or he said that you would need something like 64 years of data about the performance of a fund manager to determine whether they, in fact, were outperforming their benchmarks or not. And it wasn't just random noise. You couldn't stay off the weed. So I'm very glad you created this thing and are sharing it with us because it's not only funny, it does illustrate a principle of how we can easily get fooled by randomness.

Mostly Voices [9:51]

You can't handle the crystal ball.

Mostly Uncle Frank [9:55]

Now I'm thinking I need to go set up a new website, the Uncle Frank Investments website, where we feature this. And of course, we have to charge the 2% fee in order to get in. Ah, the sweet smell of an all-day sucker. In the meantime, I would ask that you send your 2% fee to the charity we sponsor here, the Father McKenna Center. which you can do through the support page at www.riskparityradio.com or on the charity's website directly.

Mostly Voices [10:28]

Yes!

Mostly Uncle Frank [10:32]

Now you didn't specify how much margin you were actually going to take on this, but it could be very spectacular. I will let you run those possibilities in Portfolio Visualizer for yourself. Stay in formation. Target's just ahead.

Mostly Voices [10:43]

Target should

Mostly Uncle Frank [10:47]

be clear if you go in low enough. You will have to decide. You will have to decide. you will have to decide. Anyway, thank you for your contribution to our silliness quotient around here.

Mostly Voices [11:01]

Funny, funny how. How am I funny? And thank you for your email. Everything eviscerated, thrown away, confiscated, taken from you because you can't stay off the weed and they don't listen. Stupid. Second off.

Mostly Uncle Frank [11:22]

Second off, we have an email from Brian. Hey Brian, care to place a wager?

Mostly Voices [11:26]

Tomorrow night on Fox's Celebrity Boxing, I've got Carol Channing beating Mike Tyson in three rounds. Carol Channing. You've got Carol Channing the actress beating Mike Tyson the boxer. Hell, give me 50 bucks on Tyson. And Brian writes.

Mostly Mary [11:41]

Good day, Frank. Thank you for answering my question. It is related to how to properly rebalance our portfolio with different asset classes being located in different types of retirement accounts. Between my wife and me, we each have a Roth IRA. I have a 457b, which I contribute Roth and the city contributes every paycheck towards the pre-tax portion of the 457. My wife also has a rollover pre-tax IRA from a previous job being held at Charles Schwab. I have heard that based off specific asset classes, you'll want to hold them in different retirement accounts. Roth assets should be the most aggressive so that they can have the greatest amount of growth since traditionally many advisors recommend tapping Roth last in our portfolio. I understand this type of thinking, but here's my hang up. How are we supposed to rebalance annually in both accumulation and decumulation phases if the asset classes are spread among different retirement accounts, say brokerage, IRA, Roth, and 457. Let's say theoretically, if my index stock funds are in Roth and my bonds, which I don't own yet either since I'm still on the younger side, are in pre-tax, and we have a year where one does well and the other doesn't, I can't sell the winners in one retirement account and buy the losers in the other account as the funds can't transfer between each retirement account. Or maybe even this could be between owning small cap value in Roth and international and pre-tax. In the accumulation phase, I can see being able to purchase the losers to help towards rebalancing, but even that could be minuscule based off portfolio size. In the decumulation phase, I can sell the winners for cash too, I guess for that year, but that can still possibly be a challenge trying to stay in a certain balance in the overall portfolio between accounts. I can see once I get to retirement, most likely having a Roth side and pre-tax side. Not sure I'll have a brokerage account. Is there any reason not to just have my portfolio be equal in both a Roth IRA and regular IRA in retirement and take the market returns equally between the two? It seems rebalancing would be much more simple this way. The other thought doing it this way is if I have a tax strategy that I need to pull so much from each, I'm not forced to be selling assets in of the accounts because of a certain tax strategy that I have. If my plan for a year was to pull more from Roth to stay under a tax bracket, but my assets in the Roth are down substantially versus the pre-tax, then I'm selling low or pulling from the pre-tax account pushing me into a higher tax bracket. Again, this is theoretical. Is there a solution for the retiree in this type of predicament? Anyway, I'd like to hear the best way to rebalance between different retirement accounts that hold different types of asset classes between the two or three accounts that I'm sure many listeners own. Have a great day, Brian.

Mostly Voices [14:48]

Hey, it's me, Knock Knock. So, you got my money? Huh? Oh yeah, I'll pay you soon. Yeah, well, here's a suggestion. Have the money by tomorrow and there won't be any problems. Huh? Yeah, 24 hours. Why? What happens in 24 hours? I don't know. Not psychic, man. I'm just saying it would probably be better for everybody if you had the money tomorrow. Yeah, all right. I'll see what I can do. Sweet, sweet, great.

Mostly Uncle Frank [15:15]

Well, here is the second email today where our audience has come to the rescue. And in this case, one of our listeners, Justin of Risk Parity Chronicles fame, yeah, baby, yeah! which he has put aside for the moment, has created a video about doing an asset swap between accounts like this. And I will link to that in the show notes. It's on YouTube. It has some very nice graphics, but it explains to you exactly how to do this in a better way than I can do on a podcast. But there's a couple principles behind it here. The first is that because these are in retirement accounts, your transactions do not trigger taxable events, and therefore you can do as much buying or selling in these kind of accounts as you want. So long as you don't create a wash sale with another transaction outside the account. But assuming you're just buying and selling things in various retirement accounts, you can do it to your heart's content. Because you can only have a taxable event when the money is coming out of the account. Now that also means there's no tax loss harvesting to be done here either. So it doesn't really matter whether something in a retirement account has a gain on it or not. All that being said, tax location is important for where you put particular assets in these accounts. Now, between a Roth IRA and a regular IRA, the difference does not seem to and is not that important if you're just talking about a short period of time. The reason that you want to put your growing assets in the Roth as opposed to the traditional is that over a long period of time, say decades or more, you would expect certain assets like index funds to grow a lot more than you would a bond fund or some alternative asset. And all of the growth in the traditional retirement account is eventually going to get taxed when you take the money out of it. So you would rather have that growth go in the Roth where it's not going to be taxed ever. Now when you're in your accumulation phase, this probably isn't going to matter that much because you're probably going to have 80 to 100% inequities anyway, which means everything is likely to be growing at similar rates. But when you get to decumulation, that is when you are likely to be holding bonds or other things generating substantial ordinary income. And those are the things that really want to be sitting in the traditional retirement accounts. because you're going to have to pay taxes at an ordinary income rate eventually on that, but keeping it in the retirement account as opposed to a taxable account allows you to defer that taxation and plan it for the year you want to take it. Now you mentioned you do not have a brokerage account, a taxable brokerage account, and aren't sure whether you're likely to have one. That is actually where Most of the tax location issues come to the fore, if you will, because in a taxable account, obviously the kind of tax you want to be paying there is either qualified dividends or long-term capital gains, which are taxed at a much lower rate than ordinary income. If you don't have that issue, then you do have a much simpler situation where you're just thinking about long-term growth prospects in each of the accounts. the disadvantage of retirement accounts, and this also applies to things like variable annuities, is that if you have qualified dividends or capital gains that are created in a retirement account, that account, by the way it works, is essentially converting those from a low tax situation to a higher tax situation when you pull it out. and get the ordinary income, or get taxed at the ordinary income rate, I should say. And that's what you're really trying to avoid by putting the growers in the Roth so that that growth is not taxed at all. The next place you would have put something like that would be in the taxable account because you can pay the lower capital gains tax rate on any growth that you have. And then the last position for something that is likely to generate capital gains or qualified dividends would be in the traditional retirement account, because that will eventually generate ordinary income and ordinary income taxes. Anyway, take a look at Justin's asset swapping video. I think it will answer all your questions, but please write in again if it does not. And thank you for your email. Stewie. Hey. Hey there.

Mostly Voices [20:07]

So, it's been 24 hours. Got my money? Oh, you know what? Just give me till next Friday. I'll have it for you. Oh, oh, that's funny. I could have sworn I said have it today. Yeah, I don't have it. Sorry. Oh, well, all right then. Yeah, that hurts. That hurts? Yeah, it feels so good, does it? No. Huh? Yeah. That's what happens, man. Yeah, that's what happens. Where's my money? You're gonna give me my money? Where's my money, man? Where's the money? Yeah, you like that? That feel good? That feel good? Where's my money? You got till five o'clock. You hear me? You got till five o'clock. You're freaking psychopath. Clean yourself up. Last off, we have an email from Drew.

Mostly Mary [21:04]

No way, way. Yeah. Andrew writes, hi Frank, I thought you'd appreciate this given the number of questions you have received. What global withdrawal rates teach us about ideal retirement portfolios. Portfolio charts. Best, Drew. Yes, I've referenced this before, but we haven't really talked about it and we should talk about it.

Mostly Uncle Frank [21:28]

This is a new article and analysis from Tyler over at Portfolio Charts. And it's probably one of the most interesting things I've read about portfolio construction in the past couple of years at least. And it answers a number of questions that I'd been curious about but had been unable to answer, particularly for some of our listeners outside the United States. So what Tyler has done here is to do an analysis of 10 different countries and seven different asset classes to determine things like, well, what is the best kind of portfolio to maximize a safe withdrawal rate if you're in a given country? So the countries involved are Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. and then the assets, which are actually broken down even further, are domestic stocks, foreign stocks, which obviously is going to be different for every country as to what is domestic and what is foreign. Domestic bonds and foreign bonds, domestic T-bills and gold. And so this is a similar kind of analysis like the one that Scott Cederberg was attempting to do in that paper we've flogged like a rented mule or a dead horse for quite some time here. What kind of a horse is that?

Mostly Voices [22:53]

I've never seen a horse like that before. No, it never will again, I fancy. There's only one of him in East It. He's the horse of a different color you've heard tell about.

Mostly Uncle Frank [23:05]

And also an earlier study done by Wade Fau, that dates back to 2010 or sometime around then. And he also compares this study to those earlier studies, largely to verify that he's in the same ballpark with respect to what is being analyzed. And it's interesting when he compares this study to the Wade Fales study, he sees that you're getting similar results even though the data set is different. Fales was longer but involved fewer countries. And the only place you see substantial differences in the outcomes is where you are dealing with a country that has lost a war, fought on its own soil. And those countries in those time periods have very poor results, as you can imagine. But if you take those out, the findings are very similar between what Tyler has just done here and what Pau did back when. In his discussion and comparison with the Cedarberg study, he notes what I also noted is that what Cedarberg is analyzing is not some portfolio that anyone is likely to hold, given the way he constructed the database. And Tyler notes that a lot of the results Cedarberg got were from strange situations or anomalous situations like the performance of Spain in the 1970s in financial markets, in the waning days of the dictatorship of Francisco Franco. and he also compares these results to the original Bengen work from the 1990s. But the results are quite intriguing because it does show that having a large proportion of gold in a portfolio, around 30%, over all of these different countries and situations tends to come out with the best safe withdrawal rates. And that with a decent portfolio Looking at all this data, you can actually achieve a safe withdrawal rate of 4.4% over 30 years, which is much higher than some of these other studies would have suggested. But of course, none of those studies put gold in a portfolio.

Mostly Voices [25:17]

This is gold, Mr. Bond. I think you've made your point, Goldfinger. Thank you for the demonstration.

Mostly Uncle Frank [25:25]

But it's a very lengthy analysis. It's got a number of little calculators in there you can play with, depending on which country you're in. and is the best work I've seen of this nature so far. Mostly because it doesn't pretend that you are stuck with some unreasonable or bad portfolio and then just only analyzes bad portfolios. It's a piece of crap, it doesn't work.

Mostly Voices [25:51]

I could have told you that.

Mostly Uncle Frank [25:55]

But I would suggest you all check this out, particularly if you are an investor in another country. because I have not done it justice in the few minutes I've been talking about it here. It's a very long article. It has a lot of analysis. It has a lot of calculators. It has a lot of interesting things that I don't think I've even scratched the surface of it, really, because I've only read it a couple of times now. I think it is something that we'll be referring back to fairly frequently when we're talking about investors in other countries. The other thing though it did confirm to me is that you do not want to be investing in the sovereign bonds in some country that has an unstable or weak currency or otherwise has some kind of problems like that. And Tyler talks about that, but she'll also observe it that when you're not in the United States, your allocation to foreign bonds, which includes the US Treasuries, is often the most important for stabilizing the portfolio. And it suggests to me the answer to something I've been mulling over since the beginning of this podcast is whether a person in another country should invest in their own country's bonds or in US bonds. And it seems that at least for the purpose of diversification, they're better off with the US Treasuries than they are in most countries, treasuries, or some mixture of those two things, and not just relying on the bonds they have in their own country, particularly if it's not using one of the world's reserve currencies. Anyway, this is a very interesting analysis, and thank you for bringing it to our attention, because I think it's something that we're going to be referring to fairly often in the future. It answers a lot of questions that I'd been having and I know a lot of you have had about what to do if you are an investor in another country. So thank you very much for your email.

Mostly Voices [28:00]

And now for something completely different.

Mostly Uncle Frank [28:04]

What is that? What is that? What is it? Oh, no, not the beast. Not the beast. I love my eyes. And yes, the bees have returned to the stock market, which had its worst week of the year, I think, at least for the high flyers this year. The rest of things actually didn't perform so badly, and alternative assets continue to lead the way this year in terms of performance. But going through these, the S P 500 was down 3.05% for the week NASDAQ was down 5.52% for the week and is quickly erasing all of its gains this year small cap value represented by the fund VIoV was down but only 0.

Mostly Voices [29:03]

54% for the week gold was up yet again I love gold gold is up 1.97 for the week and is up 16.

Mostly Uncle Frank [29:09]

16% year to date.

Mostly Voices [29:12]

And that's the way, -huh, -huh, I like it.

Mostly Uncle Frank [29:16]

Kashi on the sunshine band. Long-term treasury bonds represented by the fund VG LT were up 1.11% for the week. REITs represented by the fund REET were down 2.48% for the week. Preferred shares represented by the fund PFF were down 1.12% for the week. Commodities represented by the fund, PBDC were down 1.26% for the week. I think that's because the price of oil has fallen again. And lastly but not leastly, a representative managed futures fund, DBMF was down 0.03% for the week or just about flat and that is up 14.22% year to date. So it's the second best performer on this list after gold.

Mostly Voices [30:07]

Buy low, sell high, fear, that's the other guy's problem.

Mostly Uncle Frank [30:11]

Now looking at these portfolios, first one's our reference portfolio, the All Seasons that we keep around for reference since we don't actually expect anybody to use this. It is 30% in a total stock market fund, VTI, 55% in intermediate and long-term treasury bonds, and the remaining 15% in gold and commodities. It was down 1.42% for the week. It's down 0.72% year to date and up 0.79% since inception in July 2020. It's basically just sitting there generating lots of income these days since these bond funds are both paying between 4 and 5% now. Now moving to our more bread and butter portfolios here. The first one is the Golden Butterfly. This one is 40% in stocks divided into total stock market fund and a small cap value fund. 40% in bonds divided into long and short term treasuries and the remaining 20% in gold. GLDM, it was down 0.51% for the week. It's up 1.03% year to date and up 21. 77% since inception in July 2020. Next one is the golden ratio. This one is 42% in stocks and three funds. 26% in a long-term treasury bond fund, 16% in gold, 10% in a REIT fund, and 6% in a money market. It was down 1.09% for the week. It's now down 0.08% year to date or almost flat and up 16.94% since inception in July 2020. It'd be doing a lot better if I had replaced those REITs with the managed futures like I talked about doing last year, but we'll get to that eventually. We did actually increase our exposure in our personal portfolios to managed futures to about 10% last year. The other thing that we invest in our personal portfolios that I don't really have represented in any of these is something I've talked about before, which is a allocation to property and casualty insurance companies. like Travelers and Chubb, and there's a representative fund KBWP. Those are also defying gravity this year and are up over 15%. So I've been very happy with them as part of our value stock allocation, even though I don't have any long-term data to suggest why those kinds of companies seem to perform pretty well in a lot of environments other than my observation that Berkshire Hathaway is built on such things, which is why I became interested in them in the first place. Anyway, getting back to these sample portfolios, the next one is the Risk Parity Ultimate Portfolio. We'll go through all 15 of these funds. It does have some cryptocurrency in it. It was down 1.27% for the week. It's up 2.5% year to date, so still leading the pack. and up 10.53% since inception in July 2020. Now moving to these experimental portfolios that have really been taking it on the chin here. This leverage in them, these all have leveraged funds and so are quite volatile. Don't try this at home. You have a gambling problem. First one is the Accelerated Permanent Portfolio. This one's 27.5% in a leveraged bond fund, TMF, 25% in a leveraged stock fund, UPRO, 25% in PFF, a preferred shares fund, and 22.5% in gold, GLDM. It's wishing it had a bigger exposure to gold right now. It was down 3.67% for the week. It's down 3.76% year to date. and down 11.8% since inception in July 2020. Next one is the aggressive 5050, which is our most levered and least diversified portfolio, and is really struggling now since it doesn't have any alternative assets in it. It's got one third in a levered stock fund, UPRO, one third in a levered bond fund, TMF for the remaining third divided into a preferred shares fund, and an intermediate treasury bond fund as a as ballast. It was down 4.73% for the week, it's down 7.16% year to date, and down 23.87% since inception in July 2020. This is a good example of past performance not being indicative of future results since the past performance of this prior to 2020 looked awesome going back to the financial crisis. But 10 years is often just noise, particularly if you're talking about adding leverage to something. So lots of these kinds of portfolios have floundered in recent years. It's a good experiment though, and a good reference to have. And the last one is the levered golden ratio. This one is 35% in a composite levered fund called NTSX. That's the S&P 500 and treasury bonds, 25% in gold, GLDM, 15% in a REIT, 10% each in a levered small cap fund TNA and a levered bond fund TMF and the remaining 5% in a managed futures fund KMLM. It was down 1.23% for the week, it's down 0.84% year to date and down 14.19% since inception in July 2021, which was really bad timing for starting a portfolio like this. Small caps peaked in November of 2021 and have not gotten close to that peak again. It would have been much better off with a small cap value fund instead. But there is no such thing as a levered small cap value fund right now. So it is what it is, but it does illustrate that there is a difference between straight small cap and using the value factor in conjunction with that. An interesting what have we learned sort of thing.

Mostly Voices [36:21]

I have officially amounted to jack you squat.

Mostly Uncle Frank [36:26]

But now I see our signal is beginning to fade. If you have comments or questions for me, please send them to frank@riskparityradio.com that email is frank@riskparityradio.com or you can go to the website www.riskparityradio.com and puts your message into the contact form and I'll get it that way. If you haven't had a chance to do it, please go to your favorite podcast provider and like, subscribe, give me some stars, a review, a follow. That would be great. M'kay? Thank you once again for tuning in. This is Frank Vasquez with Risk Parity Radio. Signing off.

Mostly Voices [37:10]

I got a joint here, man. I've been saving for a special occasion. Hey, I hope the drums don't mess up your upholstery, man. Nah, I'm in a band too, man. Who are you? Yeah, I'm a lead singer, man. Ah, that's it. We play everything from like Santana to El Chicano, man. You know, like everything. I'm just a love machine, and I don't work for nobody but you. I'm just a love machine, and I don't work for nobody but you. My temperature rise and then I go for a test and then I see what I'm looking in my shoes.

Mostly Mary [37:49]

The Risk Parity Radio Show is hosted by Frank Vasquez. 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.