16 Comments
User's avatar
Rob Selby's avatar

Michael, thank you for another great article. I recall that a couple months ago you went risk off. Has that changed? Thanks.

Expand full comment
Charlie Erith's avatar

V important note. Placing what everyone suspects into a rigorous framework is super useful. Thanks Mike and team.

Expand full comment
Amelia's avatar

Hi Michael,

Per your mention that gold & btc have performance profile almost mirror images to bonds, this means that they keep increasing as inflation goes higher. In large parts, this makes sense as they respond to liquidity, and more liquidity eventually finds its way to high street inflation.

However, I remember you once also noted that high street inflation can be negative for liquidity. So instead of mirror images to bonds, should there be a bump in gold/btc profiles plotted against inflation -- the bump is when high street inflation becomes detrimental to liquidity?

Expand full comment
Steven Parks's avatar

Great research. Love getting this information

Expand full comment
Michael Howell's avatar

Depends on time horizon but if you want to trade the peak cash is a great option. Note how the cycle (curiously) is behaving 'normally' so far in terms of bonds, yield curve, commodities and industry sectors.

Expand full comment
Sean's avatar

Michael, in your research you mention the liquidity cycle and its anticipated peak in Q12026. What asset allocation do you recommend during such a peak. For instance in 2022, the only asset classes that seemed to do well were energy and the US Dollar. Would you recommend just going to cash as the safest bet? Thanks in advance

Expand full comment
Matthew emerick's avatar

What about other commodities? I would thing it would deserve an equal allocation % as general equities

Expand full comment
Sukhjit Sandhu's avatar

Michael, you mention the two flavours of inflation:- monetary and cost. You cover monetary inflation and its mitigations (gold, crypto) extensively. On the subject of cost inflation, do you see any merit in following the 1970s playbook of using commodities (porkbellies, oil & copper futures and suchlike) as a mitigation in portfolios?

Expand full comment
Michael Howell's avatar

Yes and consider tech stocks because they are productivity leaders

Expand full comment
Nelson's avatar

What are the pros and cons of allocating 3:3:3:1 (equities:gold:btc:cash/TIPS) when monetary inflation is the primary concern in the next decade?

(stocks are getting harder to outperform inflation hedges) Assuming you put gold and btc in tax-deferred or exempt accounts (using IAU, SGOL, PHYS as gold alternatives and FBTC as btc) What’s your thought? Thank you.

Expand full comment
Sab's avatar

Thanks for your kind reply and extra info. Ok, as I expected. All the best, Sab

Expand full comment
Michael Howell's avatar

The mix should take into account both potential returns, volatility risk and cross correlations, and need to think about what might happen if we are wrong. Hence, I reckon a higher weighting in stocks makes sense (pace your observation) and slightly less in gold/BTC

Expand full comment
Rob's avatar

I form the portfolio Michael portfolio of 1:6:1:1:1, and 1:1:1:1:1, that is equal weight to the five assets, spy, gld, btc, cash, tips from 2020 to now, the result is below.

The equal-weighted portfolio has a better shape ratio, lower risk and standard deviation, and a higher annual return. The results are below. I wanted to attach the graph of the 2 returns, but this cannot be done

Annual Return Annual Std Dev Sharpe Ratio

Portfolio 1 (2:2:2:2:2) 0.200155 0.139851 1.431200

Portfolio 2 (1:6:1:1:1) 0.173250 0.153044 1.132031

Expand full comment
Sab's avatar

Hi Rob, thanks for sharing your results. Though, I do not understand your ratios: 1:6:1:1:1 is what Michael means as 6:1:1:1:1 ? And then the Portfolio 1 reads as 2:2:2:2:2, do you mean equal weights, i.e. 1:1:1:1:1 ?

Expand full comment
Rob's avatar

yes, it is the 6:1:1:1:1 , 2:2:2:2:2 is 1:1:1:1:1, let me also include the 60:40 , and sp500 only result

Annual Return Annual Std Dev Sharpe Ratio

Portfolio 1 (equal weight) 0.201047 0.139718 1.438951

Portfolio 2 (1:6:1:1:1) 0.175457 0.152915 1.147417

Portfolio 3 60:40 0.071834 0.129510 0.554661

Portfolio 4, sp500 only 0.149867 0.197563 0.758580

As expected, the 60:40 portfolio is the worst, although the risk, std, is better, but in terms of reward per unit risk, the Sharpe ratio, it is the worst compared to all, and the S&P 500 is the third worst performing portfolio, but has the highest risk

Expand full comment
Willy Camou's avatar

Michael, can I work for you?

Expand full comment