The DTO Cycle Allocator gives you the macro regime and the asset class, like spy and commodities now, in the reflation territory. You have a choice here. You can hold just these assets classes in a form of an etf. Or you can choose stocks, sector and country etfs instead of spy. If you do it well, this could be an additional source of return above the spy. Or instead of holding the broad commodity index you hold just oil or industral metals or agriculture or whatever. So the cycle allocator gives you the long term positional view and every other part of the subscription is geared toward somewhat shorter, lest say multi month swing trades. (But some ideas i willing for hold more). Is this make sense?
The most revealing part of this framework is not the 2008 or 2022 performance. It is 2019 and 2023, the years the model was right about the macro and wrong about the market. That tension is where systematic allocation meets its hardest question. Institutional allocators face the same problem without the discipline of pre-registered rules.
The TAA consensus in 2019 was cautious on equities for precisely the reasons your macro engine flagged, inverted curve, manufacturing contraction, Fed cutting. Most allocators drifted back toward risk exposure anyway, not because their framework changed but because career risk made defensive positioning increasingly difficult to hold. Your architecture accepts the cost explicitly.
Most institutional processes absorb it quietly and invisibly. The 12-point drag in 2019 is honest in a way that most multi-asset track records are not. What does the regime classification show for the current environment?
Thank you and yes you are right. There is a trade off here. I am willing to accept somewhat lower returns in some years in excgange of more safety and outperformance in average. Regime classification: reflation, full risk on.
The fascinating thing about business decisions is they affect every aspect of society, from how we invest in research, to how people conduct their daily lives. It requires therefore a broad education and a profound understanding of basic psychology.
To give a simple example: should you invest in manufacturers of electric vehicles? Are they actually the future or are you headed for financial complications with this approach? Well you should read my article: why piston engines can outcompete EVS if you had a knowledge Renaissance.
Suppose you want to assess investing in Jeff Bezos' or Elon Musk's space technology? Well you should read my article: the Magnificent E-rocket.
Suppose you're thinking of investing in quantum computing as the big new thing that's going to be a massive disruptor? Well you certainly should read some of my articles in particular: unmasking quantum mechanics: when did magic become science.
What if you're thinking of investing in the Trump families company that's planning on going public to build a fusion reactor? Well you definitely should read by article titled: who says the sun is not a fusion furnace? Dinosaurs that's who! There I explain that it's impossible to get energy fusing atoms where some leftover mass magically turns into energy.
Or suppose you would like to take advantage of this spectacular knowledge Renaissance and make a fortune? Try reading: I sent this letter to TVs shark Superstar Barbara Corcoran under the subject title: we desperately need your social media skills to save civilization.
If you don't want to become the richest person on earth taking over piston engine production, maybe you'd like to just be incredibly rich helping me get these ideas out? Try reading my article titled: why do we accept such ridiculous ideas as science? Then you can make wise business decisions!
This is incredible. Defy the Odds is one of my best subscriptions on Substack. Now, the tough part: figure out how to implement for my own portfolio.
Thank you. I really appreciate it!
How do your stock picks fit into this framework, which rotates between ETFs?
The DTO Cycle Allocator gives you the macro regime and the asset class, like spy and commodities now, in the reflation territory. You have a choice here. You can hold just these assets classes in a form of an etf. Or you can choose stocks, sector and country etfs instead of spy. If you do it well, this could be an additional source of return above the spy. Or instead of holding the broad commodity index you hold just oil or industral metals or agriculture or whatever. So the cycle allocator gives you the long term positional view and every other part of the subscription is geared toward somewhat shorter, lest say multi month swing trades. (But some ideas i willing for hold more). Is this make sense?
The most revealing part of this framework is not the 2008 or 2022 performance. It is 2019 and 2023, the years the model was right about the macro and wrong about the market. That tension is where systematic allocation meets its hardest question. Institutional allocators face the same problem without the discipline of pre-registered rules.
The TAA consensus in 2019 was cautious on equities for precisely the reasons your macro engine flagged, inverted curve, manufacturing contraction, Fed cutting. Most allocators drifted back toward risk exposure anyway, not because their framework changed but because career risk made defensive positioning increasingly difficult to hold. Your architecture accepts the cost explicitly.
Most institutional processes absorb it quietly and invisibly. The 12-point drag in 2019 is honest in a way that most multi-asset track records are not. What does the regime classification show for the current environment?
Thank you and yes you are right. There is a trade off here. I am willing to accept somewhat lower returns in some years in excgange of more safety and outperformance in average. Regime classification: reflation, full risk on.
The model is proprirtary.
Why?
There is a concerning lack of boasting over figures achieved, in this substack.
The fascinating thing about business decisions is they affect every aspect of society, from how we invest in research, to how people conduct their daily lives. It requires therefore a broad education and a profound understanding of basic psychology.
To give a simple example: should you invest in manufacturers of electric vehicles? Are they actually the future or are you headed for financial complications with this approach? Well you should read my article: why piston engines can outcompete EVS if you had a knowledge Renaissance.
Suppose you want to assess investing in Jeff Bezos' or Elon Musk's space technology? Well you should read my article: the Magnificent E-rocket.
Suppose you're thinking of investing in quantum computing as the big new thing that's going to be a massive disruptor? Well you certainly should read some of my articles in particular: unmasking quantum mechanics: when did magic become science.
What if you're thinking of investing in the Trump families company that's planning on going public to build a fusion reactor? Well you definitely should read by article titled: who says the sun is not a fusion furnace? Dinosaurs that's who! There I explain that it's impossible to get energy fusing atoms where some leftover mass magically turns into energy.
Or suppose you would like to take advantage of this spectacular knowledge Renaissance and make a fortune? Try reading: I sent this letter to TVs shark Superstar Barbara Corcoran under the subject title: we desperately need your social media skills to save civilization.
If you don't want to become the richest person on earth taking over piston engine production, maybe you'd like to just be incredibly rich helping me get these ideas out? Try reading my article titled: why do we accept such ridiculous ideas as science? Then you can make wise business decisions!
How can I build it into a model on Altruist and offer it to my clients?
This is proprietary model. I showed it in good faith. No redistribution is permitted.
Can you convert the file to google sheets?
Why is the xlsx no good?