I get your point, but you are basically picking a time frame where gold lost value for ~20 years straight. I don't think this looks that bad considering. I think the leveraged LTT in this time frame are in effect neutralizing the bad run gold went on. The destruction of 100% SPY over the full time frame provided in the original post seems to be mostly (>80% of outperformance) from the leveraged LTT, no gold necessary.Correction: you would have destroyed 100% SPY, because gold has been on an epic run starting in 2000.It is interesting what happens if you incorporate other non-correlated assets. You can destroy a 100% SPY portfolio with lower draw downs with 95% SPY; 25% Gold; and 25% LTTs.Thank you for this. Playing around with the backtest, makes it clear to me that if I added gold exposure to my portfolio I would prefer it taking 10-15% of the portfolio that would have been stocks/bonds and allocating to GLD rather than using leverage to layer gold futures onto a stock/bond portfolio.
https://testfol.io/?d=eJyNUU1Lw0AQ%2FSt ... AcKWrC4%3D
Change the timeframe and it looks boring.
https://testfol.io/?d=eJyNUctOwzAQ%2FJV ... 6n9Q45Vq42
If gold keeps soaring, it will be a great investment. This is not surprising. But if it goes back to zero real return, you're relying on the diversification benefit, which is real, but doesn't give you a portfolio that "destroys" anything.
Statistics: Posted by slicendice — Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:57 pm