How do annual rebalanced allocations like Golden Butterfly compare with monthly TAA

[StrategyDriven]

article here

[D1984]

article here

Just curious....how does the 60/40 compare--in terms of annual CAGR, MaxDD, alpha, Sharpe, Sortino, Ulcer Index, etc--with, say, an annually rebalanced blend of 80% ITTs (VFITX) and 20% MAX PAIN? How about against an annually rebalanced blend of 70% VFITX and 30% MAX PAIN?

Note that in Portfoliovisualizer--or even just simulating it in Excel--if you want to take a simulated VFITX back before late 1991 (since that was when it was incepted) you can use an annually rebalanced blend of 26% VUSTX, 61% FIGTX, and 13% VBMFX to replace VFITX (which for an 80% allocation to VFITX would mean 20.8% VUSTX, 48.8% FIGTX, and 10.4% VBMFX). If you do this you can go back to 1-1-1987 which means you can include the crash of Oct 1987.

BTW - To simulate VFISX before 1-1-1992 you can use 82% FIGTX and 18% CASHX rebalanced annually. To simulate VTSMX before early 1992 I'd just use either VFINX itself (since the two have a 0.99 correlation) or perhaps VFINX rebalanced annually with a tiny percentage of a small cap fund like NAESX (say, 97% VFINX and 3% NAESX); again, the point of this is it lets you go back before early 1992 all the way back to 1-1-1987....theoretically to simulate VTSMX you could use a blend of, say, 94% VFINX and 6% VEXMX but the issue there is that VEXMX (while being a purer representation of the smallcap + smaller-cap midcap market than NAESX) only goes back to 1-1-1988 whereas NAESX goes back further than that.

[StrategyDriven]

Here are some metrics.

[StrategyDriven]

updated with Triad+