Golden Butterfly Portfolio

A place to talk about speculative investing ideas for the optional Variable Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Wed Dec 18, 2019 8:05 pm

foglifter wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 7:14 pm
Smith1776 wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:42 pm
Hey all, I just wanted to resurrect this thread because it seems the Golden Butterfly has been gaining traction as a topic of conversation as of late. This thread has a ton of useful information and perspective on the allocation.

I'm still not the biggest fan of the name (;D), but the allocation is certainly phenomenal!
Thanks for resurrecting the thread! I've moved from classic PP to GB a few years back and I like it.
Yup!

This thread reminds me of a redux version of the original PP thread back on the Bogleheads forum.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:14 pm

foglifter wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 7:14 pm
Smith1776 wrote:
Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:42 pm
Hey all, I just wanted to resurrect this thread because it seems the Golden Butterfly has been gaining traction as a topic of conversation as of late. This thread has a ton of useful information and perspective on the allocation.

I'm still not the biggest fan of the name (;D), but the allocation is certainly phenomenal!
Thanks for resurrecting the thread! I've moved from classic PP to GB a few years back and I like it.
Soon I will be going back to read all of these prior posts for the first time. I'm still in the process of creating my plan to go Permanent Portfolio but from what I've read about the Golden Butterfly it is an option that I am considering.

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
senecaaa
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 4:33 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by senecaaa » Thu Dec 19, 2019 2:38 am

I'm implementing it from an EU perspective. If anyone is interested in my list of funds, please let me know.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:27 am

i tend to look at pp vs gb as i do investing when i was in my accumulation stage.

in my early days when i was in my accumulation stage i was always 100% equities .. if i was down it did not matter much as i had decades to go but also because my fuel tanks were relatively empty and if i crashed and burned , well at that stage there was not a lot to burn since the tanks were not anywhere near full .

today a mere 7% drop in my portfolio represents about 10 or 11 years in 401k contributions at catch up .. back then maybe it represented a few months .

so , if you were heavily invested in broad based equity funds the last 11 years you likely made quite a lot in gains . you made your money and not only that the gains were so juicy those gains can hold you for quite a while through crappy times and you would still have done well .

so with all those gains banked at this point , 11 years in to a bull , and the most chaotic gov't i can remember , i like going more conservative at this point and preserving those juicy gains so in that case i would go 2/3's pp and one third whatever model i like , but keeping equities in the 25-30% range with low beta equity funds ( no small cap value 600) which can be volatile as heck} would be an overall target .

but if one is first starting out , or missed most of the gains so far then i would go gb since there is no gains to preserve , you need the growth and more growth may be warranted over preserving big gains you have not accumulated .

by the same token if we correct 10% or more i would move back to the gb in my situation since at least some of the froth is out and i can pick up a 10% savings over not doing anything .... i would move from the overall 30% equity position back to as high as 50% .

but with multiple 6 figure gains just this year alone i have no intention of riding much of it back down . if anything i will get exra alpha trading in and out of gld and tlt since the worst that can happen is i may lose some gain but the money would just be in cash waiting to get back in .

the extra gains i racked up already doing this would carry me over any way so basically at this point it is win /win .

so i think if someone is gun shy this could be a time for the pp if you already made those nice juicy gains and time for the gb if you did not .
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:29 pm

I just realized recently that I must be an odd duck. Many investors and advisors opt for a glidepath approach to their portfolios. They become more conservative over time.

I really don't like this line of thinking. Unexpected expenses pop up everywhere and at anytime in life. And in your younger years, things like the first house, marriage, tuition, and the first kid are expenses that need to be paid. If anything, I think young people may sometimes need to take LESS risk than older folks. Especially when older people have more money in absolute terms, their marginal utility for dollars is lower.

It's one of the reasons why I like the GB/PP. A static allocation works just fine for me. We can glidepath all we want because we think we know and can plan our future with some precision, but we really can't. Unexpected risks and expenses are surprisingly unexpected.

In other words: sh*t happens.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:37 pm

There is zero logic to the young , mitigating temporary short term dips with bonds and hurting long term performance permanently. So the young should be fully invested ...if they have a low pucker factor then they should use a 3rd party to handle things ..

There is no evidence that gun shy investors stay the course any better because they just have lower trigger points . The Morningstar investor data shows us balanced funds show the same bad investor behavior

Allocations in the 40-60% range to equities have had the best success rates for a retirement draw at 4% or higher .... 90% of the 119 rolling 30 year periods ended with more than you started with . 67% ended with 2x what you started and 50% ended with 3x ..

Odds of failure were 5% , about the same odds as ending with 6x what you started with so sequence risk goes both ways
Last edited by mathjak107 on Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:40 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:37 pm
There is zero logic to the young , mitigating temporary short term dips with bonds and hurting long term performance permanently. So the young should be fully invested ...

Allocations in the 40-60% range to equities have had the best success rates for a retirement draw at 4% or higher ....
We'll have to agree to disagree there then, or maybe we imagine different circumstances with young people.

Having small savings and not much of a buffer, on top of expenses always seeming to come out of left field, I would feel extremely uncomfortable in anything other than a PP type of portfolio.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:41 pm

Smith1776 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:40 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:37 pm
There is zero logic to the young , mitigating temporary short term dips with bonds and hurting long term performance permanently. So the young should be fully invested ...

Allocations in the 40-60% range to equities have had the best success rates for a retirement draw at 4% or higher ....
We'll have to agree to disagree there then, or maybe we imagine different circumstances with young people.

Having small savings and not much of a buffer, on top of expenses always seeming to come out of left field, I would feel extremely uncomfortable in anything other than a PP type of portfolio.
Show us any accredited study that takes that stance , that those saving for retirement should go with anything but pedal to the metal ..no one should be investing in volatile assets without a decent emergency fund ...you need to differentiate what the money is for and the time frames .

But retirement money with decades to go should be in very high equity portfolios , there is no logic that will show otherwise.

Retirement wise 40-60% equities have been through the worst of times and work fine.

As I said there is no financial logic to mitigating temporary dips as a long term investor with decades to go and permanently reducing long term results.

You may justify it mentally but that is a different issue than financial logic
Last edited by mathjak107 on Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:49 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:41 pm

Show us any accredited study that takes that stance
I don't have one, but I don't think that matters or is relevant to this discussion. I don't have any accredited study telling me to look left and right before crossing the street, but I still do it. I don't need an accredited study to use my sensibilities.

My point is this: many young people are teetering on the edge, and that's on top of needing to pay for expensive tuition, their first car, etc. They probably also want to buy their first home once their career gets started. So they need to save for a downpayment. That doesn't sound like someone who can take a lot of equity risk.

Either way, I've made my case, so again, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:53 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:41 pm


You may justify it mentally but that is a different issue than financial logic
The financial logic is pretty simple. You have many upcoming expenses you need to pay for when you're young and getting started. You can't take risk with the money you want to use for your home downpayment or first car.

Separating your emergency fund from your portfolio is nothing more than mental accounting. So if i'm justifying something mentally but not using financial logic, then we're both guilty.

Like, really, most young people don't even have the money for a full emergency fund, so one could argue that all their savings should be in cash (in other words, LOW risk). So, really you and I are in agreement to a certain extent.

Either way, I'm not responding to this anymore.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:03 pm

Smith1776 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:53 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:41 pm


You may justify it mentally but that is a different issue than financial logic
The financial logic is pretty simple. You have many upcoming expenses you need to pay for when you're young and getting started. You can't take risk with the money you want to use for your home downpayment or first car.

Separating your emergency fund from your portfolio is nothing more than mental accounting. So if i'm justifying something mentally but not using financial logic, then we're both guilty.

Like, really, most young people don't even have the money for a full emergency fund, so one could argue that all their savings should be in cash (in other words, LOW risk). So, really you and I are in agreement to a certain extent.

Either way, I'm not responding to this anymore.
We are talking long term money in 401ks , iras ,etc .......

Most of us start out with nothing ....but we devote as much as we can to retirement and as much as we can to living now .....it is like fighting a war ....you can’t pull from one front to shore up another front or you win a battle and lose the war .

You need a lot of money to compensate for decades of lower growth or you risk having an underfunded retirement.

Going to conservative for decades has a price to pay later on so you better save a load of dough to compensate....

But pre retirement or in retirement the pp is fine ....it can be great for PRESERVING THE ASSETS YOU GREW and keeping you ahead of inflation...unless you can bank some serious bucks from your income and have the luxury of being less aggressive during the growth years .

When I started in 1987 a hypothetical 10k in the fidelity insight growth model grew to 268k by 2017 .....the data I show on line says the pp grew to about 135k over the same time frame ....it stopped at 2017 so that is as far as I could compare ...today the 10k is worth 321k in the fidelity insight growth model ..

The same 10k in the insight sector portfolio in 1988 was 391k by 2017 and 421k today .


So you need to save an awful lot to compensate over decades of growth
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by flyingpylon » Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:44 pm

What if your lifestyle at retirement would be fully funded by the amount generated by the PP or whatever “suboptimal” portfolio you chose?
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:16 pm

flyingpylon wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:44 pm
What if your lifestyle at retirement would be fully funded by the amount generated by the PP or whatever “suboptimal” portfolio you chose?
Actually, I think you do bring up an excellent point. The biggest factor in what determines your wealth upon retirement is really just your savings rate. Dan Bortolotti has some excellent work/podcasts on this.

Budgeting, saving, and being prudent is so much more important than quibbling about portfolio construction. But saving isn't sexy. Talking shop about exotic portfolios and trading strategies is.

As long as your allocation is something reasonable, just stick with it. Our personal budgeting and planning is what should take centre stage.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
Tyler
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Tyler » Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:35 pm

Smith1776 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:16 pm
Budgeting, saving, and being prudent is so much more important than quibbling about portfolio construction.
+1.

As much time as I've spent studying asset allocation, I still personally attribute the vast majority of my financial success to being a good saver. Always make sure you spend at least as much time optimizing your income and spending as you do your portfolio, and you'll be much better off in the long run.
User avatar
Hal
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:50 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Hal » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:45 am

Just a quick query regarding the USA Golden Butterfly and the PP

As I understand it, the GB share allocation is expanded by adding SCV to take advantage of "prosperity" which is the most common economic climate.

I found that using the standard PP and with 25% SCV instead of TSM (and 25% ST) the results are very similar.

Was there any reason Harry Browne didn't use SCV for the 25% share allocation?

Looking forward to your insights.

Hal

PS: It's hot here. 45 Celsius outside ! (113 F)

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... ous-record
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:18 am

Tyler wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:35 pm
Smith1776 wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:16 pm
Budgeting, saving, and being prudent is so much more important than quibbling about portfolio construction.
+1.

As much time as I've spent studying asset allocation, I still personally attribute the vast majority of my financial success to being a good saver. Always make sure you spend at least as much time optimizing your income and spending as you do your portfolio, and you'll be much better off in the long run.
i was the opposite . i needed my money to work for me not being a high earner and raising a family ... a penny saved may be a penny earned , but it will always stay a penny without good compounding .

so i needed markets and eventually real estate to do the heavy lifting . which it did very very well.

investing was the primary way i accumulated assets , never the bits and pieces i managed to save.today our accumulated assets generate more than i even earned working .

counting on a high paying job continuing for decades and investing far more conservatively is really a bad idea . that job can be gone all to fast . you want to have both your earnings and investing in high gear so if one slips up the other may get you to goal .


one other thing i want to add is . budgeting and cutting expenses is NOT THE SAME as growing more income .

they may look the same until you can't cut expenses anymore and the expenses keep rising .

then you learn cutting costs has a bottom after which you are done and have no where to cut . . that is why wall street looks at revenue and profits . profits can come from cost cutting which has a bottom .

so my opinion is never let cost cutting and budgeting serve as a proxy for earning more or doing better as an investor . they are all important components but they don't replace each other . both need to be pushed to the max of your abilities .
Last edited by mathjak107 on Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:06 am, edited 8 times in total.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:21 am

flyingpylon wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:44 pm
What if your lifestyle at retirement would be fully funded by the amount generated by the PP or whatever “suboptimal” portfolio you chose?
you don't know what you will need or how you will do decades prior to retiring . remember we are talking retirement money not current living money

my opinion is strive for the max and then worry about having to much money down the road . it is a lot more palatable then coming up short because you wasted decades in assets that did not grow enough to adequately fund your future needs .

there is a time for maximum growth and then there is a time for preserving what you grew with some growth . preservation is after the fact you reached your savings goals.

but life has a way of screwing us over too . that nice high paying job you had could vanish at any point .. so the fact you were saving a lot is no longer the case ... we all eventually go through one of the big three , divorce-job loss or illness . so the more we let our money work for us the better our chances of survival .

so in my opinion we want to max out not only our earning capability , but our money working for us on our long term money so we have a bigger cushion develop over time . over decades there will be a substantial difference that develops if one is to conservative during those accumulation years .

all of us would love to have had nice low volatility investments through our accumulation stage with out big swings .. but the reality is with few exceptions that would have really reduced long term gains. so just because we can do something does not mean it is a good idea and we should .

many are coming up short with under funded retirements or stressful retirements because they are operating with less than they could have been and sweat every unexpected expense .
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by flyingpylon » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:11 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:21 am
flyingpylon wrote:
Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:44 pm
What if your lifestyle at retirement would be fully funded by the amount generated by the PP or whatever “suboptimal” portfolio you chose?
you don't know what you will need or how you will do decades prior to retiring . remember we are talking retirement money not current living money

my opinion is strive for the max and then worry about having to much money down the road . it is a lot more palatable then coming up short because you wasted decades in assets that did not grow enough to adequately fund your future needs .

there is a time for maximum growth and then there is a time for preserving what you grew with some growth . preservation is after the fact you reached your savings goals.

but life has a way of screwing us over too . that nice high paying job you had could vanish at any point .. so the fact you were saving a lot is no longer the case ... we all eventually go through one of the big three , divorce-job loss or illness . so the more we let our money work for us the better our chances of survival .

so in my opinion we want to max out not only our earning capability , but our money working for us on our long term money so we have a bigger cushion develop over time . over decades there will be a substantial difference that develops if one is to conservative during those accumulation years .

all of us would love to have had nice low volatility investments through our accumulation stage with out big swings .. but the reality is with few exceptions that would have really reduced long term gains. so just because we can do something does not mean it is a good idea and we should .

many are coming up short with under funded retirements or stressful retirements because they are operating with less than they could have been and sweat every unexpected expense .
I don't necessarily disagree. But at the same time I would point out that you (from what little I know about you from your posts) seem to be a "maximizer" in everything you do. So all options are always compared to the maximized option, and you infer that nothing else could ever possibly make sense.

Using the example of retirement funds, your answer always seems to be "more" without even knowing any other details. Anything less requires regret or compensation for "loss" or "missing out", etc. But for some people the best answer might simply be "enough". It's up to each individual to determine what that number is, how best to get there, and how finances fit into the rest of their life so that they're satisfied in the end.

I used to be more of a maximizer, but eventually I realized how frustrated and exhausted it was making me feel. Everyone is different and it's okay to do whatever works for them.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:26 am

exactly , everyone needs to do what works for them . but the problem is we don't really know what works until the fat lady sings and that is when we go retire decades later and see what we have .

so what is comfortable may not be able to actually meet goal and give you the life you hoped for .

that is why i am a big believer in maximizing investing early on with index funds in equities and maximizing your earning potential . you really need to go with what produces the best in case one or the other slacks off .

if someone insists on only doing what is mentally comfortable i suggest getting a 3rd party who can handle their money without emotion and keep them away from it if they are decades from retiring .
Last edited by mathjak107 on Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tyler
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Tyler » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:00 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:18 am
counting on a high paying job continuing for decades and investing far more conservatively is really a bad idea . that job can be gone all to fast . you want to have both your earnings and investing in high gear so if one slips up the other may get you to goal .
Why said anything about decades? :) Save a high enough percentage of that high paying job and your new savings can easily dwarf your investment income early in your career and set you on the fast track to early retirement. Try playing with both the savings rate and portfolio, and you can see for yourself which balance works best for you.

But that's not to criticize your own path at all! Clearly you've been successful, too, and it's a testament to how there are different ways to approach the same problem.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:03 am

the problem is joe american does not have these large sums to save or even modest amounts to save , that is reality , savings rates are dismal for most americans ,. .... he is quite dependent just like i was on the power of compounding working its magic on what we can save.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:54 pm

Hal wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:45 am
Just a quick query regarding the USA Golden Butterfly and the PP

As I understand it, the GB share allocation is expanded by adding SCV to take advantage of "prosperity" which is the most common economic climate.

I found that using the standard PP and with 25% SCV instead of TSM (and 25% ST) the results are very similar.

Was there any reason Harry Browne didn't use SCV for the 25% share allocation?

Looking forward to your insights.

Hal

PS: It's hot here. 45 Celsius outside ! (113 F)

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... ous-record
Your instinct is excellent and you are actually quite correct!

I believe Browne recommended the S&P 500 in his radio show. However, in his writings such as Best Laid Plans he advocates stocks with greater volatility than the general market.

From page 329/330 of the paperback version of Best Laid Plans:
The straightforward way to invest in the stock market is to buy a selection of blue-chip stocks - shares of large, well-established companies. But a Permanent Portfolio requires stocks with high price volatility, so that a small portion of the portfolio can pull the entire portfolio upward during a bull market. Blue-chip stocks don't have the volatility of smaller or more adventurous companies.
He doesn't use the phrase "small cap value" because that term hadn't even been coined yet. But if you believe that value and size premiums are risk based, then they should be appropriate and persist. Browne's writing sounds an awful lot like a prescient advocation towards tilting.
Last edited by Smith1776 on Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:00 pm

For those interested in a prima facie comparison, here's an SCV tilted Permanent Portfolio (in blue) vs the Golden Butterfly (in red).


scvpp vs gb.png
scvpp vs gb.png (86.8 KiB) Viewed 8767 times

annual returns.png
annual returns.png (32.97 KiB) Viewed 8767 times
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:50 pm

Didn’t the pp come out in the 1980’s ?
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Smith1776 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:10 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:50 pm
Didn’t the pp come out in the 1980’s ?
Yes! Browne solidified the overall PP strategy that we know it today in the 80s. Though, I believe early iterations have roots going all the way back to the 70s.

As much as I've been singing the praises of the GB, the PP will always be my personal centre of gravity. O0
I still find the James Rickards portfolio fascinating.
Post Reply