MachineGhost wrote:
Ad Orientem wrote:
The forum has missed you.
Amen!
But, I realy fail to see why anyone would even consider the PRPFX. It is pre-PP it is NOT the PP. I believe it should be banned from talking about on here so not as to mislead new investors (just kidding, give my track record...).
I never liked the over-exposure to commodities in PRPFX. I always thought that the inflationists of the 1970s simply didn't understand how the commodities markets worked over longer periods--i.e., they always cycle between boom and bust because every boom is followed by an increase in production that sets the stage for the next bust. This process seemed to have simply eluded them, or maybe they thought that all paper currencies were going to just collapse simultaneously, which is naive in a world where paper currencies are actually supported nicely by large standing armies.
The Swiss franc exposure was never a great idea and it became completely obsolete when Switzerland made it clear a few years back that it wasn't going to allow its currency to appreciate in a way that hurt its exporters too badly.
The silver exposure in PRPFX is also misguided, since silver and gold are subject to very different market forces.
The lack of long bond exposure in PRPFX misses an important component of the protection offered by the PP, and this has always been a flaw in PRPFX dating to its inception, which occurred just as the greatest bull market in history for LT bonds was starting.
So yes, PRPFX is deeply flawed and in some ways it is the worst imaginable PP simulation because it leans in all of the wrong directions most of the time.
Buyer beware.
With all that said, the 90% PRPFX/10% EDV mix has done pretty well, thought not as well as the PP.