Voices [0:01]

A foolish consistency, is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer, a different drummer.

Mostly Mary [0:19]

And now, coming to you from dead center on your dial, welcome to Risk Parity Radio, where we explore alternatives and asset allocations for the do-it-yourself investor Broadcasting to you now from the comfort of his easy chair. Here is your host, frank Vasquez.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [0:37]

Thank you, Mary, and welcome to Risk Parity Radio. If you are new here and wonder what we are talking about, you may wish to go back and listen to some of the foundational episodes for this program.

Voices [0:50]

Yeah, baby, yeah.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [0:52]

And the basic foundational episodes are episodes 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. Some of our listeners, including Karen and Chris, have identified additional episodes that you may consider foundational, and those are episodes 12, 14, 16, 19, 21, 56, 82, and 184. Whoa, and you probably should check those out too, because we have the finest podcast audience available.

Mostly Mary [1:26]

Top drawer, really top drawer.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [1:31]

Along with a host named after a hot dog.

Voices [1:34]

Lighten up Francis.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [1:37]

But now onward to episode 431. Today on Risk Prairie Radio. Let's get back to doing what we do best here, which is attend to your emails, of course, and I'll go ahead and make sure you get another copy of that memo.

Voices [1:52]

Okay, and so, without further ado, here I go once again with the email.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [1:59]

And First off. First off, we have an email from Luke French-Canadian Luke and Luke writes Hi Frank, I just listened to the latest episode.

Mostly Mary [2:15]

I wanted to share that there's a slightly better way to search the podcast episodes for a particular topic. You can go to the following link on the Listen Notes site. The interface is nicer than the RSS feed. It also searches through the transcripts in addition to the titles and descriptions. The search functionality from Listen Notes can be embedded on your website. That might be something I can help you with. If you're still interested in my offer no rush, of course.

Voices [2:41]

Au contraire.

Mostly Mary [2:43]

I also wanted to mention that I was thrilled to hear about the deluge of contributions to the Father McKenna Center.

Voices [2:49]

That's gold, Jerry Gold.

Mostly Mary [2:52]

The support you've received is very well deserved. All the best, Luke.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [2:57]

Well, thank you for the tip, Luke Sackosh. You're quickly becoming one of my top men.

Voices [3:05]

We have top men working on it right now who?

Voices [3:13]

Top men.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [3:16]

I did add the Listen Notes link to the podcast page on the website, as well as attempted to clean up a couple of other things. Just come up, luke and I are going to be chatting in the near future about how he might help me with my atrocious website. Just come up and we'll see where that goes. But regardless of where that goes, I wanted to thank you again for being a donor to the Father McKenna Center. We are still continuing with our Top of the T-Shirt campaign for the Father McKenna Center.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [3:43]

We are still continuing with our Top of the T-Shirt campaign for the Father McKenna Center, which supports hungry and homeless people in Washington DC, and if you'd like to give to that and grow to the front of the email line, as Luke has done here, I will put that link in the show notes. You can also give at Patreon through our support page, but either way I will move you to the front of the email notes. You can also give at Patreon through our support page, but either way I will move you to the front of the email line. We have also been thrilled with the outpouring of support. I actually just went to a quarterly board meeting for the center yesterday and things are looking really good.

Voices [4:20]

Yes.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [4:21]

And if you follow the Father McKenna Center on Instagram, which you should, you'll see some nice pictures that Ben has posted recently of our interns, who are all people in college or graduate school, working in social work or related areas, and they are thrilled too. So thank you again for your support, luke, and thank you for your email.

Voices [4:49]

So I don't know about you guys, but the more I look at it, the more I feel like Québécois French is becoming its own dialect, if not already, maybe even its own language. Who knows, a hundred years from now, what Québécois French will sound like?

Voices [5:01]

Hein. Qu'est-ce que t'en penses, Roger? Je m'en coulisse.

Voices [5:04]

Alright, so there you go.

Voices [5:07]

Second off.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [5:09]

Second off, we have an email from Craig.

Voices [5:12]

Well, la-dee-frickin-da.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [5:17]

And Craig writes.

Mostly Mary [5:19]

Hi Frank and Mary. I am a donor to the Father McKenna Center. I love the podcast and your coaching was a steal. Let's keep this guy working lol.

Voices [5:28]

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.

Voices [5:30]

I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob.

Mostly Mary [5:33]

I just watched you on the Stacking Benjamin's Decumulation Strategies episode Try saying that 10 times fast and was intrigued by a comment Joe put forth. Whatever strategy you are using, everyone should know what the Achilles heel is of that strategy. The only answer I could come up with is risk parity. Portfolios are based on historical data, so our Achilles heel is the quality of the data we use, any inherent weaknesses in the data and, of course, the possibility that the future looks nothing like the past, which is the same limitation of pretty much any published strategy that doesn't involve Warren Buffett Buy low after independently valuing a company or crystal ball.

Voices [6:15]

A crystal ball can help you, it can guide you.

Mostly Mary [6:19]

I know something you don't.

Voices [6:22]

I admitted you are better than I am, then why are you?

Voices [6:25]

smiling Because I know something you don't.

Mostly Mary [6:31]

You might also fault risk parity as not being something suitable for just anyone to do by themselves, but your work has put this strategy within the reach of a lot of people if they are willing to learn.

Voices [6:43]

And is the straight stuff? Oh, funk master.

Mostly Mary [6:46]

And when any two doctors give you three opinions, you know there's only so much you can do to help people.

Voices [6:52]

I am a scientist, not a philosopher.

Mostly Mary [6:55]

Do you have any other thoughts on the Achilles heel of risk parity portfolios? As a side note, the next time you share the stage with Big Earn? As a side note, the next time you share the stage with Big Earn, ask him why his ideal retirement portfolio he stated 75% stock, 25% intermediate treasuries doesn't include 10% gold, when his own published research concluded that gold would be an improvement. I hate it when people don't eat their own dog food. I think I've improved on your methods a bit too. You might also want to have the that's not how any of this work clip on your phone. For when he starts saying a CAPE ratio should trigger adjusting your safe withdrawal rate.

Voices [7:34]

Forget about it.

Mostly Mary [7:36]

Unless you start with, our current CAPE ratio suggests market conditions today are unlike anything we have ever seen before. Nothing that follows presents any argument for adjusting the safe withdrawal rate.

Voices [7:47]

That's the fact, Jack. That's the fact, Jack.

Mostly Mary [7:52]

Thanks for all you do. Love you both, craig.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [7:55]

All right, craig is referring to a roundtable I did for the Stacking Benjamins podcast that I linked to, I think, a couple episodes in the show notes, but I can link to it again. It was with Joe Salcihai, who is the host, and Karsten Jeska Big Earn and Dana Anspach, who is a well-respected financial advisor. Well, that's kind of an interesting question. What is the Achilles heel of these portfolios, these risk parity style portfolios? Well, a lot of the Achilles heel of these portfolios, these risk parity style portfolios Well, a lot of the Achilles heels are applicable to all portfolios, so you wouldn't say they're unique to that and anything that is relying on historical data. You would say that there's always a chance that the future will be so different from the past that the historical data will not be informative.

Voices [8:44]

Okay, a simple wrong would have done just fine.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [8:47]

But that applies to every portfolio, so it's not really unique to a risk parity style portfolio. There is always an ongoing debate, though, however, between whether to rely on historical data as your basis for projecting the future or to rely on some kind of a crystal ball, because it's basically your choices.

Voices [9:08]

My name's Sonia. I'm going to be showing you the crystal ball and how to use it, or how I use it.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [9:15]

And it was interesting. I was recently thinking about this and looking at the CFP curriculum and the CFA curriculum to see whether they teach anything in those programs or certifications about forecasting, basic forecasting, whether it's part of financial forecasting or just forecasting in general, and it appears that they don't, which makes a lot of sense to me because a lot of what I see financial advisors doing is just bad forecasting techniques. If you want to learn this stuff, it comes from people like Kahneman and Tversky, from Philip Tetlock who wrote the book Super Forecasters. Annie Duke is another voice in this area. I would include Gerd Gigerenzer, who wrote a book called Risk Savvy.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [10:04]

That is important for considering forecasting and particularly forecasting when you know that the future is uncertain, so like trying to forecast the weather in your location a year in advance. That's impossible to do with any precision, but you can make a reasonable estimate based on climate trends and location, and that's really the same problem you're facing with financial forecasting. But what you learn if you study forecasting technique is the most important thing to use or to rely on when you're making a forecast. Is called the base rate, and the base rate is like what? Do we think the stock market is going to return in the future in general, or any other asset class. What you look to for something like that is long-term data or lots of data if that's what you're looking at because that's what you want to always start with are base rates, and you don't vary off base rates for idiosyncratic reasons, unless those reasons are really good. Ie, in this case, you would have to have a crystal ball that actually worked.

Voices [11:10]

Now the crystal ball has been used since ancient times. It's used for scrying, healing and meditation.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [11:19]

And there aren't any.

Mostly Mary [11:20]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

Voices [11:23]

That's not how it works.

Mostly Mary [11:23]

That's not how any of this works.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [11:25]

The most recent one that's been tried for the past 10 or 15 years is CAPE ratios and valuation ratios. But as we've seen from those predictions for the past 15 or 20 years, they have not worked out well at all. In fact, they've been horrible.

Voices [11:39]

Forget about it.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [11:41]

And horribly more wrong than simply using base rates. And that's what you're trying to do here. You're trying to be less wrong Wrong. So if you look at something like the Vanguard forecast for the past 10 or 15 years, which are based on these kind of crystal balls, they're all terrible. They all say that the stock market's going to underperform and, as we know, the stock market outperformed. So just picking the base rate, the average, you would have been better off or closer to the mark, rather than trying to use one of these kind of crystal balls.

Voices [12:19]

This is the one that I tend to use more often. I have a calcite ball and I have a black obsidian one here.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [12:29]

And that's really what we're doing when we're using historical data and then putting it through Monte Carlo simulations is to try to suss out what are the base rates for drawdowns, for safe withdrawal rates, for returns in general? Because no, are they the most accurate thing? Of course not, but they are probably going to be less wrong than some other forecasting mechanism that you are going to be using. And that is one of the fundamental lessons about forecasting, which is why it is improper forecasting technique if your financial advisor or you are sticking quote conservative or aggressive assumptions about returns and inflation and stuff into a retirement calculator and compounding it into oblivion, because that is exactly the kind of bad forecasting that these experts would tell you you shouldn't be doing. But at least if you're using long series of data historically about large asset classes, you're going to avoid that problem. But anyway, getting back to your questions about Achilles heels, I think that probably the Achilles heel of these risk parity style portfolios is a psychological one, in that they are designed to perform better than other portfolios in bad markets, so it is a fact that they will tend to underperform other portfolios in good markets, so they will not grow as fast as some portfolio that says has an 80% stock allocation in good times, like we've been having since really 2010. But that's the trade-off. You are accepting lower overall returns, particularly in good times, for the insurance value that they provide in down markets, because that is where you actually get your safe withdrawal rate from. You get it from the worst case scenarios. So if you're expecting a risk parity style portfolio to outperform somebody's 75-25 or 80-20 portfolio, it's probably not going to in most years, but it will in the worst years and that's why you're holding it and you need to be mindful of that and recognize that.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [14:42]

The purpose of this is so you can spend more money now, not that you have the most money at death, right. If you want the most money at death, then you should have a heavily stock-weighted portfolio of at least 80%. But then the trade-off on that is you have to commit to not spending much money, and that is, in fact, a lot of what people do. Oddly enough, it's generally not by plan. If you ask them outright, they'll say no, that's not my intention to die with the most money. What it's really related to is what Morgan Housel calls frugality inertia. She's going to talk about it in a new book coming out in October called the Art of Spending Money, and that is the fact that many people who have been good savers for a very long time have a constitutional problem with changing that and sometimes they say they can't change. It's not that they can't change, they don't want to.

Voices [15:48]

No more flying solo.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [15:50]

Because, as we're going to learn from Morgangan house's book, the art of spending money is something to be learned, and frugality inertia is something to be overcome, just like not knowing how to exercise or not knowing how to eat properly. These are things that can be learned if you're really interested in learning them. The fact is, a lot of people just would rather not.

Voices [16:12]

Was that?

Voices [16:12]

the chance of hope that you mentioned Chicken it was Well, in that case, never mind, I think, I'd rather not.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [16:23]

Now I certainly would not say this is too complicated, even though that's the strawman argument that's frequently made about any portfolio that has more than three funds in it. The fact of the matter is, it's not significantly more difficult to manage a portfolio with up to 10 funds in it really, even though you probably only need five or six than it is to manage a portfolio with three funds, Because most of the difficulties in managing a retirement portfolio have to do with things like the tax laws that apply to your various accounts and liquidity issues and matching up your expenses with enough liquidity to cover them. If you're just managing your portfolio the way we do with the sample portfolios, that is not a complicated operation at all, and it's certainly less complicated than managing a bunch of buckets, ladders, flower pots, pie cakes and other things.

Voices [17:16]

Okay, everybody, that cake should be ready now. Why don't you sing a song while I take it out of the oven? Stupendous, there's a cake in the oven. So sweet and delicious, yummy cake in the oven. We love to eat cake. Ow, ow, oh, ah, I'm burning. Kids, help, this sucks. Whoa, whoa.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [17:46]

Moving on to your next question or comment about these cape ratio thingies. Yeah, I mean that hasn't worked for any period of time. Prospectively. It works in retrospect because you know what the data is and the mean is.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [18:01]

It's not a stable mean and it's through the candle that you will see the images into the crystal and you could tell it doesn't work if you just go back and read the Early Retirement Now blog from the beginning. Because if you look back in, like April 2016,. He was saying that based on the quote high CAPE ratio one quote in that era that the safe withdrawal rate should only be like 3% or less for the next decade. And here we are, almost a decade later and, if anything, it's predicted the exact opposite. There again, if you're trying to use a crystal ball, there is a chance that you're going to be even more wrong than just using base rates.

Voices [18:47]

Now you can also use the ball to connect to the spirit world.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [18:51]

And putting a cape around a crystal ball doesn't make it any smarter.

Mostly Mary [18:55]

I regret to say, sir, Batman and Robin are not at present available.

Voices [18:59]

What? Oh, surely you must be jesting Alas, sir, I am not oh.

Voices [19:10]

Catastrophic.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [19:13]

The other problem that Dana mentioned on this roundtable was simply that you would need to calculate a different PE or CAPE ratio for every kind of portfolio, because unless you were only holding the S&P 500, the standard market CAPE ratio is not the relevant one to what you're doing. So it's kind of a silly thing to be using as a decision-making process.

Voices [19:35]

Are you crazy or just plain stupid?

Voices [19:39]

Stupid is stupid, does Mrs Blue?

Mostly Uncle Frankb [19:42]

I guess, what you'll learn from Bill Bengen's book is that the way you should actually use it is when the CAPE ratio is really low. Then you know, your future safe withdrawal rate can be really high. But on the other hand, maybe your portfolio crashed, so the percentage you can take out is much less in dollars than it was before. What Bengen's going to say is that what really matters is the rate of inflation, and not just for one year but for over a series of years, and that we really haven't seen that kind of a condition for a really, really long time, because the spike in 2022 was not meaningful in his view, since it didn't last for a period of years.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [20:23]

Now, about the use of gold, or his non-use of gold, despite his findings in Safe Withdrawal Rate Series number 34. I did actually ask him about that back in 2022 or 2023 when we had the conversation that led to the creation of episode 223 of this podcast, and he didn't really have an answer. He said, yeah, I haven't done it. Maybe I will do it, but honestly, it really doesn't matter. Given his spending rate, he could hold just about anything he wanted. Like most people in this space, he's just grossly over-saved and his real strategy is just don't spend much money.

Voices [21:00]

I love money.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [21:03]

And, finally, you made the fatal error of mentioning my coaching services, which I try to keep under my hat but will mention when somebody else does.

Voices [21:13]

I don't think I'd like another job.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [21:15]

I do do private coaching on a very limited basis. I charge $300 an hour for a two-hour minimum, and that's mostly what people need or want. Most of that money ends up at the Father McKenna Center anyway.

Voices [21:30]

For me and the Lord. We've got an understanding.

Voices [21:35]

We're on a mission from God.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [21:38]

But I just want to make sure that I'm not having too many takers because, as you say, I don't think I'd like another job.

Voices [21:45]

It's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [21:49]

It is a much better deal, though, than joining a club where they feed you pie cakes and charge you $900 annually, with an automatic renewal on your card.

Voices [22:00]

Please accept my resignation. I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [22:08]

I will say that. Anyway, if you're interested in that, please send me an email and we can set that up, but not too many of you. I do place a high value on giving away as much content for free. I get concerned sometimes that personal finance, and particularly the fire movement, has gone to too much commercialization of information and repackaging of it in various forms and trying to sell it.

Voices [22:35]

A.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [22:36]

B.

Voices [22:36]

C, a, always B, B, c, closing, always be closing, always be closing.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [22:46]

That was not kind of the zeitgeist that we had back in the day I'm talking about the boards of early retirement extreme around 2009 or 2010, when the idea was simply to share as much information as possible and ask other smart people what they thought and put it all together for oneself. And I've always really liked Tyler's site portfolio charts because it falls in that same kind of tradition that the point of having the information is not to hoard it and sell it but to simply share it freely so that more and better information and techniques can be developed from it. It's a very open science kind of idea.

Voices [23:28]

I got this inkling. I got this idea for a business model. I just want to run it past you. Here's how it would work. I got this idea for a business model. I just want to run it past you. Here's how it would work. You get a bunch of people around the world who are doing highly skilled work, but they're willing to do it for free and volunteer their time 20, sometimes 30 hours a week. Oh, but I'm not done. And then what they create? They give it away rather than sell it. It's going to be huge.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [23:56]

Thank you so much for your support, Craig, and your donations to the Father McKenna Center. And thank you for your email. Next off, we have an email from Luke, a different Luke. The force is strong in this world, and Luke writes US large growth fans rejoice.

Mostly Mary [24:26]

Avantis very recently released the ETF AVUQ. Avantis US quality ETF Invests in high quality US growth companies across all market capitalizations designed to increase expected returns by focusing on relative profitability and valuations within the eligible universe. The benchmark is the MSCI USA IMI Growth Index. So if you're already an Avantis fan and want to follow the half in US large growth and half in US small value plan, then you can do that now and keep it all in the fund family. Just thought you might want to know about it. Keep spreading the good word, Frank.

Voices [25:07]

You have been well trained, my young apprentice.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [25:11]

Well, luke. Yes, that's very interesting. It's going along this trend of improving technologies and the fact that we live in a golden era of investing for do-it-yourselfers with all of these ETFs. It's unclear to me whether AVUQ will be a great improvement over something like VUG or IWY. I think it's harder to improve over basic indexes when you're talking about large cap stock funds, because they all essentially end up holding the same thing, but it looks to me like there's just a different mix going on here with AVUQ than the standard large cap growth funds. I'll be interested to see how it does. I would not expect this to have as much of a differential, though, as Avantis' small-cap value funds seem to have with standard indexed small-cap value funds.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [26:02]

On an unrelated note about other new funds out there, I just saw an announcement from Fidelity that they're releasing a managed futures fund as of last week.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [26:12]

I think it's FFUT, and I know BlackRock introduced one a few months ago. These are obviously designed to compete with things like DBMF, but you can see there's a big demand now for that kind of asset class amongst registered investment advisors and the kinds of people who would be likely to be using alternative asset classes in a diversified portfolio. Fidelity seems to be using an in-house algorithm or methodology. I'm not sure exactly how it works or how it compares with others, and we probably really won't know for a couple of years now of watching these to see whether any one of them is significantly better than the others. Dbmf really does seem to have the inside track on those kinds of funds these days if you're looking for something relatively cheap and as close to being an indexed fund as possible. Anyway, we'll keep watching all these things. I'm glad when you guys bring them to my attention, because I can't keep track of all this stuff. I'm not a smart man.

Voices [27:20]

And thank you for your email.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [27:23]

Last off. Last off, we have an email from Just Lucky. Lucky and Just Lucky writes.

Mostly Mary [27:32]

I appreciate your podcast very much, just having found it as referenced by Tyler on portfolio charts. Thank you, Frank and Mary, for all that you do. Helping me to stretch my own understanding has been a wonderful opportunity for personal growth. However, please pretend this has otherwise been a truly bothersome email that is barely worth your time. To facilitate maximum criticism of the following, as evaluated on portfolio charts for years ad nauseum Gosh, 20%, QQQ, 50%, VBR, 30%, GLDM or GLD, etc. I don't like that much gold either and I lost a ton on bonds in 2022, so my Igbo I got burned once and recency bias gold has made two runs for me are probably hurting my objectivity.

Mostly Mary [28:22]

I love gold made two runs for me are probably hurting my objectivity. I love gold. Otherwise, on behalf of the beneficiaries of the Father McKenna Group, thank you for being so popular and so far behind on your emails and messages. All the best, just lucky.

Voices [28:37]

You could ask yourself a question Do I feel lucky?

Mostly Uncle Frankb [28:48]

question do I feel lucky? Yes, I would say. Your recency bias probably is hurting your objectivity because, well, there's always a chance of a year like 2022. As far as bonds are concerned, that was the worst year in like a hundred years for that asset class, and something like that tends to occur only about three percent of the time. So it's like rolling snake eyes with two dice snake eyes.

Voices [29:19]

Oh no, puff Pumpkinhead, nia Noodle Jokebox, jaw Wolfman.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [29:31]

You're all under arrest. At least that's the base rate expectation. But this portfolio you've come up with does perform pretty well in backtesting and I will tell you that I've recently listened to a podcast or video with Bob Elliott, who's formerly of Bridgewater it was the compound appearing with Ben Carlson and Josh Brown and they were talking about golden bonds specifically in it, instead of bonds, either performed just as well or outperformed a stock and bond portfolio since 1970. And he really thinks that the going off of the gold standard in the early 70s did sort of change the game for gold in particular and made it just as viable or more viable than bonds in many ways as a diversifier for stocks. So this little portfolio you came up with is on the aggressive side, I would call it, although you only have 20% in QQQ in it. That's the worrisome thing in terms of volatility because it has a history of having 80% drawdowns at various points, whereas something like VBR is going to be relatively stable in comparison, and 30% gold is a lot of gold, although there's something to suggest that if you were holding international funds, that that amount of gold would be closer to the right amount. If you're not working in the reserve currency. That's when bonds become particularly dangerous if you're holding bonds that are in a weak currency.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [31:08]

That being said, I think this would be difficult to hold in certain periods, and the periods I'm thinking of particularly the period from the early 1980s up until about 1998, was a really bad almost two-decade-long segment for gold, where it was a very good period for bonds because you were coming down off those exceptionally high interest rates, but gold basically crashed after the big run-up. So it crashed in the early 1980s and then just kind of wallowed along and appeared to be almost dead by the end of the 1990s, mostly because at that point a lot of central banks were selling it, including the Bank of England, who famously sold a lot of it right near the bottom before it started to go up again. So I think both gold and bonds are really long-term holdings and that you're probably better off holding some of both than trying to guess as to which one's going to be the better holding in the next period. At least, that's the safer approach, because you got to remember both of those are diversifiers. They are not the main return drivers in your portfolio, which are going to be your stocks anyway.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [32:16]

Really, what you put together here I would consider more of as a conservative accumulation portfolio rather than a full retirement portfolio. But you could do a lot worse. You could do a lot worse.

Voices [32:28]

I'm going to end up eating a steady diet of government cheese and living in a van down by the river.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [32:37]

Hopefully that helps and thank you for your email.

Voices [32:43]

I know what you're thinking. Did he fire six shots or only five? Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I've kind of lost track myself. But, ian, this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off. You've got to ask yourself one question Do I feel lucky? Well, do you?

Mostly Uncle Frankb [33:08]

Bunker, but now I see our signal is beginning to fade. Just one programming note I will be going on hiatus, at least this weekend, and there probably will not be a podcast in the middle of next week either. So you may not hear from me for a week and a half or so, going to go to Montana to visit my parents, see some other family.

Voices [33:34]

Fredo, you're my older brother and I love you, but don't ever take sides with anyone against the family again Ever.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [33:47]

But in the meantime, if you have comments or questions for me, please send them to frank at riskparityradarcom. That email is frank at riskparityradarcom. Or you can go to the website, wwwriskparityradarcom. Put your message into the contact form and I'll get it that way. If you haven't had a chance to do it, please go to your favorite podcast provider and like subscribe. Give me some stars, a follow, a review.

Mostly Mary [34:12]

That would be great.

Mostly Uncle Frankb [34:13]

Okay, Thank you once again for tuning in. This is Frank Vasquez with Risk Party Radio signing off.

Voices [34:24]

Do I really have to do this, dad Stan? Now more than ever you need to understand the importance of saving money. But Grandma said I could use this money to buy whatever I want. Okay, next, please Go on, stanley.

Mostly Mary [34:36]

I got a $100 check from my grandma and my dad said I need to put it in the bank so it can grow over the years.

Voices [34:41]

Well, that's fantastic, a really smart decision, young man. We can put that check in a money market mutual fund. Then we'll reinvest the earnings into foreign currency accounts with compounding interest and it's gone. Uh what it's gone, it's all gone. What's all gone? The money in your account, it didn't do too well, it's gone. What do you mean? The money in your account, it didn't do too well, it's gone. What do you mean? I have $100. Not anymore. You don't.

Mostly Mary [35:07]

Poof. The Risk Parody Radio Show is hosted by Frank Vasquez. The content provided is for entertainment and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, tax or legal advice. Please consult with your own advisors before taking any actions based on any information you have heard here, making sure to take into account your own personal circumstances.