in value stocks, 25% in gold, and you'd say that is the riskiest, most radical approach I have ever heard of, but you'd only say that in comparison to the competitors. I do not believe either of those asset classes is risky. I think you'd be hard pushed to call them risky, but in the context of the current thought and the last 30 years relationships, they're called risky. And at a time of great point I've made to Dmitri before, at a point of great structural change, you don't need to own risky assets. You just need to own risky quantities. And that I think is how we begin to navigate our way through this. Finding active managers who can do that for you as we've discussed previously, Dmitri, is not easy because active managers have one way or another got caught up in momentum. That's the other thing. One of the things we look at in the course is momentum in the stock market actually works. It does work, but it's not going to work in a period of structural change. So to survive, I think, (84/99)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: