u/hillionman
r/trading212 r/MetalsOnReddit r/LETFs r/MU_Stock r/TheRaceTo10Million r/investing r/ValueInvesting r/UrbanHell r/urbanhellcirclejerk r/Republica_Colombia r/ETFs r/ColombiaFinanciera r/Bogleheads r/ColombiaReddit r/Testfolio
Norilsk, Russia.
Known as the must depressing city of the world btw.
u/Aromatic-Mistake-456 — 4 days ago
Opinion desde otro punto de vista
No busco venir aca a atacar o insultar asi que hablare desde el respeto. Opino que el sistema social demócrata (El cual supongo es el que ustedes acolitan y no el comunismo total) es en esencia ideal y nos muestra una idea muy bonita del mundo. Sin embargo como lo planean lograr? Los principales países socialistas o socio capitalistas como se autodenominan ellos tales como Noruega, Suecia, Suiza etc. lograron esas cosas como la salud publica y educación garantizada mediante la explotación de sus recursos y una economia muy pro mercado y empresa. En estos paises por ejemplo nisiquiera hay salario minimo, se agrede un salario entre el empresario y el sindicato (No digo que este bien y sea lo ideal ojo, pues aca en Colombia eso definitivamente saldria mal). Pero es verdad que muchis de estos son grandes exportadores de petroleo tambien y de hecho Noruega tiene el mayor fondo de inversión del mundo.
Ahora donde la realidad choca es con las peopuestas del presidente Gustavo Petro y el actual senado Ivan Cepeta y el Pacto Historico como tal. Pues ellos buscan un sistema asi sin embargo: Condenan la explotación de los recursos naturales, buscan muchos mayores impuestos hacia las empresas frenando su potencial crecimiento, y finalmente intentar negociar con grupos armados los cuales claramente sus interesas ya no son ideológicos. La paz de Santos estuvo bien, pero esta nueva Paz Total no ha funcionado del todo.
u/hillionman — 20 days ago
▲ 1 r/Testfolio
Does testfolio keep in mind dividends on the backtests?
From what i've seen, testfolio seems to include dividends on ETFs such as KMLM (Trend Following) and treasuries ETFs such as SGOV. Yet, I don't know if it includes dividends on ETFs such as: AVDV, AVUV, SCHD, VOO etc...
u/hillionman — 1 month ago
▲ 14 r/LETFs
FINAL Sortino ratio of 1.22 Strategy; portfolio variant that mixes leveraged ETFs, the Fama-French value factor, and trend following. Sharing the backtests (1995-2026) and looking for feedback.
https://testfol.io/?s=eA3TSGYQNEN
I’ve spent the last few weeks grinding through different simulations and trying various setups to find a structure that actually holds up long-term. I think I’ve finally found the combo I’m going to stick with. I call it the "Golden Papilio Antimachus." It basically tries to capture momentum and growth without taking the catastrophic 80%+ drawdowns that usually happen when things break (like 2000, 2008, or 2022).
It’s essentially a 5-part equal weight (20% each) mix of stuff that doesn't usually share the same sleeve.
Here is the breakdown of the allocation:
- TQQQ (20%): Simulated 3x Nasdaq-100. My primary growth and momentum engine.
- UGL (20%): 2x Gold. Acts as a diversifier for inflation and real-risk aversion.
- Small Cap Value (40%): Split 50/50 into AVUV for US and AVDV for international. This is the piece most people skip, but historically, it has very low or negative correlation with large-cap tech and pulls its weight when growth stalls out.
- KMLM (20%): A systematic trend-following (CTA) fund. It provides positive convexity and tends to go defensive or short right when equities are falling apart.
Why I'm Doing This Now (DCA at 18)
Btw, I’m only 18, so I’m looking at a massive time horizon for this. Since I have decades ahead of me, I can leverage a really aggressive DCA schedule. IMO, having that much time to let the math play out makes this setup way more viable than it would be for someone closer to retirement. I’m planning to keep adding capital consistently regardless of market conditions, which should help smooth out the volatility over the long run
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of this is radically new, it’s basically classic risk parity and factor investing logic. But the rebalancing engine is where it gets interesting. I get a lot of conflicting info on rebalancing, so I opted to not use a strict annual calendar.
The rule is to let winners run, but prune them if any single asset surges to occupy 40% of the total portfolio, otherwise rebalance every 2 years. This mechanically harvests volatility and cuts left-tail risk before a violent reversion wipes out the momentum gains, without having to pay for explicit put options.
Here is how the data stacks up:
The main thing that stood out to me is hitting a Sortino ratio of 1.22 with a CAGR over 20%. You're getting massive upside, but the downside volatility is heavily compensated.
I know a lot of people claim that beta slippage and daily leverage decay will eat you alive in sideways markets. But looking at the log growth, the underlying drift plus the rebalancing premium has consistently outpaced the quadratic drag for over 30 years.
Drawdowns are the real stress test. During the Dot-com crash, the Nasdaq collapsed by ~83%. This portfolio had a max drawdown of -32.8% in that same window. That cushion is mostly just UGL, AVUV/AVDV, and KMLM doing their jobs as diversifiers.
To make sure this wasn't just pure luck or curve-fitting a specific decade, I ran a block-bootstrap Monte Carlo simulation for a 30-year forward window against the SP500. The median trajectory is highly stable (17% CAGR), and the variance grows proportionally with time rather than explosively.
Even holding TQQQ, the portfolio's 36-month rolling volatility never breached 27% in three decades. When things panic, the vol profile actually converges closer to the un-leveraged SPY rather than the 3x tech it holds.
If you look at rolling 5-year returns (which IMO answers the sequence of return risk if you buy the absolute top), the lowest annualized return was still positive at ~2.7%, ending at the exact bottom of the 2009 GFC.
A few honest caveats before anyone runs with this. The tax drag is real. Band-rebalancing and internal LETF distributions trigger taxable events. The chart below models pre-tax vs max post-tax. It hurts, tbh, but the net compounding still beats the underlying indices. Also, these backtests use simulated leveraged instruments for history prior to the ETFs existing, so real-world slippage and tracking error aren't fully captured. IN this sim I used the taxes of my country (30% Short term hold / 15% on long term hold) and CAGR drops from 20.5% to 19.7%
Genuinely curious what people think here, especially anyone who's run something similar. Is there a specific macro regime you foresee breaking this correlation structure?
Testfolio link so you can check the numbers:https://testfol.io/?s=eA3TSGYQNEN
u/hillionman — 1 month ago
I've been playing around with a few portfolio ideas on TestFol.io and ended up with five different versions that combine Fama-French Small Cap Value, leveraged ETFs, and trend following. They're all backtested from 1988-2025, and I'd love to hear what people think.
I've been playing around with a few portfolio ideas on TestFol.io and ended up with five different versions that combine Fama-French Small Cap Value, leveraged ETFs, and trend following. They're all backtested from 1988-2025, and I'd love to hear what people think.
Test: https://testfol.io/?s=biOKMnuGve0
The idea
The goal wasn't to build the highest CAGR possible. I wanted something that could still compound aggressively while avoiding the massive drawdowns that usually come with concentrated growth portfolios.
The portfolios use four building blocks:
- 3x Nasdaq (simulated to extend the history beyond TQQQ's inception). This is the main growth engine.
- Small Cap Value (Fama-French factor). You can get close with SLYV, or combine AVUV and AVDV for U.S. + international exposure. This is the part I think gets overlooked most often. Historically, it has tended to perform well during periods when growth struggles.
- Leveraged Gold (2x) or GDE. GDE is WisdomTree's Efficient Gold fund, which uses futures to provide roughly 90% equity and 90% gold exposure at the same time.
- KMLM, a managed futures/trend-following ETF that can go long or short across commodities, bonds, currencies, and equities depending on market trends.
The overall concept isn't new. It's basically factor investing and risk parity, just using modern leveraged products so the diversifiers don't reduce expected returns as much as traditional bond allocations.
Results
STRAT1
- 10% 3x Nasdaq
- 20% 2x Gold
- 50% Small Cap Value
- 20% KMLM
- CAGR: 14.91%
- Max Drawdown: -33.26%
- Sharpe: 0.74
This had by far the best risk-adjusted performance.
STRAT2
- 10% 3x Nasdaq
- 20% GDE
- 70% Small Cap Value
- CAGR: 16.10%
- Max Drawdown: -58.57%
STRAT3
Same allocation as STRAT2, but replacing GDE with 2x Gold.
- CAGR: 15.30%
- Max Drawdown: -50.42%
Interestingly, just changing the gold exposure reduced the worst drawdown by about 8 percentage points while giving up less than 1% CAGR.
STRAT4
- 10% 3x Nasdaq
- 30% GDE
- 60% Small Cap Value
- CAGR: 16.23%
- Max Drawdown: -57.57%
STRAT5
- 30% 3x Nasdaq
- 30% 2x Gold
- 40% Small Cap Value
- CAGR: 19.79%
- Max Drawdown: -66.58%
Highest return, but also by far the highest risk.
What stood out to me
The biggest surprise was STRAT1.
Giving up around five percentage points of CAGR compared to the most aggressive version nearly cut the maximum drawdown in half. That seems like a very attractive trade-off, especially over multi-decade investing horizons.
It also looks like KMLM is doing most of the heavy lifting there. Trend following tends to perform well during prolonged bear markets because it can move defensively or even short certain asset classes while equities are falling.
The STRAT2 vs STRAT3 comparison was interesting as well. Holding everything else constant, simply replacing GDE with 2x leveraged gold noticeably reduced drawdowns, which suggests the choice of gold implementation matters more than I expected.
STRAT5, on the other hand, feels much more like adding leverage than adding diversification. It produces the highest CAGR, but the drawdown profile ends up looking pretty similar to a highly leveraged equity portfolio.
A few caveats
Obviously these results aren't perfect.
- The leveraged ETFs are simulated before their actual inception dates, so they don't fully capture real-world tracking error, leverage decay, fees, or implementation costs.
- Small Cap Value has had a long period of underperformance relative to Growth since roughly 2007, so there's no guarantee its historical premium will look the same going forward.
- Everything assumes annual rebalancing with no taxes, which isn't realistic for taxable accounts.
Still, I found the trade-offs pretty interesting.
Curious to hear if anyone has built something similar or sees any obvious flaws in the approach.
u/Then_Marionberry_259 — 22 days ago
Been testing 5 portfolio variants that mix the Fama-French value factor with leveraged ETFs and trend following — sharing the backtests (1988-2025) and looking for feedback
https://testfol.io/?s=biOKMnuGve0
Been testing 5 portfolio variants that mix the Fama-French value factor with leveraged ETFs and trend following — sharing the backtests (1988-2025) and looking for feedback
The starting point is pretty simple: the S&P 500 and Nasdaq are great, but they're priced for perfection on momentum and offer basically zero real protection when things actually break (2000, 2008, 2022). So I built 5 portfolios combining three pieces that don't usually show up together in the same sleeve.
First, leveraged Nasdaq at 3x (simulated, similar to TQQQ but extended further back so there's more history to test against). This is the growth engine.
Second, Small Cap Value, which is the "value" factor from Fama-French applied to small companies. You can replicate this almost 1:1 with SLYV, or if you want international exposure too, a 50/50 split of AVUV and AVDV works well. This is the piece most people skip entirely, and historically it's been the one pulling weight during the years growth stalls out.
Third, leveraged gold at 2x or GDE (WisdomTree's Efficient Gold fund, basically a 90/90 SPY/GLD stack using futures so you're not tying up 100% of the capital) and KMLM, a trend-following fund that goes long or short across commodities, bonds, currencies, and equities depending on the prevailing trend. These two are the actual diversification legs, since they don't move in lockstep with stocks.
None of this is a new idea, it's the classic risk parity and factor investing logic (Fama and French's work on this won a Nobel in 2013 alongside Shiller and Hansen), I'm just trying to build it with modern leveraged instruments so holding a diversifier doesn't drag your returns down the way plain bonds or cash would.
Here's how the five stack up. STRAT1 runs 10% leveraged Nasdaq, 20% leveraged gold, 50% small cap value, and 20% KMLM. It posted a 14.91% CAGR with a max drawdown of only -33.26% and a Sharpe of 0.74, the best risk-adjusted number of the group by a good margin. STRAT2 uses 10% Nasdaq, 20% GDE, and 70% small cap value, landing at 16.10% CAGR with a -58.57% max drawdown. STRAT3 keeps the same 10/20/70 split but swaps GDE for leveraged gold at 2x instead, and that single swap brings the max drawdown down to -50.42% while giving up a bit of return, 15.30% CAGR. It's a useful side-by-side since it isolates exactly what the gold vehicle itself is doing to the risk profile. STRAT4 shifted the mix to 10% Nasdaq, 30% GDE, 60% small cap value, coming in at 16.23% CAGR and a -57.57% drawdown. STRAT5 went the most aggressive route with 30% leveraged Nasdaq, 30% leveraged gold, and 40% small cap value, and it posted the best CAGR of the bunch at 19.79%, but with a max drawdown of -66.58%, which is basically what an all-equity portfolio would have handed you with none of the protection.
The thing that stood out most to me is how much STRAT1 changes the risk profile without giving up that much return. You're trading about 5 points of CAGR for cutting your worst drawdown almost in half, and that KMLM allocation seems to be doing most of that work, since trend following tends to go defensive or short right when everything else is falling apart. The STRAT2 vs STRAT3 comparison backs that up on a smaller scale too, just switching from GDE to 2x leveraged gold with everything else held constant knocked 8 points off the max drawdown for about 1 point of CAGR, so the choice of gold vehicle alone is doing real work. STRAT5 on the other hand is basically pure beta with extra steps, the leverage there is buying more upside correlated with the market rather than actual diversification.
A few honest caveats before anyone runs with this. These backtests use simulated leveraged instruments, so the "3x" and "2x" tags mean the historical data is extended synthetically rather than pulled from an ETF that actually existed that whole period. Real-world versions will have slippage, rebalancing costs, tracking error, and daily leverage decay that don't fully show up in these numbers. The value factor has also underperformed growth for a long stretch since around 2007, so the long-run backtest numbers could be inflated by decades where value was doing better than it has recently. And annual rebalancing assumes you can execute without tax friction, which obviously isn't true in a taxable account.
Genuinely curious what people think here, especially anyone who's run something similar.
Testfolio link: https://testfol.io/?s=biOKMnuGve0
Allocation. Backtests + Montecarlo for each:
Allocation:
STRAT 1-5 backtest:
MONTE CARLO STRAT FROM 1-5 (Random Seed, 10 000 Simulations, 100 years):
How to replicate FFSCV (Fama French Small Cap Value)
US ONLY:
INTERNATIONAL (50% US 50% INTL):
u/hillionman — 1 month ago
▲ 9 r/LETFs
All weather leverage strategy
I've been messing around with a portfolio idea and wanted to get some opinions.
Instead of going all in on something like TQQQ, I'm trying to spread the leverage across different asset classes. The leveraged part is TQQQ, TMF and UGL, then I balance it out with VXUS, VB and SHY.
15% TQQQ
20% TMF
20% UGL
---
20% VT or AVGE
15% VB or AVUV
10% SHY
I don't use margin, so all the leverage comes from the ETFs themselves. The idea is that when one part of the portfolio gets hit, another part hopefully holds up well enough that rebalancing actually adds value over time.
I ran a backtest going back to 1988 (using simulated data for the leveraged ETFs before they existed), and it came out to around a 14.7% CAGR with a max drawdown of about 44%.
I'm not trying to claim it's some magic strategy, so I'm mostly looking for people to poke holes in it. What do you think are the biggest weaknesses or assumptions I'm making?
Backtest link: https://testfol.io/?s=aI0iyKMcUZH
VS SP500:
u/hillionman — 2 months ago
▲ 1 r/investing
Internacional Golden Butterfly core portfolio
I’ve been pretty much all-in on tech and growth since 2020, and honestly it’s worked out way better than I expected.
Lately though, I’ve been thinking about building an actual core portfolio and just keeping growth as a satellite position. Maybe even going 50/50.
The idea I keep coming back to is basically an international take on the Golden Butterfly:
40% VT
20% SHY
20% TLT
20% GLD
Curious what you guys think. Am I overthinking it after a great run, or does this make sense?
u/hillionman — 2 months ago
▲ 11 r/MU_Stock
Heres more information of why Micron ($MU) rally still has solid fundaments.
reddit.com
u/hillionman — 2 months ago
▲ 9 r/MU_Stock
1000 floor reclaimed!
And heres why rally SHOULD conitnue!
u/hillionman — 2 months ago
▲ 83 r/MU_Stock
Ignore the intraday volatility, observe fundamentals.
To everyone saying that $MU (Micron) will eventually crash because it’s a “cyclical stock”, the market is already pricing in that scenario.
Micron currently trades at a PEG ratio of just 0.04, which implies that investors are heavily discounting a massive slowdown in future growth.
Basicallu, the markt is assuming that todays extraordinary revenue and earnings growth will collapse over the coming years. The bearish case is already reflected in the valuation.
However, if HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) proves to be a critical component for AI infrastructure buildout, Micron could experience a significant valuation re-rating. In that scenario, a forward P/E multiple of 10–15x would not be unreasonable, implying a dramatically higher market capitalization over time.
The market is pricing in the worst-case outcome. The real question is whether AI memory demand turns out to be structural rather than cyclical.
Source: Finviz ($MU)
u/hillionman — 2 months ago
▲ 5 r/ETFs
FWD (AB Disruptors) ETF
Heard alot of people talk about this pretty new ETF. What do yall think. Good or bad?
u/hillionman — 2 months ago