The idea worth investigating
Stocks, bonds and gold are familiar ingredients. The interesting question is how much the recipe matters.
A new study reports an 11.6% annualized return with an 18.1% maximum drawdown, compared with 8.1% and 33.7% for its 60/40 benchmark. It uses three ordinary ETFs—SPY, AGG and GLD—plus cash, with no leverage.
Those numbers justified a closer look. We reconstructed the allocation, delayed its trades and made its information inputs arrive later. The result held up well enough to warrant attention. The harder question is how much of the advantage we can trust.
The figures above are the authors’ 2006–2025 historical simulation after modeled trading costs. Dynamic allocations trade monthly; their fixed 60/40 benchmark trades annually. Our tests are also retrospective, with current-vintage historical data. They do not establish a live edge or a statistically secure Sharpe advantage.
The subscriber analysis covers:
Paid analysis on Substack
See what changes the investment case.
The headline is the starting point. The subscriber analysis takes you through:
- What happened when trades moved to the next session.
- Whether gold, cash and rebalancing frequency explain the headline.
- What the simpler rule delivers—and where the evidence still falls short.
AI assists curation and drafting. The research status distinguishes paper reviews from house tests. Read our research approach.