One little push-pull I'm running into is that I'm selecting quality securities that appreciate; the "Active Satellite", but I'm sizing positions smaller for risk mgmt. Desire to increase size is there, but it has to be balanced into the overall picture & the portfolio as a WHOLE.

Generally, a normal #ActII #Center investing portfolio is tailored to the individual, but there are some broad principles that I've applied across portfolios. "Passive Plus" generally has a Passive Core & Active Satellite construction with a broad diversified asset allocation.
The Passive Core is usually around 75-80% of the portfolio consisting of low-cost tax efficient index ETF's covering most equity asset classes (Large Core, Large Value, Mid Core, Mid Value, Small Core, Small Value, EM, Int'l LG/SM) w/exposure to ALL at ALL TIMES.
One caveat to the "Passive Core" is that I use (held passively) a very small number of actively managed mutual funds within that 80% of the portfolio. These are GROWTH funds that worth the small extra expense & I have one manager for US Large and Small US Growth & Int'l Large
This part of the portfolio is truly "Core". It doesn't move. It doesn't get sold aside from rebalancing. It didn't get sold in the depths of March. There is a possibility these positions will be in place for decades. The asset quilt changes every year, so we are exposed to ALL
The most important part about this "Passive Core" of the portfolio is the low-cost exposure to the entire world in thousands of securities, which is an important piece of risk mgmt. It's ok when one asset class is underperforming because the chances are several others overperform
The "Active Satellite" is generally about 20% of the portfolio. This is where there is flexibility to be very specific with the combination of single security selection, dividend stocks, and sector/thematic/concentrated funds based on specific needs. This is where alpha lives.
I would also include REITs in the "single security selection" and "Active Satellite". There is a very small number of either thematic ETFs (gaming, E-sports), sector (healthcare, industrials), opportunistic "Growth at Value" price dislocations on only the HIGHEST QUALITY Co's.
Due to the small number of securities involved in terms of single name holdings (yes I understand risk & that the true "PASSIVE ONLY" could be having strokes reading this) generally these are placed across portfolios and held for a long time. My "Active Satellite" is pretty slow!
So, what I have found is that the "Passive Plus" strategy accomplishes many things: Passive & Active complement each other, risk mgmt through diversification FIRST does NOT kill performance, and flexibility in the "Active Satellite" allows for performance enhancement over "Core"
I understand the Quants, traders, the "Value is dead" crowd, and many others would take issue with all or part of my investment philosophy, but there is nothing that can alter the basics I've outlined because I have seen them effectively implemented across millions of dollars.
I've seen the mechanics of real money in real time through the worst crash in our lifetimes aside from the GFC. I've seen how assets can be positioned in very specific ways for very specific needs or a combination of all; preservation, growth, income, etc. "Passive Plus" works.

More from For later read

1. The death of Silicon Valley, a thread

How did Silicon Valley die? It was killed by the internet. I will explain.

Yesterday, my friend IRL asked me "Where are good old days when techies were


2. In the "good old days" Silicon Valley was about understanding technology. Silicon, to be precise. These were people who had to understand quantum mechanics, who had to build the near-miraculous devices that we now take for granted, and they had to work

3. Now, I love libertarians, and I share much of their political philosophy. But you have to be socially naive to believe that it has a chance in a real society. In those days, Silicon Valley was not a real society. It was populated by people who understood quantum mechanics

4. Then came the microcomputer revolution. It was created by people who understood how to build computers. One borderline case was Steve Jobs. People claimed that Jobs was surrounded by a "reality distortion field" - that's how good he was at understanding people, not things

5. Still, the heroes of Silicon Valley were the engineers. The people who knew how to build things. Steve Jobs, for all his understanding of people, also had quite a good understanding of technology. He had a libertarian vibe, and so did Silicon Valley

You May Also Like

Master Thread of all my threads!

Hello!! 👋

• I have curated some of the best tweets from the best traders we know of.

• Making one master thread and will keep posting all my threads under this.

• Go through this for super learning/value totally free of cost! 😃

1. 7 FREE OPTION TRADING COURSES FOR


2. THE ABSOLUTE BEST 15 SCANNERS EXPERTS ARE USING

Got these scanners from the following accounts:

1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sanjufunda
3. @sanstocktrader
4. @SouravSenguptaI
5. @Rishikesh_ADX


3. 12 TRADING SETUPS which experts are using.

These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:

1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sourabhsiso19
3. @ITRADE191
4.


4. Curated tweets on HOW TO SELL STRADDLES.

Everything covered in this thread.
1. Management
2. How to initiate
3. When to exit straddles
4. Examples
5. Videos on
Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.