Back last fall, I was led to believe that if we went behind a paywall the restrictions would be less onerous. That no longer appears to be the case. Can you say "shifting goal posts"?
David, thanks for all you do, and have done! Your past research projects have been a boon. It's an eternal and sad state of affairs that government dictates we cannot be exposed to risk by credible, life-long market pros like yourself, and unsurprisingly gets more onerous with each passing week. Any chance of an "accredited subscription" as a work-around?
You're most welcome and that's an interesting question. I doubt it but it's worth checking on. If I was not affiliated with a registered investment advisor, I would be free to make security specific recommendations.
Oddly, if Evergreen Gavekal also owned a broker-dealer we would apparently qualify for an exemption. Morgan Stanley's Mike Wilson puts out a recommended list each week and tracks its performance. MS is both a major RIA and a broker-dealer. Don't ask me to explain that one!
Your individual suggestions are among the best ever. Your willingness to be specific and timely puts you in a class by yourself. Not looking at the big picture just some good ideas.
Thank you, EK! Another frustration I have is not being able to quantify the results. Maybe someday that will change. We will continue to track them internally.
""As you veteran readers might also recall, a change in SEC rules with regards to written recommendations necessitated that I halt said tracking. But due to increasingly restrictive SEC guidance to people who, like me, are affiliated with a registered investment advisor (RIA), I now need to discontinue making individual security recommendations. However, I will be able to suggest portfolio adjustments on asset classes and sectors, at least for the time being.""
Ah the nanny state strikes again. I hate this country a little more each and every day that stuff like this happens
Agreed. As a related note, Western governments are playing very fast and loose with the rule of law these days. That's a point I've been making in some of my recent podcasts, including today.
Well that stinks about the SEC. I LOVE this Monday edition. How do these paid newsletter scammers get away with their crap? How about you charge us a few $$$ as a paid newsletter service? Thanks, David!
I love the love!! Again, the issue is my affiliation with Evergreen Gavekal. One of the big advantages I believe I have is that my team and I actually manage money for clients, using individual securities, as well as ETFs. We have deep research capabilities on both a micro and macro level. Alas, that strength is, in this case, also a weakness.
I first heard you on a podcast last year and have loved your work ever since. Last year I invested in four very different paid financial newsletters, and I have continually been struck by how your content is among the best out of everything I'm paying for!
With that in mind, please charge me $50/mo for your stock picks :) I hope this can be a win-win for the community you've developed and yourself. Thanks for considering
The good news is I can ride out some of your previous picks for a while. Though I suspect your screening processes, like those you discuss here, will be even more valuable than specific picks in the long run.
This is why I'd love to be able to show the results of all our picks. Being successful as an investor involves more than selecting stocks that go up right away. It's what you do when they fall or, for that matter, when they do quickly run up.
Because I can no longer make buy, trim or sell suggestions on any names you may hold, I'd suggest watching those three-year support levels. If any get broken, get out. If some rise a lot, take some money off the table.
But I do agree that the big picture calls are the most important. My main one continues to be to overweight hard asset type securities. The Fed is in an incredibly difficult position right now...and I think it's going to get worse.
Not sure how one navigates the plethora of rules the SEC is instituting. As usual, your 30,000 foot view is well focused on the future. Would the SEC prefer it if you recommended only SPY or R2K or COMPQ or EDV or TLT? The Silly Erratic Clowns are trying to keep "investors" (read: gamblers) from harming themselves, which is a fool's errand. Thanks for your ongoing efforts to do what investment gurus do; provide useful advice. Onward!! Aloha.
Thanks very much, Rex! Yes, they prefer more generic recommendations. For now, I can be more specific than those you've listed but I worry that I'll be forced to become even more "broad brush" over time.
Compared to other briliant substacks, you are delusional to think of this as more than a marketing tool. QA requires a feedback circuit outside of management's control and the vibe here is that you have nobody who is willing to be honest with you. I'll scan free stuff only. Gold has no overhead resistance; that's rare.
Gold has plenty of overhead resistance adjusted for inflation, look at a chart going back to the 70s. Gold is just another asset that fluctuates like stocks subject to interest rates, the $ and the US budget deficit. It goes up and down and is more geared to fears $ depreciation than anything else.
Hey David, I've been following your newsletter for over a year, back when it was part of the Evergreen Gavekal newsletter. Thanks for all the time and effort you've put into the content! I've really loved the macro commentary, but I don't really trade specific stocks/bonds too much so the specific recommendations in stocks or bonds have not been the the reason I follow you (which it sounds like you can't do as much any more due to the SEC). As an individual investor, $400/year is a bit high for me to pull the trigger on paying since I'm following for the macro commentary. Other macro investing subscriptions I've subscribed to (Investech, Grant Williams Podcast) offer entry level tiers for individual investors more in the $120-$175/year range. I would very happily pay to subscribe to your newsletter for something in a similar range, the $400/year price point, while I love the content, I just wanted to share the data point that I personally would probably not subscribe at that price point.
You may want to consider offering multiple tiers of subscription to get more price discrimination. There are a few ways you could consider structuring it:
1) Individual vs Institutional investors (where institutional maybe get more access to you for questions, etc)
2) Just macro commentary vs Macro commentary + specific stock/bond recommendations (if you find some way to do it with the SEC regulations).
3) Timeliness - An entry level tier gets things on a week delay or gets a bi-weekly compilations/digests of your Haymaker + Highlight Reels while a higher tier gets the more timely 2x per week newsletter.
I very much appreciate your analysis and I join the chorus of those suggesting a paid subscription if that does away with the obstacles put in the way of investment writing that makes sense. If so, issuing two versions of this letter should be possible with a few, very simple edits. Thank you for your work!
Another "you're welcome", Felix. We'll see how it goes. As I wrote on Monday, for most of the last nearly 18 years I didn't provide specific security recommendations. So, this isn't totally foreign to me. Frankly, the part I'll miss the most relates to the yield security section. Over the years, that's where we've had our best relative returns. I may be able to share those numbers someday but, again, the rules doing so are pretty daunting. I'll definitely check on that.
Is the SEC being funded by the ETF industry? The US $ is a single currency. Will that be too much risk to mention? Thank you for taking the time to put your experienced opinions out there.
Thx, Alan, and as they say in Rome: Prego! Good point about the USD. Most US investors are far too exposed to it and the vulnerability it has to an on-going stealth devaluation.
Maybe we could pay for the subscription and then it would just be you doing your job?
Back last fall, I was led to believe that if we went behind a paywall the restrictions would be less onerous. That no longer appears to be the case. Can you say "shifting goal posts"?
What can I say? It's getting harder to understand your newsletter than to understand the market :)
David, thanks for all you do, and have done! Your past research projects have been a boon. It's an eternal and sad state of affairs that government dictates we cannot be exposed to risk by credible, life-long market pros like yourself, and unsurprisingly gets more onerous with each passing week. Any chance of an "accredited subscription" as a work-around?
You're most welcome and that's an interesting question. I doubt it but it's worth checking on. If I was not affiliated with a registered investment advisor, I would be free to make security specific recommendations.
Oddly, if Evergreen Gavekal also owned a broker-dealer we would apparently qualify for an exemption. Morgan Stanley's Mike Wilson puts out a recommended list each week and tracks its performance. MS is both a major RIA and a broker-dealer. Don't ask me to explain that one!
Your individual suggestions are among the best ever. Your willingness to be specific and timely puts you in a class by yourself. Not looking at the big picture just some good ideas.
Thank you, EK! Another frustration I have is not being able to quantify the results. Maybe someday that will change. We will continue to track them internally.
""As you veteran readers might also recall, a change in SEC rules with regards to written recommendations necessitated that I halt said tracking. But due to increasingly restrictive SEC guidance to people who, like me, are affiliated with a registered investment advisor (RIA), I now need to discontinue making individual security recommendations. However, I will be able to suggest portfolio adjustments on asset classes and sectors, at least for the time being.""
Ah the nanny state strikes again. I hate this country a little more each and every day that stuff like this happens
It's not the Country that's the problem, It's the People who claim to be it's Leaders...
Agreed. As a related note, Western governments are playing very fast and loose with the rule of law these days. That's a point I've been making in some of my recent podcasts, including today.
Agree 100%. but the people elect them.
Well that stinks about the SEC. I LOVE this Monday edition. How do these paid newsletter scammers get away with their crap? How about you charge us a few $$$ as a paid newsletter service? Thanks, David!
I love the love!! Again, the issue is my affiliation with Evergreen Gavekal. One of the big advantages I believe I have is that my team and I actually manage money for clients, using individual securities, as well as ETFs. We have deep research capabilities on both a micro and macro level. Alas, that strength is, in this case, also a weakness.
Can it be free to EvergreenGavekal clients?
David -
I first heard you on a podcast last year and have loved your work ever since. Last year I invested in four very different paid financial newsletters, and I have continually been struck by how your content is among the best out of everything I'm paying for!
With that in mind, please charge me $50/mo for your stock picks :) I hope this can be a win-win for the community you've developed and yourself. Thanks for considering
That's very kind of you, Noah. In fairness, we will go paid someday but I'd like to have the price point below that level.
The good news is I can ride out some of your previous picks for a while. Though I suspect your screening processes, like those you discuss here, will be even more valuable than specific picks in the long run.
This is why I'd love to be able to show the results of all our picks. Being successful as an investor involves more than selecting stocks that go up right away. It's what you do when they fall or, for that matter, when they do quickly run up.
Because I can no longer make buy, trim or sell suggestions on any names you may hold, I'd suggest watching those three-year support levels. If any get broken, get out. If some rise a lot, take some money off the table.
But I do agree that the big picture calls are the most important. My main one continues to be to overweight hard asset type securities. The Fed is in an incredibly difficult position right now...and I think it's going to get worse.
Not sure how one navigates the plethora of rules the SEC is instituting. As usual, your 30,000 foot view is well focused on the future. Would the SEC prefer it if you recommended only SPY or R2K or COMPQ or EDV or TLT? The Silly Erratic Clowns are trying to keep "investors" (read: gamblers) from harming themselves, which is a fool's errand. Thanks for your ongoing efforts to do what investment gurus do; provide useful advice. Onward!! Aloha.
Thanks very much, Rex! Yes, they prefer more generic recommendations. For now, I can be more specific than those you've listed but I worry that I'll be forced to become even more "broad brush" over time.
Thanks for being such a long-time reader!
Dave
Compared to other briliant substacks, you are delusional to think of this as more than a marketing tool. QA requires a feedback circuit outside of management's control and the vibe here is that you have nobody who is willing to be honest with you. I'll scan free stuff only. Gold has no overhead resistance; that's rare.
Gold has plenty of overhead resistance adjusted for inflation, look at a chart going back to the 70s. Gold is just another asset that fluctuates like stocks subject to interest rates, the $ and the US budget deficit. It goes up and down and is more geared to fears $ depreciation than anything else.
Hey David, I've been following your newsletter for over a year, back when it was part of the Evergreen Gavekal newsletter. Thanks for all the time and effort you've put into the content! I've really loved the macro commentary, but I don't really trade specific stocks/bonds too much so the specific recommendations in stocks or bonds have not been the the reason I follow you (which it sounds like you can't do as much any more due to the SEC). As an individual investor, $400/year is a bit high for me to pull the trigger on paying since I'm following for the macro commentary. Other macro investing subscriptions I've subscribed to (Investech, Grant Williams Podcast) offer entry level tiers for individual investors more in the $120-$175/year range. I would very happily pay to subscribe to your newsletter for something in a similar range, the $400/year price point, while I love the content, I just wanted to share the data point that I personally would probably not subscribe at that price point.
You may want to consider offering multiple tiers of subscription to get more price discrimination. There are a few ways you could consider structuring it:
1) Individual vs Institutional investors (where institutional maybe get more access to you for questions, etc)
2) Just macro commentary vs Macro commentary + specific stock/bond recommendations (if you find some way to do it with the SEC regulations).
3) Timeliness - An entry level tier gets things on a week delay or gets a bi-weekly compilations/digests of your Haymaker + Highlight Reels while a higher tier gets the more timely 2x per week newsletter.
Hi David
I too, would like to see a subscription service that would get back to individual equity as well as income recommendations.
Thanks for all the info you provide.
Mike G
As I noted above, Mike, a paid service is unfortunately not the magic bullet.
De nada and I'll continue to do all I can to provide worthwhile investment guidance.
I very much appreciate your analysis and I join the chorus of those suggesting a paid subscription if that does away with the obstacles put in the way of investment writing that makes sense. If so, issuing two versions of this letter should be possible with a few, very simple edits. Thank you for your work!
Another "you're welcome", Felix. We'll see how it goes. As I wrote on Monday, for most of the last nearly 18 years I didn't provide specific security recommendations. So, this isn't totally foreign to me. Frankly, the part I'll miss the most relates to the yield security section. Over the years, that's where we've had our best relative returns. I may be able to share those numbers someday but, again, the rules doing so are pretty daunting. I'll definitely check on that.
Is the SEC being funded by the ETF industry? The US $ is a single currency. Will that be too much risk to mention? Thank you for taking the time to put your experienced opinions out there.
Alan DeBoom
Thx, Alan, and as they say in Rome: Prego! Good point about the USD. Most US investors are far too exposed to it and the vulnerability it has to an on-going stealth devaluation.
How come you cannot recommend specific stocks or etf's - yet every Tom, Dick, and Jane on CNBC does that very thing all day long? thank you
Great column and truly appreciaitve of the breakout scan, it is indeed a telling and useful contribution. Thank you!