Finding alpha is notoriously difficult.

Instead of trying to pick stocks better, what if you simply added the return of high-conviction, alternative strategies on top of your asset allocation?

That’s the opportunity portable alpha unlocks for allocators.

Join us for an exclusive webinar where we reveal how capital-efficient ETFs can be used to “port” the returns of any alternative investment on top of your asset allocation.

In this educational session, we will:

• Explain what portable alpha is, where it came from, and what problems it solves for allocators
• Demonstrate how the Return Stacked® Global Stocks & Bonds ETF (RSSB) enables anyone to implement portable alpha
• Discuss key considerations in running a portable alpha approach
• Provide a live demonstration of how investors can evaluate different portable alpha ideas

Perfect For:

• Investment professionals seeking to enhance their portfolio construction toolkit.
• Advisors looking to provide better diversification solutions for their clients.
• Advisors looking to introduce unique sources of alpha for their clients.

Okay.

2

Well, thank you everybody.

3

for joining us today.

4

My name is Rodrigo Gordillo.

5

I'm the president of Resolve

Asset Management Global and co

6

founder and trading advisor of

the ReturnStack suite of ETFs.

7

And I'm delighted today to be joined by

Corey Hofstein, CIO of Newfound Research,

8

as well as co founder and portfolio

manager of the ReturnStack suite of ETFs.

9

If you haven't heard of the ReturnStack

lineup before, Ultimately, what

10

this suite aims to do is to unlock

the benefits of diversification.

11

And this is done by allowing you

to introduce alternative investment

12

strategies and exposures into your

portfolio without having to sacrifice

13

your core stock and bond exposure.

14

Now in the suite, Each ETF follows

the same simple formula, which is

15

for every dollar invested, we're

going to provide a dollar of either

16

a core stock or bond exposure, plus

an extra dollar to an alternative

17

asset class or investment strategy.

18

And we launched our first ETF in

19

suite just actually passed over four

hundred, eight hundred and forty million

20

dollars, and hopefully rapidly toward

a billion by the end of the year.

21

We only have a couple of weeks scoring.

22

we're excited by that growth.

23

Obviously, there's a demand for it.

24

And today, uh, I'm actually quite

excited for Corey, uh, to specifically

25

talk about the return stack global

stocks in bonds, ETF, that's RSSB.

26

And he will have a chance to really

walk the audience through, through

27

the many ways that one could utilize

this unique ETF to enhance portfolio

28

diversification and really allow for all

types of unique stacking opportunities.

29

And importantly here for this webinar

is that please do feel free to ask any

30

questions along the way in the chat bot.

31

You can just type it in.

32

I'll do my best in responding real time

to you, or if I can kind of nudge Corey

33

and ask him questions as he goes along.

34

Um, so with that, Corey, I'm excited to

turn it over to you to do the deep dive.

35

Corey Hoffstein: Well, thank you, Rodrigo.

36

And thank you for that kind intro.

37

I'm personally really excited

to talk about RSSB, the Return

38

Stack Global Stocks and Bonds.

39

I think at its face, it's probably our

most boring ETF that we have in the suite,

40

but I actually think once you go under

the hood, it is our most powerful ETF.

41

This, product allows you to

ultimately stack whatever you want.

42

onto your portfolio.

43

So whatever alternative investment class,

asset class or strategy, you can now turn

44

that into an overlay on your portfolio.

45

So really excited to talk about it.

46

Before I get there though, I want to talk

about this concept of portable alpha.

47

This was an institutional idea that was

48

me, in the, in the 2000s and then post

49

except among a select few

institutions who really had a

50

like extreme success using it.

51

We actually just did a podcast with

the CIO of Delta's Pension, John

52

Glidden, who had an unbelievable

turnaround at their pension.

53

You can check out our Get Stacked

podcast, or we actually published a

54

quick A case study on our website.

55

You can check that out.

56

That went live today talking about

how he used Portable Alpha to take

57

a dramatically underfunded pension

and get it to an overfunded status.

58

Really a great story and a great

success case of using Portable Alpha.

59

Where I want to start with

is what is Portable Alpha?

60

This term is coming back.

61

We're seeing it a lot more in the news.

62

If you haven't heard of it,

if you're unfamiliar with it,

63

that's that's not a surprise.

64

It really has been exclusively

an institutional concept.

65

So I want to start with a quick

explanation of what it is, and more

66

important than what it is, I want to

start with what problem is Portable

67

Alpha ultimately trying to solve.

68

And as you can probably guess from

the name, the Alpha part of the name,

69

what Portable Alpha was originally

designed to solve was for allocators

70

and professional investors who were

trying to beat their benchmark The

71

portable alpha was effectively invented

as a new way to try to beat a benchmark

72

in a more sophisticated manner.

73

So I want to start with

this picture, right?

74

Because this is actually, the story

75

They were actually the originators

of the portable alpha idea.

76

It's a little fuzzy.

77

I'll give them credit.

78

There's a couple other

folks who take credit.

79

But largely I think the story starts

80

were running some bond mandates.

81

Now this is a current breakdown of the U.

82

S.

83

aggregate bond index, but you

can guess that probably back in

84

the 1980s, the total exposure to

treasuries wasn't too dissimilar.

85

When we look at the U.

86

S.

87

aggregate bond index today,

there is a large slug of U.

88

S.

89

treasury exposure, and so if you're

trying to beat this benchmark as a bond

90

manager, One of the choices you have

to make is am I going to touch that U.

91

S.

92

Treasury exposure or am I going to

take some off benchmark bets, right?

93

Because there really isn't a

tremendous amount of security

94

selection you can do within U.

95

S.

96

Treasuries.

97

A 10 year U.

98

S.

99

Treasury is largely fungible

with any other 10 year U.

100

S.

101

Treasury.

102

So if you have 10 year U.

103

S.

104

Treasury exposure in your benchmark,

How are you supposed to beat that unless

105

you go maybe buy corporates or mortgage

backed securities and take some off,

106

off benchmark bets in terms of how much

treasury exposure you're going to have?

107

Well, in the early 1980s, some very

sophisticated and thoughtful investors

108

at PIMCO said, well, what if we, what if

we did something a little bit different?

109

What if instead of buying U.

110

S.

111

treasuries with our cash, we buy U.

112

S.

113

treasury futures?

114

Now, U.

115

S.

116

Treasury futures are going to

give us the total return of U.

117

S.

118

Treasuries, but does

so in a levered manner.

119

So we only have to put up a little

bit of capital to get that exposure.

120

The return of those U.

121

S.

122

Treasury futures is in effect

going to be the return of U.

123

S.

124

Treasuries minus that cost of leverage.

125

And then we're going to have a

whole bunch of cash left over with

126

which we can invest however we want.

127

To make this, if you don't know futures,

sort of the simple way to think about

128

this is, let's say you wanted to buy

a house, a million dollar house, and

129

you have a million dollars in cash.

130

Well, one choice is you

can just buy the house.

131

In this case, that would just

be like equivalent to just

132

buying the treasury bond.

133

Or you could go to a bank and get

a mortgage, maybe put 200, 000

134

down, get an 800, 000 mortgage.

135

You then get the return of the house minus

the cost of financing with your mortgage,

136

and you have 800, 000 of cash left over.

137

Now, then the question becomes,

what do you do with that cash?

138

And that's where PIMCO said,

well, we can invest that cash to

139

outperform our cost of financing.

140

In our analogy, say, the cost of

the mortgage interest that you're

141

paying, well then you have effectively

added return on top of that

142

original thing you're investing in.

143

For PIMCO it was the treasuries,

in our case it's the house.

144

And so that's a very powerful concept

because it unlocks sort of that

145

beta you're getting, the treasuries,

versus how you are able to add

146

something on top by thoughtfully

using some leverage and financing.

147

Now what's important about using treasury

futures is that historically like if you

148

go look at mortgage rates today The actual

financing costs of mortgages can be quite

149

high, and a significant spread above,

say, the equivalent, uh, duration for U.

150

S.

151

Treasury, right?

152

You're gonna borrow at a

much higher rate than the U.

153

S.

154

government is.

155

But if you look at the embedded

cost of financing inside of Treasury

156

futures, it's historically been

a lot closer to T bill rates.

157

So what I have in this graph is

going back the last five years.

158

I've plotted the three

month LIBOR rate or SOFR.

159

It sort of starts LIBOR and SOFR.

160

Uh, the black line is your three

month T bill rate and the green

161

line is the embedded cost of

financing inside of a 10 year U.

162

S.

163

Treasury futures contract.

164

And what you can see is that

green line has historically, while

165

not perfectly fit, Very closely

danced around that black line.

166

And so what we can say is if we're

using something like us treasury

167

futures to replicate treasuries,

we're actually getting that

168

treasury return minus e bills.

169

And that's a, one of the lowest costs

of financing you can get, right?

170

That is the short term borrowing

rate of the us government.

171

And we're effectively able to tap

into that through the futures market.

172

The reason that's powerful and what

PIMCO did and what became known

173

as their bonds plus strategy is

they said, okay, let's replace our

174

treasuries with these treasury futures.

175

We're going to put a little

cash aside for margin, right?

176

We need that.

177

That's sort of like a down

payment for the house.

178

That's how we're managing these treasury

futures as they move up and down.

179

Now those treasury futures are going

to have Um, a financing cost equal to

180

T bills, but what if we take that cash

that's left over and invest it in short

181

term, slightly worse credit quality, maybe

some stuff with some embedded optionality

182

like mortgage backed securities, things

that we think are close to cash, cash

183

like in terms of risk, but slightly

riskier to earn a slightly higher return.

184

And if we can earn that slightly

higher return above the financing

185

rate, we've effectively stacked that

return on top of our bonds, right?

186

And so they were able to take their

security selection advantage in short term

187

bonds to outperform cash and then stack

that excess return on top of treasuries.

188

And that's how they were able to

basically create alpha in that big

189

slug of treasuries that they had

that otherwise there was really

190

no security selection opportunity.

191

Now, a couple of years after this,

they realized this didn't have to

192

simply be done in the world of bonds.

193

They could take the same

idea and do it in U.

194

S.

195

equities.

196

I think it was 1985 or 1986 that the U.

197

S., uh, that the S& P 500

futures started trading.

198

And what PIMCO realized is they said,

look, our advantage is in picking bonds.

199

We don't think we can pick stocks.

200

But what if we simply said we're

going to buy S& P 500 futures

201

to get S& P 500 exposure?

202

We're going to put some cash aside as

margin, and then we'll use the rest of

203

the portfolio to invest in short term,

you know, high quality corporates, maybe

204

some embedded optionality with some

mortgages, again, some, some cash like

205

instruments that take on a little bit

more risk and by outperforming cash, the

206

cost of financing in those S& P futures,

we can create what looks like alpha.

207

And right.

208

And so this concept of portable

alpha is born because what they're

209

doing is generating returns in bonds.

210

And stacking that on top of stocks, right?

211

So the, where they're generating the

excess returns has now been unlocked

212

from the underlying asset, the beta

that most investors are buying for.

213

And this became known as PIMCO's

Stocks Plus program and has been

214

running since the mid 1980s, uh,

with great popularity, right?

215

Because again, the idea is you can get

your S& P 500 exposure, but you don't need

216

to pick stocks better to beat the market.

217

Hempco is able to say, no, we think

we can pick bonds better and we're

218

going to take that ability and stack

it on top of the equity beta you want.

219

So it's a profoundly powerful

construct that they unlock.

220

And this is something that in the early

221

of institutions who said, well, we don't

just have to pick bonds with that cash.

222

We can do whatever we want.

223

And that's where things really started

to see, well, we can take our betas,

224

whether it's stocks or bonds and stack

on all sorts of hedge fund strategies.

225

What we, when we take a step

back and say, well, what does

226

this really unlock for investors?

227

What we think this unlocks is

what we call the funding problem

228

of alternative strategies.

229

This idea that if you are traditionally

benchmarking to a portfolio of stocks and

230

bonds and you want to add alternatives

to your portfolio, you typically

231

have to sell those stocks and bonds

to make room for those alternatives.

232

So your classic 60 percent stocks, 40

percent bonds becomes say a 50, 30, 20.

233

The problem with this approach is

that by selling stocks and bonds

234

to make room for your alternatives,

you create a hurdle rate problem.

235

A hurdle rate both in the rate of

return that those alternatives have

236

to have and hopefully outperform to be

additive to the portfolio, but also a

237

behavioral hurdle rate in our experience.

238

Stocks and bonds tend to be

much more transparent to end

239

investors and stakeholders.

240

Alternatives tend to be higher cost,

less tax efficient, less transparent, and

241

just behaviorally harder for investors

to stick with over the long run to reap

242

the benefits of the diversification

that they bring to the portfolio.

243

This new world approach of Portable

Alpha, again, not really new world,

244

it's been around for 40 years, but

is being reintroduced now, allows

245

us to say, let's keep the 60 40 and

let's stack those alternatives on top.

246

So let's keep that core benchmark.

247

And use our active risk budget

to add these alternatives on top.

248

And again, we think this really solves

that funding problem because no longer

249

do you need to outperform the stocks

and bonds you sold, you simply need

250

to outperform your financing rate.

251

And if you're thoughtful as to how

you're constructing this stacking, that

252

financing rate can be as low as T bills.

253

And what this then allows us to

do is say, well, we can be really

254

thoughtful about where we are using

our active risk budget, right?

255

If we are benchmarking to some

passive 60 40 portfolio and we choose

256

to be active, does it make sense

to be active in picking stocks?

257

Well, we've all seen the SPIVA report,

for example, that would tell you over

258

the last 15 years, Only 10 percent

of large cap managers have actually

259

beat their benchmark after costs.

260

It's a very hard thing to do, and it takes

an exceptional amount of skill to identify

261

those managers and stick with them over

that period to reap those benefits.

262

And even if you do, sort of the average

alpha they generate isn't that great.

263

So on the, on the left side here, what

we have is what the return would have

264

looked like in a decomposed fashion.

265

If you had managed to

pick a top four tile U.

266

S.

267

large cap equity manager over

268

So the prior decade, and

what you would see is that.

269

You would have earned a 12.

270

84 percent annualized return, about 120

dips of which would have come from manager

271

alpha, the vast majority of which would

have come from underlying beta in U.

272

S.

273

large caps.

274

Consider the new world approach, which

says, well, instead of trying to find

275

alpha in the place that's proven to be

one of the hardest to find alpha, what if

276

we just buy our beta, right, and stack on

top, in this case some hedge fund beta.

277

So just basically chose a generic

hedge fund benchmark, didn't even

278

have any skill, didn't try to do any

hedge fund selection, just said just

279

give me broad hedge fund exposure,

stack that on top, get rid of the

280

financing rate, the cost of cash, and

you would have added 275 basis points.

281

So really no skill needed there in terms

of manager selection, and you would have

282

more than doubled the excess returns

you would have added to your portfolio.

283

So again, what we think is a truly

profoundly, uh, important unlock for

284

the way we think about spending that

active risk budget for investors

285

in the pursuit of outperformance.

286

And when you use this framework,

really what it allows you to do is

287

think of any alternative investment

strategy or asset class as sort

288

of these Lego building blocks.

289

When we look at the long term returns,

if we cut out the cash component, if

290

we say what are, what's the excess

component of these different asset

291

classes, whether it's gold or trend

following or market neutral, long,

292

short or event driven strategies.

293

If we subtract out that T bill rate,

whatever's left over would have been

294

effectively what we can think about

stacking on top of our betas, right?

295

And the, and again, we can mix and

match these to whatever objective

296

or outcome we're looking for.

297

So we could say, well, instead of trying

to pick stocks, why don't we just buy

298

the S& P 500 and stack some gold on top?

299

Or we could stack some trend following

or some macro or some equity long short.

300

Again, in whatever combination we want

that creates an outcome that we want.

301

Maybe it's, we want absolute

returns, uh, low vol alpha,

302

excess returns, or maybe we want.

303

some sort of stack that we think is going

to provide profound diversification in

304

certain sort of market environments,

high inflation environments, or,

305

uh, a breakdown of fiat, right?

306

You could think about stacking a

little bit of gold and Bitcoin.

307

There's all sorts of creative things you

can do when you unlock this framework.

308

Question is then, how

do you do this, right?

309

Because I mentioned at the very beginning,

the way PIMCO did this is they bought.

310

U.

311

S.

312

Treasury futures.

313

And then they bought S& P 500 futures

and most allocators don't have the

314

ability to do that themselves, either

because their mandate prohibits it,

315

or they don't have the ability to

do it on behalf of their clients.

316

And that's where RSSB comes in.

317

And that's why we think RSSB is

such an exciting product because

318

it allows you to unlock this return

stacking and portable alpha concept.

319

By simply using an ETF.

320

So RSSB, when you give us a dollar, we

are going to give you a dollar of global

321

equity exposure and a dollar of U.

322

S.

323

Treasury exposure.

324

And the way we do that is very simple.

325

You give us a dollar and we're

going to put 90 cents in, or

326

effectively 90 cents, in passive.

327

low cost equity exposure.

328

We're basically trying to give you

something as close to call it MSCI Acqui

329

or FTSE Global All Cap type exposure.

330

No active bets being

made on the equity side.

331

Every dollar, 90 cents is going into that.

332

And then we're going to put

10 cents in basically T bills.

333

And those T bills are going to

serve as collateral for us to buy

334

10 cents of equity futures to help

us fill out the rest of that dollar.

335

as well as a dollar of

treasury future exposure.

336

It's going to be a ladder of

two, five, ten, and long bond U.

337

S.

338

treasuries equally weighted,

so 25 percent in each.

339

When you take that exposure combined,

what we're getting is a dollar of equities

340

plus a dollar of treasuries, and those

treasury futures are going to include

341

that cost of financing, and which is we've

seen is historically close to T bills.

342

And so this tool then is is

a tool of capital efficiency.

343

You're getting two dollars of

exposure for every dollar you invest.

344

Now the way most people have, would have

historically looked at a fund like this

345

would have been as a standalone, right?

346

They would have said, well what have

global stocks done historically?

347

What have bonds done historically?

348

What happens if you look at something

where you stack them on top of

349

each other and pay, you know, a

financing rate equal to T bills?

350

Black line global stocks, blue line bonds,

green line would have been if you stack

351

them together and pay the financing rate.

352

And what I would argue is

this is the complete wrong

353

way to look at this product.

354

Because this product is not

meant to say buy this instead of

355

global equities and you're going

to outperform over the long run.

356

What this product is meant to

do is help you free up capital

357

in your portfolio to then use to

stack other concepts and ideas.

358

So in my opinion, this is a much better

way to think about a product like this.

359

That if I put 50 cents into a product

like this and 50 cents in T bills,

360

that return is going to look almost

equivalent to 50 percent global

361

stock, 50 percent bond portfolio.

362

Right?

363

The black line, the green line match here.

364

And that's important because that 50, 50

percent in a product like RSSB, Giving

365

you returns that look like a dollar

in a 50 50 means that the rest of that

366

portfolio, the other 50 cents in T bills,

can then be used to invest in whatever

367

you want, and that will effectively

be stacked on that original 50 50.

368

Now most people don't have a 50 50,

they have a 60 40 or a 70 30, so, and

369

most people aren't going to want a

huge stack anyway, they might want a

370

10 percent stack or a 20 percent stack.

371

So the way we think about using

this is, for whatever stack size

372

you want, you basically need to

sell enough stocks and bonds.

373

And then get the exposure back

with RSSB to create the room for

374

whatever alternative stack you want.

375

So let's say you have a 60 40, 60 percent

stocks, 40 percent bonds, and you wanted

376

a 20 percent stack of alternatives.

377

Well, what you could do is you

could sell 20 percent of your

378

stocks, sell 20 percent of your

bonds, and put 20 percent into RSSB.

379

Now, remember, RSSB is going to give

you a dollar of stocks and a dollar

380

of bonds for every dollar you invest.

381

So that 20 percent in RSSB is

going to give you back 20 percent

382

stocks and 20 percent bonds.

383

And then you have left over 20

percent of your portfolio with which

384

you can invest in alternatives.

385

And when you take the stocks and bonds

and RSSB and add the exposure together,

386

Through an x ray, you get your 60 40 back,

and the other things you're investing in,

387

those alternative investment strategies or

asset classes, are now effectively stacked

388

on top, at the financing rate, embedded in

the leverage that we manage within RSSB,

389

again, using the treasury futures that

get you a financing rate close to T bills.

390

And that's why, if we go back to

a graph like this, we would see

391

that the T bill rate, When you

invest the 100 100 portfolio, plus

392

T bills, gets you something that

looks almost identical to the 50 50.

393

Because those treasury futures have

historically had an embedded financing

394

rate almost equivalent to T bills.

395

Incredibly powerful way to borrow.

396

So then, the question is,

okay, what do you stack?

397

And there's really, sort of, it's

an open ended conversation here.

398

We have some biases as to what

we think you should stack.

399

We have a strong bias that whatever

you're stacking, ideally is, has

400

low correlation to stocks and bonds.

401

That's where we can go back to what

Rodrigo said at the beginning, that

402

return stacking is all about unlocking

the benefits of diversification.

403

But we recognize some people may

want to stack for outperformance.

404

Some people may want to stack for

diversification and downside protection.

405

And some people might have more specific

outcomes in mind, like they want to

406

stack some sort of fiat hedge, right?

407

So when you're stacking for

outperformance, You might think

408

of all these style premia, these,

these long short equity strategies,

409

these event driven strategies like

merger arb or, or SPAC arb, uh,

410

market risk transfer strategies or

some alternative lending strategies.

411

In stacking for diversification, you might

think of things like trend following,

412

or carry, or systematic macro, or even

sort of defensive equity long short,

413

quality long short, anti beta long short.

414

Those sort of things can be stacked on

top of your portfolio as pseudo hedges.

415

If you're stacking some sort of

fiat hedge because you're concerned

416

about the currency in which you're

investing in, well, you could try

417

to stack some gold or bitcoin.

418

Again, the combinations

are sort of endless.

419

RSSB is just the vehicle

that allows you to do it.

420

Question that comes up is,

okay, RSSB allows you to do it.

421

What should we do?

422

How big a stack size should we create?

423

How much of this is that stack

going to impact my portfolio?

424

What's it going to do to the

volatility of my portfolio?

425

These are questions that

come up all the time.

426

And this is where I wanted to

take the bold step of trying to do

427

some sort of live demonstration.

428

Um, We do have some tools that are

available to financial professionals

429

and advisors through our website.

430

If you go to returnstack.

431

com and go to the tools section we

have some, pretty easy to use Excel

432

tools that allow you to explore this.

433

But I recognize while we're prohibited

from giving that to anyone but

434

investment professionals, um, there

are other ways in which you can try

435

to explore these concepts on your own.

436

And so

437

Rodrigo Gordillo: So, Corey,

why don't we, why don't we

438

just, there's a few questions,

broad questions about the, well,

439

Corey Hoffstein: let me, let

me just sort of finish the last

440

point of the presentation here.

441

and then we'll, we can

do some, some Q and A.

442

to end things.

443

So, so the final point here for us

when it's at, at ReturnStack Portfolio

444

Solutions and ReturnStack ETFs is

all about when you're talking about

445

trying to It's a question of what

do you have greater conviction in?

446

The traditional approach to beating

the market is security selection.

447

And, and we've all seen the

SPIVA reports and the Morningstar

448

Barometer, Active Passive Barometer.

449

It is incredibly hard to beat the

market through security selection,

450

especially when you're in an environment

like we are today, where large cap U.

451

S.

452

equities absolutely dominate the market.

453

The market cap, and if you're

a global investor, 60 percent

454

of your money is in U.

455

S.

456

equities, and the vast

majority of that is in U.

457

S.

458

large cap, where alpha is very,

very hard to find historically.

459

Our question is, are your energies

better spent thinking through portfolio

460

construction and saying, let me just

take the passive beta, and then try

461

to stack things on top that we simply

have a higher conviction that that

462

combination of whatever we stack

is just going to outperform cash.

463

Doesn't even have to be alpha, right?

464

Your portfolio is truly indifferent

between what is alpha and what

465

is a new novel beta that you've

never had exposure to before.

466

Your portfolio is not going

to know the difference.

467

And so stacking new novel betas.

468

Can be just as, if not more powerful than

spending your energies looking for manager

469

selection and stock selection outbound.

470

And so that is the question

that we leave everyone with.

471

We know where we sit, right?

472

We clearly sit on the side that we

think stacking is a profoundly powerful

473

concept and should be utilized by all.

474

Um, and we think RSSB is the tool

that really unlocks the ability for

475

people to stack whatever they want.

476

So with that, Rod,

477

Rodrigo Gordillo: questions?

478

Great stuff.

479

Great job, Corey.

480

yeah, some questions here about

the construction of the ETF itself.

481

Uh, can you talk a little bit

about the longer average duration

482

of the bonds in RSSB versus AG?

483

RSSB's duration is longer than AG, right?

484

Um, so what's rationally

behind the choice?

485

Corey Hoffstein: Yeah, so we go with

a very simple futures ladder here.

486

Um, when you go and look at AG.

487

The composition of ag includes a lot

of mortgage backed securities, which

488

have, right, an embedded optionality

in them that makes the duration sort

489

of, uh, change quickly, depending

on how that option gets triggered.

490

So we opted for a very simple 25 percent

2 year, 5 year, 10 year long bond ladder.

491

the duration, I believe, is slightly

higher than where it is Ag today, but

492

not, not meaningfully, not, not several

points higher, probably within a, I

493

think it's within, uh, half a point.

494

So, it is going to be a little bit

different, but we do find that that

495

ladder, that equal weight ladder,

actually has done a pretty good job

496

approximating Ag without doing anything

complicated, just doing equal weight

497

2, 5, 10, and long bond approximating

Ag, over the last 15 20 years.

498

And a better job when you get

out of Ag and look at just a

499

diversified treasury bucket.

500

So if you look at GOVT, for example, which

is an index of all the US treasuries,

501

it actually gets you pretty darn close.

502

The reality is you can use a

lot more complicated methods.

503

Um, but when you look under ag, right,

you have durations and optionality

504

and, and credit risks that just can't

be captured with four simple key, key

505

duration points, uh, with futures.

506

And so what we opted for was rather

than adding a tremendous amount of model

507

risk and trying to match the duration

and curvature and convexity perfectly,

508

sticking with the simple ladder seemed

to be a, uh, very robust approach.

509

Rodrigo Gordillo: Perfect.

510

Now, one question here is, wouldn't

it be more reasonable to have

511

launched with 50 percent global

equities, 50 percent global bonds,

512

instead of having an active bet on U.

513

S.

514

bonds?

515

Why did we make that design decision?

516

Corey Hoffstein: Yeah, so I can

answer that theoretically and

517

I can answer that practically.

518

Theoretically, When you talk about

going with global bonds, you have to

519

ask the question of whether you're

going to currency hedge those bonds.

520

Because if you don't currency

hedge those bonds, you are taking

521

much more of a currency bet than

you are an international bond bet.

522

The currencies tend to have much

more volatility than the bonds.

523

So you have to consider whether you're

going to currency hedge that or not.

524

And that's, that's not a

trivial design question.

525

Practically, when I talk about being a U.

526

S.

527

allocator, U.

528

S.

529

investors really predominantly

only invest in U.

530

S.

531

bonds.

532

And so when we talk about,

unfortunately, just being a U.

533

S.

534

based firm, predominantly selling to U.

535

S.

536

based allocators, the beta

they need to be replicated in a

537

structure like RSSB tends to be U.

538

S.

539

bonds, not global bonds.

540

Uh, I would say 99 percent of the

portfolios I evaluate includes

541

zero international bond exposure.

542

Rodrigo Gordillo: I agree with that.

543

Corey, so what's one of the other

questions is what is kind of the stacking

544

advantages or disadvantages of using

RSSB versus some of our other stacks?

545

maybe we can talk about the size of

stacking available between one and

546

the other, and then the obvious.

547

Corey Hoffstein: Yeah, so RSSB is

going to give you the flexibility

548

to stack whatever you want.

549

So that is the advantage to RSSB, right?

550

Um, you can, whether you like the

way we do alts or not, or maybe we,

551

there's an alternative strategy that

we don't offer yet that you want to

552

include, RSSB allows you to do it.

553

But the downside to RSSB is the

maximum stack you can create

554

in your portfolio is 50%.

555

And that assumes you put 50 percent

of your portfolio into RSSB.

556

Okay.

557

which then assumes you want a 50 50

base and then you're doing a 50 50

558

plus up to 50 percent alternatives.

559

So there's a there's an inherent limit

as to how much you can stack with RSSB

560

because you're only getting two dollars

of exposure for every dollar you invest.

561

Whereas the other products in our suite

which are pre stacked alternatives are

562

giving you a dollar of either stocks or

bonds depending on the ETF plus a dollar

563

of that alternative and so you can in

theory have up to a 100 percent stack.

564

The trade off is being, you are accepting

our approach to doing those alternatives.

565

Um, and I understand that there

may be alternatives that we don't

566

offer yet that you may want, or you

may prefer another, uh, manager's

567

approach to certain alternatives.

568

And so the trade off is really

the flexibility versus how much

569

of a stack size you can create.

570

Rodrigo Gordillo: Any

thoughts on a line item risk?

571

Corey Hoffstein: Yeah, this

is one that comes up a lot.

572

This is sort of the practical

reality of investing.

573

What we find is for most people, a

stack of 10 percent isn't going to

574

move the needle in their portfolio.

575

They sort of need a stack of about 20

percent and 20 percent of things that

576

are, you know, a vol of, of, 10%, right?

577

So you're talking 20 percent

of managed futures and gold

578

and all that sort of stuff.

579

but if you were to do all that

with just a single fund, right?

580

Let's say you were to buy our

RSST fund, which is every dollar

581

you give us a dollar of U.

582

S.

583

equity plus a dollar of managed futures.

584

That fund has a volatility of 19%.

585

And so if you put 20 percent into

that, it's just going to stick out to

586

your stakeholders or end investors,

hopefully both in a good way, right?

587

And, you know, from time to time,

it's probably going to have a

588

higher average per year drawdown.

589

We hope the max drawdown is less than

just something like equities, but we

590

think on average it's just higher vol.

591

It's higher average annual drawdown.

592

And so that product is going to stick out.

593

And so what we advocate for is actually,

if you're going to take this stacked

594

approach, you really probably don't

want any individual product to be

595

more than five, maybe at most 10%.

596

Because otherwise it's going to

start to stick out in your quarterly

597

reviews and going to create that

behavioral friction as well.

598

And so there's a trade off here of,

you know, how do you achieve the

599

stack size you want versus how many,

you know, products do you need to mix

600

and match to make sure that none of

them stand out too much in doing so.

601

Rodrigo Gordillo: And can I

add something there as well?

602

I think one of the key considerations

as you assess whether you want a

603

standalone alternative as part of your

RSSB plus alternative portfolio versus

604

a prepackaged, you know, stocks plus

alternative in a single solution, there's

605

also the flip side of that, right,

Corey, from a behavioral perspective,

606

where the line item risk, um, when

you're seeing a 20 percent allocation

607

of a strategy, as we showed earlier

608

Versus one that's prepackaged

that makes the returns of the S&

609

P and zero returns on the stack.

610

You know, there's also some play there

in terms of whether, you know, line

611

item risk is important to you and your

clients, um, to consider with all of

612

these types of stacking alternatives.

613

All right, I think we're

at the top of the hour now.

614

Uh, I'd like to thank you, Corey,

for a fantastic presentation.

615

You're already getting a lot of

comments here, uh, saying that it was an

616

outstanding presentation, and I agree.

617

For everybody here that, um, that

wants to learn more about what we're

618

doing, The return Stack is all about.

619

Please do reach out to

us, uh, on the website.

620

You go to return stack.com/contact

us and you will be able to connect

621

with somebody from the team.

622

We are active participants

with our investor community and

623

help create better portfolios.

624

So if you want to

consultation, 50 minute chat.

625

We're available there for you on, uh, for

any advisor that wants to, to reach out.

626

And, um, as Corey alluded to some

of the other areas of education, if

627

you have a YouTube channel, Return

Stacked or YouTube channel, if you

628

look that up, we have the Get Stacked

Investment Podcast on returnstacked.

629

com.

630

If you go to the insights page,

we have a wide variety of articles

631

that really answer all the

questions that we've been asked.

632

We've tried to be thoughtful

about answering that.

633

We'll also be publishing a couple of

new, um, articles in the next couple

634

of weeks based on some of the new

stacks that are coming out, uh, that

635

I think people would find useful.

636

And, uh, finally we have a section

and we have the model portfolio

637

section and the tools base, the

section for advisors and that's free.

638

You just need to sign up.

639

And we need to verify that

you're an advisor and within 24

640

hours, you'll get access to it.

641

And again, happy to help you understand

all those, understand the tools and

642

see how those things could help.

643

Any parting thoughts?

644

Anything else you want

to talk about, Corey?

645

Corey Hoffstein: No, thank you everyone

for tuning in, especially on the

646

East Coast during your lunch hour.

647

We appreciate you.

648

And if you have any questions,

uh, as Rod said, there's a variety

649

of ways you can contact us.

650

So please reach out.

651

Rodrigo Gordillo: Thanks everybody.