Home › blogs › The iM-Inflation Attuned Multi-Model Market Timer

The iM-Inflation Attuned Multi-Model Market Timer

  • Investment risk can be reduced by a multi-model market timer whose many components use different and uncorrelated financial and economic data, including inflation.
  • This model seeks to determine effective asset allocation for risk-on and risk-off periods for equities considering the effect of inflation.
  • Four risk scenarios are possible: risk-on & normal-inflation, risk-on & high-inflation, risk-off & normal-inflation, and risk-off & high-inflation. Different ETF groups apply to each risk scenario.
  • From 2000 to 2022, switching accordingly between risk-related ETF groups would have produced an annualized return of about 39% versus 6.5% for buy and hold SPY.

Basic risk-on and risk-off signals for equities

Previously described market timing models (listed in Appendix-1) are used to determine the basic risk-on and risk-off periods for equities, similarly to what was described in the iM-Multi-Model Market Timer article.

For this model signals for basic risk-on situations arise when either

  • the Inflation Lower Timer plus the Consumer Sentiment Timer, or
  • the Cyclically Adjusted Risk Premium Timer, or
  • the SuperTimer indicate this, otherwise

if none of the above three options are true basic risk-off periods are indicated.

Inflation considerations

During risk-on and risk-off periods for equities one should consider inflation risk as well. Rising inflation means that interest rates are increasing and the discounted value of future cash flows from stocks is driven down, lowering equity prices.

Higher inflation, or an inverted yield curve signal a higher risk environment for equities.

We define rising inflation with data from the University of Michigan Inflation Expectation© series (MICH) and the 6-month moving average of the inflation rate as discussed in Evaluating Popular Asset Classes For Inflation Protection.

Typically, the Federal Funds Rate is near a high when the yield curve inverts, indicating the Federal Reserve’s activity in combating high inflation. An inverted yield curve signifies that economic activity is near the end of the expansion phase of a business cycle and that a high probability of an oncoming recession exists.

For this model “high-inflation” is defined when the value of MICH is greater than 3.1% and the 6-month moving average of the inflation rate is greater than 2.9%, or the yield curve is near inversion or inverted as indicated by the Yield Curve Timer, all data point-in-time. When “high-inflation” is not present then “normal-inflation” is assumed.

Risk environments and risk-related asset allocation

The following ETFs were used:

  1. Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP)
  2. Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund (VGT)
  3. Vanguard Real Estate Index Fund (VNQ)
  4. Invesco Dynamic Energy Exploration & Production ETF (PXE)
  5. ProShares Short Russell2000 (RWM)
  6. iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT)
  7. ProShares Short S&P500 (SH)
  8. ProShares Short QQQ (PSQ)
  9. Vanguard Mid-Cap Value Index Fund (VOE) and Invesco DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund (DBC) as proxies for VGT and PXE prior to their inception dates, respectively.

The four possible risk environments and corresponding risk-related ETF groups are:

  1. risk-on & normal-inflation: RSP & VGT
  2. risk-on & high-inflation: VNQ & PXE
  3. risk-off & normal-inflation: RWM & TLT
  4. risk-off & high-inflation: SH & PSQ

Note that the model never holds any leveraged ETFs.

Performance of the Inflation Attuned Multi-Model Market Timer

The model was backtested using the online portfolio simulation platform Portfolio 123, which also provides extended price data for ETFs prior to their inception dates calculated from their proxies. Closing prices and trading costs of 0.05% of each trade amount were assumed in the backtest.

The simulated performance of the model is shown in Figure-1 below. The red graph represents the performance of the model from Jan 3, 2000 to May 11, 2022 (22+ years) and the blue graph, which resembles a horizontal line, shows the performance of benchmark SPY.

The simulation shows an annualized return of 39% with a maximum drawdown of -22% and only 169 realized trades (a listing of realized trades is in the Appendix-2). An initial investment of $100,000 would have grown to $160-million if one could have followed this model from January 2000 onwards. Total trading costs would have been $850,000.

width="640"/(click to enlarge)

Risk Measurements

The risk statistics for the model relative to the benchmark ETF (SPY) show a positive alpha of 36%, indicating that this strategy would have outperformed its risk-adjusted benchmark return on average by 36% per year since January 2000. Additionally, the Standard Deviation for this model’s monthly returns is similar to that of SPY, indicating similar volatility and demonstrating that the model’s investment strategy should be a better alternative to buy-and-hold SPY over the longer term.

Conclusion

From the analysis it would appear that the Inflation Attuned Multi-Model Market Timer could profitably be used to switch between the specified ETF groups according to the signaled risk situation. This model’s calendar year returns ranged from a minimum of 11% in 2018 to a maximum of 152% in 2008. The model shows excess returns over benchmark SPY for each year, and there would never have been a year with negative returns.

From Jan 3 to May 11, 2022 the model shows a gain of 26% versus a loss of 17% for SPY.

At iMarketSignals we will report weekly the status of this timer. Gold subscription would be required.  The last trade, switching from risk-on & high-inflation to risk-off & high-inflation occurred on 5/2/2022, and current holdings are therefore SH and PSQ since then.

Although this model performed extremely well over 22 years, there is no guarantee that it will perform well in the future.

Appendix-1

Market timing models used:

  1. Consumer Sentiment Timer : Investment in equities is signaled when the 15-week return of the discretionary sector outperforms the 15-week return of the staples sector.
  2. Cyclically Adjusted_RiskPremium Timer : An alternative measure of risk is the Cyclically Adjusted Risk Premium (CARP), defined as the inverse of the Shiller CAPE Ratio (CAPE) in percent minus the 10-year note yield. The value of the CARP and directional trend of the CAPE can be used to profitably time investments in risk-on and risk-off assets.
  3. Composite Market Timer : An entry for the stock market is signaled when the combined weight of its six component models is equal to, or greater than 50%. This model has the greatest weight in the SuperTimer.
  4. SuperTimer : A weekly Stock Market Confidence Level (SMC level) is obtained by considering the percentage allocated to each of its 15 component timer model and their weight in the system. Positive stock market investment climates are indicated by SMC levels greater than 50%.
  5. Inflation Lower Timer : Normally equities perform better when inflation is lower.
  6. Yield Curve Timer: The timing rules are based on the state of yield curve and on the trend of the Effective Federal Funds Rate.

Appendix-2

Realized trades:

Trade # Symbol Open Close Days Pct Return
169 PXE 9/7/2021 5/2/2022 237 68.90%
168 VNQ 9/7/2021 5/2/2022 237 -7.60%
167 VGT 4/13/2020 9/7/2021 512 90.10%
166 RSP 4/13/2020 9/7/2021 512 72.20%
165 VGT 9/23/2019 3/2/2020 161 14.20%
164 RSP 9/23/2019 3/2/2020 161 -1.10%
163 PXE 9/9/2019 9/23/2019 14 2.20%
162 VNQ 9/9/2019 9/23/2019 14 0.50%
161 VGT 1/7/2019 9/9/2019 245 29.40%
160 RSP 1/7/2019 9/9/2019 245 15.50%
159 TLT 12/10/2018 1/7/2019 28 1.20%
158 RWM 12/31/2018 1/7/2019 7 -4.30%
157 RWM 12/10/2018 12/24/2018 14 13.20%
156 VGT 2/1/2016 12/10/2018 1043 72.00%
155 RSP 2/1/2016 12/10/2018 1043 34.20%
154 RWM 12/7/2015 2/1/2016 56 11.40%
153 TLT 12/7/2015 2/1/2016 56 3.90%
152 VGT 10/5/2015 12/7/2015 63 8.30%
151 RSP 10/5/2015 12/7/2015 63 2.50%
150 TLT 9/28/2015 10/5/2015 7 -0.70%
149 RWM 9/28/2015 10/5/2015 7 -4.60%
148 VGT 8/24/2015 9/28/2015 35 1.60%
147 RSP 8/24/2015 9/28/2015 35 -2.00%
146 RWM 7/6/2015 8/24/2015 49 11.20%
145 TLT 7/6/2015 8/24/2015 49 6.80%
144 RSP 7/2/2012 7/6/2015 1099 60.80%
143 VGT 7/2/2012 7/6/2015 1099 54.10%
142 VNQ 3/5/2012 7/2/2012 119 6.80%
141 PXE 3/5/2012 7/2/2012 119 -9.80%
140 VGT 2/6/2012 3/5/2012 28 3.00%
139 RSP 2/6/2012 3/5/2012 28 0.40%
138 PXE 10/3/2011 2/6/2012 126 39.40%
137 VNQ 10/3/2011 2/6/2012 126 30.10%
136 VGT 9/6/2011 10/3/2011 27 -2.70%
135 RSP 9/6/2011 10/3/2011 27 -8.30%
134 RSP 8/8/2011 8/15/2011 7 8.80%
133 VGT 8/8/2011 8/15/2011 7 7.70%
132 RWM 6/13/2011 8/8/2011 56 16.30%
131 TLT 6/13/2011 8/8/2011 56 9.10%
130 RSP 6/14/2010 6/13/2011 364 19.60%
129 VGT 6/14/2010 6/13/2011 364 15.10%
128 RWM 5/3/2010 6/7/2010 35 15.90%
127 TLT 5/3/2010 6/7/2010 35 7.40%
126 RSP 2/8/2010 5/3/2010 84 17.50%
125 VGT 2/8/2010 5/3/2010 84 15.20%
124 RWM 1/4/2010 2/8/2010 35 8.40%
123 TLT 1/4/2010 2/8/2010 35 2.40%
122 RSP 3/23/2009 1/4/2010 287 56.60%
121 VGT 3/23/2009 1/4/2010 287 56.50%
120 VGT 1/5/2009 2/23/2009 49 -12.20%
119 RSP 1/5/2009 2/23/2009 49 -21.40%
118 PXE 12/15/2008 1/5/2009 21 16.30%
117 VNQ 12/15/2008 1/5/2009 21 5.10%
116 VNQ 12/1/2008 12/8/2008 7 40.50%
115 PXE 12/1/2008 12/8/2008 7 -0.10%
114 PSQ 9/2/2008 11/3/2008 62 27.00%
113 SH 9/2/2008 11/3/2008 62 21.50%
112 VNQ 8/4/2008 9/2/2008 29 4.40%
111 PXE 8/4/2008 9/2/2008 29 -1.00%
110 SH 6/2/2008 8/4/2008 63 9.90%
109 PSQ 6/2/2008 8/4/2008 63 9.80%
108 PXE 3/17/2008 6/2/2008 77 28.40%
107 VNQ 3/17/2008 6/2/2008 77 9.60%
106 SH 2/4/2008 3/17/2008 42 7.30%
105 PSQ 2/4/2008 3/17/2008 42 7.10%
104 TLT 10/15/2007 2/4/2008 112 2.00%
103 RWM 1/28/2008 2/4/2008 7 -3.10%
102 RWM 10/15/2007 1/22/2008 99 22.40%
101 VGT 9/10/2007 10/15/2007 35 7.60%
100 RSP 9/10/2007 10/15/2007 35 5.90%
99 RWM 7/23/2007 9/10/2007 49 8.70%
98 TLT 7/23/2007 9/10/2007 49 5.90%
97 VGT 6/4/2007 7/23/2007 49 4.90%
96 RSP 6/4/2007 7/23/2007 49 -1.40%
95 PXE 5/14/2007 6/4/2007 21 8.20%
94 VNQ 5/14/2007 6/4/2007 21 0.60%
93 VGT 2/5/2007 5/14/2007 98 5.10%
92 RSP 2/5/2007 5/14/2007 98 4.70%
91 VNQ 12/26/2006 2/5/2007 41 11.00%
90 PXE 12/26/2006 2/5/2007 41 0.80%
89 RSP 12/11/2006 12/26/2006 15 -0.70%
88 VGT 12/11/2006 12/26/2006 15 -1.50%
87 PXE 10/9/2006 12/11/2006 63 15.90%
86 VNQ 10/9/2006 12/11/2006 63 7.80%
85 SH 9/5/2006 10/9/2006 34 -2.30%
84 PSQ 9/5/2006 10/9/2006 34 -4.90%
83 VNQ 7/3/2006 9/5/2006 64 5.90%
82 PXE 7/3/2006 9/5/2006 64 0.50%
81 PSQ 6/26/2006 7/3/2006 7 -1.80%
80 SH 6/5/2006 7/3/2006 28 -0.80%
79 TLT 5/22/2006 6/5/2006 14 0.00%
78 RWM 5/22/2006 6/5/2006 14 -0.50%
77 RSP 2/6/2006 5/22/2006 105 -0.40%
76 VGT 2/6/2006 5/22/2006 105 -4.60%
75 PXE 11/7/2005 2/6/2006 91 19.00%
74 VNQ 11/7/2005 2/6/2006 91 10.10%
73 VGT 9/6/2005 11/7/2005 62 1.60%
72 RSP 9/6/2005 11/7/2005 62 -1.50%
71 DBC 5/2/2005 9/6/2005 127 23.00%
70 VNQ 5/2/2005 9/6/2005 127 13.10%
69 VGT 4/18/2005 5/2/2005 14 1.40%
68 RSP 4/18/2005 5/2/2005 14 1.10%
67 RWM 2/28/2005 4/18/2005 49 16.20%
66 TLT 2/28/2005 4/18/2005 49 1.00%
65 RSP 10/25/2004 2/28/2005 126 11.90%
64 VGT 10/25/2004 2/28/2005 126 4.30%
63 TLT 9/13/2004 10/25/2004 42 2.70%
62 RWM 9/13/2004 10/25/2004 42 -0.60%
61 RSP 8/9/2004 9/13/2004 35 6.30%
60 VGT 8/9/2004 9/13/2004 35 5.80%
59 RWM 6/28/2004 8/9/2004 42 25.00%
58 TLT 6/28/2004 8/9/2004 42 4.60%
57 RSP 5/24/2004 6/28/2004 35 4.60%
56 VGT 5/24/2004 6/28/2004 35 4.10%
55 RWM 4/19/2004 5/24/2004 35 11.50%
54 TLT 4/19/2004 5/24/2004 35 -2.90%
53 RSP 9/22/2003 4/19/2004 210 15.60%
52 VGT 2/2/2004 4/19/2004 77 -7.30%
51 VOE 9/22/2003 2/2/2004 133 12.20%
50 TLT 9/2/2003 9/22/2003 20 3.40%
49 RWM 9/2/2003 9/22/2003 20 -3.00%
48 RSP 3/3/2003 9/2/2003 183 33.20%
47 VOE 3/3/2003 9/2/2003 183 30.20%
46 RWM 11/25/2002 3/3/2003 98 22.30%
45 TLT 11/25/2002 3/3/2003 98 5.00%
44 RSP 10/14/2002 11/25/2002 42 18.20%
43 VOE 10/14/2002 11/25/2002 42 10.20%
42 TLT 4/1/2002 10/7/2002 189 13.40%
41 RWM 8/12/2002 9/23/2002 42 13.40%
40 RWM 4/1/2002 7/15/2002 105 45.50%
39 VOE 3/18/2002 4/1/2002 14 -0.20%
38 RSP 3/18/2002 4/1/2002 14 -0.50%
37 TLT 3/4/2002 3/18/2002 14 -2.50%
36 RWM 3/4/2002 3/18/2002 14 -6.10%
35 VOE 12/24/2001 3/4/2002 70 5.10%
34 RSP 12/24/2001 3/4/2002 70 4.40%
33 RWM 10/8/2001 12/24/2001 77 -30.20%
32 TLT 8/20/2001 12/24/2001 126 -1.20%
31 RWM 9/17/2001 9/24/2001 7 11.00%
30 RWM 8/20/2001 9/10/2001 21 17.30%
29 VOE 8/6/2001 8/20/2001 14 -1.80%
28 RSP 8/6/2001 8/20/2001 14 -2.00%
27 SH 7/2/2001 8/6/2001 35 2.70%
26 TLT 5/7/2001 7/2/2001 56 0.10%
25 RWM 5/7/2001 7/2/2001 56 -5.10%
24 VOE 4/23/2001 5/7/2001 14 5.40%
23 RSP 4/23/2001 5/7/2001 14 3.40%
22 RWM 4/2/2001 4/23/2001 21 -10.60%
21 TLT 1/16/2001 4/23/2001 97 -1.80%
20 RWM 1/16/2001 3/19/2001 62 17.10%
19 SH 11/27/2000 1/16/2001 50 1.10%
18 RWM 11/6/2000 11/27/2000 21 12.80%
17 TLT 11/6/2000 11/27/2000 21 2.60%
16 SH 10/30/2000 11/6/2000 7 -2.40%
15 TLT 10/16/2000 10/30/2000 14 0.90%
14 RWM 10/16/2000 10/30/2000 14 -1.10%
13 SH 10/2/2000 10/16/2000 14 4.30%
12 RWM 9/18/2000 10/2/2000 14 1.40%
11 TLT 9/18/2000 10/2/2000 14 0.40%
10 SH 8/28/2000 9/18/2000 21 4.90%
9 TLT 7/3/2000 8/28/2000 56 2.80%
8 RWM 7/3/2000 8/28/2000 56 -2.00%
7 SH 6/19/2000 7/3/2000 14 1.10%
6 VNQ 6/5/2000 6/19/2000 14 3.10%
5 DBC 6/5/2000 6/19/2000 14 0.00%
4 VOE 4/17/2000 6/5/2000 49 11.20%
3 RSP 4/17/2000 6/5/2000 49 7.60%
2 TLT 1/3/2000 4/17/2000 105 8.50%
1 RWM 1/3/2000 4/17/2000 105 6.90%

Note that Pct Return does not include dividends.

 

 

Posted in blogs, featured
51 comments on “The iM-Inflation Attuned Multi-Model Market Timer”
  1. yossarian says:
    May 13, 2022 at 6:12 pm

    Fascinating, thank you. I’ll be tuning in weekly.

  2. yossarian says:
    May 14, 2022 at 4:33 pm

    Another aspect that jumps out is that there are only three trades of 169 in 22+ years that would trigger a -10% stop loss safeguard.

  3. maspap says:
    May 16, 2022 at 9:47 am

    Hi, you reported -22% as max drawdown but trades 33/38 show greater losses.
    By the way do you mind adding yearly returns as you always did before.
    Thank you.

    • TDCARLSON says:
      May 16, 2022 at 2:55 pm

      As I understand it trade 33 (and all the trades) are only 50% of the portfolio in general, so 22% drawdown seems reasonable.

      Tom C

    • geovrba says:
      Jun 30, 2022 at 5:29 pm

      Return (%) *** Model *** Benchmark *** Excess
      2000 *** 43.43 *** -9.74 *** 53.17
      2001 *** 17.65 *** -11.76 *** 29.41
      2002 *** 69.12 *** -21.58 *** 90.7
      2003 *** 56.35 *** 28.18 *** 28.17
      2004 *** 50.14 *** 10.7 *** 39.44
      2005 *** 33.98 *** 4.83 *** 29.15
      2006 *** 17.76 *** 15.85 *** 1.91
      2007 *** 45.78 *** 5.15 *** 40.64
      2008 *** 151.9 *** -36.79 *** 188.69
      2009 *** 32.18 *** 26.35 *** 5.83
      2010 *** 64.63 *** 15.06 *** 49.57
      2011 *** 43.14 *** 1.89 *** 41.24
      2012 *** 17.42 *** 15.99 *** 1.43
      2013 *** 32.86 *** 32.31 *** 0.55
      2014 *** 15.58 *** 13.46 *** 2.12
      2015 *** 14.79 *** 1.23 *** 13.56
      2016 *** 29.39 *** 12 *** 17.39
      2017 *** 27.26 *** 21.71 *** 5.55
      2018 *** 10.95 *** -4.57 *** 15.52
      2019 *** 38.33 *** 31.22 *** 7.11
      2020 *** 46.02 *** 18.33 *** 27.69
      2021 *** 37.45 *** 28.73 *** 8.72
      2022 *** 27.62 *** -19.33 *** 46.95
      to 06/30/22

  4. RobertFairchild says:
    May 18, 2022 at 5:57 pm

    Hi,
    Perhaps I’m mistaken but it appears that the model sometimes goes to a partial cash position.
    For instance trades 155-159:
    – Trades 156 & 156 close on 12/10/2018 and open into trades 157 & 159.
    – Trade 157 appears to close on 12/24, but doesn’t open into Trade 158 until 12/31/2018.
    – Trades 158 & 159 close on 1/7/2019
    So there was a period from 12/24 -> 12/31 with a %50 cash allocation.
    12/24/2018 was an early close, so trading should have been possible.

    • bmatkins44 says:
      May 19, 2022 at 1:14 pm

      I also have this same question. The most glaring spot to me is between trades 164 and 165 (which were closed on 3/2/20) and 166 and 167 (which were opened on 4/13/20). Right in the middle of the COVID meltdown and start of the bounce back.

      • geovrba says:
        Jun 30, 2022 at 4:39 pm

        The model can only be in Risk-On when the drawdown over 25 days of benchmark SPY is better than -12% x (a moving average factor). So there are a few periods when it is out of Risk-On.

  5. GM says:
    May 19, 2022 at 7:21 am

    why not consider GOLD etf as one of the asset allocation?

  6. GM says:
    May 19, 2022 at 7:29 am

    After reading this article, would you consider an updated version?

    https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp500-wells-fargo-heres-the-best-asset-to-own-during-inflation/

    • geovrba says:
      Jun 30, 2022 at 4:35 pm

      The article from Wells Fargo: Here’s The Best Asset To Own When Inflation Strikes lists Oil (USO) and Emerging Markets (VWO) as the two best performers during periods of inflation post 2000.

      We found that for risk-on periods during inflationary times the Dynamic Energy Exploration & Production ETF (PXE) does better than USO and the Real Estate ETF (VNQ) also is also a better choice than VWO.

  7. Kyatoro says:
    May 19, 2022 at 11:57 am

    When will this model be available?

  8. Oakbrook says:
    May 22, 2022 at 1:46 pm

    The chart states that the model is “rebalanced every week”. Does that mean that the 2 positions are balanced on a dollar basis when the ETF’s do not change?

    • geovrba says:
      Jun 30, 2022 at 4:07 pm

      This model sets Min Rebalance Transaction to 50.00% which eliminates all rebalancing transactions.

      Thus the weights are set only at the time when new buys occur (equal weight). Weighting for a position can become higher or lower than 50% depending on the relative performance of the two ETFs over time.

  9. Kyatoro says:
    May 29, 2022 at 2:46 pm

    How come sometimes there are no positions for a while?

    An an example, we can see that on 02/23/2008 we sell RSP/VGT and we buy them again only on 3/23/2008. Is there a reason to explain why we were 1 month without any position? Is there a rule to sell and stay cash?

    Thank you.

    • geovrba says:
      Jun 29, 2022 at 10:36 pm

      The model can only be in Risk-On when the drawdown over 25 days of benchmark SPY is better than -12% x (moving average factor). So there are a few periods when it is out of Risk-On.

  10. TedWrinch says:
    May 29, 2022 at 8:58 pm

    Thanks, Anton, this strategy is a significant improvement over it’s predecessor for high inflation environments like now. From my calculation, the previous strategy lost -5% from September to now, when the market went into reverse, whereas this strategy gained 30%, the difference being due to including the energy and property ETFs. From UK, I don’t have access to these ETFS so I use equivalents, which seems to work as well.

    • Lucror1 says:
      Jun 28, 2022 at 9:33 am

      Hi Ted,

      I was just wondering which UK equivalent ETFs you use? I am also based in the UK and I can’t seem to find an equivalent of some of the above ETFs (e.g. PSQ).

      Any help would be appreciated.

      Cheers

      • TedWrinch says:
        Oct 27, 2022 at 9:15 am

        Sorry for the delay, apparently no e-mail notifications here. I use XSPS.L, XSPS.L risk-off, high inflation; XSD2.L, VVUKLD risk-off, low inflation; ENCG.L, ENCG.L risk-on, high inflation; iGUS.L, EQQQ.L risk-on, low inflation.

  11. bmatkins44 says:
    Jun 16, 2022 at 8:26 pm

    Has any one had their questions answered, especially regarding missing dates? As a paying customer, I expect better service and at least some type of response.

  12. Golar says:
    Jun 27, 2022 at 3:21 pm

    I`m new to this website so maybe some members can explain the current holdings in the Multi-Model.

    On 5-2-22 SH was bought then 50% of that position was sold on the same date.Also on 5-2 PSQ was bought.

    So, are the current holdings 25% cash, 25% SH and 50 % PSQ ?. If this is correct was the 50% SH position held for 2 weeks and then reduced to a 25% position per the holding rule ?

    Anyone that can help with this is much appreciated

    • geovrba says:
      Jun 29, 2022 at 10:26 pm

      Current holdings are:
      PSQ 50%
      SH 50%

      On 5/2/2022 the model sold PXE and VNQ.
      On 5/2/2022 the model bought PSQ and SH, each having a weight of 50%.

      Our report states that on 5/2/2022:
      Buy SH and sell 50% SH = Buy 50% SH
      Buy 50% PSQ

  13. Golar says:
    Jul 1, 2022 at 3:13 pm

    Thank You for the clarification

  14. Longtermview says:
    Oct 17, 2022 at 4:00 pm

    Hi Georg and Anton, I just want to check if this model here is different from the model that was recently added to P123 named: 12 Russell 3000 stocks – Inflation Attuned?

    Thank you.

    • geovrba says:
      Oct 17, 2022 at 6:36 pm

      Yes, it is totally different.
      The model on P123 is a 12-stock model hedged with SH.
      The Inflation Attuned Market Timer is an ETF model, it never holds individual stocks.

  15. jdog007 says:
    Dec 14, 2022 at 8:53 pm

    Hi Georg and Anton,
    Just checking when this model will be tracked weekly with detailed performance metrics (such as recent trades and performance charts) like the other models
    Thanks
    James

  16. ovacikar says:
    Dec 22, 2022 at 4:15 pm

    For non-retirement account, What can I substitute PXE with? DO not like owning Real estate investments, due to delayed tax reporting complications

  17. jdog007 says:
    Dec 29, 2022 at 3:10 am

    Hi Georg and Anton
    It it possible to please backtest this model in a 50/50 split with the QQQ model to show all the normal performance and risk management stats
    Thanks again for your help
    Much appreciated
    James

    • ovacikar says:
      Jan 4, 2023 at 5:18 pm

      Don’t understand the question, this model does not hold QQQ, PSQ shorts QQQ (meaning QQQ is expected to fall)

      • jdog007 says:
        Jan 4, 2023 at 11:19 pm

        Hi, I’m asking for a backtest on a portfolio that holds 50% of this inflation strategy, and 50% of the separate iM QQQ strategy
        Thanks
        James

        • geovrba says:
          Jan 6, 2023 at 7:54 pm

          jdog007
          Backtest from 2016 for this combination 50:50

          Period 01/01/16 – 01/05/23
          Benchmark S&P 500 (SPY:USA)

          Quick Stats as of 1/5/2023
          Total Return 514.76%
          Benchmark Return 111.06%
          Active Return 403.70%
          Annualized Return 29.54%
          Max Drawdown -21.58%
          Benchmark Max Drawdown -33.72%
          Sharpe Ratio 1.68
          Correlation with S&P 500 (SPY:USA) 0.80

          Performance by Calendar Year
          Return (%) … Model … SPY
          2016 … 25.83 … 12
          2017 … 36.19 … 21.71
          2018 … 5.02 … -4.57
          2019 … 59.87 … 31.22
          2020 … 47.29 … 18.33
          2021 … 45.99 … 28.73
          2022 … 0.01 … -18.18

  18. SQN614 says:
    Mar 3, 2023 at 2:41 am

    Hi Georg and Anton,

    Having read the model description carefully, I’m not understanding why the model is currently in ‘risk-on’, based on the PXE/VNQ holdings.

    iM-SMC = 50% (Down-Market)
    CARP is “Risk OFF”:

    “For this model signals for basic risk-on situations arise when either
    the Inflation Lower Timer plus the Consumer Sentiment Timer, or
    the Cyclically Adjusted Risk Premium Timer, or
    the SuperTimer indicate this, otherwise
    if none of the above three options are true basic risk-off periods are indicated.”

  19. geovrba says:
    Mar 3, 2023 at 2:42 pm

    Both, the Inflation Lower Timer and the Consumer Sentiment Timer are signalling “risk-on”. That is why the model is currently holding PXE and VNQ.

  20. babi1983 says:
    Mar 5, 2023 at 9:27 pm

    loving your site and models, but if im building on it… and u suddenly stop?,,, then what i will do with my portfolio, mybe you consider to automate it all so people chould forever use your models and buy them ?

    • geovrba says:
      Mar 5, 2023 at 9:50 pm

      We could run them as subscription models on Portfolio 123. They are currently rethinking their membership tiers and pricing to attract more people to easily use the site. Let’s see how this develops.

      • SQN614 says:
        Mar 13, 2023 at 2:39 am

        I would be very interested in this. Like @babi1983, I have the same concerns about the long-term of this site.

        Additionally, while I am interested in this particular model, it is very difficult to justify $800/yr subscription given the current size of my portfolio available to dedicate to this particular strategy. The other aspects of the gold subscription are of no interest to me at this time.

      • SQN614 says:
        Jun 15, 2023 at 6:36 pm

        Hi George. Any update on potential of running subs through Portfolio 123?

        • babi1983 says:
          Jul 29, 2023 at 3:31 pm

          same here, the models seems amazing but we need also to run backtest ourselfs, and the site here is very outdates, this super importent work must be more “out there” and more accssible, whould pay for sure also 1000$ a month for this type of automations and models which are accssble to back test

  21. babi1983 says:
    Jul 25, 2023 at 5:44 pm

    cant we automate it into a model who give signal ? as what will happen if god forbid you will close the service due to some reason?

  22. legend says:
    Sep 19, 2023 at 2:01 am

    Why pxe/vnq vs dbc or gnr or gld? The high inflation growth quadrant has multiple options; is there analysis to prove non curve fit data against pxe/vnq for other options?

  23. legend says:
    Oct 4, 2023 at 2:53 am

    Do you have an updated out-of-sample chart of Figure 1 since 5/9/22?

  24. legend says:
    Oct 22, 2023 at 1:47 am

    Having followed this signal since it was originally posted it seems like another case of curve fitting… where in sample it looks amazing, and out of sample is fairly close to random or worse. I’d love to see a market timing signal that hasn’t been interrogated so heavily in sample that it fails to produce any meaningful output out of sample. Heck even a really simple signal with worse performance in sample but at least was on par out of sample would be fine…

Leave a Reply

With reference to Section 202(a)(11)(D) of the Investment Advisers Act: We are Engineers and not Investment Advisers, read more ...
By the mere act of reading this page and navigating this site you acknowledge, agree to, and abide by the Terms of Use / Disclaimer