Episode description

Together with Mark Rzepczynski we discuss how the activist treasury issurance of more bills than coupons have provided more quantitative easing and why we are seeing a decline in concern for inflation and rising interest rates. Mark also shares key insights to why building a system is more important than building models and what you can use a backtest for, and we discuss whether investors should focus mostly on stocks or bonds in their portfolio. We also discuss why you should include trend following in your portfolio and ways to assess macro economic risk, how AI will impact the trend following industry, how the hot hand fallacy applies to investing and much more.

-----

50 YEARS OF TREND FOLLOWING BOOK AND BEHIND-THE-SCENES VIDEO FOR ACCREDITED INVESTORS - CLICK HERE

-----

Follow Niels on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube or via the TTU website.

IT’s TRUE ? – most CIO’s read 50+ books each year – get your FREE copy of the Ultimate Guide to the Best Investment Books ever written here.

And you can get a free copy of my latest book “Ten Reasons to Add Trend Following to Your Portfolio” here.

Learn more about the Trend Barometer here.

Send your questions to info@toptradersunplugged.com

And please share this episode with a like-minded friend and leave an honest Rating & Review on iTunes or Spotify so more people can discover the podcast.

Follow Mark on Twitter.

Episode TimeStamps:

00:54 - If trend following was an Olympic sport, which one would it be?

03:17 - What has been on our radar recently?

06:20 - Bills = money?

09:59 - A declining concern for rising rates and inflation?

13:38 - Industry performance update

16:01 - Q1, Philippe: When to remove an asset as a trend follower??

26:10 - "I've never seen a bad backtest"

31:56 - Simplicity vs. complexity

35:26 - Stocks or bonds - what should you prefer?

40:18 - Why you should have trend following in your portfolio

48:50 - How to assess true macro economic risk

53:33 - Machine learning and AI in systematic trading

01:00:22 - The hot hand fallacy

Copyright