(MONEY Magazine) -- Since its launch in 1982, the Permanent Portfolio has stuck to the same eclectic mix of Treasuries, high-quality corporate bonds, gold bullion, silver, growth stocks, commodity and real estate equities and Swiss-franc-denominated assets.
For most of the '80s and '90s, this strategy lagged behind funds that combine stocks with other investments. But after 2000, when gold and commodities began to take off, the Permanent Portfolio (PRPFX) whipped its peers.
Michael J.Cuggino spoke with contributing writer Laura Lallos.
Gold has been on a tear for years, owing largely to investor fear. Is there a fundamental reason to think that prices might continue to climb?
Yes. There's still a focus on looser monetary policy by central banks here and around the world. That's keeping real interest rates low to negative, always a bullish sign for gold.
Stumbled on this article this morning. It's the usual fluff piece with vacuous questions by someone who I would bet has no clue what the PP is all about. But I figured I would put it up.
Trumpism is not a philosophy or a movement. It's a cult.
He says "FedEx (FDX, Fortune 500) has managed strong growth in the U.S. and even more internationally. It's cyclical, and earnings may slow, but it is an industry leader and a long-term holding. We don't trade stocks, we invest in companies."
To my mind, the PP rebalancing actually amounts to "trading stocks" in a brazen way. The cyclical nature of FedEx makes that all the more important to do??
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." - Mulla Nasrudin
Medium Tex, do you mean that he doesn't try to explain how the fund works but rather simply says whatever he guesses might draw the punters in and get favorable press?
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." - Mulla Nasrudin
stone wrote:
Medium Tex, do you mean that he doesn't try to explain how the fund works but rather simply says whatever he guesses might draw the punters in and get favorable press?
I have never heard him offer a coherent explanation of the whole PP strategy, as modified through the PRPFX allocation.
All I have ever heard him say is that he likes the individual assets the fund holds, and then offers a situation where each asset might do well.
I have certainly never heard him in an interview have the grace to mention that it was Harry Browne and Terry Coxon who developed the strategy that he is getting so much attention for managing.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
