Year-to-date, the model now stands at +9.1% against +11.2% for the S&P 500, a deficit of 2.1 percentage points after holding a 2.1-point lead through April. The entire swing came in a single month. The deep-dive selection told a different story, posting its best month since the March correction: the average return across the eight active positions rose to +64% from +55% in April, led by a recovery in the precious metals miners even as the gold price itself eased.

Markets in May

May was a second consecutive strong month for U.S. equities, with the S&P 500 adding +5.3%. Leadership stayed concentrated in the large-cap and AI-related names that drove April’s rebound, and breadth outside that cohort remained thin. The Federal Reserve held rates steady, and markets continued to price in limited easing for the remainder of 2026 given the inflation overhang from elevated energy prices tied to the ongoing Middle East conflict.

Precious metals gave back part of April’s recovery. Gold eased from roughly $4,800 at the end of April into the $4,500–$4,600 area through May, pressured by rising U.S. Treasury yields, with the ten-year benchmark approaching a one-year high, and a firmer dollar that raised the cost of bullion for overseas buyers. The structural case stayed intact, with continued central bank accumulation and major banks holding year-end targets in the $5,400–$6,300 range.

The notable divergence in May was between the metal and the miners. Gold mining equities rose even as the gold price consolidated, recovering ground after lagging April’s metals rally and re-rating on a wave of strong first-quarter earnings. That dynamic worked in favor of the deep-dive precious metals positions, which had absorbed the brunt of the March correction.

Model Portfolio Performance

The challenge in May was the same one that defined March and April: a microcap value and momentum strategy lagging a market whose gains were concentrated in the largest, most expensive names. The rotation out of precious metals that began in late March is now largely complete. Materials settled at 9.7% of the portfolio from a peak above 16% in March, while industrials grew to 34.9%, absorbing the capital the ranking system redirected toward newly attractive names. The systematic process is functioning as designed, selling positions that have lost their edge and rotating into higher-ranked candidates, and the residual drag from unwinding a sector that drove returns through 2025 has now cleared.

Return results (as of May 31, 2026):

• Total return (15 months): 65.5%

• S&P 500 return (same period): 31.2%

• Alpha generated: 34.3 percentage points

• Annualized return: 49.7% (vs. 24.3% for S&P 500)

• Monthly beats: 10 of 15 months (67%)

• Quarterly beats: 5 of 5 completed quarters (100%)

Realized trades (since inception):

• Win rate: 55% of 113 trades (62 winners, 51 losers)

• Average return: 17.0% (winners: +46.7%, losers: -19.0%)

• Average days held: 151.9 days

• Realized multibaggers: 6

Risk-adjusted metrics (since inception):

• Beta: 0.64

• Sharpe Ratio: 2.15 (vs. 1.00 for S&P 500)

• Sortino Ratio: 2.53 (vs. 1.46 for S&P 500)

• Maximum Drawdown: -13.83% (vs. -16.19% for S&P 500)

May was an active month for realized trades, with several long-held positions exiting at strong gains. The largest realized trade of the month, an industrial holding entered roughly a year earlier, was closed at +98%, narrowly short of multibagger status, alongside a consumer staple realized at +71% and two further holdings closed in the +35% to +55% range. The count of realized multibaggers held at six. The portfolio currently carries four open multibaggers, two industrials and two technology stocks, with the largest single position, a technology name, sitting near the top of the ranking.

The risk profile remains the clearest expression of the strategy’s edge. A beta of 0.64 and a maximum drawdown of -13.83%, shallower than the S&P 500’s -16.19% over the same span, show the portfolio has delivered its returns with materially less risk than the index, even through the most difficult stretch since inception. The Sharpe Ratio of 2.15 remains well above the benchmark’s 1.00.

The current quarter is tracking behind the index, an honest consequence of three straight months of underperformance, and the since-inception alpha has compressed from its February peak. What has not changed is the longer-term record: ten monthly beats in fifteen, every completed quarter ahead of the benchmark, and a return better than double the S&P 500 since inception. Stretches like this one are an expected feature of a strategy that deliberately avoids the crowded, large-cap leadership currently driving the index.

Model Portfolio Holdings

Current allocation is now spread broadly across sectors. Industrials lead at 34.9%, followed by Technology at 17.0%, Materials at 9.7%, Consumer Non-Cyclicals at 7.9%, Energy at 7.6%, and Consumer Cyclicals at 7.5%. Microcaps continue to dominate at 73% of the portfolio, with small caps making up the remaining 27%. Allocation charts and the full holdings breakdown appear in the attached performance report.

Deep-Dive Stock Performance

May was a recovery month for the deep-dive selection, with the precious metals positions leading the rebound and the healthcare names mixed after a heavy week of first-quarter earnings.

Deep-Dive Summary

• Total positions: 8

• Average return: +64%

• Average holding period: ~9 months

• Multibaggers: 3 of 8 (APM, MSA, SRB)

The three publicly available deep-dives, APM, MSA, and SRB, remain accessible to all subscribers in the deep-dives section.

Read more

The model portfolio gained +7.2% in April, a strong month in absolute terms but trailing the S&P 500’s narrow, semiconductor-led rebound by 3.3 percentage points. The combined effect of March’s drawdown and April’s partial recovery means the portfolio is -4.7% since the start of March versus +5.1% for the S&P 500 over the same span — a two-month gap of nearly 10 percentage points. Year-to-date, however, the portfolio remains ahead at +7.8% versus +5.7% for the S&P 500. Since inception fourteen months ago, the model has returned +63.5% versus +24.6% for the S&P 500, an alpha of 38.9 percentage points, beating the benchmark in 10 of 14 months and in all five completed quarterly periods.

The deep-dive selection held its ground during the recovery. The average return across all eight active positions stands at +55% with an average holding period of approximately eight months. Serabi Gold joined APM and Mineros as a third multibagger, recovering strongly from March’s correction. The model portfolio’s third realized multibagger gold trade came in late April when a precious metals position was sold at +209%, the second-largest realized trade in portfolio history.

Markets in April

April produced a paradoxical setup. The U.S.-Iran conflict moved into a fragile ceasefire that held through most of the month, but the Strait of Hormuz remained essentially closed and oil prices stayed elevated throughout. Brent crude averaged roughly $102 per barrel, peaking near $126 mid-month and ending April around $114. The Federal Reserve held rates steady, with markets continuing to price in only one cut for the remainder of 2026 given the persistent inflation overhang from energy.

Despite this backdrop, U.S. equities staged their strongest monthly advance since 2020. The S&P 500 climbed 10.5% to a record close of 7,165 on April 24, but the rally’s leadership was unusually narrow. The story was overwhelmingly about semiconductors and AI infrastructure: Intel surged approximately 50% in April — its biggest monthly gain since 1974 — and the iShares Semiconductor ETF gained more than 30% from late March. Q1 earnings provided fundamental cover, with 88% of S&P 500 reporters beating expectations at the highest rate since 2021. Outside semiconductors and AI-adjacent names, breadth was decidedly thinner.

Precious metals partially recovered. Gold climbed from approximately $4,200 at the end of March to around $4,800 by April 30, retracing roughly half of March’s decline as speculative liquidation eased. Silver also recovered, though gold mining equities followed the metals higher only modestly as capital rotated aggressively into AI infrastructure names. The structural bull case for precious metals remains intact, with major banks maintaining year-end gold targets in the $5,400–$6,300 range.

The model portfolio’s challenge in April was less about lagging the rebound than about not fully recovering March’s drawdown. The materials weighting from the precious metals run dropped from 16.2% at end of March to 9.5% by month-end as a gold miner was sold. Industrials grew from 24.8% to 30.5% to absorb the rotation. The systematic ranking is doing exactly what it should — selling stocks that have lost their edge and rotating into newly-attractive names — but the transition takes time, and during that time the portfolio carries the residual drag from a sector that benefited the strategy enormously through 2025.

Model Portfolio Performance

A +7.2% monthly gain is a strong absolute result by any standard. The relative shortfall versus the S&P 500 is best understood as the accumulated effect of two months: the model gave up more than the index in March’s precious metals correction and then recovered somewhat less in April’s narrowly-led rebound. Year-to-date, however, the portfolio is still +2.1 percentage points ahead of the S&P 500, and since inception alpha stands at +38.9 percentage points.

Return Results (as of Apr 30, 2026):

• Total return (14 months): +63.5%

• S&P 500 return (same period): +24.6%

• Alpha generated: 38.9 percentage points

• Annualized return: 52.4% (vs. 20.8% for S&P 500)

• Monthly beats: 10 of 14 months (71%)

• Quarterly beats: 5 of 5 quarters (100%)

Realized Trades (since inception):

• Win rate: 56% of 101 trades (57 winners, 44 losers)

• Average return: 17.4% (winners: +45.5%, losers: -19.1%)

• Average days held: 144.5 days

• Realized multibaggers: 6 (the latest a gold miner realized on April 27 at +209% — the second-largest realized trade in portfolio history)

Risk-Adjusted Metrics (since inception):

• Beta: 0.64

• Sharpe Ratio: 2.15 (vs. 1.00 for S&P 500)

• Sortino Ratio: 2.53 (vs. 1.46 for S&P 500)

• Maximum Drawdown: -13.83% (vs. -16.19% for S&P 500)

The maximum drawdown remained at -13.83% through April, with the portfolio recovering steadily from March’s lows without setting new troughs. The Sharpe Ratio of 2.15 continues to reflect strong risk-adjusted returns, more than double the benchmark’s 1.00. Importantly, the portfolio’s maximum drawdown remains shallower than the S&P 500’s worst peak-to-trough decline over the same period — a meaningful demonstration of downside resilience even after the most challenging months since inception.

Current allocation is now spread more broadly across sectors than at any point this year. Industrials lead at 30.5%, followed by Technology at 15.9%, Consumer Non-Cyclicals at 10.4%, Materials at 9.5%, Consumer Cyclicals at 8.8%, and Energy at 8.7%. Microcaps continue to dominate at 76% of the portfolio, with small caps making up the remaining 24%.

Deep-Dive Stock Performance

April was a recovery month for the deep-dive selection, with most positions regaining ground after March’s correction. The average return across all eight active positions held steady at +55%, essentially unchanged from March despite the volatility of the past two months. Serabi Gold joined APM and Mineros as the third multibagger on the list.

Deep-Dive Summary

• Total positions: 8

• Average return: +55%

• Average holding period: ~8 months

• Multibaggers: 3 of 8 (APM, MSA, SRB)

The three publicly available deep-dives (APM, MSA, and SRB) remain accessible to all subscribers — you can find them in the deep-dives section.

Read more

The model portfolio declined -11.1% in March, underperforming the S&P 500's -4.9% decline. Year-to-date, however, the portfolio is still up +0.5% versus -4.4% for the S&P 500. Since inception thirteen months ago, the portfolio has returned +52.4% versus +12.8% for the S&P 500, outperforming by 39.7 percentage points. Despite March's drawdown, the model has beaten the benchmark in all five quarterly periods since launch — including during both up and down markets.

My deep-dive stock selection was not spared. The average return across all eight positions fell from +108% last month to +55%, driven primarily by the precious metals correction. With an average holding period of just seven months, that still represents a return well above what the model portfolio has generated over the same timeframe. APM — the portfolio’s all-time best-performing deep-dive — has been extended for another twelve months following its annual review, with a new entry price and updated targets reflecting record FY2025 results.

Markets in March

The Iran war dominated markets in March, creating the kind of cross-asset volatility not seen since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in early 2022. The U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran that began on February 28 triggered Iranian retaliation across the Gulf region, including attacks on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz. The effective closure of this critical chokepoint — through which roughly 20 million barrels of oil pass daily — transformed what might have been a contained military operation into a global energy supply shock.

Brent crude surged from roughly $70 per barrel to above $119 at its peak, with WTI settling around $100 by month-end. The immediate consequence was an inflation repricing: eurozone inflation jumped to 2.5% in March, driven by a 4.9% surge in energy costs. The Federal Reserve held rates steady at its March 18 meeting and penciled in just one rate cut for the remainder of the year — a sharp reversal from the two to three cuts markets had expected entering 2026. Bond yields climbed as investors repriced rate expectations, with the 10-year Treasury yield reaching 4.46% by March 27.

The precious metals sell-off was the most paradoxical development of the month. Gold, which entered 2026 near all-time highs above $5,500 after rallying 65% in 2025, fell approximately 14% in March — its worst monthly performance since the 2008 financial crisis. The mechanism is well understood but frequently misjudged by market participants: rising oil feeds directly into inflation expectations, which reduces the probability of rate cuts, which strengthens the dollar, which increases the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets like gold. In a market where speculative long positions had built up aggressively during 2025’s rally, this created a self-reinforcing liquidation cycle. Silver fared even worse, declining over 20% for the month. Gold and silver miners — heavily represented in the model portfolio and deep-dive selections — fell sharply alongside the metals. The junior gold miner index (GDXJ) saw significant outflows as leveraged positions unwound.

Energy stocks were the lone bright spot, with the S&P 500’s energy sector the only one to post positive returns for the month. The broader S&P 500 closed down -4.9% for March and -4.4% for Q1 2026, its worst quarterly showing since 2022. The Nasdaq entered correction territory, down more than 10% from its October peak.

For the model portfolio, the heavy weighting in materials (16.2%) and the concentration in micro-cap stocks (77%) amplified the impact. Small-cap and micro-cap stocks, which had been outperforming since late 2025, gave back gains as risk appetite collapsed. European and international stocks — where the model holds significant exposure — faced additional headwinds as the energy crisis weighed more heavily on energy-dependent economies.

Model Portfolio Performance

March was the first month where the model significantly underperformed the benchmark, generating -11.1% versus -4.9% for the S&P 500 — an excess return of -6.2% for the month. The magnitude of the drawdown reflects the portfolio’s concentration in sectors and market caps that bore the brunt of the war-driven sell-off.

Return Results (as of Mar 31, 2026):

• Total return (13 months): +52.4%

• S&P 500 return (same period): +12.8%

• Alpha generated: 39.7 percentage points

• Annualized return: 47.4% (vs. 11.7% for S&P 500)

• Monthly beats: 10 of 13 months (77%)

• Quarterly beats: 5 of 5 quarters (100%)

Realized Trades (since inception):

• Win rate: 55% of 98 trades (54 winners, 44 losers)

• Average return: 15.1% (winners: +42.9%, losers: -19.1%)

• Average days held: 141.5 days

• Realized multibaggers: 5 (the latest being a precious metals miner realized on March 30 at +338% — the single largest realized trade in portfolio history)

Risk-Adjusted Metrics (since inception):

• Beta: 0.21

• Sharpe Ratio: 4.07 (vs. 1.12 for S&P 500)

• Sortino Ratio: 5.13 (vs. 1.49 for S&P 500)

• Maximum Drawdown: -13.8% (vs. -16.2% for S&P 500)

The maximum drawdown increased from -12.2% to -13.8% this month as the portfolio experienced its sharpest intra-month decline since inception. The drawdown remains below the S&P 500’s -16.2% worst peak-to-trough decline over the same period, and the Sharpe Ratio of 4.07 continues to indicate exceptional risk-adjusted performance despite a very difficult month.

The portfolio’s low beta of 0.21 is worth emphasizing in context. The model’s returns are driven overwhelmingly by stock-specific selection rather than broad market exposure. In months where broad market factors dominate — as in March, when macro forces drove correlations sharply higher across asset classes — a low-beta portfolio with concentrated sector exposures can temporarily underperform. The systematic approach does not attempt to time macroeconomic events; it captures alpha through persistent factor exposures that compound over time.

Current allocation remains concentrated in micro-caps (77%) and small caps (23%), with Industrials (24.8%), Technology (18.6%), and Materials (16.2%) as the largest sector exposures.

Deep-Dive Stock Performance

March brought the most challenging month for the deep-dive portfolio since its inception. The precious metals correction — gold’s worst month since 2008 and silver’s sharpest decline in over a decade — weighed heavily on the three mining positions that have driven the majority of deep-dive returns. APM completed its 12-month annual review and has been extended for another year with updated targets.

Deep-Dive Summary

• Total positions: 8

• Average return: +55%

• Average holding period: ~7 months

• Multibaggers: 2 of 8 (APM, MSA - both stocks reached their bull case target)

The three publicly available deep-dives (APM, MSA, and SRB) remain accessible to all subscribers — you can find them in the deep-dives section.

Read more

The model has beaten the benchmark in 10 of 12 months (83%) and in all five quarterly periods since inception, including the only down quarter for the S&P 500. With a Sharpe Ratio of 3.80 versus 1.31 for the benchmark and a maximum drawdown of -12.2% versus -16.2% for the index, the portfolio has delivered strong absolute returns with superior risk-adjusted performance.

February itself added another strong chapter. The model generated +5.8% while the S&P 500 declined -0.9%, an excess return of +6.7% for the month. Year-to-date, the portfolio is now up +13.1% versus just +0.6% for the benchmark. This month also brought a new deep-dive stock and some notable market developments including the Supreme Court striking down IEEPA tariffs on February 20th.

The deep-dive stocks continue to deliver. The average return across all eight positions now stands at +108%. The four deep-dives published in the first six months average +217%, with three of those now multibaggers. Three of the four recent healthcare positions remain near their entry points, and with geopolitical tensions and tariff uncertainty continuing to drive market volatility, the coming weeks may offer attractive entry opportunities as key catalysts approach. The fourth received significant pipeline news today that will require a reassessment — paid subscribers will find a full update below.

Markets in February

February was a turbulent month shaped by a landmark Supreme Court decision, renewed tariff uncertainty, and a deepening rotation away from mega-cap technology stocks. The S&P 500 finished the month down approximately -0.9%, its worst monthly performance since March. The Dow held up somewhat better, while the Nasdaq dropped roughly -3% as AI-related concerns weighed on the sector.

The dominant event was the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling on February 20th that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. The decision struck down the sweeping reciprocal tariffs imposed in 2025, estimated to have raised over $160 billion from U.S. importers. Markets initially rallied on the ruling before giving back gains as President Trump responded within hours by imposing new 10% global tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, effective February 24th. This replacement authority expires after 150 days unless Congress votes to extend it, injecting further uncertainty heading into the midterm election season. Markets ended the week lower after a hotter-than-expected producer price index report on the final trading day added sticky inflation to the list of investor concerns.

The small-cap renaissance that began in January continued to gain momentum. Small-cap stocks outperformed large caps by approximately 4 percentage points in the first six weeks of the year, driven by a narrowing valuation gap, improving small-cap earnings growth (projected at 18-22% for the full year versus 13% for large caps), and the beneficial effects of the Federal Reserve’s rate cuts in late 2025. The sector rotation is notable: energy, materials, and consumer staples are leading the S&P 500 in 2026, while technology lags. This environment plays directly into the model portfolio’s strengths, with its concentration in microcaps (73%), small caps (27%), and heavy weightings in materials (27.3%) and industrials (25.5%).

Gold prices remained elevated throughout February, trading between approximately $4,900 and $5,200 per ounce. After January’s sharp spike above $5,500 and subsequent correction, February saw a more orderly consolidation with gold ending the month around $5,275. The precious metal is now up over 75% since early 2025, driven by persistent central bank buying (863 tonnes in 2025), geopolitical uncertainty, and expectations of further Fed rate cuts. The portfolio’s precious metals exposure, led by APM at 8.7% and GG at 8.8% of the portfolio, continues to benefit from this structural tailwind.

Model Portfolio Performance

February marked another month of meaningful outperformance, with the model generating +5.82% versus -0.86% for the S&P 500 — an excess return of +6.69% for the month.

Return Results (as of Feb 27, 2026):

• Total return (12 months): 71.5%

• S&P 500 return (same period): 18.6%

• Alpha generated: 52.9 percentage points

• Monthly beats: 10 of 12 months (83%)

Realized Trades (since inception):

• Win rate: 54% of 84 trades (45 winners, 39 losers)

• Average return: 12.4% (winners: +38.8%, losers: -18.0%)

• Average days held: 126 days

• Portfolio turnover: 119% annualized

• Realized multibaggers: 4 (MSA +184%, BKTI +165%, AAC +126%, NELLY +102%)

Risk-Adjusted Metrics (since inception):

• Beta: 0.24

• Sharpe Ratio: 3.80 (vs. 1.31 for S&P 500)

• Sortino Ratio: 4.86 (vs. 1.70 for S&P 500)

• Maximum Drawdown: -12.2% (vs. -16.2% for S&P 500)

The Sharpe Ratio of 3.80 and Sortino Ratio of 4.86 remain exceptional after a full year of live trading. This is live performance with 1% transaction and slippage costs applied to every trade. The portfolio’s low beta of 0.24 demonstrates that the majority of returns come from stock-specific selection rather than broad market exposure.

February saw the realization of the MSA (Mineros SA) position from the model portfolio, closing on February 23rd at a +184% return over 266 days. This was the single best realized trade in the portfolio’s history.

The portfolio currently holds five multibaggers — APM (+641%), GG (+417%), BYGGP (+189%), PXM (+123%), and WAS (+107%) — with several other positions showing strong returns. Combined with four realized multibagger trades, the model has produced nine multibaggers in its first year. This consistent ability to capture outliers across different sectors and geographies is precisely why the top of the ranking serves as the primary hunting ground for my deep-dive stock selection. As of the end of February, the two largest positions remain precious metals miners: GG (Golconda Gold) at 8.8% and APM (Andean Precious Metals) at 8.7%.

Deep-Dive Stock Performance

A new position was added in February (see deep-dive).

Deep-Dive Summary

• Total positions: 8

• Average return across all 8 positions: +108%

• Multibaggers: 3 of 8 (APM, MSA, SRB)

The three multibagger deep-dives (APM, MSA, and SRB) are available to all subscribers — you can find them in the deep-dives section.

Read more