After 1yr of constantly researching finance/markets, this is where I landed. 12.5% CAGR backtest linked. Each position explained.

{"summary": "Author defends a leveraged/diversified portfolio backtest, noting fees are largely included and that rebalancing every one to two years limits tax drag; only ~10% of the backtest is RSST/CTAP/MATE.", "reason": "Actionable portfolio-construction argument with named funds and rationale, though the comment is a rebuttal rather than a fresh directional call.", "ideas": [{"symbol": "RSST", "direction": "watch", "thesis": "The author includes RSST as part of a ~10% sleeve of return-stacking funds in a backtested portfolio, arguing the fund's expense ratio is already reflected in the backtest results. The mechanism is stacking equity and managed-futures exposure to diversify without giving up capital space, with rebalancing only every one to two years to limit tax drag. Main stated risk is tax drag from rebalancing, which the author considers manageable.", "thesis_short": "RSST in small return-stacking sleeve", "quote": "Besides the expense ratio’s of RSST/CTAP/MATE. That’s only 10% of the backtest though.", "confidence": 0.55, "sentiment": 0.3, "timeframe": "rebalance every one to two years"}, {"symbol": "CTAP", "direction": "watch", "thesis": "CTAP is cited as one of the return-stacking funds making up roughly 10% of the author's backtested portfolio, with its expense ratio already accounted for in the backtest. The rationale is diversifying exposure via capital-efficient funds while keeping the allocation small. Main stated risk is tax drag from periodic rebalancing.", "thesis_short": "CTAP part of 10% stacking sleeve", "quote": "Besides the expense ratio’s of RSST/CTAP/MATE. That’s only 10% of the backtest though.", "confidence": 0.55, "sentiment": 0.3, "timeframe": "rebalance every one to two years"}, {"symbol": "MATE", "direction": "watch", "thesis": "MATE is listed among the return-stacking funds comprising about 10% of the author's backtested portfolio, with fees already factored into the backtest. The author treats it as a diversifying satellite rather than a core holding. Main stated risk is tax drag from rebalancing.", "thesis_short": "MATE small satellite in backtested portfolio", "quote": "Besides the expense ratio’s of RSST/CTAP/MATE. That’s only 10% of the backtest though.", "confidence": 0.55, "sentiment": 0.3, "timeframe": "rebalance every one to two years"}], "model": "deepseek-v4-flash"}