Funds

Fourteen funds, each with one job

Only large, liquid US-listed ETFs. Below: what each fund does, why we chose it, what could go wrong, and what would make us review it.

Technology

XLK15% / 33%

Technology Select Sector SPDR

The growth engine: the technology companies of the S&P 500

Issuer: State StreetLaunched: Dec 1998Fee: 0.08%

16.4%

a year

23.5%

volatility

−53%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007

Why this fund: The technology stocks of the S&P 500, weighted by market value. It has the lowest fee for this exposure, deep liquidity and its own history back to 1998. QQQ adds Amazon, Alphabet and Meta but had the same 2000–02 drawdown (−81% against −80%) at more than twice the fee.
Main risk: Concentration: three stocks (NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft) are 40% of the fund. It fell 80% in 2000–02 and 34% in 2022.
We review it if: The top three stocks rising above 45% of the fund, or any single stock above 6% of a portfolio.
Price history: Own price history for the whole period, daily and monthly. The fund has traded since Dec 1998.

Diversifying equities

SCHD9% / 10%

Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity

Strong balance sheets, steady dividends, little technology

Issuer: SchwabLaunched: Oct 2011Fee: 0.06%

13.3%

a year

15.3%

volatility

−33%

worst fall

Own history since Oct 21, 2011

Why this fund: It tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100: companies with 10+ years of dividends, ranked on cash flow to debt, return on equity, yield and dividend growth. It is the cheapest quality-value exposure, and only about 12% of it is tech, so it complements XLK rather than repeating it.
Main risk: It lags in tech-led years: in 2023 it returned 4.6% against 26.2% for the S&P 500. The March 2026 reconstitution cut energy by about 7 pp.
We review it if: Methodology changes at the annual reconstitution, or tech rising above 25% of the fund.
Price history: Own price history since Oct 2011; before that DVY (iShares Select Dividend) stands in.

DGRW6% / 0%

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth

Profitable companies that keep raising their dividends

Issuer: WisdomTreeLaunched: May 2013Fee: 0.28%

13.1%

a year

15.4%

volatility

−32%

worst fall

Own history since May 23, 2013

Why this fund: Dividend payers ranked on earnings growth and profitability, weighted by dividends paid, which gives a quality tilt with steady earnings. It is held only in Balanced, where XLK is smaller; in Aggressive about a third of it would duplicate XLK.
Main risk: About 35% of the fund is tech, and its index was revised in December 2025, cutting it from 300 to 200 stocks.
We review it if: Tech rising above 40% of the fund, or further methodology changes.
Price history: Own price history since May 2013; before that VIG (Vanguard Dividend Appreciation) stands in.

XLV7% / 7%

Health Care Select Sector SPDR

Demand that does not follow the economic cycle

Issuer: State StreetLaunched: Dec 1998Fee: 0.08%

10.4%

a year

17.3%

volatility

−39%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007

Why this fund: The health-care stocks of the S&P 500. It is the large sector least correlated with the S&P 500 (0.77) and holds little tech. It fell 17% in the 2000–02 crash, when the S&P 500 fell 44%, and 12% in the 2022 sell-off, when the S&P 500 fell 24%.
Main risk: Policy and drug-pricing risk. Eli Lilly alone is about 15% of the fund.
We review it if: Any single stock rising above 20% of the fund.
Price history: Own price history for the whole period, daily and monthly. The fund has traded since Dec 1998.

XLU5% / 0%

Utilities Select Sector SPDR

Steady, regulated earnings; sensitive to interest rates

Issuer: State StreetLaunched: Dec 1998Fee: 0.08%

7.3%

a year

19.2%

volatility

−46%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007

Why this fund: The utility stocks of the S&P 500. It has the lowest correlation with the S&P 500 among the equity holdings (0.61) and pays a steady dividend. It is held only in Balanced, because IFRA, held in Aggressive, owns nearly all of its names.
Main risk: Rate-sensitive, and it now holds AI-power names whose fortunes depend on data-center demand.
We review it if: AI-power names rising above 25% of the fund.
Price history: Own price history for the whole period, daily and monthly. The fund has traded since Dec 1998.

RSP4% / 5%

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight

All 500 companies at the same weight: breadth beyond the largest names

Issuer: InvescoLaunched: Apr 2003Fee: 0.20%

9.3%

a year

20.9%

volatility

−60%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007

Why this fund: Every S&P 500 stock at the same weight: the index without mega-cap concentration. Its top 10 holdings are under 3% of the fund, and it gains when market leadership broadens.
Main risk: More small and cyclical exposure than the S&P 500; it fell 60% in 2007–09.
We review it if: No specific trigger; it is a plain index fund.
Price history: Own price history for the whole daily period. The fund has traded since Apr 2003.

IFRA0% / 5%

iShares U.S. Infrastructure

Owners and builders of rails, grids and pipelines

Issuer: BlackRockLaunched: Apr 2018Fee: 0.30%

12.0%

a year

21.1%

volatility

−41%

worst fall

Own history since Apr 6, 2018

Why this fund: U.S. infrastructure in two halves: owners and operators (utilities, energy pipelines and storage) and enablers (construction, machinery, materials, railroads). Since March 2026 stocks are weighted by market value within each half, capped at 4%. These companies can pass inflation through to prices.
Main risk: It behaves like equities in crashes (−41% in March 2020). It overlaps XLU, which is why Aggressive holds IFRA and not XLU.
We review it if: Overlap with XLK or XLU rising above 40%.
Price history: Own price history since Apr 2018; before that IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure) stands in.

Bonds and cash

SHYG6% / 0%

iShares 0-5 Year High Yield Corporate Bond

Income from short-dated corporate bonds

Issuer: BlackRockLaunched: Oct 2013Fee: 0.30%

4.2%

a year

6.0%

volatility

−19%

worst fall

Own history since Oct 18, 2013

Why this fund: Short-dated U.S. high-yield corporate bonds, held for income: about 7% (September 2026), roughly 2 pp more than Treasuries. The short duration (about 2.3 years) limits rate risk. It suits Balanced investors who value cash yield.
Main risk: Half stock, half bond: correlation 0.72 with the S&P 500, −34% in 2008, −19% in COVID. Splitting it into SCHD and IEF gave the same return with a shallower drawdown; it is kept for income.
We review it if: High-yield spreads below 2.5%, which is thin pay for the risk, or default rates rising above 5%.
Price history: Own price history since Oct 2013; before that HYG (iShares High Yield) stands in.

IEF8% / 2%

iShares 7-10 Year Treasury Bond

Gains when growth fears pull yields down; loses in inflation shocks

Issuer: BlackRockLaunched: Jul 2002Fee: 0.15%

3.1%

a year

7.0%

volatility

−24%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007

Why this fund: U.S. Treasury bonds maturing in 7–10 years. It rose in 8 of the 13 S&P 500 sell-offs since 2007, by 20% in the 2007–09 crash, and yields about 5% (September 2026).
Main risk: It loses when inflation forces yields up: −15% in 2022. That is why commodities, gold and trend sit beside it.
We review it if: Stocks and bonds falling together for more than two quarters while core inflation stays above 3.5%.
Price history: Own price history for the whole daily period. In the 1999–2026 monthly history, a model bond built from the 10-year yield stands in before Aug 2002.

SGOV4% / 2%

iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond

Stability, and funds for rebalancing

Issuer: BlackRockLaunched: May 2020Fee: 0.09%

3.0%

a year

0.2%

volatility

worst fall

Own history since Jun 2, 2020

Why this fund: U.S. Treasury bills. In none of the 13 sell-offs since 2007 did this role lose more than 0.1%. It funds withdrawals and rebalancing without forced selling, and earns roughly the policy rate (about 4%).
Main risk: Reinvestment risk if the Fed cuts. Over a full cycle it earns less than every other holding.
We review it if: No specific trigger.
Price history: Own price history since Jun 2020; before that BIL (1–3 month T-bills) stands in. This cash series sets the start of the daily history, 31 May 2007.

Commodities

HGER12% / 14%

Harbor Commodity All-Weather Strategy

Protection when inflation rises

Issuer: Harbor (sub-adviser Quantix)Launched: Feb 2022Fee: 0.68%

17.4%

a year

17.5%

volatility

−23%

worst fall

Own history since Feb 11, 2022

Why this fund: It tracks the Quantix Commodity Index, which tilts toward commodities that track inflation and shifts between consumables and gold. Commodities were the one asset class that rose in the 2022 sell-off, when stocks and bonds both fell (HGER +16%).
Main risk: Commodities crash in deflationary shocks: its stand-in funds lost about 60% in 2008–09 and 55% from mid-2014 to early 2016. It holds swaps through a Cayman subsidiary with a few counterparties.
We review it if: Assets below $1bn, a counterparty or index-method change, or core inflation below 2.5% for a year.
Price history: Own price history since Feb 2022. Before that: the Quantix commodity index from Aug 2018, which its provider calculated back (the index went live in Jan 2022), PDBC from Nov 2014, and DBC before that.

GLDM5% / 4%

SPDR Gold MiniShares

Protection against a weaker dollar and a loss of trust in policy

Issuer: World Gold TrustLaunched: Jun 2018Fee: 0.10%

9.5%

a year

18.2%

volatility

−46%

worst fall

Own history since May 31, 2007 (GLD)

Why this fund: Allocated physical gold bars held by a custodian and not lent. Gold has near-zero correlation with stocks (0.08 since 2008) and rose in 7 of the 13 sell-offs. GLDM holds the same gold as GLD at 0.10% a year instead of 0.40%.
Main risk: Valuation: about 14% above its 1980 inflation-adjusted peak (October 2026). It fell 46% in 2011–15 and 26% in the first half of 2026, and it fell with stocks in liquidity crashes (March 2020, March 2026).
We review it if: Central-bank buying below its 2010–21 pace (about 470 tonnes a year) for two quarters. Quarterly rebalancing trims gold after rallies.
Price history: Gold is held through GLDM, but the price history used is GLD's for the whole period: the same gold price, at a higher fee (0.40% against 0.10%).

Trend and hedges

DBMF16% / 15%

iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy

Gains in long bear markets and inflation shocks; loses in sudden reversals

Issuer: iM Global Partner / Dynamic Beta investmentsLaunched: May 2019Fee: 0.85%

9.8%

a year

12.3%

volatility

−20%

worst fall

Own history since May 9, 2019

Why this fund: It copies the pre-fee returns of the SG CTA Index, 20 of the largest managed-futures hedge funds, with about 10 liquid futures. Trend gained in slow sell-offs and inflation shocks: +18% in the 2007–09 crash (stand-in funds) and +32% in the 2022 sell-off. It is the largest managed-futures ETF and copies 20 managers, not one.
Main risk: It loses in fast V-shaped crashes (COVID −7%, 2025 tariffs −7%) and in trendless years (2023 −9%). It is a replication model and holds futures through a Cayman subsidiary.
We review it if: Tracking error to the SG CTA Index widening, an adviser change, or assets below $1bn.
Price history: Own price history since May 2019. Before that, AQR Managed Futures (AQMIX) stands in from 2010 and Guggenheim managed futures (RYMFX) for 2007–09.

BTAL3% / 3%

AGF U.S. Market Neutral Anti-Beta

Gains when the riskiest stocks fall hardest

Issuer: AGFLaunched: Sep 2011Fee: 1.40%

−3.3%

a year

16.9%

volatility

−53%

worst fall

Own history since Sep 14, 2011

Why this fund: Long low-beta and short high-beta stocks within each sector, so it is dollar- and sector-neutral. It is the only holding that rose in every S&P 500 sell-off since launch: +12% in Q4 2018, +9% in COVID, +17% in the 2022 sell-off, +18% in the 2025 tariff shock.
Main risk: Standalone it lost 3.6% a year since 2011 and fell 53% peak to trough, because it is short the market's leaders in bull markets. It is small ($0.31bn).
We review it if: Assets below $200m, any closure notice, or costs above 1.6%.
Price history: Own price history since Sep 2011; before that T-bills (BIL) stand in, so no crash protection is assumed in 2008.