Animal Spirits Podcast - Talk Your Book: The Long and Short of Commodities

Episode Date: January 30, 2023

On today's show, we are joined by Sal Gilbertie, CEO of Teucrium to give us an update on Oil & Gas, how supply chains are looking in 2023, Teucriums latest Long/Short fund, potential issues with China, and much more! Find complete shownotes on our blogs... Ben Carlson’s A Wealth of Common Sense Michael Batnick’s The Irrelevant Investor Like us on Facebook And feel free to shoot us an email at [e-mail] with any feedback, questions, recommendations, or ideas for future topics of conversation.   (Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, received compensation from the sponsor of this advertisement. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. Any mention of a particular security and related performance data is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. The information provided on this website (including any information that may be accessed through this website) is not directed at any investor or category of investors and is provided solely as general information.) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's Animal Spirits is brought to you by Tukrium. To learn more about the opportunities and risks of investing in agricultural commodities, visit Tukrium.com. Welcome to Animal Spirits, a show about markets, life, and investing. Join Michael Batnik and Ben Carlson as they talk about what they're reading, writing, and watching. Michael Battenick and Ben Carlson work for Ritt Holtz wealth management. All opinions expressed by Michael and Ben or any podcast guests are solely their own opinions and do not reflect the opinion of Ritt Holt's wealth management. This podcast

is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon for investment decisions. Clients of Ritt Holt's wealth management may maintain positions in the securities discussed in this podcast. Welcome to Animal Spirits with Michael and Ben. We've been talking quite a bit, I want to say, very surface level for reasons that are about to become obvious. We've been talking, questioning, wondering, asking, how come the European energy crisis hadn't come to a head? When it seemed like one of the most obvious risks out there. Yeah. To Sal said, well, they didn't have a winter yet. Maybe it's that easy. It's kind of ironic that global warming might have saved an energy crisis this year. But I guess that's it. Again, it seemed like things

were going to be bad. This is one of the reasons why predicting these commodities market is so difficult. You could think you have all this stuff figured out if this happens, this happens, this happens, and sometimes it doesn't happen that way. I'm planning a trip to go with my stepfather who's getting up there in years, so I don't know how many more opportunities will get to do something like this. There's a place all the way up state, at least it's all the way up for me. It's called Tug Hill. And we used to ride snowmobiles there.

I haven't done it in a long time. And I just made a reservation called the hotel and said, what's the snow situation? She said, we got it dusting. The trails are closed. Now, mind you, we'd fall in like three feet of snow and nothing. All the ski resorts around here in Michigan, they rely on this. They've had not of this year, pretty much. It's a warm season. So we've talked to Sal in the past. We got him on the horn, I don't know, within two weeks of the war happening last year, and he laid out potential

risks and what's going to happen here and why this stuff matters. And so you and I have been tracking this stuff, agricultural commodities and energy and the impact. We're not experts in the field, but it definitely didn't play out how I would have imagined in a lot of different ways. Commodities had a really good 2022. They probably should have had a blowout 2022. The numbers, if you look at them, 2022 ended up pretty darn good for commodities in a really bad year for the stock market, but it probably should have been even a bigger blowout for commodities than it was. They kind of came in towards the end of the year. I think this stuff is interesting because it gets into the idea of supplying demand. There's economics 101 stuff here, but it's also human nature

and unexpected events that can have an impact, and it's a really interesting field. So one of the bigger takeaways, and I'll give a little bit of a spoiler because this just surprise me, and sales is a straight shooter? I asked him, why should, or is there an expected long-term positive return from these commodities? And he said, no. That was interesting. But the explanation for why that there still might be is also interesting. So we won't step on that. We'll get into it. Tookin, they do long-only agricultural commodity ETS until actually. they have a long, short version. And that's what we get into on today's show. So I hope you all

enjoy our conversation with Sal Gilberti from Tukrium. We were joined once again by Sal. Gilberte. Sal is the CEO of Tukrium. Sal, welcome back to the show. Thanks. We've had you on at some interesting inflection points in the commodities, markets, talk about what's going on in agriculture and energy in some of these different markets. So before we get into some of the stuff that you're all doing, maybe we could get an update. I'd be curious because we talked to you, I think right after the war in Ukraine it started and how that roiled up things in terms of food production and where that was going to come from. You've given us on us updates on how that's shaken out. Anything surprised you at how things have turned out since then

based on where we are now and knowing what we know now? Well, I think the biggest surprise for me and for everybody is no winter. I think last time we spoke was around June. We were expecting a disastrous winter because of lack of natural gas supplies in Europe. That would keep natural gas prices high. That would keep fertilizer prices high because fertilizer comes from natural gas, the peat stock. And the lack of winter there is just astounding. And that has helped tremendously. And I think I remember we talked about oil and oil was going to the moon. Everybody thought it was going higher. And I just said, I've been in commodities for a long time. And this doesn't feel right. I can't tell you why, but oil's probably going down. And it did.

We were at 110 or something then, and now it's at 80, but where it's going to go from here? I just don't know. Michael and I have been talking in recent weeks about how, like, the natural gas prices, especially in Europe, have just crashed. And that was something that it seemed like at the time, no one would have predicted. Is it as simple as just saying people figured it out, but also the weather just really helped and they haven't needed as much as they thought? It's the weather, bottom line, because if it got truly as cold as it normally does, right now, we would be talking about guessing over what week in the next few weeks Europe would run out of gas.

that's what we'd be talking about. And we're not. I think I just looked it up. They're 80% above last year's storage levels. They had a normal drawdown two days ago. They drew down almost exactly the amount they did the prior year and the five-year average. But what happened is all those LNG cargoes that are waiting offshore to unload, they're just sitting there ready.

And they will eventually offload. If it gets really cold, when they run out of those, okay, that's when you would see prices go back up. But we're running at a time. They're very lucky. You only have another six or eight weeks. and we're done. Inflation seems to have potentially peaked, depending on who you ask. I think it's peaked.

With energy coming down, as I always say, energy is the root cause of it. Energy reflects inflation. So the root cause of inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods. And we had all kinds of production issues across all kinds of things. But there's enough energy right now. The supply demand balance for crude is up in the air. I still think we could go lower, but China reopening, throws a big variable into the mix. But I don't see how inflation hasn't peaked. I think it has.

And so the question is, do agricultural commodities, can they work in a world where inflation is coming down? Can they be divorced from inflation? Yeah, because they're supplying demand. The number one correlated factor for energy prices is cost of production. Cost of production goes up with inflation and with rising energy prices. But those are all clearly peaked. And we're still trending in terms of grain prices well above the cost of production, whatever that may be. It used to be the future's equivalent of about $3.50 in corn, $3.50. It's probably, depending when you talk to, it's $4.20 or higher right now. But corn's a lot higher than that. Corn's above $6. So you've got every farmer in the world planting as much as they can. You had a record wheat

crop in Russia. You're going to have a record soybean crop in Brazil. You had a record wheat crop in Australia. So all of this that we saw happening the last time we all spoke is coming to fruition because ags are supply and demand. That's what they're about. And we're running tighter than normal. But this year should loosen things up. So we would expect if the weather cooperates and Brazil's harvest is as good as people think and we get good production out of North America, we would think that things will start to normalize, meaning grain prices should head back toward their cost of production, whatever that may be. I have a follow on question.

Does the demand for these things slow down if we head into a recession? When you say the supply demand imbalance or balance, talk about where the supply and the demand comes from. Demand's pretty steady. So for grains, if you look at the combined use of corn, soybeans, and wheat, every single year it's a record or it's a second high. So if they don't break a record, it's the second highest demand. It's 1960.

If you go back all the way to 1960. So the demand for these things is always rising, in essence, over the long term. it's really the supply. And what happened with supply in grains over two years time prior to the Russian invasion, you had some problems with supply, with weather in China, with weather in the U.S. wheat producing regions, with production being variable. So production is variable. Ag demand is steady. When ag production declines, you get a tightening of the supply demand balance sheet, meaning the excess inventories that we're accustomed to get a little smaller. We don't run out of food. We just don't.

But the inventories get a little smaller and people get nervous, and that's where we are now. It's called the stocks to use ratio, the amount of inventory left over after you take all that's grown in a year and all that's used in a year. And that can range from four weeks worth of supply to six months' worth of supply, typically, depending on which ag you're talking about. We're on the lower end of all of those. We're below the five-year averages in the United States and all of those. And in fact, in the world excluding China, and this is important,

because China, they claim, to be holding more than half of the world's grains, corn, soybeans, and wheat in inventory. And when you take China out of the picture, the five-year averages for our stocks-to-use ratios were below the five-year average on all those things. So China never exports, eggs. It only imports. So whatever's in China, whether they actually have it or not, is not coming out. So the rest of the world is a little bit tight on grains, and that's why we see elevated price. We talked to you before about how a decent out of the world's grains is supplied by Ukraine and that was going to be disrupted. Did the rest of the world just step up? What happened? And how did that get fixed? Or is that one of the big reasons why the supplies are so short right now? It's all the

above, actually. The rest of the world stepped up, so no place ran out of grain. But the price got really high. Ukraine, since we last spoke, they cut a deal for export. The Russians do everything they can to slow Ukrainian exports down. But the Ukraine did manage to export quite a bit of grains and particularly wheat and corn. But Russia's exporting, they're the best. Right now, if you want to buy wheat, buy it from Russia. It's cheap. That's where you get. If you're just looking at price and you have a need, Russian wheat is cheap. They had a record amount. And again, Australia stepped up. They had a really good production last year, record production. And they stepped up and filled in. Is Russia on the naughty list, though, in terms of trade partners? They are, but I mean, it's food.

So you're allowed to buy food and fertilizer from Russia. Nobody gets punished for that. If you're buying according to the naughty list and not price rush is your last choice to buy from. But they have plenty of wheat and they'll sell tea. A lot of people think in terms of commodities, if we're looking at it like an investment, that you're going to see these huge booms when there is a big inflation and maybe you're going to see a bust when there's some deflation or recession. But your whole point is those booms and bust can and will happen. But over the long term, the supply and demand is to what's going to matter for those longer term returns. That's right, especially in Ag. And when you look at grains, if you look at the S&P 500 grain index or the Tuchrium grain index that goes

into our tags fund, and that's corn, soybeans, wheat, and sugar, or just take the grains, take sugar out of it, corn, soybeans, and wheat. For the last five S&P 500 declines of 10% or more, the grains index blew it away. Grains are a great diversifier because they zig when the market's ag, because they go by their own fundamentals. They don't care what the economy's doing. They don't care what the iPhone is. They don't care to the president. It doesn't matter. What matters is, is there enough or not? Looking at the returns of your ag index in 2021, it was up the same year, the stock market was up, and last year it was up when the stock market was down. So to your point, it does it something then.

Yeah, grains are very effective diversify. Do these commodities have positive, long-term expected returns? What's the investment case? I understand the shorter term, but long-term, why should there be like a risk premium in these things? There shouldn't. Normal ag price performance is trading at the cost of production. So you can Google it, okay? We've written about it.

It's called the golden grain cycle. because grains are subsidized around the world, their natural state, their natural price state should be, all else being equal, trading at the cost of production. And shouldn't that go down over time? They'll go down when they're elevated versus the cost of production, but the cost of production goes up over time because of just basic inflation. If you're in a deflationary environment completely, sure, the cost of production will go down, but corn traded for six years, either side of $3.50, spot corn.

And we had a lot of people calling us up saying, I'm going to put 1% of my portfolio in your corn fund because I look back and I've heard your speeches. And every five to seven years, there's a supply disruption and corn goes up. And we had a lot of people call us and say, wow, that really worked well. And next time corn goes back down to its cost of production, I'm going to put my 1% in there. And I think when they do the math, they look at it and go, well, wait a minute. The cost of production is the cost of production. You have very limited downside when grains are flatlined.

And you have quite a bit of upside because people don't stop using them when you have a supply disruption. So I think when you're looking at long periods of time for grain in your portfolio, the time to layer them in is when they're just flatline, trading at their cost of production. And the expression is weight, W-E-I-G-H-T, weight, W-A-I-T, drought out. That's the expression in the people who invest in grains, not trade grains, buying a low, solemn high, but say, I'm going to park this in my portfolio. It's going to be a diversifier. And that 1% may go down a 10th of a percent across my portfolio may give me a 10% decline if grains go down 10% and I own 1%. But if they go up 100%, like they sometimes do, fast in the history, I'm going to make 1%

in my portfolio for a low-risk diversifier. I think that's how a lot of people look at it. The golden grain cycle, it's an interesting read. It explains that. Maybe there's a nice segue for us to talk about a new fund that Tukram recently launched, which is a long short agricultural ETF. What was the inspiration? What is this supposed to do? Talk about it. Thank you. That's a great question. Our inspiration is we think the future, machines are taking over.

Everybody's got a machine to do something faster and better than a human. And what are they call a chat box, the thing that writes kid's school papers now, does whatever you want it to do. That's coming in investing. What machines are doing now, basically multi-factor regression analysis that can be done by a machine, you put a risk overlay in it, it's looking at thousands of data points. It's what the finance industry is always done. It's what we all do. We look at data points and make decisions. But machines now can look at more than we can look at, faster than we can look at, and they can learn. They can say, wait a minute, that didn't work. Why didn't it work? Next time it happens, this will happen instead of that. And so what we're looking at is an index that is run by a machine. It has a six-year track history that's quite good. and all we're going to do is track that index.

So the fund does not have a 60-year tracker. Let me be clear. The index does. We've opened a fund in order to passively track the index. It's a passive fund. All we do, we make no decisions. We follow the index. I understand your phrasing of passive.

This is obviously super active, but it's following an index. I guess it's the terminology here. Correct. But it's an active index. We're just following. So who's the index provider here? It's called Opel AI. They're based out of Singapore.

We were introduced to them by a very large agriculture company that everybody knows. And we researched these guys, and they actually come from ags and science. They're an index provider. And we're looking at it going, well, wait a minute. You're providing indexes to banks internationally and to hedge funds. And people are paying two and 20 or whatever the fees that banks are dinging them for and their structured product. They're ill-liquid.

I can't see them. They're only available to high-net-worth individuals and institutions. you have an index. It's published. Why can't I license that index stick it in an ETF and make it available to everybody at a really good price? I mean, comparatively. So we charge 149 bips, but you're not paying two and 20. It's totally liquid. It's totally transparent. You see what it holds every night on the website, and you can train it in and out of it. Are you short eggs or are we riding the momentum? Eggs aren't in there, but that's pretty good. I just put an eggs article up on Forbes this morning. It's pretty funny. But eggs have their own little set of supply and demand fundamentals that are pretty

interesting. It's bird flu took out. Basically, the flock is 5% smaller. Over the course of the last year, the flock has averaged about 5% smaller, less laying hens, egg-laying hens than normal. But we're only getting 3.2% less eggs. So the chickens that are there are working harder for us, which is a good thing. But the price of eggs went way up mainly, I think, because of energy and feed. Those are the costs that these poultry producers and egg producers are struggling with. Then you had the bird flu come in, and the government policy is you get one bird in a million bird flock, you kill a whole million birds. They don't let anybody live. They come in and just take the whole thing out. They're kind of like the Chinese locking everybody down during COVID, but the USDA is a little

more drastic when it comes to chicken flocks. I want to get back into the investment process of this index. So what's the difference between the inputs in a quantitative rules-based strategy and something that is using AI to trade? Is it just that the model is going to be updated more often? What's the difference there. So quantitative rules base, it's when X and Y happened, you do Z. But I'm looking at thousands of inputs, and they could be anything. And I'm making an instant decision on, say, bean oil. The last time all these 2,000 things lined up in this particular way, over the last 30 years, seven out of ten times bean oil goes up. I'm just making this up as an example. So I'm going to buy bean oil. But if it doesn't work, if that trade doesn't work, the next time when it looks at it,

it says, well, wait a minute, it didn't work. It literally learns as it goes. It might say, well, everything lined up again and in a quantitative strategy that a human is running and say, well, okay, it'll probably work this time. It didn't work last time, but work seven out of 11 times. It's still pretty good to put it on. The machine won't do that. The machine learns what was different, what wasn't, what do I wait differently?

And it's been very effective in doing that in the index for the last six years. And this isn't like a directional strategy where it's going long at certain points and short at certain points. It's market neutral, meaning it's constantly. hedged and whatever's left is which directional bets are made in the right way? Not any of that. It's an alpha fund. It goes long, short, or flat? And it does it with agricultural commodities, this particular fund, OAAIA. And it's literally learning as it goes. It overlays risk parameters of volatility and maximum drawdowns and things like that. And it

trades. And it can be flat. It can just sit in cash. What's a turnover? Like you say, it trades. What's the average holding period? That I can't answer directly. I can't tell you, it trades every single day. We get trade singles every single day. Would you expect this then, since it's a market-neutral strategy, to be far less volatile than the commodities themselves? Or is that not true? I don't know statistically if it's true or not. I mean, the performance is up on the website. Their monthly performance is up there, and it has some losing months and more winning months. And I don't even think it's meant to be market-neutral. This is an alpha strategy. This is meant for somebody who, say, in our case, wants ag exposure. They don't know when to go long. They don't know when

go short and they want this. If I had 2,000 traders and each one of them focused on their own individual input, I still couldn't get them to agree on a trade. The machine can do it. It's fantastic. This is for people who don't want to try to guess when we're going to get back to the cost of production or figure out when to put their hedge and trade on. That's correct. It's a different kind of product. It's an alpha product. It's a product where you want positive returns from this. I saw a tweet this morning. Christopher Barad tweeted, China's reopening comes with a $720 billion dollar inflation bomb. I don't know where that number exactly comes from, but the chart that he's showing is the net increase in China's household savings deposits and looks like it doubled almost

in 2022 as the people were locked down. It appears as if they're reopening. A lot of like the data on flights and things like that is going vertical. If there is a reopening in China, what might that do to the demand side of the equation? I think it goes up for everything. I think. Inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods. Production's increasing everywhere. People are pouring money in since the post-COVID production problems across the board. That's being fixed. But China reopens really quickly and there's really that much money coming in. The other thing is, let's not forget, there were estimates that Europe was going to spend a trillion dollars, and they claim they already have, in supporting their people and businesses

for their higher energy costs. And the estimates were it might be $2 trillion or higher if winter's cold. well, winter isn't cold, so we've saved at least a trillion dollars. But supposedly a trillion dollars is out there in Europe that they printed and shoveled out there. And it probably went to the energy sector, okay? But it went somewhere. It's out there. This is real money. This isn't QE like I'm going to make the banks have plenty of liquidity so it can be business as usual. This is, I'm giving people real money. That's the difference. We had QE for years. There was no inflation. When everybody got a COVID check, we got inflation because it's real money. It's not just business as usual, keep the bank stable. This is, wow, I have some money. Let's go. And wow,

if that's the case in China, I would expect inflation will be a little bit more tenacious. Do you think that there's hopefully some balance on the other side of that, though, that the supply chains have been fixed a little bit and that will be able to handle some of this, maybe increased demand? Or you think things are still pretty screwed up? I think we'll still be screwed up, but I think that the supply chains are improving every day. Follow the money. Just produce, produce, produce. If you are a producer, just produce. Even the U.S. where they hate you if you produce fossil fuels. We're at record natural gas production, and I think we're going to hit record crude oil production again next year. We're still going. Even though when things are working

against you, you follow the money. And the rewards are tremendous to produce commodities right now. Fast forward a year from now, are the potential problems with European energy fixed? Could a cold winter be a big problem? Or is it just completely dependent on what happens with Russia and Ukraine? A cold winter will still be a problem next year. Because remember, until they, they replace their steady supply of energy, what's in storage. So the natural gas in storage is not enough to get them through the winter. So if you were to get a cold winter again next year, we've got a warm winter this year. But if you were to actually get a cold winter next year, they can only get their storage so full. They're going to build more LNG import

facilities. They are building out as fast as they can. Their wind and solar and all that for their electric. I imagine that they're going to try to increase. There's a lot going on in the Netherlands where they're closing fields because they want to get away from those fossil fuels and the earthquakes. There's that one giant gas field they close because of earthquakes. And they can reopen that and take the earthquake risk. And Europe has a new gas supplier. They've got to fix the steady incoming supply. Because remember, in the winter, you draw from your normal sources and your storage. So until they make normal sources more normal, the storage isn't enough to handle a cold winter all by itself. And luckily, this winter just hasn't been.

cold. By the latest readings, I think the latest number was 140% of economists are predicting a recession this year, give or take. If that happens, I mean, that has to hurt the commodities markets correct. In some way, there's going to be a slowing of demand and recession would bring prices down. You'd have to think, yeah. But there's too much coming at us in terms of what you just said about China and all that money sloshing around what they put in Europe. I think the Fed's got a tough job ahead of it. And remember, how the Fed slows the economy is killing the consumer. kill consumers and businesses with high interest rates, but everything else stays the same. You still need a place to live. You still need to eat. But they just want anything that you do

voluntarily, your disposable income and your discretionary spending and your risk-taking as a business. They want to make that more expensive for you. And so it slows that down. So that, in turn, slows demand down. But the demand for commodities for housing, for food, for energy, for cars, for the new metals for the green economy, that demand just keeps going higher. You'd have to have a heck of a recession to kill that. It does kind of seem like if it is a mild recession, that's kind of everyone's baseline right now. If it's going to be a recession, it's going to be mild. I guess that could slow things down for a little bit.

But to your point, those demands are structural. That's not like they're just going to go away unless we had some massive financial crisis. Correct. That's the case. And as commodity price go down, people will be willing to spend more and take more risk and grab more commodities. I'm almost thinking there's not going to be a recession. If there is, it's going to be particular to industries. It's going to hurt the things that are selling discretionary items. Your basic real

stuff to grow the economy, take care of all these people that just keep coming as the population grows. And as the middle class grows around the world, that's not going to stop. You've been doing this for a while. Did you learn or relearn anything interesting about investor behavior after a wild year for 2022? Normally, the agricultural market is not front and center, but it certainly was last year. Can you talk about what your experience was working with investors? I learned that headlines are just about more important than anything. To us, we're ag-centric, so we're always thinking about ags. And the number of people who all of a sudden paid attention to them was just astounding to me. And I'd like to think that they'll continue paying

attention to them. I mean, once people get oil in their portfolio, they tend to keep it there. Once people get gold in their portfolio, they tend to keep it there. I'm hoping that they understand that ags are a great diversifier. They're a good thing to lay. in when they're trading at their cost of production because history shows it's only a matter of time before supplies are disrupted again and the demand just keeps going unabated. And then you've got the new products where things are coming out. You want to sector exposure and yet you want to see if you can get yourself in good returns too. So these new machine things that we've put out. You don't have to sell very hard with 9% inflation. No, we didn't have sell very hard

with Russia invading Ukraine. I mean, that's for sure. I think that's really did it for us. I mean, Our Wheat Fund headlined, and everybody looked at corn. The soybeans were in the news a couple of years before when Trump was fighting with China. I find that commodities are dependent on headlines. I guess to your original point, when Michael asked, should these have an expected return? And you said, no, it should be the cost for production. The reason that doesn't happen is because it's almost always something that happens. People get in the way or an event or it's either geopolitical or its mother nature or something

causes that to get off track. Correct. And the commodity by itself isn't producing. any income. It represents value that somebody else. So a commodity company, you invest in the sector that uses commodities, that's going to have an expected return. But a commodity itself is not going to have an expected return because it's just itself. It's just supplied demand. You've spoken a bunch about that these things should ultimately trade at the cost of production and obviously it fluctuates wildly, especially when there's headline events. Are these things

that people can look up? Do you write about it? Is it a formula? Is it an opinion? How do people know what the cost of production is for sugar, because I don't know. The easiest way to tell everybody, look at a futures chart. Look at a spot continuation futures chart, and it will tell you where it's flatlining, and that's the future's equivalent cost of production. Because remember, if you're looking at corner sugar or oil, wherever, they're producing that all over the world. So everybody's cost of production is different.

But the most visible liquid point is at the futures delivery point. That's what's represented in a deliverable futures contract. And so that's where you look. I should just say, please don't try this at home. That's right. Be cautious. Talk to your investment advisor. Know what you're buying. When you're buying a commodity's ETF, know what it is. Is it passively following the commodity itself? So the commodity's got to go up to give you an absolute return. Where is it in its cycle? Can you expect a return or just diversification? Or are you going to look for products like OAIA that we hope will give you a return over time that's steady? But that's really an alpha product. It's a different box that you check. Perfect. Where can we send people to read some of your research sale? Tukrium.com. It's a wealth of knowledge. We do tweet at Tukrium ETFs, but Tukrium.com has everything on it. We do put out several papers. We put out a 2023 Outlook. We do write things and sometimes get it right. So everybody's welcome to go there. Use whatever's on there. If it's public, it's public domain. Appreciate the time, Sal. Thank you.

Always a pleasure, guys. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks again to Sal for coming on. Remembertukrium.com to learn more about the new fund, all their other funds they already had, email us, animals, Spherespot at gmail.com.