The Canadian Investor - The importance of position sizing when investing

Episode Date: February 22, 2021

In this week’s episode, we talk about some recent earnings releases and news. We then talk about position sizing, how we approach it in our own portfolio and how it can help you mitigate risk. Tickers of stocks discussed: SHOP.TO Want to send us a question? Check out our Anchor.fm link in the description below and leave us a voice message! Getstockmarket.com Candian Investor Pod Twitter: @cdn_investing Simon’s twitter: @Fiat_Iceberg Braden’s twitter: @BradoCapital --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/the-canadian-investor/messageSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome back into the show. This is the Canadian Investor Podcast, made possible by our friends and show sponsor, EQ Bank, which helps Canadians make bank with high interest and no fees on everyday banking. We also love their savings and investment products like GICs, which offer some of the best rates on the market. I personally, and I know Simone as well, is using the GICs, which offer some of the best rates on the market. I personally, and I know Simone as well, is using the GICs on a regular basis to set money aside for personal income taxes in April of every year. Their GICs are perfect because the interest rate is guaranteed, and I know I won't be able to touch that money until I need it for tax time. Whether you're looking to set some money aside for a rainy day or a big purchase is

coming through the pipeline or simply want to lower the risk of your overall investment portfolio, EQ Bank's GICs are a great option. The best thing about EQ Bank is that it is so easy to use. You can open an account and buy a GIC online in minutes. Take advantage of some of the best rates on the market today at eqbank.ca forward slash GIC. Again, eqbank.ca forward slash GIC. Live from the great white north, this is the Canadian Investor, where you take control of your own portfolio and gain the confidence you need to succeed in the markets. Hosted by Braden Dennis and Simon Belanger. The Canadian Investor Pod. It's February 17th.

We talked a little bit about some news. Shopify released earnings this morning. So you know, we're going to talk about position sizing. And we're going to keep it to position sizing because we were talking, we were texting back and forth, and we thought, not only do we get lots of questions about position sizing, but it's really important. And I've been learning tons about position sizing,

I want to say just in the last year in the way I think about it. And it's something I don the way I think about it. And it's something that I don't think I thought about enough. So yeah, I've been dabbling a bunch in that. So Simon, how's it going, man? Yeah, it's going well. Just finished working and now getting ready to record that episode. And I think position sizing and also how concentrated and diversified you are, that will probably go all in this discussion. I think it's really important. And I think it is overlooked by a lot of people as well.

So it'll be a fun discussion. Yeah. Yeah. I'll admit, like, I overlooked it a little bit too so um okay so shopify just reported their year end of 2020 quarter four wow some pretty good numbers revenues are up 94 for the quarter for 977 million in revenue for the quarter so not so bad almost double and uh gross gross volume for 2020 for things that they sell, that their merchants sell, $119.6 billion, an increase of 96% over 2019. And for the full year, $2.9 billion in sales, increase of 86 percent net income to 491 million the stock's down right now today we're just recording at the close here around three and a half percent but it actually opened down over seven percent because toby and management on the call said revenue will be growing rapidly, but not as quickly as in 2020 when it increased 86% to 2.9,

3 billion. The company said Wednesday, like, are we, are we surprised that of course some, some growth was pulled forward. Of course, like everything digital and e-commerce was pulled forward of course like everything digital and e-commerce was pulled forward but

i can't believe the stock is selling off on these results i mean this is a very good business maybe it's a valuation thing i'm curious on your thoughts here oh yeah i'm actually not surprised that it's down contrary to you uh the main reason is it's purely evaluation. So people have a tendency to project in the future what is happening right now or in the near future or in the recent past. And I think Shopify is a great example for that. I mean, how can you not like those results? I mean, they just blew it out of the water. And they're not the only business that really got huge tailwinds from the pandemic. But I think a lot of people get caught up and especially when it comes to really growth stocks, they tend to get caught up and project that well into the future. And then when management kind of pulls back that that vision, not that they misled anyone or anything like that, they

they haven't, I don't think they have. But it's just people's expectations, right? Get all out of whack. And then management basically gives really good forecasts for the business. But then it's not as high as people are expecting. And then the stock gets a pullback. So I think it's just a cautionary tale for a lot of people. When you invest in growth stocks that have really stretched multiples

this is one of the risks you may look at an earnings report that looks like that is that is basically awesome that it's great but because those expectations were just out of whack by investors then you can get a pullback just like that yeah good point i I mean, the stock's trading like 80 times sales ago um so it's it's uh it's good to take a a wider view of these things and you're right i mean the guidance obviously toby's not going to come out and say yeah we're going to double revenue every single year like no of course like that's not going to happen forever right Right. So of course, some of the growth was pulled forward. Oh God. I just wish I owned this stock because it's so expensive yet.

I want to own it so I could just stop having this mental battle with myself at this point because it's such a good business. And I wonder if like a lot of these companies when you look at a multiple we're just so expensive and then continue to have growth rates that we just weren't thought we didn't think were sustainable um so like some of those fang stocks have been able to pull out these numbers for like two decades now it's pretty. I wonder if it's in that category, and a lot of people are wondering if it is as well, and that's why it trades at such an expensive multiple.

But I think this is actually a good segue into position sizing because the upside is obviously massive for a huge total adjustable market that Shopify has. But if you are wrong and you're paying too high a price and the stock does nothing for a while, even if, you know, Toby and all continue to execute incredibly well, then you might not want it to be, you know, a huge conviction in terms of position sizing.

So do you think that's a good segue do you think that's a good segue i think that's a good segue yeah yeah no i i think it's uh it's a great segue and especially um you know a business might look almost bulletproof right and we can just project in the future and you cannot think of anything bad happening for that business. Like the sky is the limit, but, um, I, do you remember about PG and E what happened with them?

Is that right? Is that the oil and gas company or the pharma company? No, it's a, it's neither, but Hey, I just put you on the spot. So it's my bad.

Um, so it's the utility, the California utility company that, um, basically ended up pleading guilty for, uh, one of the big fires that happened a few years ago. Oh, the utility. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know what you're talking about.

I know what you're talking about. Yeah. And just to show, I mean, typically utilities are considered really safe investments, right? So I'm sure there might have been people that were holding a pretty big portion of their portfolio in PG&E and then all hell broke loose for them and the company actually filed for bankruptcy. If you would have said that a few years before the fire started and they filed for bankruptcy, I'm sure a lot of people would have said like, oh, this is like a bond-like company. There's almost no risk and so on. So it kind of goes back to that position sizing where, yes, a company may look bulletproof, but there's always going to be some kind of risk. Right.

And you've got to leave that margin of safety in your position sizing that sometimes you're just wrong. Like, I could fill a whole library of books of things I'm wrong about all the time. Like seriously. So you got to factor that in, right? Yeah, exactly. That's it.

As do-it-yourself investors, we want to keep our fees low. That's why Simone and I have been using Questrade as our online broker for so many years now. Questrade is Canada's number one rated online broker by MoneySense. And with them, you can buy all North American ETFs, not just a few select ones, all commission free so that you can choose the ETFs that you want. And they charge no annual RRSP or TFSA account fees.

They have an award-winning customer service team with real people that are ready to help if you have questions along the way. As a customer myself, I've been impressed with Questrade's customer service. Whenever I call or email, every support rep is very knowledgeable and they get exactly what I need done quickly. Switch for free today and keep more of your money. Visit questrade.com for details. That is questrade.com. Okay, so position sizing. Let me talk about the Kelly Criterion. So the Kelly Criterion is a mathematical formula by John Kelly. In 1956, he published this this paper it outlines how people should size their stakes in like gambling and betting games and it's now looked at and used by many famous investors

on how to appropriately size their stake and in portfolio application and other position sizing. So I'm not going to get into the math. The formula uses either a full Kelly or a half Kelly to determine a perfect optimization and calculation of how you should stake your size in a bet. and calculation of how you should stake your size in a bet. So I don't use it exactly like the formula, but the concept of it and the theory of it I think is really powerful in terms of how much you should size your position. And it really comes down to the higher the conviction,

then the higher the position size it should be. And here's an example, right? So if I, Simon, if I give you some super high upside bet, but you only have like a one in 10 chance of, of winning, you're obviously not going to bet your whole net worth on that correct but you know that there is a huge upside if you win and you want to gamble so you you put down a few bucks does that seem fair yeah yeah exactly that's how i would do it okay so what if i told you that you will get an 100 return if the sun rises tomorrow. Are you betting your whole net worth? I mean, I would probably bet most of it.

The sun rising tomorrow, come on. Hey, you never know what can happen, right? Okay, I was not expecting that answer. Maybe there's an eclipse. Maybe there's a comet or something that blocked the sun i don't know i don't have a i'm not an astronomer but obviously i'm just i'm just being facetious a little bit but yeah i'd be willing to bet a whole lot on that right okay so yes that is the so we'll say simon put% of his net worth on the sun rising. Just edging a little bit.

Yeah, yeah. He's got the 1%. For the end of the world. It's Simon, so he probably has the other 1% in Bitcoin. Okay, so here's an example of accordingly matching position sizing based on conviction. You know, you're going to bet the house on something that you know has a pretty good chance or what you believe is to be a much higher probability of you being right. So when I think about these things in position sizing, it's really just a direct correlation to my conviction and risk reward being baked into position sizing. So if something has a huge

upside potential that I don't feel like I need a huge position in if I'm right, but if I'm just dead wrong,'s not gonna hurt and i think about this as like bitcoin so i mean simon you you're making me announce on the podcast i officially own a position as of like last week ding ding ding ding it's it's so small but this is how i think about the upside if it's right if i'm right you know or not if if i'm right but if the bitcoin story is right then i don't need a whole lot if there's something that a lot of the bulls are just not factoring in they're underestimating the government risk and you know whatever long laundry risk laundry list of risks there might be to that asset class i'm not gonna you know be hurting from that so i think this is a perfect example of of using the kelly criterion and conviction in terms of

position sizing yeah exactly and i like i posted a screenshot of my portfolio just with the percentages i think a week and a half ago on twitter so if you guys are interested you can look at that it's fiat underscore uh iceberg and essentially you'll see in my portfolio it's very similar to what brayden is saying i'll have some positions that are way smaller than others. Some it's because I just did a starter position and never got into adding to it yet. So keep that in mind. But you'll notice one of them that's done really well and it was actually just a starter position but it was never meant to be a big position to begin with is Etsy. So Etsy specifically, Etsy is I think up five or six times since I bought it. And it's become a pretty decent position because I, you know, it just upside was right there. I

mean, not that I was afraid that Etsy would go bankrupt or anything, but I knew it was a riskier stock than, for example, a Brookfield Renewable partner. So when I start my positions, that's the reasoning I kind of look at when I started building my portfolio, I had more like anchor stocks, so stocks that were a bit more stable, had good growth prospects, but it wasn't the risk factor was way lower. And then I had these kind of long shot or moonshot kind of investments where I would assign a smaller, very small percentage for some of them to potentially have the UJIP side that Brayden just explained. So that's, that's also the way I'm doing it. So if you want to have a look a bit the way I'm thinking about

it, just have a look and Teladoc's another one where it started as a small position and has grown to be a pretty big one as well yeah good point um yeah and so i guess i'm asking you did you did you trim at sea at all or you just let it grow into what it is uh just letting it grow yeah yeah okay and i think that's the right play too because you know over that time your conviction might have increased accordingly right yeah? Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, I wish I wish I would have bought more than just that starting position. And I mean, it was, it was one third of basically what I wanted to, to start an Etsy. So it's done quite well. But I definitely wish I would have done more. But you know, it's, it is what it is. Hindsight is 2020. You can just, you know, do the best you can with the information

you have when you do invest. Okay. So the rest of this podcast, we're going to talk about position sizing and just like kind of our own applications of it in our portfolios. So it's going to be super just casual. Simon, can you give me an example of something? Let's take this to the to the counter side, something that you just have a small position in now that you're you're applying this this mental model into the reasoning for why it's a small position. And your lack of knowledge in the name like a starter position is kind of that exact application of it, right? Because you don't know the business perfectly well, you're baking into that risk assumption that you just might not know everything, right? So that's kind of like what a starter position is in nature is that level of conviction

and how you're sizing it accordingly. Yeah, I mean, one, a good example, I'm just looking at my portfolio as we're talking. So a good example was Axon that I talked about. So that one, I did a starter position back in July, and it's almost doubled since. I already had done some research on the business but I'm not going to lie that I know that business in and out that's not true and it is like you just said it's actually a good incentive when you do a small starter position to actually keep an eye on it you know just do a bit more research you have that extra incentive because now you have skin in the game. So that's an example of one that's a starter position is still done well, still a relatively small portion of my portfolio.

So I could still see myself adding to it in the future. That's a good point about starter positions in terms of aligning the incentives to actually research the business more. And I know you and I both do this, to actually research the business more. And I know you and I both do this, but a lot of like big professional managers do the same. You know, they'll be managing huge funds and they'll do the same thing.

They'll initiate tiny, like half percentage of the portfolio into something that they just need to do more work on. And they, you know, they've obviously done the work. They're managing money. But they would say that they don't know the ins and outs of the business like they know maybe the 10 other names in the portfolio. So they're sizing that accordingly as well

because that could be a risk that you just don't understand. That you don't understand the risks is the risk of the position right so it's something it's something to consider yeah yeah exactly do you have one that you have like a small starter position or maybe one that you're thinking about that's a bit riskier yeah aside from bitcoin yeah well i know we just talked about it, but I think Shopify is, and not that I think that it's risky in terms of the business. The business is crushing it.

Execution is incredible. It's the risk that I could just be paying a multiple that it's going to take so long for it to grow into. And we've seen this happen so much, right? It's something trading at those outrageous sales numbers, especially in what people consider a frothy market. And I could argue that all day. I mean, interest rates are zero, and there's lots of reasons to think that it's a good time to be an investor all the time, but especially now too. It's a good time to be an investor all the time, but especially now too.

And I think about that as an example. Let me rack my brain here. Oh, Unity Software is one that I'm starting a position in for next month's picks on the real money portfolios at Stratosphere. Unity is a company that owns a very, very large market share in the mobile gaming industry. Over 50% of mobile games on the App Store are built on their gaming engine. And then pretty much the other half of gaming is built on the Unreal Engine, which is owned by Tencent. So I feel between those two companies that have a really good grasp on the gaming engine business. But I'll tell you why Unity fits that criteria.

One, the stock is not cheap by any metric. The upside is huge in the fact that you can apply, and I'm already seeing this, like I'm an engineer, so I'm seeing the applications of the gaming engine in terms of modeling real estate buildings uh industrial projects and energy and combined cycle natural gas plants they're building these really really awesome models before construction actually in unity or in the Unreal Engine. And you can do all this really, really cool modeling. So that's an upside of Unity that if

it plays out, the stock's super undervalued. Like it just straight up is because it's way more than just a gaming engine. And same thesis with the Unreal Engine owned by tencent is yes it's it's gonna probably do well just owning market share and gaming because that has so many secular uh um tailwinds but like that upside of beyond that is is something i consider but i might not need to have the whole portfolio in that because what if i'm just I have a bias if I'm seeing it in my day job and I might be applying it too much to the actual growth of the business in terms of the upside outside of gaming like if I'm just wrong on that then you know maybe it does okay with the gaming business but if I'm right I don't need it to be a 20% position in my portfolio.

So I think Unity is the one I'm looking at right now in terms of a smaller starter position. And if my conviction grows, I have no problem backing the truck. I mean, the stock's down a bunch too, based on their latest guidance. So opportunity i saw arc invest bought unity on this dip too so other people are looking at this as well yeah yeah other people are looking at this as an opportunity so anyways yeah i think that's a pretty good example but have lots on the other side too where it's such a big part of the portfolio. Yeah, and I think most investments, if you size them appropriately, I mean, there's not really any investments when you think about it. I'm sure there is, like, obviously some really poor ones.

But overall, if you do your sizing appropriately, most investments are probably fine to consider as long as your sizing is done correctly. And I'm going to tell the story I told you about one of my friends. His buddy had somewhere around $300,000 to invest. And he put, I think if I remember correctly, $200,000 worth of it in Virgin Galactic. That basically, Virgin Galactic has no revenue so far. I think they just have people. And I remember when he told me that i just couldn't believe it and you know i'm not saying like i personally would not invest in virgin galactic because i i'm not a rocket engineer

by any stretch of the imagination but the way i see it is space travel will probably become a bit like airlines were let's just say in the 40s and 50s when the technology came out and then as soon as something becomes profitable you there will be some competitors eventually so that's kind of my thesis where I'm kind of reluctant as to the profitability of space travel at least in the short term, and I mean, in the long term, in the shorter term, maybe there's opportunity there, but that's why I'm reluctant. But say you want a piece of the space travel industry, and Virgin Galactic is a company you're interested in, that's fine. But do your sizing appropriately. Because if your thesis is right and I'm completely wrong on the thesis you won't need much more probably than 0.5 or 0.25 percent of your portfolio for it to make

a really significant difference because if you're you know 100xing that position it's going to become massive even with that tiny tiny percentage so it's just to keep that in mind. If you're looking really at super risky pre-revenue things, it's fine. It's up to you. Obviously, it's your money. But just make sure you do that position sizing appropriately because that will be the biggest driver in terms of the risk to your portfolio. Yeah, good point.

As do-it-yourself investors, we want to keep our fees low. That's why Simone and I have been using Questrade as our online broker for so many years now. Questrade is Canada's number one rated online broker by MoneySense. And with them, you can buy all North American ETFs, not just a few select ones, all commission-free so that you can choose the ETFs that you want. And they charge no annual RRSP or TFSA account fees. They have an award-winning customer service team with real people that are ready to help if you have questions along the way. As a customer myself, I've been impressed with Questrade's customer service. Whenever I call or email, every support rep is very knowledgeable and they get exactly what I need done quickly. Switch for free today and keep more of your money. Visit questrade.com for details. That is

questrade.com. So I know what a lot of people do, a lot of people I engage with on Twitter So I know what a lot of people do, a lot of people I engage with on Twitter, is what they'll do is like the top 10 positions will make up so much of the portfolio. And they might have like 20, 25 positions, but the actual allocation of the top 10 is like 90%. So they're running like a long list of stocks in terms of their personal account, maybe 25 stocks, which I think is a lot for a personal account. But that being said, they're actually running a super, super concentrated portfolio because five or six names make up like 85% of the portfolio and they're applying the Kelly criterion. So I'll give him a couple examples of how I do this in, in my portfolio too. Uh, you guys on this podcast know that I have this long distance love affair with Mark Leonard from constellation software.

And the guy's just brilliant. And he finally came out with a president's letter first time in 2017. And he coined a term called high performing conglomerates, HPCs. He talks about lots of them like Donaher, Transdime, Berkshire Hathaway, talking about some of these managers running super, super high return on invested capital, conglomerates, and acquisition companies. And the model really works. I mean, you spin off free cash flow and you buy new companies. What you end up with is a super diversified company.

So Constellation Software owns over 500 software companies. Constellation Software owns over 500 software companies. So when I think about that, there is built-in diversification immediately in that company. If any one of the 500 software companies sucks, it's probably not going to make hardly a dent on Constellation's financials. So when I think about that, and my conviction for their ability to every year like clockwork continue to make acquisitions, larger and more frequent vertical market software companies, my conviction that they're able to every year increase revenue

and increase free cash flow is very, very high. So I will position something like that or another or any other type of free cash flow, high performing conglomerate type business that owns tons of tons of companies within it. I'm not too worried about having a super high position sizing for something like that. So I know people that have CSU as you know, well over 20% of the portfolio, it only trades on the TSX, which is great, you're getting some of that alpha for Canadians. And it's something to consider, right? Because it's not just one business, it's a whole long list of businesses. And my conviction super high. So I'll size that one

accordingly. A Visa and MasterCard, for instance, I talk about them all the time, because my conviction so high, I'm going to I'm going to size that accordingly. So even if you have a portfolio of 25 companies, some of the conviction levels in terms of how much it actually makes up in your portfolio, it's not going to be all equally weighted. And I think that's the right way to go. I think I used to be an equal weighted kind of guy. I don't know if it's to cure some, like, it's a nice looking pie chart at your portfolio and they're all equally weighted, but I actually think that's the wrong way to go. And I've changed my mind on this, I want to say in the last six months to a year. So I'm curious, have you always kind of sized accordingly to your conviction? Or? Yeah, I'm curious about that.

Yeah. Yeah, I've always been I started position a little heavier in certain companies for sure. It's been I started position a little heavier in certain companies for sure. So Brookfield Renewable Partners is the is my biggest holding by far. I think it represents about 20 percent of my portfolio. But when I started investing, really, I tried to have like some anchor stocks like I just mentioned. So I would have bigger starting positions in those. And then I had other stocks where they were still good companies, some were a bit riskier, and then I would start my positions accordingly. So I would kind of vary based on that because obviously I'm going to go back. I can compare Brookfield Renewable Partners

to Teladoc, for example. You know, I think I have a way stronger conviction, at least back then, I had a way stronger conviction for Brookfield Renewable Partners and its future prospects and the future renewable energy, but also the stability of Brookfield, the dividend. So those were all factors that made me start a bigger position in that. I think originally when I started was a bit under 10%. Teladoc, I had strong conviction, but because they were not profitable just yet, and I saw a lot of prospect in the future for Teladoc, but also recognized that some things could go wrong and it could also not pan out. So I've always kind of approached it that way.

I have always liked to edge my risk a bit more. And when I do like a company, but I do see a lot of risk with it, even though I think it could be a multi bagger, I adjust my position sizing accordingly. So I'm definitely, you know, on board with that. And the fact with my work as well, I have a defined contribution pension, and I don't have a choice but to be in index funds with that pension. So that's the only option really. I do get a lot of diversification on there. So I don't mind being a bit more concentrated for the portfolio I manage. Yeah, that's a good, that's a great point because you already have that index portfolio on the side.

You can run something probably more concentrated in your personal account. Yeah, exactly. And you guys can, like I posted it on Twitter, you guys can go have a look. I posted the percentages and what each account represents in terms of my holdings because the percentages in Questrade are specific to that account. And you'll see I have some positions that look really big compared to others, mainly Brookfield. Yeah.

Yeah. Shocker there that is. This is a really good way to end the show. We got a question on our Twitter, CDN underscore investing. So he's talking about asking us about managing a $10,000 portfolio. And this segues actually well with position sizing. So he's talking about asking us about managing a ten thousand dollar portfolio and this this segues actually well with position sizing so he's saying that he's depositing money in his in his account every payday and we get this question all the time simon should i focus building the one position with my like ten thousand dollars or even like what I'm adding with the $500 or just diversify right away? And we've answered this a handful of times, but I think, you know, if you're taking a portion of your portfolio every month, just one position is fine. You're going to dollar cost average

other things over time. You don't need to go rack up a bunch of trades on your like, monthly contribution amount. Right? Yeah, yeah, exactly. And I mean, when you have a lump sum, you'll probably want to at least split it between at least a few positions. So like, let's say you have that $10,000. Like, I think it'd be a bit foolish personally to just stick it in one position, and that's it. But if you split it into at least a few different holdings, and then as you're adding more regularly, then you build, build your other old things that you want to have, or you add to your existing position. And that's the whole power of dollar cost averaging and not having to time the market. So I think it's kind of personally, I've done it,

I've had a lump sum before to work with from a previous pension. And that's what I did. So I basically had, you know, a handful of holdings that I used a lump sum for did in installments. And then as I was adding more and more money over time, then I built more in my portfolio over time that way. Yeah, that's a great point if you're doing a lump sum you definitely want to diversify it i sorry i thought it was confusing i just meant like the monthly contributions or the paycheck contributions i don't think you need to split those into you know 10 odd positions yeah well it depends how how rich you are i guess yeah i mean if you're putting 100k every month you

may want to put it in more than one position i know but also if you're getting 100k every month then you'll have another 100k next month and you can put that in something else um okay i think that does it for this week guys uh one other thing actually on that is this goes back it's all coming back to position sizing is you can continue to to add to the names in your portfolio you don't have to go search for new stocks or else you end up with a long list of stocks that you hardly even know what they are you can just keep adding to the ones that you have the highest conviction on. And you will naturally create a nice Kelly criterion type position sizing across your portfolio. As you continue to every month or every quarter or every, you know, paycheck,

whatever, whatever you want in your portfolio of position sizing that matches your conviction. I think that is a great way to go. I've really shifted from equal weighting mindset. All right, guys, that does it for this week. You can see model portfolios and my portfolio on Stratosphere. Go to GetStockMarketmarket.com it'll bring you right there you can make an account boom sign in takes two seconds and uh yeah there's also a community there you can ask questions i answer them like frequently fast because i have nothing better

else to do that does it for this week guys simon thank you for also uh chiming in on the community there you've been giving some good answers hey no problem yeah you just have to let me know sometimes i forget to check why tag you in them so then you get an email yeah exactly and for my portfolio i just have crappy screenshots on twitter yours is probably way better uh All right, guys, we will see you next week. Take care. Bye-bye. The Canadian investor is not to be taken as investment advice. Braden or Simone may own securities mentioned on this podcast. Always make sure to do your own research and due diligence before making investment decisions.