Yet Another Value Podcast - Planet Microcap 2025 Q&A with Artem Fokin of Caro-Kann Capital

Episode Date: May 21, 2025

In this episode of Yet Another Value Podcast, host Andrew Walker shares a keynote Q&A from the Showcase Vegas event with returning guest Artem Fokin of Caro-Kann Capital. Artem breaks down his concept of “superpowers” in investing—an individual’s unique edge based on comparative advantage—and how it shapes portfolio decisions. The discussion extends into sell discipline, including identifying when a thesis is broken and handling emotional pitfalls during drawdowns. Artem also touches on evaluating management teams, international microcap investing, and the psychological toll of investing for a living. The conversation is a practical dive into staying grounded and focused amid the volatility of markets.______________________________________________________________________[0:00:00] Intro & sponsor message.[0:02:45] Andrew introduces Artem.[0:03:45] Defining investment 'superpower'.[0:05:08] Artem's investing superpower explained.[0:06:30] Identifying others' superpowers.[0:08:15] Matching skills to stock selection.[0:09:30] Using expert calls effectively.[0:10:55] Selling stocks on thesis change.[0:13:46] Holding through macro noise.[0:15:12] Assessing management capability.[0:17:30] Micro vs. large cap dynamics.[0:19:30] International vs. US investing.[0:23:10] Mental resilience in investing.[0:26:00] Avoiding emotional decision-making.[0:30:00] Balancing fund and personal finance.[0:33:00] Final thoughts and close.Links:Yet Another Value Blog - https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com See our legal disclaimer here: https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com/p/legal-and-disclaimer

All right. Hello, welcome to the yet another value podcast. You are about to listen to a special episode. This is a recording of a 30-minute Q&A keynote interview I did with my friend Artem Foken from Carol Con Capital. Ardum is a super thoughtful guy, one of my favorite people in the industry to talk to. We did this towards the end of April. We had the video and I think people enjoyed it. Maybe they were just blowing smoke up my butt. Who knows? But we figured, hey, we've got the video. Let's toss it on the podcast. feed and let people get to know specifically how Arden thinks about things because, again, he's just one of my favorite people in the industry, one of the most thoughtful people I know. So you're going to

have that on the back end of this. There's a disclaimer video all the way at the end of this thing, but first, a word from our sponsor. This podcast is sponsored by FinTool. Those of you who have followed me on the blog, on the podcast, know that the two areas I've probably thought the most about over the past couple months is AI and corporate governance. And look, if you, are not using AI, you are getting left behind. And let me just marry those two thoughts in one way. If you read through proxies, there's one thing that you know. Proxies contain a lot of information, but they suck. Companies are almost intentionally obfuscating and bearing a lot of the interesting information here. Guess what? You can use AI to really cut through the noise

there. So FinTool just released the thing. You can go do a deep dive into every person in a company's executive roster. So, you know, if I'm looking at a company, I can go to the FinTool People tool. I can look at their CFO and I can see, hey, here's exactly how much he's paid. Here's everything that he's done. Here's everything that's been included about him in the proxy for the past five years. Here's all those key incentives points, summarized, laid out so that, you know, what used to take me a day of going through 12 different proxies and looking and matching and saying, was he on this board? When did he join this board? It takes 15 seconds. So look, go check out FinTool.

Start using AI. You are going to get left behind fast if you are not using AI as a fundamental investor. FinTool, really interesting product and it continues to evolve. Next up, I'd like to introduce our next keynote Q&A here at the Planet MicroCep Showcase, Vegas, and partnership with MicroCap Club. This is my favorite podcast that I listen to in finance. I've had the pleasure of working with Andrew for the last few years. just really enjoy all the work that he does and how much time and energy he does to prep

and just really amazing conversations on individual ideas. And so, yeah, we love to introduce Andrew Walker from host of yet another value podcast and his guest, The Inimitable Artem Fokin. Thanks, everyone for being here and listening to us Ramble for 30 minutes. I'm excited to be joined up here by my friend, one of my favorite people in finance, Artem Foken. I'll introduce him. He doesn't know this, but he is one of two people in the world where we've probably talked three times a week on the phone, but sometimes I dodge his calls because talking to him, I have to be so mentally on that I find it can be draining. So if I'm having a tough day or I'm tired, I'm like, man, I can't deal with Artem right now because I have to be on my A game. I can't be multitasking. I have to be ready. So he's just such an insightful investor, one of my favorite people in finance. Ardum, let's get this started. We've got 30 minutes of talk, you know, in our calls, I have stolen this, I have shamelessly stolen this from you.

You were the first ones to talk to me about it. But when you and I talk, a lot of times just talk to me about investments that we're looking at or companies we'll be looking at and having them fit into what is your superpower. So I'd love to start this off by having you to find, you know, when we talk about using your superpower investing, what that is. Sure. And you're welcome to steal my ideas as long as you want and as much as you want. So I, some time ago, I come up in my mind.

with this idea of a superpower, a superpower investor. And the premise is that every investor has a superpower. Why is that? Because I define it through a comparative advantage using economist Ricardo terminology. So every investor has a certain skill set and certain tools. And one of those skills is usually dominant,

while others are not as strong. And that's your investor. superpower. To be clear, you don't have to be in top 1% in the world in that specific scale or trade of the trade, but it's got to be more robust in your own toolkit than everything else that you have. And the consequence is that once I, in my opinion, once an investor identifies his or her superpower in the ideal outcome is to tailor the idea generation, research and positions in the portfolio to that superpower. Can you, well, let's start.

Why don't you give an example of, or why don't you talk about what you kind of think your superpower is and then we can dive into that a little bit further? So I think my superpower is matching a conceptual framework about the business model of the business with evidence that I collect from various dispersed sources. For example, one company that you and I talked privately a number of times that we have in the portfolio, I probably read about 70 export calls, did around 10 of my own, and then since then that number has only grown,

so probably now it's closer to 90 or 95, and then I was able to get discrete data points, a discrete pieces, to match them with the framework in my head about what makes this business. very strong. When you, so I want to dive into that real quick, but when you look at other investors, are you able to identify what their superpower is when you're talking to them or when you're looking at their portfolio? If I spend enough time with an investor, I think talking and discussing ideas, I think I can usually have a good guess what a superpower of this investor is.

When you talk to another investor, do you think the best investors that you talk to have kind of identified what their superpower is and used that to swing at the pitches that are fattest for them? My suspicion is that they have a good understanding of their superpower, even if they don't frame it that way. And that understanding can be explicit or implicit. The chess analogy would be Garikaspar, of the 13th champion of the world. He knew his style and he knew which type of positions on the board he plays the best.

He doesn't, he typically, remember, this is the chess champion. So he's strong, it's everything. But a certain type of positions plays better to his personality and style. And by the way, I also believe that the superpower is usually linked to what you love doing and to you as a person. No, like, that's what, it's so interesting to me because I hear, I see a lot of investors. And when I talk to them, I'm like, oh, my God, this guy is so good when he's analyzing real estate stocks or this guy is incredible at analyzing coal companies. And then I talk to them

and all they want to talk to me about is, hey, man, I'm really interested in, you know, Apple Leaps or I've been spending a lot of time thinking about Tesla. And I'm like, man, you are so good at, you are so good when I talk to you on real estate or whatever it is. Why are you even going out and doing that? But then the reason the superpower that you've talked to has resonated so much with me is I think about it on in my own investing. I'm like, hey, here's something that I think I'm really good at, but I love to look at all these different things. And like, I feel like I need to be more focused on what is my superpower? Does this company fit into my superpower?

How do I do that? So that's why it's just resonated so much with me in talking to you. And, yeah, I don't know if you want to say anything else about the superpower. I think that's all about superpower. One more question. When I asked you about your superpower, you said, hey, here's this company. I read 70 TIGUS calls. I did all this work.

You know, is reading, the first thing you went to was reading expert calls. Is reading expert calls part of your superpower? Like, how does that particular, which I think is like kind of the basic blocking and tackling of understanding a company and industry, how does that fit into your superpower? I think it's not about reading per se. It's about extracting information and putting that information into the right buckets. And by the way, in that particular case, I heard the pitch actually on your podcast. So a shout for yet not value a podcast, subscribe and follow.

And this is how I first found. about I found a next generation of the thesis. I knew about the company. I've heard two prior thesis before, never invested. But then when I heard the third generation of the thesis in a podcast, I thought that's interesting now. And then I went to work. And in that particular case, I started reading earnings calls,

having a historical model, and then I went to expert calls. So let's switch to, you just mentioned a company that you listened to two pitches on. You've done 100 expert calls, read 100 expert calls on them. So one thing that I've personally struggled with is selling a company when a position change. And look, we're talking here, Russell is down 20% in four months, right? It's very easy to say a stock is down 20%. It's hard to know, has the thesis broken or is it just soft macro?

You know, was that a bad quarter or was that a sign that the business is deteriorating? So I'd love to start talking to you a little bit about when you've done so much work on these companies and you've got a company that is down 10% reports a disappointing quarter. How do you separate, hey, this is just a bump in the road versus, hey, this is a company where something has materially changed, and I need to reassess, I need to sell, I need to get out. If I don't, I'm kind of just sucking my thumb and hoping for the best. I don't think because there is a silver bullet, and it's always difficult to do. And I would like to say that it gets better and easier over time. I'm not sure that it is, even though you have more experience. There are few tools.

in quotes that I found helpful, number one, going back and reviewing your notes if you speak with management or reviewing earnings called transcripts on conference called transcripts and seeing what management said six months ago, 12 months ago, versus what happened is a very valuable exercise. Do not rely on your memory and your own recall. I have a very strong recall, but still I would prefer, I've always preferred checking the notes and seeing what happened and mentioned that. It's almost as you're collecting evidence to prove a case whether the management is at fault, faulted quotes, meaning they did not execute, or whether it's an external environment and

whether those changes in the environment are temporary, and in that case, probably should hold the stock, or whether they're permanent. in that case, the world is different. The company that might have had tailwinds before, now it doesn't have them. And if your thesis was dependent on a secular growth story, now it's not a secular growth story, probably it's time to leave.

Do you, it's funny, you mentioned that, because we were talking right before this about a company that went poorly for me. And one of the things that happened was exactly what you said. Like in Q1, they said, oh, this is going to happen this year. And then in Q3, they said, no, it's probably not going to happen next year. And then, you know, here I've been Two years later, it's like it's always six months in the future.

Like what they've said would happen, what they've said would execute has never played out. And if I was being honest with myself, it said, hey, the thesis broke 18 months ago and you kind of just sat there waiting and hoping for the best. But your thesis didn't play out. When you talk about reassessing the companies, you invest all up and down the spectrum. And I'd love to talk to you about how that impacts you're investing in a second. But can you, do you need to give different amounts of rope and different amounts of leeway to a microcap company versus. a large cap company like can you give a little bit more leeway to the large cap company just because they have more resources so you know if they said they do

something in q2 and it's going to be a q3 thing it's not as dramatic as a microcap company just with less resources less cash less availability or do you have to give the same amount of rope to companies of all sizes the most accurate answer will have two words and it'll be very annoying it depends but now i try we'll try to generalize. I think it's fair to give Molli way to a smaller company. They have less resources, they have fewer people on the team, and they may have got distracted by other priorities of running the business. However, that leeway cannot be infinite. There are limits to that. And at some point, you need to say that this management may not be able to execute at the level

that you believe they would, or alternatively, and this is actually a lot more difficult to identify, is that the management that kept executing growing a company hypothetically from one million to 10, from 10 to 50, just hit the ceiling of their natural abilities, and they cannot grow beyond those 50 million. They are not the right team to take the company to the next level. But that's a lot more difficult to identify and make the judgment, because you look at the prior history of success and track record, and you say, they're stellar executors. You know, I hear a lot of people talk about the management teams that, as you said, like there's a manager team that's really good at running a business out of their garage

or going from one to 10 employees or 10 to 100 employees. And then, you know, that skill set might be different from going to 100 to 1,000 or 1,000 to 10,000. And I do sometimes wonder, like, do you think that is the management team is lacking in the capabilities to manage a bigger organization? You know, once you get over 100, you don't know everyone's name anymore. you have to kind of delegate a lot more. Or I always wonder, do you think it's more likely that the business model has run into issues,

right? Like, once you hit 50 million in revenues, there aren't a lot of businesses that can grow beyond 50 million. You know, if you're running a restaurant, yeah, maybe you can have three restaurants in the market and 50 million, but beyond that, the market just can't support more than three restaurants. So it's not the management team that's the issue. It's the business. It's the TAM.

It's the expansion. I think it's so context-specific, that it'll be very difficult to generalize. And the best test is only that management. team leaves and the new management teams comes and they can grow now then the answer is obvious it was the management team if you try another management team who in your opinion has historical track record of running bigger businesses and growing bigger businesses and they could not get it done then probably it was the industry slash market structure slash market share let's go back to the

exiting a company once the thesis has changed can you give me an example recently of a company where you had a thesis, nine months went by, two years went by, whatever the thesis had to change out, and you have to change your mind on it? I can give an example without naming a company where I changed my mind in less than nine months. I changed my mind in probably about two months. Okay. And I realized that I most likely made a mistake.

And it was not a microcap. It was about in round numbers, called a two billion market cap company. And in that specific case, my thesis, investment thesis, had three or four premises, and I think I got very strong evidence that at least two or three of those four are no longer valid as of right now. And that could change. Maybe I just needed to give more leeway, even though, in my opinion, the company had already a lot of leeway for the last 12 months. I just became an investor a lot later after the company share price crashed. And I was pretty fast to live the party after about two months. Let's go to, again, you invest all up and down the capital.

All up and down market cap sizes. When you're investing in a microcap, a company that might be pitching here versus you and I've talked about companies 5 billion plus before, how does your investment process differ when you're investing in a micro-cap, small-cap, large-cap? I think talking to management a lot more regularly with microcaps is a lot more critical, and understanding the depth of the management team and the bench is a lot more important. Because if you're looking at a company with $2 billion, $3 billion, $4 billion, $5 billion market cap, it's probably safe to believe and assume that there is some bench in terms of talent

behind the CEO. And if anybody leaves, they probably could replace that person with an equally qualified to human being. When you look at microcaps, I don't think it's always safe to assume that there is a depth of the bench behind the CEO and CFO. So understanding that is a lot more important. I think that's the big difference between the caps. Do you demand a different return profile

when you're looking at smaller microcap companies versus larger cap companies? I don't think per se request a higher return, but I do force myself be more mindful about risks. I need more conviction in the microcap idea than in a small cap idea or a midcap idea, plus the liquidity profile is also different. Exiting a $2 billion company, if you believe you made a mistake, It's pretty easy, let alone something bigger. Exiting a microcap company, if you're wrong, is very, very difficult. I am frequently surprised by how easy it is to get into a $100 million market cap company

and how difficult it is to get out of the same $100 million market cap company. If it's difficult to exit, most likely in that case, it's not 100 million market cap company anymore, it's probably 50, but that's why it's more difficult to exit. But reverse is also true. If you buy a company with relatively limited liquidity and let's say it's a 100 million market cap just to use round numbers, it can be 200 as well. If the fundamentals do well and company grows its KPI and financial metrics, when you need to exit and it's 400 million or 500 million or 700 million market cap, that's actually a lot easier than to build a position to begin with. What about, I ask you return profile for microcap versus large cap companies? What about, I mean, international investing has always been here, but it's getting particularly popular among microcap investors.

You know, we just did the microcap stock pitch. I'd say of the 10, four of them were international listed companies. I know multiple of the companies that are presenting this week that people are really excited about are international listed Israeli, Sweden, wherever. Do you demand different return profiles and different liquidity profiles when you're looking at? and international, whether it's microcap, large cap, whatever, versus a domestic company? Only if that market, only if that company does business in the currency that is very unstable. So in other words, most likely it will be an emerging markets company, but I usually don't invest in emerging markets microcaps.

I may invest in the emerging market mid-cap or large-cap company. We have one portfolio, if we have at least one portfolio position, in a company where currency historically been depreciating against the US dollars. So you need to model the depreciation accordingly. But I don't particularly like investing in emerging markets microcap companies. I like investing in microcap companies outside of the US in developed markets. And I think that the reason, one of the reasons why many US investors started gravitating towards non-US and sometimes even non-English language contrasts.

is because venture capital ecosystem and growth equity as a sub asset class are massively less developed in those countries than in the US. In the US, we are often dealing with an adverse selection, meaning best companies usually raise capital privately and do sit around A, B, C, and by the way, there are about 26 letters in English alphabet, so you can be raising money for a long time in the private markets and delay in the OAPO for a long time. So there is this adverse selection that I think hits microcap investors, sorry, hurts microcap investors in terms of selection. But thankfully, venture capital is not as robust in many other countries and many great companies become public

very early. Just, I mean, obviously the Sarbanes-Oxley, it's been 20 years, the cost of being public has gone up exponentially for investors. I hear a lot of investors talk about the Russell 2000 as a flawed benchmark because the good companies graduate. out of it. There's no new companies coming in to like supplant it with the fresh blood. You know, the market caps 150 million. All the good 150 million microcap market cap companies are staying private for longer. They're doing all of these rounds. You can even take away the Russell 2000. Like you can talk microcaps. There's not going to be an exciting 75 million market cap company. Do you worry that the market structure of the U.S. is just so far tilted

a field for microcaps that you're kind of playing a negative selection game with them? I don't think as Sarbanes-Oxley, I think impact of the amount of assets raised by venture funds and growth equity funds over the last 15 years, I think that's a lot more important role than just Sarbanes-Oxley Act and increase compliance costs. Let's switch. And I'm not worried that much because my goal is not to find 300 amazing microcabs. My goal is to find a handful. So I am hoping slash believing that there are still handful of those out there.

No, look, I agree, though. I just always worry from a game theory, like, or a game selection. If you said, hey, there's 300 of these companies over here and 290 of them are just complete crap, go find the 10, versus like, hey, there's 100 normal companies over here and 20 of them are going to be good. Like, I'm just really worried about going and looking through the 300, you know. I'm just very worried about that negative selection. bias. Saying often no is a good skill. Let's switch to, we're talking April 22nd. You know,

the Russell is down about 15% on the year. We're talking April 22nd after hours. Trump might have said he's putting 50% tariffs on everyone or taking all the tariffs off. So it could be up another 10, down another 10. Who knows? You and I have been up here for 15 minutes. The world's changing. I'd love to talk to you a little bit about something you and I talk a lot about in our private talks. And that's investing as a mental game. The mental game to it, dealing with drawdowns, handling resilience, learning from drawdowns and all that sort of stuff. I'll just turn it over to you. Start, what do you think about the resiliency in investing when you're handling a drawdown

and when you're handling one of the more volatile markets we've seen in the past 20 years? So first, I do believe that investing is a mental game and a mental sport or mental activity and mental sport. And why? It's because. investing is mostly about making decisions. Sure, we spend most of our time in the day researching, talking to management teams, talking to people in the field, talking to experts, doing modeling, talking to our peers. But the ultimate output of all that activity is your decisions about the portfolio. What to buy or not to buy, what to sell, what not to sell, what to trim, what to add.

So it's all about decision making. those decisions will drive your returns for you and your investors if you manage outside capital, which means that keeping a straight head, even in the time when you're in draw down and keeping your, and knowing how to deal with your emotions, that's a critical skill. And I think resilience is one of the most important skills of personality trades for an investor. because it's pretty unquestionable that you either

you either had a drawdown or you either draw down or you will have a dot down at some point. There are very few exceptions that the world knew. And how you deal with that and whether it will impact your decision-making abilities,

whether you go on tilt or not, that's what really matters. You mentioned going on tilt and what I find the hardest about a volatile market or having a drawdown is company X that you follow and have a position in is down 20%. You know, if you, we talked earlier about knowing when to eject.

If you sell, are you selling because, you know, in the moment you're scared, you're panicking. If you buy, are you buying because, hey, I want to take, I think this is an attractive opportunity or are you buying because you want to take a yolo, right? You just want to double down and take a position. I find it really difficult, especially when markets are very volatile. to kind of step away, cold, rationally think and say, what is the best opportunity? It really starts to affect your mental game, as you said. And I've seen investors have trouble swinging the bat after big drawdowns

because they're too worried that they're going to do a YOLO, or I've seen investors have a big drawdown. And one mutual friend of ours, I think he's written about how at the end of his fund, he was down a little bit, and then all of a sudden he made a couple bad investments and was down a lot. And with the benefit of hindsight, he was betting on companies that he would have never invested in except he was having a drawdown. And he wanted to kind of like increase the variance of his portfolio to get there. So how do you deal with the doubts that come from handling a drawdown, the doubts of am I swinging hard enough or am I swinging too hard because of this drawdown?

So whatever I say right now will sound too generic. And without specific context, it probably will not be helpful. So let me answer your question different ways. Let me answer a question from more practical slash procedural perspective. And what I have found helpful for me over the years, it doesn't mean that will be helpful for you or someone who is listening here. So number one is, is there an avenue for you to express your thoughts and someone will hear them and may point your blind spots?

for example having a coach an executive coach performance coach is a good idea in my opinion because we're not talking about coaching on investing or like this is a great idea and you did proper analysis of the margin profiling growth drivers we are talking about helping you identify in your mental game how you can be the best and whether right now you are on the tilt And that's why you're swinging too hard and making an investment that you would not have made before, because it does not meet your quality criteria, for example. Or whether you're doing your job. You've done your research.

You got your conclusion. It's okay that you made some mistakes in the past. Everybody makes them. And you've done your analysis. It's a great idea. There are no guarantees in investing or in life in general. But it's okay to invest right now. you are not doing a crazy stupid thing.

So, and by the way, it may not be a coach. It may be a group of peers with whom you talk to who ideally understand you and understand your psychologist and also understand your typical investments where you make money and where you lose money. So that's second. Some people find journaling very useful. I don't journal much, but the difficulty there is that it will be you who need to draw those insights. And it may be more difficult, especially in the moment.

the heat of a battle, not many people will say, let me go open my journal, whether it's paper, or whether it's digital, review it and say, no, I am right now until I will not make this investment. So that's another tool. The third tool, and this is more general about resilience, it's okay to admit that you make mistakes. And the best way for me to frame it, you think about people who achieved greatness in their field. Maybe investing, maybe not investing. And then, so they are at the top, at the top of the mountain.

And then you think about the moments in their careers where they fell very much down from the top and how they came back. And the story that you drew from that, and this is where I personally derive inspiration, is to say, okay, this person is great or like outstanding. And he or she is still outstanding despite they mess things up. up in the past, and they went from being very good or great to down and then recovered. And by the way, it doesn't have to be from, it can be from investing. And there are some people investing world who, in my opinion, showed incredible resilience.

And you look at them like, wow, I really admire this person because what he has overcome and how he came back when everybody was against them. Or, and people may guess who I'm thinking about or may not, or there is another example. Or you can get an example from non-investing field. It can be sports. It can be anything. For example, I mentioned Kasparov, the 13th champion, the 13th chess champion. So I like going back to the story where he was playing in 1984.

He was a challenger against Antoli Karpov. And Karpov had a lot of support from the Soviet government. And they were playing a match. Whoever got six scores wins, Kasparov was down 5-0. Nobody should be able to come back. He actually came back, did five three, and then the match was interrupted for whatever reasons. We can only speculate and have strong suspicion why.

And then later he won the next match. So think about people like this, helps you in the moment when you're having a crisis. Let me ask you one more question slightly related, but I think a lot of the people here are either professional investors or their private investors, but their investing income is a big piece of their livelihood. And one thing I don't hear discussed publicly a lot, but you and I talk about it, so might as well do it in three minutes in this public conversation. But how do you worry about your income is derived from your portfolio, your funds, whatever it is?

How do you think about the personal finance aspects of the pressure of a market, especially during drawdowns? It's very difficult. And there is no way around it because not only your income broadly defined depends on your performance, but also most managers, small managers, emerging managers, have the majority of their own net worth in the fund, so they're not diversified. Like, I'm not diversified, probably not diversified. So that's a lot more difficult.

And I don't think I have any particular strong tools that are unique to share how to deal with that, except for what I already mentioned, thinking about that your portfolio and what you're doing. And also, and this is an obvious one, this is like personal finance 101, I think if your spouse, for example, works in a field that is unrelated and that has very little correlation to your own performance, that probably helps.

Some people have heard advice, take several years of ink of your living expenses, put them into the treasuries and keep them there. And typically, I have not done that, but I think it's a very good advice once you have that, when you're in that situation. My spouse works in the public school system, so I've just got that sweet, sweet public school system fallback money to rely on. You're golden. No, it's funny. When I was launching, I still talk to a lot of managers, and I hear 50-50. Like, I'll hear people who say you should have all your money in your fund, and I'll hear people who say you should have none of your money in your fund.

Because if all of your money is in your fund, you're going crazy with every drawdown. So I'm getting to wrap it up. Anything we didn't talk about that you want to kind of leave people with or if you want to respond to that last question, that last comment I had? No, look, first of all, I'm very happy that Alicia helps you diversify. That's fantastic. You married well. So it's great.

And my personal opinion, the majority of their personal money should be in the fund. But I also over years, and this is where my thinking has evolved, I think it's healthy to have that one or two or three years of living expenses in something that just like cash equivalents. And to be clear, I don't have that setup, but I think at some point I should. Well, it's funny, we end here with, we went from talking about investing to personal finance advice for not financial advisors, but look, five minutes in, I was worried how are we going to fill 30 minutes up?

And then we're getting the, we've gone way past 30 minutes. So, Arndham, I always enjoy talking to you. Thanks for coming up here and doing this public with me. and thanks to everyone for listening to us Rumble. Thank you, Andre. A quick disclaimer. Nothing on this podcast should be considered investment advice. Guests or the hosts may have positions

in any of the stocks mentioned during this podcast. Please do your own work and consult a financial advisor. Thanks.