Welcome back to Portfolio Rescue. Our inbox is always full of questions about personal finance, taxes, investing. Duncan, we've got our first one on leveraged ETFs in a while today. We're going to talk about it on the show. Remember, email AskTheCompoundShow@gmail.com. We're sponsored today by Future Proof. Future Proof Festival, September 10th through 13th, I think it is.

Yep, I nailed it. Huntington Beach, California. A bunch of us from the firm were in Chicago this weekend, in our Chicago office, and we were talking about some things we're going to be doing differently at Future Proof. Last year was kind of the initial thing. We had fun, we figured it out, but we were still just kind of testing the waters a little bit.

Now that we know what we're doing, it's going to be even more fun. It's going to be great. I have an important question. The people want to know what movie scene are you guys going to reenact? I know I think I asked this on a previous one, but have you thought about it?

I don't know if we can top Rocky III. What's another good beach one? Yeah, I don't know. I'll have to think. All right. We'll think about it. We'll come up with something. All right. Let's do a question. Okay. Up first today we have a wedding question. So first off, congrats.

I'm getting married in July and we're spending about $50,000 on a 150 person wedding. We booked our honeymoon in Cabo at an all-inclusive resort for $7,200. I'm very excited for this trip and I know that it's going to be the time of my life and one of the happiest things I do along with the wedding.

We're in great financial shape and they give details and I would say very great financial shape, but this just seems like a huge amount of money for a trip. How do you guys go about planning, budgeting, and following through on big purchases? Yeah, we're talking I think someone in their late twenties, six-figure income combined with their new spouse, no debt, paid off student loans, no credit card debt, maxing out their 401k and IRAs, and setting aside money for a house in a taxable account.

So for someone in their twenties, they are beyond prepared financially. The problem is there's plenty of personal finance experts out there who teach you how to save money, but no one actually teaches you how to spend money. That's not a thing anyone ever talks about, right? It's really easy to chastise someone for spending too much and going crazy with their credit card.

Not many people spend the time to figure out what should you spend your money on to make you happy. And I do say now not all spending is bad, right? If all you do is save money but don't enjoy it now, what's the point? I think you have to strike some sort of balance between I'm going to delay gratification for future me, but I'm also going to enjoy in the present a little bit, too.

You have to have some balance here. Obviously, for some people, it's the opposite problem. All they do is spend, right? But we have plenty of people like this who have that mentality of a saver, and that was me for the longest time. I think a lot of it, there's two parts for your financial habits.

Part of it is the environment you grew up in, the habits you learned from your family or parents or friends or whatever it is, and then I think part of it is personality driven. I think I was just born to be a saver. I've always been a saver. So in the twenties, I was in a similar situation, minus the six-figure income this person has.

I had to teach myself how to spend a little bit, right? So I think the important thing is this person is going to be fine. They're already maxing out their 401(k) in their twenties. Regardless, you should have some fun. So I do have one comment on the wedding thing first.

I know a lot of people will, especially after you are a few years away from it and you're financially inclined, you look back and you say, "God, what a ridiculous way to spend your money. Why would you spend that much money for one single day in your life? It doesn't make any sense." The economists will say, "Why would you spend X thousands of dollars on a dress you're going to wear once and put it in your storage closet?

What if we invested that money instead?" I get that mentality. But looking back on my wedding, now that I'm far enough away from it, I think, let's see, 2007, so we're getting close to... It's been a while. Closing on 20 years there. It's the only time in my entire life that everyone who mattered to me in my life was there on the same day.

All my friends, all my family, high school friends, college friends, childhood friends, family from both sides of the family, wife's friends, everyone was in one place at the same time. That's never going to happen again. Is that the worst that kind of investment? I think so. Plus, it was a good party, too, right?

My wife and I actually did Cabo for our honeymoon as well. I don't think it cost that much, but not a bad place. Here's what I would do to get over this hump and get out of that Saber mentality. I just want you to start off by picking one category that you're going to use as your spending thing.

Your one place for safe spending. It's a safe place for spending. You're not going to be judged. It could be travel. For some people, it might be health and fitness, experiences, going out to dinner or drinks with friends, something like that. Give yourself a break in that just one specific category.

You can set a dollar amount within reason, but I'd say don't question it. My first category was books. I think I mentioned before, when I first came out of college, I knew next to nothing besides reading a few textbooks, so I had to play catch up. I was doing a ton of reading.

I would go to the library, because I was a frugal guy, but all these books would be on back order that people would have already signed up for. I'd wait weeks or sometimes months for a book. Finally, I said, "Screw this. I'm just going to buy the book." For me now, I bought a Kindle, and I never questioned buying books.

If I see a book I want to buy, I'm going to buy it. If it looks interesting, I'm going to buy it. Granted, some of them sit on my Kindle forever and don't get read, but to me, that's a spending category that I'm okay with. I'm not going to question it, because that's something that I like spending money on.

The way I view it is, you have to be selectively cheap. Unless you make obscene amounts of money and you just don't care, you're going to have to cut back in certain places and spend in other places. You have to prioritize. Here's my line of thinking on some of this.

We like having a nice house, but we filled it with relatively inexpensive furniture. Why? Because kids destroy furniture. So, we don't want to spend a lot on that. I do like paying for time and convenience. Lawn care, snow plow, house cleaning, that sort of stuff. I'm perfectly fine paying for time.

I don't drive luxury vehicles. My wife and I aren't big fans of fancy restaurants. No expensive hobbies, like skiing or golf for me. If that's your thing, that's fine, but for me, it's too much of a time and money suck. I know that I only have a finite amount of time with my kids before they're out of the house and doing their own thing and not wanting to hang out with me anymore.

So, my wife and I prioritize spending on experiences with the kids. Not to brag, I like spending money on clothes a little bit. I'm not going to apologize for that, but I couldn't tell you the last thing I bought that wasn't on sale. This sweatshirt here, pretty new one, sweater.

Bought it on sale. Is that marine wear? That's probably J. Crew. Okay. Yeah, I do get a lot of questions from people about my fashion choices. Maybe I should start my own little fashion. Honestly, yeah. I think you're setting the fashion trend for the compound. Yeah. So, I think the big thing is just prioritizing the thing you care about and then just being fine cutting back everywhere else.

But you have to find those categories that you enjoy and then double down on them. So, I think start with one. Get one category, travel, experiences, going out, whatever it is. And I think this is definitely a psychological hangup for some people, but I think knowing that you have that savings taking place already, then you're fine and you don't worry about the other stuff.

It's kind of guilt-free spending once you have the savings taken care of. And this person obviously has that. Duncan, what's something you like spending money on? I was just saying, yeah, I was saying in the chat kind of the same thing. I've never regretted spending money on traveling. I've gotten to go to quite a few countries in Europe and I've never been like, "Oh, wow, that wasn't worth it." And including when I was younger, I probably took out an irresponsible amount of debt on a credit card to travel and go on a trip to Hungary and some other countries.

My wife and I said that too. Before we were going to have kids, we said, "Let's travel." So we had one thing where a friend got married in Connecticut and we went for like 36 hours. We flew in, hotel, partied with friends, flew back out. And the amount of money we spent, we spent like a couple thousand dollars probably.

And it seemed ridiculous at the time, but we got to hang out with all of our friends for that one weekend. And it's like without kids, no responsibilities, it was worth it. So yeah, so I think finding some of those places where, yeah, you know you're not going to regret it in the future.

But I do agree for traveling to big ones. Apparently it's $86 tequila drinks, you know, so teach their own. You only live once. All right, let's do another one. That's a reference to Animal Spirits for those of you that haven't listened yet. Okay. Up next today, we have a question from Brent.

"Piggybacking on the Roth IRA conversation from last week, what are your thoughts on buying and holding a leveraged ETF and a Roth IRA? For example, I'm 34 years old and plan to retire at 65. Would a leveraged ETF and my Roth IRA likely lead to better long-term returns? I'm a very disciplined investor and do not make changes in my accounts.

I've held SPY and only SPY since I opened the account 12 years ago. Thanks for all you do." All right, first one of these in a while, right? A lot of bond questions lately, but finally got a leveraged one. So this fund that they ask about, it seeks to two times the daily performance of the S&P 500.

Some of these leveraged ETFs will kind of chop you up because they reset on daily basis. They're trying to get double the daily return. So sometimes it doesn't work out exactly what you'd think, but I looked at this one. This one is actually not too bad. So John, pull up the chart here.

This is SSO versus SPY. These are the annual returns by year. This actually goes back to 2006. And you can see it's not exactly two times, but it's pretty darn close. The down years are really bad. The up years are really good. The highs are higher and the lows are lower, right?

So this thing actually does an okay job doing this. This is ridiculously volatile, obviously. So let's do one more chart here. This is the drawdown profile. Now, this goes back to 2006. We pick up the 2008. And the 2008 crash, from 2007 to early 2009, the S&P was down 56%, I want to say.

This thing was down almost 86%. And the difference between a 56% return and an 86% return is not 30%. It's way, way bigger. This is depression-level kind of stuff here, right? Even during the COVID crash, this fund was down 60%. When the S&P was down a little more than 30.

The depths of the current bear market was down almost 50%. So these things get crushed. I know you said you're disciplined, you can hold on to the S&P, that's fine. I just wanted to point this stuff out there. So I don't really think the placement of a fund like this matters nearly as much as your ability to hold on for dear life.

However, let's say that you want to use this as a carve-out piece for your speculation bucket, and you're going to keep the majority of your holdings in other stocks or bonds or whatever, and you have a small piece in this, 10%, 15%, 20%. You say, "I'm going to speculate with this, and I'm going to rebalance it occasionally, because I want to take advantage of this volatility.

When it's up a lot, I want to rebalance out of it. When it's down a lot, I want to rebalance into the pain." That may be a rough make sense, if you're going to be doing some rebalancing and taking advantage of that volatility. But I think the placement of this one probably doesn't matter nearly as much as your ability to hold on for dear life.

I guess if you think that you're going to be holding on and getting big gains over time, and the stock market continues to go up, yeah, Roth would make sense. But yeah, I think it depends how you utilize it. I have to be honest. This one hits home for me, because I started to buy into all the questions we were getting back a couple years ago.

Why wouldn't everything just be triple levered? The market is still going up, and look at this past performance. I've gotten kind of torn up on the triple levered cues. Okay, triple levered. So, it's down, what, probably 80%, 70%? I think I was top-ticking it, basically. I've averaged into it, but it's been a rough position.

And you're going to hold on to it? Yeah. The thing is, when it comes back, the gains will be good, but that's the thing. It's only got, what, like a 1.2% fee or something? You're paying for that leverage, I guess. Yeah, it's rough. It's tough. I mean, the good thing is, I guess in a fund like this, you're not going to get like a traditional margin call or something.

So, I get it. I would say just position size correctly, because this thing will rip your face off. Yeah. And yeah, stocks go down. Who knew? All right, let's do another one. Okay, question three from Charles. "As a retail investor, how does one go about assessing the investment performance of a security or index fund beyond looking at the historic performance, which Ben Carlson recently described as chasing performance?

On this note, can you please explain a backtest in simple terms? What is a good way for an average investor to do a backtest?" This one, I don't really understand the backtest thing, not being a finance person. It sounds really cool, though. Well, the idea is, there's a few different ways to look at a backtest.

A backtest could be you look at some sort of stock picking strategy. I'm going to pick only stocks with this type of P/E ratio or this type of momentum, or whatever the case may be. You put it into a backtest, you say, "I'm going to do the top 30 holdings," or whatever, and then you run it, and then it looks amazing.

The problem is that you can torture the data to say anything you want it to say in a backtest. So, I'm not sure what performance chasing comment they're talking about here. I do like to use my full name here. You know the only time people really use full names is in rom-coms.

If it's a Matthew McConaughey movie, whatever his name is, they'll say the full name. No one ever says your full name first and last in real life, right? It's only in movies or TV shows. Or when you're in trouble. Yes. I do agree that making an investment decision is based on short-term outperformance tend to lead to disastrous outcomes for investors.

It's not just individual investors. This is not just retail. Institutional investors as well. John, throw this up there. This is from my Organizational Alpha book. A team of researchers looked at the outperformance one, two, and three years before these pensions and endowments and billion-dollar funds decided to hire a manager, and then what happened after they hired them.

So, the one, two, three years before, they were performing like crazy, right? And then the one, two, three years afterwards, of course, they underperformed. So, you know, you make your decision based on short-term performance, probably not going to work out too well. Same thing with individuals. The good news is that individual investors have never had better access to backtesting tools, right?

Most of them for free. I've always enjoyed Portfolio Visualizer. It's a pretty good one if you want to do mutual funds, ETFs, individual stocks. You can do a backtest and look at the performance and the drawdown profile and all that stuff. I do have a lot of thoughts on backtests, because I've performed many of them in my career.

So, I think we need to Charlie Munger this thing and invert it. So, not looking at what you can get out of a backtest. Here's what you can't get, right? No matter how good it looks on paper. One of the problems is like the data availability and frictions of the past.

You can run a backtest back to 1920, but if you were armed with today's level of knowledge and information, you'd probably go back and clean up in the 1920s, right? It's kind of like if you took the seventh best man on an NBA roster and put him back in like the 1940s, they would clean up in the NBA, right?

It's the same thing. So, because they knew nothing at the time. It's kind of like how LeBron's better than Michael Jordan. Is that what you're saying? Not quite. Well, hey. I was just in Chicago. You can't say it's blasphemous there. Discounted cash flow analysis, I think, was first created in like the 1930s.

They didn't know anything back then. So, I think a lot of backtests failed to consider the information people knew at the time, as well as the cost to trade, right? So, you could look at this wonderful backtest of small caps, but realize that half of these stocks didn't trade back in the day, because they were microcaps and they had no liquidity.

So, I think backtests can provide context, but you have to think through how realistic it would have been at the time. The other thing, a backtest cannot tell you how you would have felt at the time, right? The 1987 crash looks like a blip on any long-term stock market chart, but it felt like the second coming of the Great Depression at the time.

So, backtests are like extremely unemotional. They follow the rules no matter what. Human beings don't always have that same level of self-control, right? Duncan, if you did a backtest of your TQQQ, past you on the spreadsheet is going to hold that thing forever. Present you, when you're 90% drawdown, might say, "I don't know if I can do this anymore." Yeah.

I mean, it's all darkness, right? Well, sure. Backtests also don't tell you what the future will look like. I think this is the Michael Batnick line I'm seeing here, but he said there's no such thing as a front test. So, you see all these strategies with these indexes that are created, and there's a wonderful backtest.

If you would have just done this, you would have knocked it out of the park. And then, these things go live in an ETF, and they stink. It happens all the time. So, I think it's easy to look at a backtest, and a lot of times, you never know how many different tests and variations they did before they settled on this one strategy.

Sometimes, these strategies get arbed away. They may have worked in the past, and they don't work anymore. Sometimes, they go away because premiums are there, and then money rushes in, and size is the enemy of all performance. So, I think there's countless strategies that can look good in a backtest, but they put it in an ETF, it stops working magically, and that sort of happens all the time.

So, what good is a backtest? I do believe that one of the big traits you need to have as an investor is understanding financial market history. I think you have to, if you want to be successful in the long term. Studying the past doesn't really help you predict the future, but I think it can provide context in terms of the relationship between risk and reward.

I think that's the big thing. John, throw my other chart up here. I think we've used this one in the past. Stocks, bonds, and cash. Annual returns back to 1928. This shows the average return in the middle there, in blue. High for a year, low for a year. You can see the stock market when you could drive a truck through it, right?

Then, it narrows a little for bonds, even narrower for cash. It's not the only reason, but one of the big reasons that the stock market is the best-performing asset class is because of the variance of returns. You should expect a wide range of potential outcomes, especially in the short run.

I do think that risk is a lot easier to predict than returns going forward. I think a general understanding of volatility and drawdown profile in the risk of loss is probably the biggest thing historically. I think anyone can create a back test that looks wonderful in terms of past performance.

What you need to understand is the risk involved and how reality can differ from the spreadsheet. Good advice. Sorry, I'm laughing because I just triggered a bunch of people by saying that Shaq was the true GOAT. Okay. All right. You spent way too much time online, Duncan. You just know what'll get people.

All right, let's do another one. Okay. Up next, we have a question from Allison. "I know it's frowned upon, but I'm thinking about taking out a 401(k) loan to help with a down payment for my first house. Here's my thought process. My husband and I don't have enough for a big enough down payment to qualify for a loan, so we need the money.

It's basically a loan to myself. I understand the problem with pulling money out of the market, but the rates are so high right now, I'm not quite as worried about this. As long as I pay it back in a few years, this should work, right?" Good question. All right.

Let's bring on someone who actually has done this both professionally and personally now. Blair Duquene. Blair wrote a great post on this at The Bell Curve. Hey, Blair. Hey, guys. Good to talk to you. Blair, you wrote a great post about a month ago about your personal experience with a 401(k) loan.

Why don't you tell us some of your experiences with this? I've never done this before. Tell me how this works, and then we can maybe get into some of the nuts and bolts of it. I want to hear your story about why you did this. Absolutely. I am a recent convert to the idea of the 401(k) loan.

I used to be very anti, and I'm anti for the reasons that were mentioned in the question, but I just want to run through them. When you take money out of your 401(k) in a loan, it comes out of the market, which means that money is not growing if the market's going up.

In a year like 2022, it would have been a great thing to have taken a loan because the market went down. The second thing is you may not be able to continue saving because now you have a new loan payment. It's very important to think about what your cash flow is going to be while the loan is out.

Are you still able to contribute at a minimum to get your employer match? I think that that's important. The third thing is, and this is the biggest risk of all, is if you leave your company for any reason by your choice or not, that loan is going to become payable in about three months on average.

If you can't come up with the cash to pay it back, that's going to be treated as a taxable distribution from your 401(k). That can leave you in a really bad position. You thought of all these cons, so what's the pro that talked you into doing this then? What are the benefits here?

In my situation, I bought a new home, and it's going to be a few months before I put my old home on the market. I'm using this as a bridge loan. The home equity in my current home is a big part of what was going to help me with that very large down payment.

In the meantime, I took a 401(k) loan knowing that hopefully in just a few months, I'm going to pay it back. Now I'm paying myself back with interest. By the way, it's an 8% interest rate, not a low interest rate, but that money is going back into my 401(k).

I'm hoping that I'll still be able to max my 401(k) this year, so I'm going to even be able to put more than the max in my 401(k) if I pay back the interest and still max out my contributions. I thought of it as a temporary lending solution. It doesn't count against the debt ratios that the bank used to analyze how much of a mortgage I could qualify for, so that was another benefit.

I think in this questioner's case, the first-time homebuyer, I think it also makes sense. Our colleague Emily Johnson reached out to me and told me she used a 401(k) loan for her first-time home purchase as well. The median home price is getting up close to $400,000. Most people have to put 20% down.

That's a really large number, $80,000. Most people cannot save that in even five or ten years from regular earnings. Yes, you're paying yourself back if you can do it and also make at least contributions to get your employer's match because that's additional compensation to you that you'd be leaving on the table.

I think it can be a great option. A home is, for most Americans, the largest part of their net worth. Getting into home ownership, if that's what you want and there's a lot of debate around rent versus buy, but if it's a goal of yours and you're able to make it work from a cash flow basis and a budget basis, I'm actually in favor of it now.

I think it can be a great option. You said in your post that you're still saving your 401(k). Essentially, this 8% that you're paying back is almost forcing you to increase your savings rate in some way. It is. It is in a way, yeah. I'm paying back interest and I'm contributing to the 401(k).

There are apparently some 401(k)s that won't let you contribute while you're paying back a loan. I think that's unfortunate. The loans can be taken out for a year, three years. I think the max is five years. Your payment's going to be higher if you take out a three-year loan versus a five-year loan.

That's important to think about as well. If the budget works out and you're able to pay yourself back that loan over the next three or five years, I really am in favor of using this responsibly. Just know that there is a risk that if you get laid off or decide to change jobs, you're going to need to pay that loan back to avoid paying tax on the distribution.

Duncan asked us a couple weeks ago if he should slow his 401(k) contributions to save for down payment. Duncan, what do you think about the 401(k) loan as a possibility here to help? That's exactly what I was just thinking. This would be the argument to just keep contributing and then whenever you need it, to pull it from your 401(k), right?

It could be one way. In a perfect world, you would have the full down payment in your savings account. That's not reality for most people these days with home prices as high as they are. Right. Perfect. Unless we get a nice big pullback for those of us interested in buying, right?

There you go. All right. Demographics say differently, but maybe not those high prices that we saw in 2021 for sure. So this is a great segue to the next question. So Bella writes, "This one's going to trigger some people probably." Oh, no. The firearms going off. Uh-oh. Live television.

Hopefully it's a test. I'm not leaving regardless, but we're only on the 15th floor. This is your Wolf of Wall Street moment here. Yeah. "I know that y'all advise to take advantage of an employer's 401(k) match. However, what would your rebuttal be to those who say hope is not a strategy and that it's better to have control of what you're invested in?

I'm young and I've heard horror stories of those that lost meaningful amounts of their savings during the last downturn. I understand that the market tends to go up over time, but I do worry that in the future I won't be able to retire when I want to because of the way the market is behaving at that particular time.

It seems like I would be better off passively investing in multifamily real estate as everyone will always need a place to live. For the time being, I've decided to stop contributing to my 401(k) so that I have enough to invest in a different manner, in things I can control." So I just, I'm not the finance person here, so I'm curious to hear what you guys say, but like, can you control the real estate market and multifamily housing?

I agree that hope is not a strategy. They are right there. Also, Blair, this had to be from someone in the South because they put y'all in here, right? And I know that as someone in the North, I don't feel comfortable ever using that term. I don't even use y'all.

I need to get better at using y'all. It's actually a better way of saying you guys. But my thinking here is shifting your investment strategy from financial assets like stocks and bonds in a 401(k) to multifamily real estate is simply trading one risk for another, right? I'm not saying you can't find success as a real estate investor.

Like Blair, you and I both know people, clients that have been very successful real estate investors. It can happen, but there are unique set of risks to that strategy. And I know there's a lot of investors that view real estate as like this tangible thing, so they think they can control it better because it seems like stocks feel like this just intangible thing that's out kind of in the ether, that you're like, you have no control over those corporations, or if investors get spooked or interest rates or whatever.

But a lot of those other risks of owning single family or multifamily housing are just kind of different and idiosyncratic to those different areas. So, Blair, thoughts on some of the risks involved here? I absolutely agree with that assessment. There's two parts to this question. One, that you don't have control over the investments in your 401(k).

That's really not true. You can decide if you want to be in stocks, bonds, some combination of both. If you want in large cap stocks, small cap stocks, there's a menu of options available to you to build a diversified portfolio and you can go in and trade that account.

Some of them limit it to two or three times a year and you don't want to be actively trading, but you do have some level of control. Now if the question is I don't feel in control over stocks versus having real estate in my hand that I feel this sense of control over, just consider the fact that you also want a diversified portfolio.

Maybe investing in multifamily real estate is a great option for you, but you wouldn't want to put all your eggs in that one basket. I think about living here in New Orleans. What if I had a portfolio of rentals here and we have another hurricane that displaces people for months?

That's a huge risk. Having tenants move out, not being able to re-rent the place, having to evict people. If it's development of multifamily homes, those are really risky. They're taking a lot of leverage with high interest rates. So all investments incur a certain amount of risk. Even if you can't touch or feel bonds, you do have some control over your asset allocation in the 401(k).

Lewis: I think the concentration is the biggest one. It's much harder to be diversified in real estate. So I think having that other piece is helpful. Also, you have liquidity risks where you can't exactly spend a home. Yes, you get monthly cash flows, but who knows how much that is covering what your costs are.

It also could be more expensive than you assume, right? Because borrowing costs have gone up and the costs of upkeep and maintenance and taxes and all this stuff. If you have to replace a roof or find tenants. It is true that everyone always needs a place to live, but I don't think that necessarily means that people are going to have to live right exactly where you buy.

So the location could just be wrong. Like you said, there's other big risks that come. I wouldn't try to talk anyone out of investing in real estate. It's just a totally different set of risks if you don't know what you're doing. Because you're competing against people who really do know what they're doing.

And even for them, it's not that easy. Exactly. So think of your 401(k) as part of your compensation. If you don't at least do that, you're taking a pay cut. So I think it's worth always doing the match at a minimum. Whether or not you don't want to lock up money that you can't spend until retirement or not is a different conversation.

And there are reasons to save cash outside of the 401(k) as well. But at the end of the day, there's nothing inherently -- it's not just hope if you're investing in a 401(k). A long-term diversified strategy will do well for you. All right. If you're investing in real estate, you're hoping that you have income coming in and that it's going to grow over time.

And if you're investing in the stock market, you're having profits come in and dividends come in, and that's going to grow over time. Kind of the same thing. It's not any less real than investing in real estate. It's just more spread out. And imagine the people -- imagine if you owned the apartment building that I was living in back at the end of 2022.

30 units, one person lets a pipe bust because they turned their heat off, and you're out of eight units. Eight units and the common areas all needed a ton of work. So, yeah. There's definitely stuff out of your control. Wathen: Yes. There's other risks there. Yep. Okay. So, I want to thank Blair for coming on again, sharing her experience.

Lapera: Thank you for having me. Wathen: I appreciate that. I love when someone takes a general rule of thumb that people think in finance exists and then show an exception. Because I think there always are exceptions to these rules, right? Lapera: 100%. Wathen: If you have a question for us, email us.

Askthecompoundshow@gmail.com. Leave us a comment in the YouTube section. Thanks for everyone for tuning in live. Everyone really wants to see the Ben fashion blog. I think we're going to have to go for it, Duncan. Duncan: Let's do it. Wathen: If you're watching on YouTube, remember, become a subscriber for us so you can be part of this chat.

Compound merch, idontshop.com. Tomorrow, new Compound and Friends. We'll see you next week. you