Skip to content
Kelly Portfolios

An optional portfolio

Higher growth

More money in the value, momentum and trend funds, for someone willing to accept deeper falls and years behind a simpler portfolio. The name is the aim, not the result, and the extra return is uncertain.

Maybe A plausible higher-risk choice. Neither the advantage nor these exact weights are settled.

What you buy

Eight funds: 35% in RSST, and the rest in stock funds that favor cheap companies, smaller companies or recent winners. RSST aims at US stocks and trend following at the same time. Count its stock side and the target is 100% stocks, with trend on top. What the funds actually hold varies.

The assumed stock split is 60% US and 40% foreign. Nothing is set aside for bonds or gold. Against Plus trend, more rides on stocks, and more rides on these strategies paying what they are expected to pay. Two funds can also hold the same large companies and the same sector bets.

Holdings, weights, fund fees and which account each one fits
FundWhat it holdsShareFee on $10,000Account
RSSTReturn Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF US stocks and a managed-futures strategy 35% $99 Pre-tax retirement account, first
AVLVAvantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF Large US companies that are cheap and profitable 10% $15 Taxable or retirement
AVUVAvantis U.S. Small Cap Value ETF Small US companies that are cheap and profitable 5% $25 Retirement account, Roth first
SPMOInvesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF The hundred large US companies whose shares have been rising 10% $13 Either
DFIVDimensional International Value ETF Large foreign companies that are cheap and profitable 15% $27 Taxable or retirement
AVDVAvantis International Small Cap Value ETF Small foreign companies that are cheap and profitable 10% $36 Retirement account, Roth first
IDMOInvesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF Foreign companies whose shares have been rising 10% $25 Either
AVESAvantis Emerging Markets Value ETF Cheap companies in emerging markets 5% $36 Retirement account
Higher growth: RSST 35%, AVLV 10%, AVUV 5%, SPMO 10%, DFIV 15%, AVDV 10%, IDMO 10%, AVES 5% Each arc is one fund, sized by its share of the money invested. RSST 35% AVLV 10% AVUV 5% SPMO 10% DFIV 15% AVDV 10% IDMO 10% AVES 5%

The longer simulation

The charts apply today's assumed fund holdings to older markets, with costs. They show the trade-off. They are not returns these funds earned, and they are not a forecast.

$10,000 became
$1,110,000
1990 to 2025, simulated
Growth a year
14.3%
13.1% for Plus trend in this model
Deepest simulated fall
−49.0%
An example of loss, not a limit
Fund fees a year on $10,000
$51
0.51%; financing, trading and taxes can add costs
What $10,000 became in the model $10,000 invested in 1990, month by month to 2025, on a scale where each gridline is a bigger step than the last. Plain world stock index finished on $314,000; Plus trend finished on $764,000; Higher growth finished on $1,110,000.
What $10,000 became in the model: what each finished on
Series Start Finish
Plain world stock index $10,000 in 1990-10 $314,164 in 2025-12
Plus trend $10,000 in 1990-10 $763,532 in 2025-12
Higher growth $10,000 in 1990-10 $1,113,382 in 2025-12
1990 to 2025. These are simulated portfolios built from market and style index returns, not the records of real funds. Holdings rebalance once a year. Current fund assumptions and dated constant fees, financing and trading charges are extended through history; fund-specific risks are omitted. The bond line is a modelled nominal ten-year US government bond standing in for inflation-protected bonds; Cautious also holds a long-government-bond index. One fund uses the VT model at a 0.06% annual fee. The plain stock benchmark uses VTI and VXUS globally and a US-market model on the long history; its fees and style exposures differ from VT. The 60/40 line holds 60% of the benchmark and 40% bonds. Dollars are nominal and before tax. The US value funds AVLV and AVUV carry profitability and investment loadings fitted from their filed returns in Experiment 056. This window runs from November 1990 to December 2025. The cheap stock benchmark and VT both use 65% US and 35% foreign stocks. Trend uses an index of trend-following returns before costs, then deducts assumed trend trading costs, and gold uses the London afternoon price. RSST itself began only in September 2023.
Falls from the last high Percent below the previous high, 1990 to 2025. Higher growth fell at most −49.0%; Plus trend fell at most −44.0%.

−49.0% $10,000 fell to $5,100 and took 40 months to get back.

Falls from the last high: the worst fall of each
Series Worst fall
Higher growth −49.0%
Plus trend −44.0%
1990 to 2025, simulated. A future fall could be deeper or take longer to recover.

What the actual funds add to the case

Over October 2023 to March 2026 this mix grew faster than Plus trend, with larger swings. Those years were good ones for markets, and they cannot show how it would hold up through a long crisis. What looks like an advantage could still turn out to be a loss.

Higher growth compared with Plus trend, using actual funds
+1.07 % a year
Interval [−1.12, +2.99]

Annual rebalancing, fund costs included, before investor taxes. This is the annual log-growth difference. The range includes a loss; the smallest effect this short test could reliably distinguish was 2.98% a year. These observations also appear in the later fund comparisons.

as of 2026-09-05 Actual fund comparison, October 2023 to March 2026

Comparing these funds with broad regional stock funds gives a more specific reason to hold more of them. It does not isolate skill: which companies they cover, how much of the market they own and their country weights all differ too. And the comparisons reuse the same data.

What if the extra rewards shrink?

One longer simulation cuts the average reward from the stock leans and from trend, and keeps their past swings. Higher growth holds on to a small measured advantage. The range around it includes losing to Plus trend, and its deepest fall is worse either way.

Higher growth compared with Plus trend, with weaker rewards
+0.36 % a year
Interval [−0.43, +1.12]

Positive stock-style and trend rewards are halved while fund swings stay intact. The test could reliably distinguish an annual log-growth difference of 1.14% a year. The deepest simulated fall was 50.9% for Higher growth, against 45.1% for Plus trend. Costs are included; investor taxes are excluded.

as of 2026-09-05 Weaker-reward simulation, November 1990 to December 2025

The model misses some risk

Over the same short window, the model and the funds themselves give a similar advantage. Swap the model's swings for the funds' own and the comparison becomes far less precise, even with the average returns held fixed. A smooth model can make an uncertain choice look firmer than it is.

How much harder the extra stock-style benefit was to distinguish
0.72 → 1.42 % a year

The smallest reliably distinguishable extra stock-style benefit roughly doubled when actual fund swings replaced modeled swings, keeping the model's average fund returns unchanged. The estimated benefit barely changed. This short comparison measures missing uncertainty; it does not validate future returns.

as of 2026-09-05 Fund-model comparison, October 2023 to December 2025

That is a reason to be modest, not a fix that makes the long simulation accurate. Recent data went into estimating what these funds hold, so this check is no independent evidence about future returns.

The longer history, from US data

This history treats foreign holdings as though they were US ones. The trend rule sizes its positions from earlier data, and trades only a few markets. In the Plus trend comparison, ordinary bonds stand in for inflation-protected ones, and gold earns the cash rate in the early years. It can say nothing about spreading money across countries, and nothing about the worst you could lose.

The longer history, from US data $10,000 invested in 1931, month by month to 2025, on a scale where each gridline is a bigger step than the last. Plain world stock index finished on $211,000,000; Plus trend finished on $1,160,000,000; Higher growth finished on $3,680,000,000.
The longer history, from US data: what each finished on
Series Start Finish
Plain world stock index $10,000 in 1931-12 $210,778,185 in 2025-05
Plus trend $10,000 in 1931-12 $1,164,836,444 in 2025-05
Higher growth $10,000 in 1931-12 $3,681,373,319 in 2025-05
1932 to 2025. These are simulated portfolios built from market and style index returns, not the records of real funds. Holdings rebalance once a year. Current fund assumptions and dated constant fees, financing and trading charges are extended through history; fund-specific risks are omitted. The bond line is a modelled nominal ten-year US government bond standing in for inflation-protected bonds; Cautious also holds a long-government-bond index. One fund uses the VT model at a 0.06% annual fee. The plain stock benchmark uses VTI and VXUS globally and a US-market model on the long history; its fees and style exposures differ from VT. The 60/40 line holds 60% of the benchmark and 40% bonds. Dollars are nominal and before tax. The US value funds AVLV and AVUV carry profitability and investment loadings fitted from their filed returns in Experiment 056. This window runs from January 1932 to May 2025 and excludes the 1929 crash. Foreign stocks and their style returns use US substitutes throughout, so this history does not measure geographic diversification. Profitability and investment returns are zero before July 1963. Trend is a four-market simulation sized from the previous 36 months only, with a cap of three; the first three years are excluded for preparation. Gold earns cash before May 1968 and then uses the London afternoon price. RSST itself began only in September 2023.

How to hold it

Review the allocation once a year and direct new money toward holdings below target. Before selling an existing portfolio, compare taxes and trading costs with an advantage that may be small. Retirement-account space can help with trend-fund distributions; see the holding guide.

The one dial that measured better was more RSST. Moving from 35% to 45%, paid from the value funds, added about half a percent a year on the 1990 history with a slightly shallower worst fall, and about nothing on the century. Over the funds' own two and a half years the 45% version did worse. Raising both momentum funds to 15% or adding borrowed bonds through a stacked fund measured nothing or lost. This portfolio is the strongest the evidence supports; more of it is a bet on the trend fund.

Read what the funds do, not only what they earn. SPMO and IDMO's index rules change in September 2026 to limit combined holdings in one company more tightly across share classes. That change has no history in these comparisons. The index provider's announcement gives the effective date. A lasting change in what a fund holds, what it costs or how it works is worth another look. A disappointing year on its own settles nothing.

Compare portfolios Consider Plus trend