On this page
A dollar put into 60/40, US stocks and intermediate Treasuries, in February 2006 became $5.23 by September 2026, rebalanced once a year, before costs and taxes. Started in January 2010 instead, a dollar became $4.69. Those are the two floors every other mix is measured against, and the second start matters because 2008 sits inside the first and not the second.
Three books of the same stocks and Treasuries plus gold, one for each lifestyle:
| book | stocks / Treasuries / gold | from 2006: a year, vol, worst fall, 2008, 2022 | from 2010: a year, vol, worst fall, 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grow wealth | 65 / 10 / 25 | 10.6%, 13%, −35%, −21%, −14% | 12.0%, 12%, −22%, −14% |
| Balanced financial independence | 50 / 20 / 30 | 9.9%, 11%, −28%, −14%, −13% | 10.6%, 10%, −19%, −12% |
| Leave a legacy | 45 / 25 / 30 | 9.5%, 10%, −25%, −11%, −13% | 10.0%, 9%, −18%, −12% |
| 60/40 | 60 / 40 / 0 | 8.4%, 11%, −30%, −16%, −17% | 9.7%, 10%, −21%, −17% |
What both starts agree on
Each book returned more per unit of risk than 60/40 from 2006 (Sharpe 0.72 to 0.78 against 0.67) and from 2010 (0.90 to 0.92 against 0.87). Each lost 12 to 14% in 2022 against 17% for 60/40, because gold fell 1% in the year stocks and Treasuries fell together. Balanced FI and Legacy fell less than 60/40 at the worst from both starts, by two to five points from 2006 and three from 2010.
What depends on the start
The return gap. From 2006 the books earned one to two points a year more than 60/40; from 2010, a third of a point to two. The Sharpe gaps are inside the standard error in both windows, about 0.22 over twenty years, so a different twenty years could reorder the return column. The risk-adjusted direction held in both windows tested, and that is the claim, not a promise of two points.
Grow wealth’s worst fall. From 2006 it fell 35%, four points further than 60/40, because 65% in stocks in 2008 costs more than 60%. From 2010 it fell one point less than 60/40. A household choosing Grow wealth chooses the 2008 outcome with it.
Why these weights and not the optimizer’s
From 2006 an optimizer picks 43 to 45% gold and no Treasuries, because the window holds one bond bear market and one gold run. From 2010 it picks 70 to 85% stocks, 15 to 25% gold and no Treasuries. Gold at 15 to 30% is in both answers. The Treasury weight is where the two decades disagree, zero or a third, and its only job is the 2008 kind of year, which the second window lacks. The books hold 10 to 25% Treasuries, 25 to 30% gold, and were chosen to be acceptable from both starts rather than optimal in either. Any weight can move five points without leaving the noise.
Once a year is enough
Every row above rebalances once a year. Monthly rebalancing returned within 0.2 points of it, turned over 12 to 14% of the book a year instead of 4 to 5%, and moved the worst fall by about a point. For a household holding the book in a taxable account, the once-a-year version realizes a third of the gains, which is the difference Implement measures.
Which book
Grow wealth is for a household whose income covers its spending and whose money is for terminal wealth; it holds through a 35% fall. Balanced financial independence is for a household that wants the option to live off the portfolio at 3 to 4% a year; it holds through 28%. Leave a legacy is for a household whose wealth already exceeds its lifetime spending; it holds through 25% and never needs to sell. A house changes the count, not the book, and the house page shows how.
Next: gold is a view on the decade.