Central banks can’t buy gold fast enough, while gold miners are recovering after a dramatic selloff and Bitcoin, the asset previously regarded as digital gold, is having a miserable year.
Ask most investors what determines their long-term returns and they’ll most likely talk about their asset allocation, the way they select their fund managers or their track records at getting macro calls right.
Central banks can’t buy gold fast enough, while gold miners are recovering after a dramatic selloff and Bitcoin, the asset previously regarded as digital gold, is having a miserable year.
Ask most investors what determines their long-term returns and they’ll most likely talk about their asset allocation, the way they select their fund managers or their track records at getting macro calls right.
The rich just keep getting richer. In Australia, the top 10% now control over 58% of national wealth, while the top 1% own almost half of the nation’s wealth.
The idea of separating a portfolio into core and satellite exposures has moved from institutional asset allocation frameworks into the mainstream toolkit of retail investors. Its appeal lies in its apparent simplicity. A stable, low-cost core provides broad, diversified market exposure, while smaller satellite allocations pursue incremental returns.
We’ve all been there. Standing in the supermarket aisle, trying to make sense of the vast number of products available to us in every single category. Does a cheaper toothpaste mean it’s less effective? We think through the benefits of saving money by buying products on sale versus a vast number of other micro-decisions that collectively drive our final choice.
We all know the long list of benefits of investing in ETFs, but the passive fund boom has reached the stage where narratives can sometimes reign supreme. The risk is that the recent wave of ETF launches, particularly in thematic, single-stock, options-enhanced, and actively managed strategies, is partially shaped by investor demand for exposure to recent winners rather than enduring sources of return.
There’s a persistent misconception among investors that portfolio construction is a set-and-forget exercise. But much like physical health, financial fitness depends on consistent, disciplined work. This is because portfolios drift, risks evolve, and market conditions change.
In recent years, shorting has migrated from the realms of professional hedge fund management into reach of individual investors en masse. That’s not necessarily a good thing.
By now, most of us have realised that the US-Israel-Iran war will have longer-term consequences beyond recent volatility. It’s accelerating a structural shift in global markets defined by tighter energy supply, more persistent inflation, and the fragmentation of trade and capital flows.
These days, most investors are well-trained to minimise their fund and ETF costs. It’s been drilled into their minds that an apparently small fund fee difference can create an enormous performance drag over the long term. Hence, management expense ratios, brokerage fees, and tax leakage dominate product comparisons and marketing narratives.
For bond investors, the first few months of 2026 have been chaotic to say the least. It has been a year in which duration, inflation sensitivity, and market structure have mattered again, often brutally.
The decade-long narrative in funds management has been that passive investing is winning at the expense of active management. It’s hard to argue with that. Fees have fallen, passive fund transparency has improved, and cost-focused investors have taken advantage of the opportunity.
Investors love the rush of making money. It’s a signal that they were right, and that feels good. But rarer is the investor who’s genuinely ready for the darker, less enjoyable side of investing; navigating market sell-offs. Like we’ve witnessed in the past few weeks since the US and Israel attacked Iran.