You brought up something earlier, Jerry, not in our conversation that we're having right now,

but something when we were just getting ready for this, that talked a little bit about, you know,

equity returns, equity drawdowns versus CTA returns, CTA drawdowns.

Why don't you talk a little bit about that? I thought that was pretty interesting.

Yeah, I think to some degree, not only does CTAs have to explain their performance as

it relates to the systems and the markets that they trade and the shorts that they trade,

they also have to choose a certain amount of leverage. and very few hedge funds or CTAs are targeting, you know, similar return drawdown that an S&P has historically had, 8% return and a 50 plus percent drawdown.

So I think this week, especially there's headlines that CTAs lost more money than the S&P,

and some of that is due to the leverage, and they're expected annual return, at least according to all of us,

when we do our research and back testing would be far greater than 8%.

Not an excuse, just kind of an explanation

of how the returns can not only not provide crisis alpha in a certain week, but actually be worse,

because our expectation of profit and drawdown is looked at over 20 or 30 years of analyzing

the markets. And we're coming up with methods and systems and ideas that are going to work

and have worked over a long period of time, but not that reliable on a weekly basis.

Yeah. No, I completely agree that definitely, you could say, many strategies are held up to a very

high standard when it comes to that in terms of expected returns, but also expecting to have

relatively shallow drawdowns, which is difficult

to deliver in the long run.

And maybe this is part of the problem, at least this is sort of one of the things that I've

been pondering.

And that is a lot of these strategies that we know of today take risk parity and

...