The Interesting Times: Taylor's Machete

Hi,

If you missed it, last week I announced a new project we have been working on at Mutiny Funds, the Cockroach Strategy.

Cockroaches aren’t anyone’s favorite animal, but they do two things well that we also want out of our portfolios: they’re hard to kill and they compound fast. We’re working on constructing a portfolio that does just that.

If you enjoy or get value from The Interesting Times, I'd really appreciate it if you would support it by forwarding it to a friend or sharing it wherever you typically share this sort of thing - (Twitter, LinkedIn, Slack groups, etc.) You can read past editions here.

Taylor’s Machete

Most of us have a knee-jerk reaction that when something bad happens to assume that someone or something is “out to get us.”

My personal favorite example is that every time I lose my wallet, my first thought is “someone stole my wallet.”

I have, in fact, never had my wallet stolen but have been sufficiently careless to misplace it many times (usually somewhere I can find it, fortunately).

Hanlon's Razor is a clever way of pointing this out:

Do not attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

However, I think it leaves a little something on the table. I would like to humbly submit an addition to Hanlon’s Razor (which someone on Twitter has dubbed Taylor’s Machete which I thought was funny and I am sufficiently egotistical to want something named after me that I’m running with it).

Don't attribute to incompetence, that which can adequately be explained by poorly structured incentives.

While it’s true that a lot of things we attribute to malice are actually incompetence, I would go further and say that a lot of what appears to be incompetence is actually the result of poorly structured incentives.

I generally think that most people are doing their jobs to the best of their abilities and that most disfunction is just poorly structured rules and incentives.

I think one of the elements about incentives that is often missed is that people with poorly structured incentives don’t realize that’s the case.

There's a great story from Charlie Munger about a gallbladder surgeon in Lincoln, Nebraska that did way too much surgery.

Here, my early experience was a doctor who sent bushel baskets full of normal gallbladders down to the pathology lab in the leading hospital in Lincoln, Nebraska. And with that quality control for which community hospitals are famous, about five years after he should've been removed from the staff, he was.

And one of the old doctors who participated in the removal was also a family friend, and I asked him, I said, “Tell me, did he think, here's a way for me to exercise my talents,” this guy was very skilled technically, “And make a high living by doing a few maimings and murders every year, along with some frauds?”

And he said, “Hell no, Charlie. He thought that the gallbladder was the source of all medical evil, and if you really love your patients, you couldn't get that organ out rapidly enough.”

Not to pick too much on the medical community but I think this is very prevalent there. Because physicians and dentists tend to be best compensated for providing surgery, there is evidence (at least in dentistry, though I suspect more broadly) that far too much surgery is done on people and that the risk/reward is often better to wait and do nothing.

When we think about people with poor incentives, we tend to think “these people must know they are bad/evil/incompetent and are acting maliciously.”

When a financial advisor recommends some complex structured product that exposes their client to a lot of negative risk but gives them a big kickback, we tend to think “oh, that person knew they were doing something wrong and is just a bad person.”

I think that’s almost never the case. Most people doing these things really believe they are doing the right thing. Sure, some people are actual, clinical sociopaths. But, in most cases, it’s something more akin to the Nebraskan gallbladder surgeon: they really think they are doing the right thing.

One implication for this is it is always worth being mindful of the incentives of who you are talking with and working with. I’m pretty excited about the direct primary care movement where doctors in the U.S. move from an insurance-based model to a monthly retainer one: you pay the doctor a monthly fee in exchange for providing a service. They can still be incompetent or a sociopath, but you at least know that they don’t stand to benefit from recommending an unnecessary procedure.

Having spoken with a few doctors that have moved to this model, one of the most common changes is that they tend to become a lot more focused on their patients’ sleep, nutrition and diet than they were previously.

It turns out if you get someone to eat healthy, do some exercise and sleep decently that tends to be upstream of a lot of other issues that resolve themselves.

Another implication is to always be mindful of your own incentives. I like to think that I would “do the right thing” regardless of my incentives, but I try to always put myself in a position where my incentives are as closely aligned as possible as whoever I am working with.

It’s kind of like taking all the unhealthy food out of your house before you start a diet. You can convince yourself all you want that you’ll have more willpower and not crush an entire bag of cinnamon raisin bagel chips (which I did last night and they were delicious), but it’s a heck of a lot easier to just take them out of the house.

#81 – Debra Kimless, M.D. & Steve Goldner, J.D.: Cannabis – the latest science on CBD & THC
Peter Attia MD

With the increasing legalization of cannabis and CBD in the United States, it’s become a lot more of a topic lately. I have always been skeptical as it has some faddish elements to it.

This podcast was a good exploration of what the current state of the research is and what it can and can’t tell us.

Broadly, my takeaway was that we really don’t know much about cannabis or CBD, in large part because its Federal illegal status has made it hard to do research. However, it seems that there is relatively little downside and I hope more research will be done on it in the near future.

How I Misapplied My Trader Mindset To Investing
Party at the Moontower

A thoughtful reflection from an experienced options trader about how he misapplied his trading mindset to investing with a good lesson about the value of compounding:

Part of the trading mentality is short-termism. Today I’m thinking more about bets that pay off longer in the future. Bets that build under the surface, accumulating value. Value that is not marked and therefore untaxed. Human capital works that way. Ownership often works that way.

Sure, a mercenary mindset can be worth it. But just as a ballplayer needs to earn a giant 1 year-deal to make it appetizing relative to a longer-term contract, you must be thoughtful about how you align your rewards with your efforts. Short-term certainty creates reinvestment risk. Weigh them carefully.

…

At a high level, I focus on asset allocation.

Risk and correlation are my primary concerns. Focus on the shape of returns and how the systemic risks you are underwriting are correlated to each other. Do this qualitatively. For example, I think of real estate as an idiosyncratic risk based on local supply/demand, but its systematic risks are interest rates and liquidity.

Presume returns will be driven by market-implied parameters. This is the agnostic part I accept from trading. If you invest in large-cap US equities today, they offer say a 3-4% risk premia over the risk-free rate, in exchange for 20% volatility and fat tails. It’s not a great proposition, but the point is I don’t pretend I would get more out of my equity allocation. Size that proposition appropriately.

As always, if you're enjoying The Interesting Times, I'd love it if you shared it with a friend (or three). You can send them here to sign up. I try to make it one of the best emails you get every week and I'm always open to feedback on how to better do that.

If you'd like to see everything I'm reading, you can follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn for articles and podcasts. I'm on Goodreads for books. Finally, if you read anything interesting this week, please hit reply and send it over!

Newsletter Past Editions: Read past editions of The interesting Times Newsletter.

Interesting Essays: Read my best, free essays on topics like bitcoin, investing, decision making and marketing.

Consulting & Advising: Are you looking for help with making decisions around scaling your company from $500k to $5 million? I’ve been working with authors, entrepreneurs, and startups for half a decade to help them get more out of their businesses.

Internet Business Toolkit: An exhaustive list of all the online tools I use to be more productive.

Futures and options trading involves a substantial risk of loss. You should therefore carefully consider whether such trading is appropriate for you in light of your financial condition. Unless distinctly noted otherwise, the data and graphs included herein are intended to be mere examples and exhibits of the topic discussed, are for educational and illustrative purposes only, and do not represent trading in actual accounts. Opinions expressed are that of the author. The mention of specific asset class performance (i.e. S&P +3.2%, -4.6%) is based on the noted source index (i.e. S&P 500 Index, etc.), and investors should take care to understand that any index performance is for the constituents of that index only, and does not represent the entire universe of possible investments within that asset class. And further, that there can be limitations and biases to indices such as survivorship, self-reporting, and instant history.

DISCLAIMER

This email provides information regarding the following commodity pools: The Long Volatility Fund LLC and The Cockroach Fund, LLC (collectively the "US Funds") and Mutiny Funds Cayman Ltd. (together with the US Funds, collectively the “Fund(s)“), which are managed and operated by Attain Portfolio Advisors LLC and Mutiny Funds LLC (the “Managers”). Investments in the US Funds are only available to Accredited Investors as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D of The Securities Act of 1933. This content is being provided for information and discussion purposes only and should not be seen as a solicitation for said Fund(s). Any information relating to the Fund(s) is qualified in its entirety by the information included in the Fund’(s)’ offering documents and supplements (collectively, the “Memorandum(s)”) described herein. Any offer or solicitation of the Fund(s) may be made only by delivery of the Memorandum(s). Before making any investment in the Fund(s), you should thoroughly review the Memorandum(s) with your professional advisor(s) to determine whether an investment in the Fund(s) are suitable for you in light of your investment objectives and financial situation. The Memorandum(s) contain important information concerning risk factors, including a more comprehensive description of the risks and other material aspects of an investment in the Fund(s), and should be read carefully before any decision to invest is made. This site is not intended for European investors, and nothing herein should be taken as a solicitation of such investors.