Turning to Page 2: Insights and Strategies for 2026
5 min read
I’ve been at this investing thing for a while now—10+ years and counting, long enough to have seen multiple market regimes, a few drawdowns, and more than one confident narrative fall apart.
A single fact continues to hold: the stock market is the one “game” that remains broadly accessible. As other avenues of wealth creation—real estate, entrepreneurship—have raised their barriers to entry through higher cash requirements, regulation, and complexity, more individuals are turning to the market. This is not out of speculation, but necessity—as they attempt to compound their capital before the cost of living quietly erodes their savings.
No one ever got rich working a 9 to 5.
Sheeeit, even Ophelia in Trading Places saw her limitations with her life savings—42,000 in T-bills wasn’t a plan, it was a ceiling. The accessibility of the market offers individuals, not without risk, a way to grow their wealth beyond a standard salary that can no longer keep pace with rising costs.
Exactly one year ago, I dropped a post titled Turning the Page: Insights and Strategies for a Strong 2025 as a way to reset—not portfolios, but thinking. The objective wasn’t to predict outcomes. It was to establish a process that could withstand noise, volatility, and the temptation to wait on the sidelines.
Today’s post is the natural next step—not a revision, but a continuation.
Turning to Page 2 is about what actually happened after the page was turned. What held up. What tested patience. And what quietly worked for those who stayed engaged instead of waiting for certainty. It’s an opportunity to look back with clarity, not nostalgia, and to carry forward lessons that matter as we position for 2026.
Because real strategy doesn’t reset every January—it evolves.
“If you stayed with us and followed the framework—not signals—here’s what the real-world outcome looked like one year later.”
🔁 📊 Strategy Follow-Through: Sector Positioning Update
| ETF | Sector | Price (12/30/24) | Price (12/30/25) | 2025 Return | Volatility | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XLI | Industrials | 131.92 | 156.77 | +15.85% | ~10% more volatile than the S&P 500 Index | Delayed-cycle exposure validated by participation |
| VDE | Energy | 120.00 | 126.58 | +5.20% | ~44% less volatile than the S&P 500 index |
Capital preservation with asymmetric optionality |
What mattered most:
Entry timing mattered less than remaining invested
Volatility was the price of participation, not a signal to exit
Policy expectations were noisy; cash flows and balance sheets weren’t
Then (12/30/24):
Many investors held excess cash
Fear of headlines > discipline
Waiting for a “clean entry”
Now (12/30/25):
Markets rewarded participation, not perfection
Missed months proved more costly than drawdowns
Investors who stayed liquid paid an opportunity cost
Resulting Effect:
Staying invested—even imperfectly—outperformed waiting to feel “certain.”
📈 Portfolio Impact: BMG Snapshot, One-Year ‘Lookback’
| Metric | Portfolio Return 12/30/24 |
Portfolio Return as of 12/30/25* |
Volatility | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🐢BMG | 26.55% | 22.51% | ~14.89% | Risk-adjusted outperformance with smoother drawdown profile |
| S&P 500 | 23.76% | 17.30% | ~16.79% | Market exposure delivered returns with higher volatility cost |
Key takeaway:
BMG’s ~4.97% outperformance relative to the S&P 500 index was driven by disciplined position sizing, defensive diversification, and staying invested through volatility—not by market timing or panic-driven exits..
*Data is current as of 12/30/25; final year-end result may vary following the last trade session.
🏆 Best & Worst Portfolio Contributors: ETF and Individual, respectively.
| Ticker | Sector | Position Type | Entry | Exit(Currrent) | %Return | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLV | Precious Metals | Unrealized | $29.95 | $70.26 | +134.59% | A volatility hedge that became a return driver, validating exposure to real assets amid currency debasement and geopolitical risk. |
| GOOG | Technology | Unrealized | $192.78 | $314.39 | +63.08% | Core growth holding that carried portfolio returns and rewarded disciplined exposure to dominant platforms during a momentum-driven market. |
| SPHD | High Dividend | Unrealized | $49.95 | $48.23 | -3.44% | Underperformed on price but reduced drawdown anxiety and portfolio volatility, enabling continued participation elsewhere. |
| WFG | Basic Material | Realized | $88.75 | $61.15 | -31.10% | A realized loss that reinforced the cost of early cyclicals, but preserved capital and informed position sizing for future commodity-linked trades. |
Notable Pattern:
Last year’s laggards—like SPHD, XLI and VDE—were not mistakes. They were expressions of patience. Their thesis did not fully materialize in 2025, but they served a critical function: keeping the portfolio invested while higher-beta exposures did the heavy lifting. In a year when returns were driven by participation rather than precision, these holdings reduced emotional decision-making and prevented the more costly error of absence.
🧩 What 2025 Reinforced
Diversification works slowly—until it works all at once
Low-beta exposure reduced emotional decision-making
Being “early” is survivable; being absent is not
Process > prediction > personality
🔄 Lifestyle Parallel
Just like investing, health and habits compound quietly for those who:
Stayed active even when progress felt incremental
Replaced negative habits with structured routines
Prioritized consistency over intensity
Over 12 months, the payoff wasn’t cosmetic—it was optionality. More energy. Fewer setbacks. Greater capacity to respond when life demanded it.
Portfolios behave the same way. Quiet discipline doesn’t look impressive in real time, but it preserves the ability to act when conditions finally change.
🎯 Heading Into 2026
The lesson from the last year isn’t that we got everything right—it’s that we stayed engaged, adjusted rationally, and avoided extremes. We didn’t chase certainty, and we didn’t retreat from discomfort.
As we enter 2026, the plan is not to overhaul the playbook, but to remain opportunistic within it. That means monitoring the market for tactical asset allocation opportunities and selectively increasing exposure where risk-adjusted return profiles improve—particularly in:
Commodities ($GLD, $SLV): as portfolio insurance amid supply concentration, geopolitical competition, and ongoing central bank diversification.
Energy ($VDE): provides cash-flow participation in global fuel markets without requiring precise commodity timing.
Power-focused assets ( $NLR,$VST): align with structurally rising electricity demand driven by electrification, nuclear baseload reliability, and data-center expansion.
Utilities ($FUTY, ): anchor the allocation with lower volatility and predictable cash flows, complemented by long-term upside from grid modernization.
Together, these positions express resilience across inflation, energy security, and infrastructure demand—not as forecasts, but as a framework designed to remain invested through evolving market regimes.
That’s the approach we’re carrying forward: stay invested, stay flexible,
and let process—not emotion—do the compounding.
If you want help:
Reviewing your allocation(s)
Stress-testing your assumptions
Building a strategy you can actually stick with
BMG is here.
👉 Are you ready to take the next step? Click here to begin your journey.
