Part 1 · A visual essay · 7 exhibits
Foundation in Pictures
Each chart makes one claim and shows the mechanism. Hover, tap, or pin for the deeper explanation; sources sit behind each Details toggle.
01 · Diversification · Fragility ◇
The Hedge Broke
Stocks, bonds, and the 60/40 blend indexed together through an inflation shock
Stocks and bonds are not always true diversifiers.
Indexed through the inflation shock, the bonds line falls with the stocks line, and the 60/40 blend falls with both. The diversification assumption failed exactly when it was needed.
When inflation drives the regime, the hedge can fall with the risk.
02 · Correlation · Regime ◇
Correlation Turns
A rolling stock–bond correlation crossing from negative to positive through an inflation shock
Stock–bond correlation changes when inflation becomes the dominant stress.
The negative correlation that made 60/40 work was a property of the disinflationary regime, not a law of markets. Under inflation stress both assets fall together.
The diversifier did not disappear. The regime that produced it did.
03 · Inflation · Measurement ◇
Inflation Was Bigger
Assets vs CPI as indexed lines; the widening gap between them is the claim
CPI alone does not capture the full inflation story.
Indexed from the same base, consumer prices grind upward while the assets that store capital reprice several times over. The widening gap is the inflation that portfolios actually had to outrun.
Consumer prices roughly doubled. The assets that store capital did far more.
04 · Policy · Constraint ◇
The Bill Came Due
The same debt backdrop in both states; the interest cost is revealed beneath it
Debt rose for decades while falling rates hid the cost.
One backdrop, two readings. On the surface, debt to GDP grinds upward while the carrying cost stays faint. Beneath the same backdrop, normalized rates reveal the interest burden inflecting toward a structural constraint on policy.
For decades, debt rose while falling rates hid the cost. The cost is no longer hidden.
05 · Path dependency · Withdrawals ◇
Path Changes Everything
One shared return deck, two orders; both portfolio paths are generated from those exact returns
Same returns, same withdrawals: different order, opposite survival.
The deck and the paths are the same math. Ten annual returns are shown in two orders, and each portfolio path below is generated from exactly those returns with identical level withdrawals.
Withdrawal-phase capital does not care about the average. It cares about the order.
S1 · Payoff shape · Signature ◌
Shape the Payoff
The payoff shape the whole framework is built to produce
ACF shapes exposure: the left side is capped, the right side is left free to run.
A symmetric position gives back on the left what it makes on the right. ACF caps the downside and keeps the upside open, so being roughly right occasionally still compounds. The whole system exists to defend that shape.
Survive the left tail; stay convex on the right tail.
06 · Convexity · Endurance ◇
Survive the Path
A representative portfolio path that compounds through a drawdown rather than around it
Upside only matters if sizing lets you survive the path.
The path does not route around the drawdown; it goes through it. Constant accumulation, no leverage, no forced exit: the volatility is endured, and the compounding continues on the other side.
Volatile assets can still compound: through, not around, the drawdown.