WEBVTT - This ETF Is Betting Against Jim Cramer’s Picks 0:00:06.280 --> 0:00:07.000 Welcome a Trillions. 0:00:07.040 --> 0:00:15.200 I'm Joel Webber and I'm Eric Belchunis. 0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:20.759 Eric, we have a true innovator back on Trillions today 0:00:21.280 --> 0:00:21.600 we do. 0:00:22.239 --> 0:00:24.759 This is an episode we did where at the very end, 0:00:25.000 --> 0:00:29.840 this particular issuer teased us with this particular ETF and 0:00:29.880 --> 0:00:33.199 we knew it was no you know, it wasn't going 0:00:33.240 --> 0:00:37.279 to be easy, but he somehow managed to put it 0:00:37.360 --> 0:00:40.720 in registration, get it through the SEC, and it is 0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:41.839 launching today. 0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:45.040 So we're talking about Matt Tuttle of Tuttle Capital Management. 0:00:45.960 --> 0:00:50.320 Before he was on the program to talk about Inverse Tesla, 0:00:50.800 --> 0:00:54.360 he teased a Jim Kramer ETF and that's what we're 0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:57.840 talking about today. Jim Kramer, of course, the host of 0:00:58.040 --> 0:01:03.200 Mad Money on Seeing, which is a very entertaining show 0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:07.640 to watch, filled with lots of stockpicking, lots of calls, 0:01:08.240 --> 0:01:13.000 kind of active management at its finest. Eric, what about 0:01:13.160 --> 0:01:15.480 the Jim Kramer idea? Do you love most? 0:01:16.600 --> 0:01:17.960 Yeah? I mean, look. 0:01:19.280 --> 0:01:19.320 It. 0:01:20.760 --> 0:01:24.600 The guy just has a knack for not being wrong, 0:01:24.720 --> 0:01:28.640 but being spectacularly wrong on occasion. He's got somewhat of 0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:32.760 reverse Midas touch, is how I put it. And I 0:01:32.800 --> 0:01:35.679 think that it's all over Twitter in the Internet. There's many, 0:01:35.720 --> 0:01:37.840 many examples. We'll go through some in the episode, but 0:01:38.680 --> 0:01:41.119 I think he's just sort of late to the party 0:01:41.160 --> 0:01:45.640 a lot. He'll get his loudest and most boisterous after 0:01:45.680 --> 0:01:47.640 the price action is really good for like two or 0:01:47.680 --> 0:01:50.200 three years. I think the price gives him confidence to 0:01:50.240 --> 0:01:52.600 be loud. So he's almost like the last guy at 0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:54.960 the party or on the bandwagon. And that's why he's 0:01:55.000 --> 0:01:59.120 a decent reverse indicator of a big collapse or a 0:01:59.200 --> 0:02:02.600 run up. And it seems to work, and it's you know, look, 0:02:02.640 --> 0:02:05.160 we're all looking for a return, so why not try 0:02:05.200 --> 0:02:07.360 something that looks to have a proven track record. So 0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:10.280 this will be a fascinating experiment in the ETF world. 0:02:10.560 --> 0:02:14.000 Okay, Joining us Matt Tuttle of Tuttle Capital Management, where 0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:17.079 he's the CEO, as well as Katie Greifeld of Bloomberg News, 0:02:20.080 --> 0:02:26.680 this time on Trillions saying money Matt, Katie, welcome back 0:02:26.680 --> 0:02:27.200 to Trillions. 0:02:27.919 --> 0:02:28.760 Thanks for having me. 0:02:28.919 --> 0:02:31.880 Thrilled to be here, Matt, what took you so long? 0:02:33.760 --> 0:02:39.040 So this was not easy? You know, when you launch 0:02:39.080 --> 0:02:41.359 an ETF, first off, you've got to get a board 0:02:41.720 --> 0:02:44.240 of a trust to say yes to it. Then you've 0:02:44.240 --> 0:02:47.160 got to get it through the SEC, and boards in 0:02:47.360 --> 0:02:51.639 SEC tend to be more conducive to like SMP four 0:02:51.800 --> 0:02:56.040 ninety nine than they are to you know, going short 0:02:56.200 --> 0:03:01.200 the recommendations of a media pundit. So, you know, convincing 0:03:01.240 --> 0:03:04.480 a board it was a lot of fun, not as 0:03:04.480 --> 0:03:06.400 hard as I thought it would be, but certainly not 0:03:06.520 --> 0:03:11.360 a slam dunk. And then convincing the SEC. You know, 0:03:11.400 --> 0:03:15.040 whenever you're doing a first of its kind type of ETF, 0:03:15.440 --> 0:03:18.519 you know you're you're you're dealing with a larger pool 0:03:18.720 --> 0:03:21.120 of people at the SEC than you are when you're 0:03:21.280 --> 0:03:24.840 doing something simple. So took a lot longer than I 0:03:24.880 --> 0:03:28.200 had wanted it to, but we're finally here, So that's. 0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:30.960 All that matters. Who all was on that on that board. 0:03:31.280 --> 0:03:33.320 I mean, it's just it's a board of directors of 0:03:33.400 --> 0:03:36.720 the trust that you know has got to approve an ETF. 0:03:36.840 --> 0:03:40.480 And it's like, you know, twenty people, a lot of 0:03:40.520 --> 0:03:43.280 who have been in the industry for like five hundred years, 0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:48.680 so you know, they're used to hearing pitches for normal stuff. 0:03:49.800 --> 0:03:53.280 I would probably venture to guess they weren't used to 0:03:53.320 --> 0:03:56.960 hearing pitches like like I gave them uh, so you know, 0:03:57.040 --> 0:03:59.680 they had to kind of noodle on that a little 0:03:59.680 --> 0:04:02.760 bit before saying, hey, let's let's do it. 0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:03.800 And what was the pushback? 0:04:04.760 --> 0:04:08.000 I'm really from the board level there, there wasn't. It 0:04:08.080 --> 0:04:10.560 was just wrapping their head around it, you know. From 0:04:10.600 --> 0:04:14.440 the SEC level. The biggest pushback we had was just 0:04:14.480 --> 0:04:19.239 putting Kramer the name into the ETF, from the argument 0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:22.480 of if you've got someone's name in an ETF, but 0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:25.200 they're not actually involved in the running of it, which 0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:27.680 I would argue he kind of is, but you know, 0:04:27.800 --> 0:04:33.120 not not by choice. Then you know that's kind of 0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:35.919 an issue. So we threw Tracker on the end of 0:04:35.960 --> 0:04:38.280 it and took them a couple of weeks to think 0:04:38.320 --> 0:04:42.120 about that, and they were cool, and I like Tracker 0:04:42.200 --> 0:04:44.680 better anyway. So there we are. 0:04:44.839 --> 0:04:45.800 So what's the official name. 0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:49.720 So we've got the inverse Kramer Tracker and the long Cramer. 0:04:49.440 --> 0:04:53.080 Tracker, and let's dig in here, so it's actively managed. 0:04:53.520 --> 0:04:55.839 We'll go with s Jim, which is the inverse Kramer Tracker, 0:04:55.880 --> 0:04:57.760 which I think is the one most people are interested in. 0:04:58.520 --> 0:05:03.400 Explain how, oh it's gonna work. It's long short, right, 0:05:03.800 --> 0:05:06.760 It's not just going long to stuff he doesn't like, 0:05:06.960 --> 0:05:09.560 or short the stuff he does like it does. Both 0:05:09.600 --> 0:05:11.960 can just go through how it's gonna actually function. 0:05:12.240 --> 0:05:14.800 Yeah, and you are correct, it's gonna be long short, 0:05:15.040 --> 0:05:18.760 And you know, probably the way it's gonna look and 0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:22.360 smell is as the market is going down, it's gonna 0:05:22.360 --> 0:05:25.159 be getting more and more long, and as the market's 0:05:25.200 --> 0:05:27.560 going up, it's gonna get more and more short. So 0:05:27.680 --> 0:05:31.719 basically what we're looking at is three things. We're looking 0:05:31.800 --> 0:05:34.560 at when he comes on in the morning, which is 0:05:34.920 --> 0:05:38.839 typically like eight forty five ish to ten. We're looking 0:05:38.839 --> 0:05:40.840 at tweets he puts out during the day, and then 0:05:40.839 --> 0:05:46.400 we're looking at mad money, and if he specifically says 0:05:46.640 --> 0:05:51.120 either bye bye bye a stock, then we're gonna go 0:05:51.160 --> 0:05:55.640 short that stock at the next practical moment. So if 0:05:55.640 --> 0:05:58.080 it's mad money, we'll do it, you know, sometime around 0:05:58.120 --> 0:06:01.200 the open. If he says it not forty five, then 0:06:01.360 --> 0:06:03.400 you know, probably we'll do it at nine forty five. 0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:06.640 And if he tells you he hates a stock or 0:06:06.680 --> 0:06:09.560 sell sell sell or something like that, then we're going 0:06:09.640 --> 0:06:12.280 to go along that name again at the next kind 0:06:12.320 --> 0:06:14.159 of practical entry point. 0:06:14.560 --> 0:06:17.320 So that sounds like a massive amount of work. 0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:19.680 I was like that it sounds like a full time job. 0:06:19.720 --> 0:06:22.559 Sounds like you're just that's like so many hours spent 0:06:22.880 --> 0:06:24.880 watching this man on television. 0:06:25.360 --> 0:06:28.160 Yeah, and so I've got there's three of us who 0:06:28.200 --> 0:06:30.280 do it. You know, at the end of the day, 0:06:30.839 --> 0:06:34.839 you know, I'm the final arbiter. So sometimes you know 0:06:34.960 --> 0:06:39.440 he's not one hundred percent clear. So you know, David 0:06:39.440 --> 0:06:41.240 Faber might say, hey, Jim, what do you think about 0:06:41.279 --> 0:06:43.920 alphabet earnings? And they'll sell they had a great quarter. 0:06:44.400 --> 0:06:46.200 So I want to be the guy who's like, all right, 0:06:46.279 --> 0:06:48.760 is that is that going to be enough? Or or 0:06:48.839 --> 0:06:50.480 is that not? So I've got to watch it. I've 0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:54.240 got a team who's watching it. I am very concerned 0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:57.400 about the long term impact on my brain cells. You 0:06:57.440 --> 0:07:01.440 know that that has not been adequately stuck ui. But 0:07:01.720 --> 0:07:04.960 luckily my team is younger than me. So if you know, 0:07:05.040 --> 0:07:07.159 I go off the sea screens, well but yeah, but 0:07:07.200 --> 0:07:09.240 if I go off the deep end, you know, I've 0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:12.040 got two people to kind of take up the mantle 0:07:12.240 --> 0:07:14.480 and you know, put me in a home or something 0:07:14.560 --> 0:07:14.880 like that. 0:07:15.280 --> 0:07:17.600 So have you dabbled with this just on an ad 0:07:17.640 --> 0:07:21.120 hoc basis, like just to see how it how it works. 0:07:21.240 --> 0:07:24.160 Yeah. So I mean I've been running this on paper 0:07:24.720 --> 0:07:28.840 since January first, in expectation of the launch, because we 0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:31.720 need to get the you know, have an actual portfolio 0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:35.760 on launch day. So yeah, I've I've watched every episode 0:07:35.800 --> 0:07:39.320 of Mad Money for the past two months. I can't 0:07:39.360 --> 0:07:44.960 say it's getting any better. Yeah, And like you know, 0:07:45.080 --> 0:07:50.280 walking over to the studio, I'm watching Kramer. You know 0:07:50.840 --> 0:07:53.000 other things I would have rather been doing on the 0:07:53.040 --> 0:07:56.240 walk over here, But it's I mean, I chose to 0:07:56.280 --> 0:07:57.840 do it, So it is what it is. 0:07:58.520 --> 0:07:59.480 So when you. 0:07:59.600 --> 0:08:02.880 Go and you decide this is a convicted Kramer call, 0:08:03.000 --> 0:08:05.480 this is where we're going to do the opposite, you know, 0:08:05.520 --> 0:08:08.160 I'm thinking of like Meta, remember when he kind of 0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:10.280 almoll he cried a little bit on TV because he 0:08:10.320 --> 0:08:13.480 had recommended Facebook for so many years. He loved Zuckerberg Andy, 0:08:13.800 --> 0:08:16.800 and he had a Mia Kolpa. I was wrong. I'm sorry, 0:08:16.920 --> 0:08:20.520 this stock is awful. That's when you would have bought right. 0:08:20.400 --> 0:08:22.760 Because yeah, we would have gone along then, I know, 0:08:22.880 --> 0:08:25.360 And I wished I wished we were up and running 0:08:25.400 --> 0:08:26.920 because that would have been a great long. 0:08:27.160 --> 0:08:30.480 So it's up sixty percent since then, which this is 0:08:30.520 --> 0:08:34.760 why In my opinion, this ETF could could really do 0:08:34.880 --> 0:08:38.760 some damage because all you need is a couple grand 0:08:38.800 --> 0:08:42.560 slams for an ETF to overcome some wishy washy ones. 0:08:42.960 --> 0:08:46.000 We've seen this in a couple of ETFs, and again 0:08:46.480 --> 0:08:49.240 there's definitely grand slam potential here. Sixty percent in a 0:08:49.280 --> 0:08:51.559 couple months is really good. I mean that could power 0:08:51.720 --> 0:08:53.280 over three or four dogs. 0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:55.880 I mean, you know, no offense, we may put you 0:08:55.920 --> 0:08:57.840 out of business on all this bogel stuff. 0:09:00.360 --> 0:09:03.760 Man, that tunnel just making shots all over the fat thing. 0:09:04.280 --> 0:09:07.520 So you've been watching a lot of television for several 0:09:07.559 --> 0:09:10.480 months now, how how big are these portfolios? How many 0:09:10.559 --> 0:09:11.520 names are actually in them? 0:09:12.080 --> 0:09:16.760 So my goal is to have you know, s GYM 0:09:16.960 --> 0:09:19.160 between thirty and fifty names. I don't want to get 0:09:19.200 --> 0:09:22.400 any above fifty because then you start diluting it and 0:09:22.600 --> 0:09:26.040 l GM will be you know last typically you know, 0:09:26.080 --> 0:09:28.880 we've been running it around thirty ish names or so, 0:09:28.960 --> 0:09:31.280 and again I don't want to get any more than 0:09:31.280 --> 0:09:33.840 that because you start really diluting the portfolio. 0:09:34.360 --> 0:09:36.880 As of today, what are so? 0:09:36.880 --> 0:09:38.920 So, what we want to do is we want to 0:09:38.960 --> 0:09:42.360 equally wait the whole things you going to ask Yah yeah, 0:09:42.360 --> 0:09:45.560 so we're going to equally weight it unless there's like 0:09:45.640 --> 0:09:49.240 meme stocks in there, you know, I so then they'd 0:09:49.240 --> 0:09:51.480 probably be a lower weight, just because I don't want, 0:09:51.720 --> 0:09:55.760 you know, amc ripping fifty percent five minutes to to 0:09:55.840 --> 0:09:59.080 mess anything up. But you know, it's it's the names 0:09:59.160 --> 0:10:02.079 you'd you'd reckon. You're in the videos that he I've 0:10:02.120 --> 0:10:06.760 guess named his dog. He's all over that one. You know, 0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:12.400 we'd be long crypto because he still hates crypto, you know, 0:10:12.480 --> 0:10:15.920 eli Lily is one that he keeps saying he loves, 0:10:16.320 --> 0:10:17.480 you know, so stuff like that. 0:10:17.600 --> 0:10:19.760 So if he doubles down and keeps coming back to things, 0:10:19.760 --> 0:10:20.600 what do you do then. 0:10:20.679 --> 0:10:22.400 So we're not going to add to it. But the 0:10:22.679 --> 0:10:26.840 way it's working is every night he's there's new stocks, 0:10:27.280 --> 0:10:29.800 and we're lopping off the old stocks. But if he 0:10:29.880 --> 0:10:32.440 keeps doubling down on something like Lily is a name 0:10:33.080 --> 0:10:36.320 that he mentioned, you know, on Mad Money, you know 0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:40.360 what was it Tuesday night? But he also mentioned it, 0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:42.719 you know, a week or so ago, So that's a 0:10:42.800 --> 0:10:45.280 name we just wouldn't lop off. And if he keeps 0:10:45.320 --> 0:10:48.320 mentioning it, we'll just keep it on there until he stops, 0:10:48.360 --> 0:10:51.440 and we need that room for for something fresh, because 0:10:51.480 --> 0:10:52.640 I want to keep it fresh. 0:10:52.800 --> 0:10:54.720 So this is a little meta. What happens if he 0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:56.840 mentions either of your tickers? 0:10:57.679 --> 0:11:01.320 Then the universe probably explodes and we're all dead. So 0:11:01.440 --> 0:11:04.960 it really doesn't matter. You know, none of us are here, 0:11:05.280 --> 0:11:08.760 and so I'm really hoping he doesn't do that. 0:11:09.280 --> 0:11:10.360 What happens though, for real? 0:11:11.200 --> 0:11:13.839 I mean, we would ignore that. But I've had people 0:11:13.880 --> 0:11:16.600 tell me, Hey, I'm calling in to mad Money and saying, Hey, Jim, 0:11:16.880 --> 0:11:19.600 what do you think of s Jim? Like, all right, 0:11:19.800 --> 0:11:20.200 do it. 0:11:20.880 --> 0:11:24.080 I think he's too proud to actually say, go along, 0:11:24.280 --> 0:11:26.320 es Jim, but it might be a fun joke. I 0:11:26.360 --> 0:11:29.120 know he tweeted it when the filing hit. He had 0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:31.240 a little tweet storm on this. At first, I think 0:11:31.280 --> 0:11:32.920 he tried to ignore it, but then I could tell it. 0:11:34.000 --> 0:11:36.240 A couple of days he was just lashing out a 0:11:36.240 --> 0:11:37.880 little bit about it. And I think one of his 0:11:37.920 --> 0:11:41.680 tweets was what if I just recommend es Jim, that'll 0:11:41.679 --> 0:11:42.720 show him or something like that. 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:51.120 So he's had a few things to say. 0:11:53.120 --> 0:11:56.080 Have you had a conversation with CNBC or with Jim? 0:11:56.120 --> 0:12:00.319 So I have not. I've heard through the grapevine that 0:12:00.720 --> 0:12:05.720 CNBC is angry and maybe a little bit scared, which 0:12:06.000 --> 0:12:08.559 makes sense. I mean, if that's Jim from a performance 0:12:08.559 --> 0:12:13.240 standpoints up like one hundred percent every year, that's probably 0:12:13.280 --> 0:12:16.800 some explaining to do there. And you know, and David 0:12:16.840 --> 0:12:20.480 Faber might you know, hey, Jim, you know what's going on? 0:12:21.679 --> 0:12:24.959 And yeah, I would love to have a conversation with Kramer. 0:12:25.480 --> 0:12:27.600 I mean, I know some of the other guys over there. 0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:30.080 I know some people who know him. I've tried to 0:12:30.800 --> 0:12:33.120 tried to arrange that, and they've been a little bit 0:12:33.640 --> 0:12:37.640 frightened to arrange it. But I mean, hopefully one day. 0:12:38.280 --> 0:12:42.320 Here's the thing, though, he should embrace this. This is 0:12:42.360 --> 0:12:46.520 his livelihood. He believes he's making great calls, and I 0:12:46.600 --> 0:12:49.600 think one of his tweets early was bring it on, 0:12:49.679 --> 0:12:52.520 you know, And I would have the same attitude. He 0:12:52.559 --> 0:12:55.000 should want to see this fail and he has a 0:12:55.120 --> 0:12:58.960 chance to be the hero. The thing, though, is this 0:12:59.080 --> 0:13:02.960 idea of just just shouting out about stocks like every 0:13:02.960 --> 0:13:06.600 other day. It really isn't a great way to invest 0:13:06.640 --> 0:13:09.480 in general. It's very hard to beat the market with 0:13:09.520 --> 0:13:12.560 this kind of run and gun shifting gears all the time, 0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:15.760 especially if you're so bullish or bearish at the end 0:13:15.840 --> 0:13:18.240 of the cycle. You know, if you get bearish on 0:13:18.320 --> 0:13:21.679 Meta after it's had a really, really bad run, well, 0:13:21.720 --> 0:13:24.400 of course that's not a great time. It's already passed. 0:13:24.720 --> 0:13:28.840 Like with Crypto, he's so bearish and hating on Crypto 0:13:29.320 --> 0:13:34.280 after it lost seventy percent, whereas you kind of want 0:13:34.280 --> 0:13:36.720 to be bearished before that. And I think that's why 0:13:36.760 --> 0:13:41.240 this has a shot to work legitimately. But I would 0:13:41.240 --> 0:13:43.320 think he'd want to sort of prove it wrong. And 0:13:43.400 --> 0:13:45.720 I think it'll be an interesting thing, and I think 0:13:45.840 --> 0:13:49.520 it'll be tempting for him to tweet about it and 0:13:49.840 --> 0:13:52.319 you know, challenge it, and that would probably be good 0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:53.000 marketing for you. 0:13:53.720 --> 0:13:56.800 I would not mind him talking about it all day 0:13:56.840 --> 0:14:00.320 every day, yelling at me, calling me names whatever. You 0:14:00.320 --> 0:14:03.200 know that Uh, I think that's that is called free 0:14:03.200 --> 0:14:06.320 publicity that you know, money can't buy. 0:14:07.280 --> 0:14:08.440 So what's your goal? 0:14:09.320 --> 0:14:12.640 So, and Eric hit on on the main point. A 0:14:12.640 --> 0:14:14.400 lot of people will think, oh, you know, this is 0:14:14.440 --> 0:14:17.840 just gimmicky. It's not. I mean, this to me is 0:14:17.880 --> 0:14:23.880 an awesome portfolio diversifier, because you know, I've noticed over 0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:27.960 the years there's a factor out in the marketplace that 0:14:28.320 --> 0:14:31.680 there's probably a technical term for it. If not, I'll 0:14:31.680 --> 0:14:33.960 make it up. But it you know, for lack of 0:14:33.960 --> 0:14:36.760 a better term, it's, you know, most investors are pretty 0:14:36.800 --> 0:14:39.880 much clueless, and you know we see it with sentiment 0:14:40.000 --> 0:14:43.640 numbers and analysts calls and trying to call the market. 0:14:43.840 --> 0:14:47.960 And Kramer a as Eric said, has that might as touched, 0:14:48.000 --> 0:14:51.360 but b he swings at every pitch and that's not 0:14:51.440 --> 0:14:54.280 a criticism he has to. I mean, you can't call 0:14:54.360 --> 0:14:55.960 mad money and be like, hey, Jim, what do you 0:14:55.960 --> 0:14:58.160 think of Navidia? Oh you know that could go up 0:14:58.200 --> 0:14:59.960 a lot, but it also could go down a lot. 0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:04.600 Oh well yeah, thanks Jim. So by swinging at every pitch, 0:15:05.680 --> 0:15:08.840 what you've got it? And again Eric hit on it. 0:15:08.840 --> 0:15:12.640 You've got this portfolio that is shorting stuff, you know, 0:15:12.760 --> 0:15:16.040 right at the top, buying stuff at the bottom. And 0:15:16.400 --> 0:15:18.720 I mean people are looking for ways to diversify their 0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:22.280 portfolio now that sixty forty had a let's say a 0:15:22.320 --> 0:15:25.920 bad year last year. To me, this should be in 0:15:25.960 --> 0:15:28.720 every portfolio and gonna be in mind. 0:15:28.880 --> 0:15:31.520 Well, realistically, I have to imagine it would be mostly 0:15:31.680 --> 0:15:34.520 grassroots retail though right like I can't see like a 0:15:34.560 --> 0:15:35.960 financial advisor. 0:15:35.600 --> 0:15:38.560 You know, ending yeah, a financial advisor. Maybe not, that 0:15:38.600 --> 0:15:42.080 would have to come from their clients. What is interesting, 0:15:42.360 --> 0:15:45.560 and it'll be interesting to see is on the institutional side. 0:15:45.920 --> 0:15:49.760 You know, are there institutions fading what he's doing? And 0:15:50.040 --> 0:15:53.120 just anecdotally, as I've been running this, I've seen some 0:15:53.160 --> 0:15:57.800 weird stuff. Like he tweeted out about oil stocks a 0:15:57.800 --> 0:16:00.600 couple of weeks ago, and right after that tweet, oil 0:16:00.600 --> 0:16:03.240 stocks had been going up. Right after that tweet, they 0:16:03.280 --> 0:16:05.720 started selling off, and they sold off for like an 0:16:05.720 --> 0:16:08.480 hour and then they stabilized. And I'm looking at that, 0:16:08.560 --> 0:16:10.960 I'm like, was that a coincidence? I mean, maybe it's 0:16:11.000 --> 0:16:13.800 as midas touch. I mean, he tweets it, they go down, 0:16:14.440 --> 0:16:19.760 or are there institutions that have outgoed that? And you know, 0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:23.240 is this a product that maybe you know, you've got 0:16:23.440 --> 0:16:25.720 some of them sitting there watching Mad Money, saying, Hey, 0:16:25.840 --> 0:16:28.920 Tuttle's gonna do it. Let him freaking burn his brain 0:16:29.000 --> 0:16:31.440 cells and we'll just buy es Jim. I mean, we'll say. 0:16:32.080 --> 0:16:34.760 One time, I think I saw him. There's a couple 0:16:34.760 --> 0:16:37.640 of people on Twitter who track his calls, and they 0:16:37.720 --> 0:16:40.840 pointed out that he said buying Navidia at like nine 0:16:40.840 --> 0:16:43.480 to thirty am, and then he was hating on it 0:16:43.560 --> 0:16:47.600 like four hours later. And I guess, how are you 0:16:47.680 --> 0:16:49.280 going to deal with the flip flop? Or do you 0:16:49.320 --> 0:16:53.720 wait till he like is completely bullish or bearish, say 0:16:53.720 --> 0:16:54.840 two or three times in a row. 0:16:55.040 --> 0:16:57.320 No, I mean, we'll flip flop with him. I mean, 0:16:57.400 --> 0:16:59.640 you know, we're sitting there. I got a trader who's 0:16:59.680 --> 0:17:03.240 in front one of his computer all day. So if 0:17:03.240 --> 0:17:05.600 he says buying a video in the morning, we'll buy it. 0:17:06.240 --> 0:17:08.040 And if at the end of the day he flip 0:17:08.080 --> 0:17:11.919 flops and and it's a clear flip flop, then you know, 0:17:12.080 --> 0:17:14.520 then then we're then we're out of that position. So 0:17:14.600 --> 0:17:16.639 I have no problem with that. We're ready for that. 0:17:17.520 --> 0:17:20.040 I think one of the things that and I'm curious 0:17:20.040 --> 0:17:22.280 to see how this worked because long short is the 0:17:22.280 --> 0:17:26.800 one variable of this fund that is an unknown because 0:17:27.359 --> 0:17:29.479 the market tends to push a lot of stocks up 0:17:29.520 --> 0:17:31.560 or down depending on what the FED does. So if 0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:33.560 you have long short, you're probably going to have a 0:17:33.560 --> 0:17:36.800 lot of offsetting. And I agree that will give you 0:17:36.840 --> 0:17:40.679 a nice lower volatility and a lack of correlation, so 0:17:40.720 --> 0:17:43.920 you're almost you could be like an alternative that said 0:17:44.040 --> 0:17:47.080 it might limit the shiny object potential. Did you think 0:17:47.080 --> 0:17:47.439 about that? 0:17:47.800 --> 0:17:50.280 Yeah, and maybe maybe not. So I'll give you an 0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:52.960 example why we've been tracking it. So a lot of 0:17:52.960 --> 0:17:55.159 people were coming up to me because Kramer was bullish 0:17:55.240 --> 0:17:56.840 on the market in the first part of the year 0:17:56.880 --> 0:17:59.000 and the market went up, and they're like, hey, Kramer 0:17:59.040 --> 0:18:01.880 got that right. I was like, well, well no, look 0:18:01.920 --> 0:18:05.000 at the details. What he was saying is don't buy Tech, 0:18:05.119 --> 0:18:08.320 don't buy NASDAK, don't buy Fang, and buy all these 0:18:08.400 --> 0:18:12.359 value stocks. So if the portfolio had been live, we 0:18:12.359 --> 0:18:15.560 would have been you know, long Fang, long Tech, long, 0:18:15.600 --> 0:18:17.840 a bunch of the Nasdaq names, and short some of 0:18:17.840 --> 0:18:21.439 the value stuff, and that still would have done pretty well. 0:18:21.960 --> 0:18:24.679 Because you know, he was completely wrong. Yeah, he was 0:18:24.760 --> 0:18:27.359 right to be bullish, but he was wrong about what 0:18:27.440 --> 0:18:31.520 to be bullish about. You know, but could that limit 0:18:32.160 --> 0:18:33.880 you know, like, are we going to be up three 0:18:33.960 --> 0:18:36.560 hundred percent in a year like we could be if 0:18:36.560 --> 0:18:40.159 it was all long or long short? Probably not. But 0:18:40.760 --> 0:18:42.960 if I'm going back to this whole theme of this 0:18:43.040 --> 0:18:47.480 is a portfolio diversifier, then that's not really what I'm 0:18:47.520 --> 0:18:50.040 looking for anyway, I mean, I you know, I don't 0:18:50.040 --> 0:18:52.639 want to put a ten percent allocation in something that 0:18:52.640 --> 0:18:54.640 could be up three hundred percent or could be down 0:18:54.680 --> 0:18:55.520 like eighty percent. 0:18:56.520 --> 0:18:59.879 So I'm curious about the back testing here, because you 0:19:00.119 --> 0:19:03.920 said he had been experimenting with this since January A. 0:19:04.200 --> 0:19:07.440 How is it performed in that in that time, which 0:19:07.440 --> 0:19:09.719 has been an interesting time in the market. And then like, 0:19:10.160 --> 0:19:13.359 I mean, sort of impossible to go back test for 0:19:13.560 --> 0:19:15.879 you know, three five years, but you know, how did 0:19:15.880 --> 0:19:17.200 you attempt to do that? 0:19:17.560 --> 0:19:22.440 So I probably can't comment on performance stuff that'd probably 0:19:22.480 --> 0:19:25.280 not be a good thing, but you know, certainly there 0:19:25.600 --> 0:19:28.800 would have been some names like coinbase was kind of 0:19:28.800 --> 0:19:31.439 a double, you know, so there would have been some 0:19:31.520 --> 0:19:35.000 interesting things in there. I know other people have done 0:19:35.040 --> 0:19:39.320 back tests. I think the problem is, you know, I mean, 0:19:39.440 --> 0:19:42.000 you don't always know when to enter because again, if 0:19:42.040 --> 0:19:44.960 he says, you know, hey, Alphabet's quarter was good, one 0:19:44.960 --> 0:19:46.879 guy might say, right, that's a bye. I may not, 0:19:47.320 --> 0:19:49.719 And then when do you get out of something, you know, 0:19:49.800 --> 0:19:52.280 because he may say, you know, hey, I love Meta, 0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:55.760 and then he may never say I hate metah. So 0:19:56.119 --> 0:19:59.520 I think it's very difficult. All the anecdotal stuff I've seen. 0:19:59.560 --> 0:20:02.440 I mean, there's some guys on Twitter who post some stuff. 0:20:02.920 --> 0:20:08.080 I mean that all looks extremely interesting, and you know, 0:20:08.240 --> 0:20:13.520 and obviously you don't get this type of reputation if 0:20:13.520 --> 0:20:17.119 you're like the best stockpicker ever. So I'm not worried 0:20:17.160 --> 0:20:17.560 about it. 0:20:18.560 --> 0:20:22.440 So when we had the Twitter spaces back then, there 0:20:22.480 --> 0:20:25.119 was a section of that call where some of the 0:20:25.160 --> 0:20:27.919 listeners called in and asked you, and this is theory 0:20:28.000 --> 0:20:30.040 here a lot when I tweet on this topic. Is 0:20:31.240 --> 0:20:35.440 the reason he's so he's good at being spectacularly bad 0:20:35.600 --> 0:20:38.280 is that he's actually in cahoots with his hedge fund 0:20:38.280 --> 0:20:40.880 pals and this investing club you have to pay for. 0:20:41.960 --> 0:20:44.320 And so what he does is he does the real 0:20:44.359 --> 0:20:48.439 investing there, and then he purposely gives bad advice on 0:20:48.520 --> 0:20:52.040 air so that the other people can go the opposite way. 0:20:52.680 --> 0:20:55.239 I know that that's not to work. I know I 0:20:55.280 --> 0:20:58.359 don't buy it, but that's I guess a conspiracy theory 0:20:58.359 --> 0:21:01.040 out there. But I guess the question is the difference 0:21:01.040 --> 0:21:02.840 between his picks on air and the club. 0:21:04.119 --> 0:21:06.600 So and I've heard that theory. I mean, I had 0:21:06.640 --> 0:21:09.720 a guy call me up a couple of weeks ago 0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:14.040 telling me that that's fact, and again who knows. It 0:21:14.080 --> 0:21:16.320 does sound like a lot of work. To me, it 0:21:16.400 --> 0:21:19.000 seems like a guy like that's got a lot to lose. 0:21:19.520 --> 0:21:23.840 I don't buy it. I purposely am not a subscriber 0:21:23.880 --> 0:21:26.159