E294: Endowment Model vs Total Portfolio Approach: The Real Trade-Offs

How should families think about portfolio construction when traditional diversification breaks down? David Weisburd speaks with Michael Phipps about building New Republic Partners, designing portfolios around growth, income, and diversification, and why open architecture matters in multifamily offices. Michael discusses common portfolio mischaracterizations, the role of alternatives and co-investments, and how families can better align risk, liquidity, and long-term objectives.

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:02David Weisburd?

  What is the simplest way to explain New Republic Partners? And what problem did you see in the ecosystem that you wanted to go after?

• 0:08Speaker 01

  For New Republic Partners, we are a multifamily office founded by a group of seasoned investment professionals and two prominent multi-generational families here in the Southeast. And really, our aim is to offer clients the expertise, the resources, and scale of a multi-billion dollar family office. And we started that multifamily office because there was a shared appreciation of the advantages of an MFO between the founding team and those two families, where we could offer customization, minimize conflicts of interest, and also attract some top-tier professionals while maintaining and getting that scale that's necessary to access institutional quality investment opportunities

• 0:49Speaker 01

  and have a deeply resourced team and infrastructure, which we didn't think at the time was in the industry. Where if it was out there, I think we would have sought it as a single-family office, and we sought to create it at New Republic.

• 1:02David Weisburd?

  Give me a sense for where New Republic Partners sits today at the AUM level?

• 1:07Speaker 01

  So New Republic today sits at about 2.5 billion in assets under management. Two-thirds of that is discretionary and mandate, a third non-discretionary. And as a firm, we're headquartered in Charlotte with offices across the Southeast. We have 27 employees as a firm today.

• 1:22David Weisburd?

  You said you wanted to minimize conflicts. In what ways are other multifamily offices conflicted? Talk to me about that.

• 1:30Speaker 01

  So for MFOs or RIA's more broadly, we're seeking to stand apart from the mix by being open architecture in our investment platform. We don't have proprietary products or vehicles that I'm incented to put a client's portfolio or family's portfolio in. I just think, we just think, it's a tough argument to hold to say that you believe you have the best growth equity or stock picker in-house. And therefore, we should have our clients' growth equity or US equity allocation only go through those managers. That's just a tough argument to make. And so, our platform is open architecture, open scope, such that we are seeking, searching for the best managers and to get the best execution and talent in a particular asset class or sub-asset class.

• 2:12David Weisburd?

  Sounds simple, but not easy. You say open architecture. Does that mean that any of your clients can send you a fund and say due diligence on this fund? What does that practically mean?

• 2:23Speaker 01

  If you think about how we look at kind of the pipeline investments, we're trying to keep the top of the funnel as wide as possible. And so, yes, we're open in the sense that we would be doing searches in a particular asset class to kind of fill the top of that funnel. Also, it would be the case if our clients or families had brought us different managers that they had seen, we would be looking at doing the diligence on those managers too. So completely open scope in that regard and really trying to aim and find those great managers within specific sub asset classes and broader asset classes.

• 2:56David Weisburd?

  Maybe you could walk me through a case study of a $200 million family comes to you or a small foundation. How would you go about building their portfolio?

• 3:04Speaker 01

  With each family, we design portfolios that match that family's risk tolerance. It also aligns with their investment time horizon, income and liquidity needs. Because as you've heard, if you've met one family office, you've met one family office. All can look very different based on how their capital base was built and their journey when exiting the family business and moving into a family office format. So after establishing those risk, liquidity, income and time horizon parameters, the cleanest way I can bridge to a model portfolio construction for that family is to think about their investment portfolio really in three shades. Growth assets, your income assets and diversification assets. And when I talk about growth assets, that's the span of liquidity within that bucket.

• 3:48Speaker 01

  You have global equities, long only equity on one side, and then private equity venture on the other. And then even in the interim, you have hedged equity, which we view as an asset class unto itself. Within income assets, you have traditional fixed income on one end, all the way to private credit. And then diversification assets, it includes real assets and absolute return hedge funds because it's meant to act like a counterbalance to the other two pieces of the portfolio. So let's say, putting it all together for that family that has a payout need of 3% to 5% and a risk tolerance that matches up with a 60/40 stock bond benchmark, you would end up having 65% in growth assets, 20% in income assets, and about 15% in diversification

• 4:32Speaker 01

  assets. And on a look through basis, that private allocation would be in the zip code of 15% to 20% of the total portfolio. That in our view, that's the construct that we would have in order to meet what is the core needs of that family to deliver strong risk-adjusted returns that exceeds that spend rate or that payout that they might have plus inflation and how we would think on and translate for them, how we think about putting together that model portfolio construction for a family.

• 4:59David Weisburd?

  What's the most common mistakes that other multifamily offices make? And what are some misnomers that you see and some errors being committed all the time?

• 5:07Speaker 01

  Mischaracterizing certain assets and expecting a, an outcome that, you know, historically it, you would, you would think act in a more diversified way than it does. And so let me, let me put an example on it. One aspect that people have always tended to lean on, just because of the recent history over the past, you know, call it even 20 years or so, that if you just had a more traditional portfolio of 60, 40 or 70, 30 stocks and bonds, there's an expectation that that fixed income component of your portfolio can act like a diversifier when the equity side of your portfolio kind of falls out of bed in tough market periods.

• 5:48Speaker 01

  You know, call it in, you know, the GFC or even more recently in 2022, even back in COVID as well. And I think the, the argument that, that we've been pressing is for people to think about that fixed income, that income asset side of their portfolio a bit differently. Because the aspects about having both income coming from your traditional fixed income and diversification, don't believe that those elements will persist going forward or there's no guarantee of that. And so that's why we dedicate a piece of a client's portfolio to diversification assets. Cause in a period like 2022, you, you had stocks down mid teens and you had fixed income down mid teens as well. And you needed that ballast in your portfolio, those diversification assets to show up for

• 6:33Speaker 01

  you and also give you a place where you could draw from to kind of take advantage of different opportunities and be opportunistic with that capital during that timeframe. And so I'd say that's one area where I'd say from a construction standpoint, I think family offices. Are need to be thinking a little bit more broadly of how they define what is a growth asset in their portfolio, what is a income asset and diversification asset such that it can act how you want it to in a portfolio, given different market scenarios.

• 7:03David Weisburd?

  One of the hardest things of investing is seeing what's shifting before everyone else does. For decades, only the largest hedge funds could afford extensive channel research programs to spot inflection points before earnings and to stay ahead of consensus. Meanwhile, smaller funds have been forced to cobble together ad hoc channel intelligence or rely on stale reports from sell-side shops. But channel checks are no longer a luxury, they're becoming table stakes for the industry. The challenges has always been scale, speed, and consistency. That's where AlphaSense comes in. AlphaSense is redefining channel research. Instead of static point-in-time reports, AlphaSense channel checks delivers a continuously refreshed view of demand, pricing, and competitive dynamics powered by interviews with real operators, suppliers, distributors, and channel partners across

• 7:48David Weisburd?

  the value chain. Thousands of consistent channel conversations every month deliver clean comparable signals, helping investors spot inflection points weeks before they show up in earnings or consensus estimates. The best part, these proprietary channel checks integrate directly into AlphaSense's research platform, trusted by 75% of the world's top hedge funds, with access to over 500 million premium sources. From company filings and brokerage research, to news trade journals and more than 240,000 expert call transcripts. That context turns raw signal into conviction. The first to see wins, the rest follow. Check it out for yourself at alphascense.com/HowIInvest. They use the fixed income part of their portfolio, both for income as well as diversification,

• 8:33David Weisburd?

  and sometimes it only really provides income. It's not really truly diversifying.

• 8:37Speaker 01

  Correct. And it's it's one where there is a need for those income pieces of your portfolio to be in there, to deliver what you're asking of the portfolio. But you just need to dedicate a portion of your portfolio to something that's truly diversified.

• 8:51David Weisburd?

  These diversifiers, oftentimes they're hedge funds, and they're these mysterious, there's these mysterious black box strategies. Take me through the terrain of these diversifier funds. What are the different types? What are some common use cases? And what are some best practices when picking diversifiers?

• 9:09Speaker 01

  What we like to do is to separate out, I'd call it more of your hedged equity or your directional long-short managers from everything else within hedge fund land, because I do feel that oftentimes, as a grouping, people will just bunch them all together. And, you know, take that 60-40 portfolio that I mentioned before, on the 40%, they'll say, "Okay, I'll do 60% in equities, 20% in fixed income, and then 20% in alts." But the alts are all together in one big bucket, even though there's kind of a, you know, 31 flavors of different types of hedge funds underneath. And so, first off, I want to separate out those hedged equity managers where they do take some market direction, have some higher net exposure in the portfolio, and we put them in that growth assets bucket.

• 9:50Speaker 01

  And then I'm pairing that with what we view as absolute return hedge fund strategies that can take on different shapes, but when putting them together, they have qualities such that they are lowly correlated to one another and make for a great diversifier. So that can include everything from your larger multi-strat pod shops for one in that bucket, as well as distressed credit, market neutral equity, relative value credit as well. And if you're within the right sizes, kind of marry those together. One that I had forgotten as well would be discretionary macro, systematic macro managers that you would include in that bucket, that when taken all together, you get a portfolio

• 10:32Speaker 01

  exposure that ends up being lowly correlated to stocks and bonds, which is the aim, but yet also still has an expected return that's more in the zip code of kind of a mid-single-digit to low-double-digit return. And so, that's additive to the portfolio, not only just from a correlation standpoint, but also from a contribution from a return standpoint, too. So, that's one thing that I key in on typically and try to separate, because people just throw hedge funds all into one bucket, but there's a different purpose.

• 11:01David Weisburd?

  It's such a good and underrated point in that people put these labels on their portfolios that either serve no purpose or actually confuse the purpose of their portfolio. And putting into growth, income, and diversifiers, then you're forced to say, "What is, why do I, why am I in this asset?" In other words, if I'm in a hedge fund that's long-short and I'm paying 2 and 20, do I want to be in a hedge fund or do I want to be in the index fund? Because they're both taking the same level of concentration in my portfolio versus saying, "Well, this is a hedge fund structure, this is an index structure." It's almost like the wrapper around the strategy is much more trivial than actually what it's doing in your portfolio.

• 11:35Speaker 01

  Agreed. It's really answering the question of like, why do I own this manager? Why do I have this asset in my portfolio? What's its core purpose? And then I want it to compete against other managers or other assets that have that similar quality, such that there's a trade off in competing within them. I know there's this whole discussion that's occurring about taking a kind of a total portfolio approach versus the endowment model style and getting too ingrained on asset classes and sub asset classes. I certainly have come up in the school from the endowment model and still lean in that strategic policy portfolio way of management, but I think there is a bridge between those two in the sense of you're just trying to loosen up those buckets and not be so dogmatic about the asset classes specifically.

• 12:19Speaker 01

  Get at what that ultimate purpose of that strategy or that manager is in your portfolio and make it compete. And so for growth assets, there's a trade off of, you know, having long only equity exposure versus locking it up and having a growth asset type exposure, but doing it in private equity or with venture. One's locked up for 10 years plus ultimately, but that means you need to raise the bar as to what your expectation is from a return standpoint. But I like that, we like that way of kind of putting those asset classes and those assets in those buckets. Cause it makes it compete ultimately. I'm always thinking about what the opportunity cost is of trading off one versus the other within that.

• 12:58David Weisburd?

  So taking to the extreme, just as a thought experiment, you could be 60% in long equity, 20% in junk bonds, which are correlated to long equity and 20% in quote unquote alternatives. But really, when you double click on it, you're in long, short hedge funds, which are also correlated with your equity portfolio. So it seems on outside, you're 60, 20, 20, but you're really 100 zero from a correlation standpoint.

• 13:18Speaker 01

  There's an element of kind of a growth allocation that you've just wedged into all three of those buckets without, you know, pulling. I would take that 20% that you had in hedge funds and actually I'd put that more aligned with that equity bucket that you had at 60% for long only equity and the same for high yield, just let's take it today. Ultimately, you know, I know it's the case that rates are higher than they once were, but you're really not getting paid much from a credit spread standpoint and taking that extra credit risk within high yield or investment grade today. And so you need to be cognizant about what valuations look like and how you're stepping into each of those three buckets as well. Because you, you could be susceptible to that risk that you just outlined there, where you're taking very similar risk across those three buckets of feeling diversified.

• 14:03David Weisburd?

  I had the ex CIO of Northern Cross, Thomas Swainy, episode 224. And he double clicked on this whole concept, which is people, the 6040 portfolio. In order to get more gains in that 40, investors would keep on going down on the risk spectrum to these junk bonds. And they found that these 6040 portfolio, some of these portfolios with a lot of junk bonds were highly correlated to each other. And instead, his strategy was to take treasuries and essentially put synthetic leverage on it. So that they're truly negatively correlated to the stocks. And one of the points that he made, which I think is extremely underrated is

• 14:43David Weisburd?

  one of the main reasons to diversify is when there's that once in a decade drawdown. It's two, one is to avoid taking wrong action. So you don't want to sell at the exact wrong time, which is like the most predictable and the most common behavioral finance mistake. But two is actually as your stocks go down, your bonds go up and you're able to systematically rebalance and actually buy the dip. It's a way to kind of systematically buy the dip without having to take heroic action. And I thought that framing on building a portfolio for diversification, because the question is why diversify? You're not supposed to ask, it's supposed to be, it's supposed to be solved out. And but one of the best answers to why diversify is when things go down, you don't make a mistake and you also can be opportunistic.

• 15:29Speaker 01

  To say it a bit differently, too, that's core to how we measure risk appetite for a family when they come on board. We're asking, or I'm asking them perhaps directly in a meeting of what kind of portfolio peak to trough drawdown can that family tolerate? I want to calibrate the portfolio such that it matches up with that risk tolerance so that we can be opportunistic when drawdown periods occur, which they will occur. And we also want to make sure that we build in those portfolio exposures like the absolute return oriented hedge fund strategies that can act as a counterbalance or a ballast in drawdown periods. The only piece that I would, you know, quibble with your guest earlier before was just saying, I, I think it's tougher to be able to say that your long bonds today can act in the same manner.

• 16:12Speaker 01

  That they have in the past, like was the case, as I mentioned in 2022, where it actually hurt you during that period when rates went the other way and the Fed had kind of pushed things up, your, your long bonds actually didn't end up acting as that ballast. And partly, you could say it's a commentary on our fiscal situation and ultimately that there needs to be some type of further premium that needs to be jammed into the long end of the curve. And that's, that's where we then balance and say, hey, you need to have true diversification through this allocation to absolute return hedge funds to really act just like you described and such that you're able to be more opportunistic when drawdowns occur.

• 16:51David Weisburd?

  One thing that I've learned from talking to hundreds of investors, founders and business leaders is that planning for the future isn't just about growing assets, it's also about protecting the people who matter most. Life comes with a lot of important milestones. Maybe you're buying a home, starting a family, planning for college, or simply thinking more intentionally about your financial future. As those responsibilities grow, it's worth making sure you protect those you love. Not sure what kind of life insurance you may need? Concerned about how much it may cost? Think life insurance is too complicated? Your local State Farm agent can help answer those questions. They can help you explore your options for life insurance and choose coverage that you can adjust as your family's needs change over time. Financial protection for your loved ones when it matters most. Learn more about life insurance at statefarm.com. Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.

• 17:35David Weisburd?

  Hopefully, a third of your capital goes into co-invest. Why are you so active in co-invest? And how do you know that you're not being adversely selected?

• 17:43Speaker 01

  You're right. And that our typical allocation in both private equity and private credit is two thirds to funds, a third in directs and co-invests, though that can vary based on opportunity set. And we feel co-invests are important as they allow you to average down on investment costs. They help improve, reduce any J curve in your portfolio, and they give you more control over portfolio construction, too, let alone they deepen relationships with the GPs you're investing with and I'd also, one could argue the other side of that adverse selection question, rather, I mean, you're getting access to, to a set of higher conviction investments that these managers are doing when you're doing co-invests and, and selecting them appropriately.

• 18:26Speaker 01

  So as you mentioned, you have to have some processes in place to, to do your best, best to mitigate the adverse selection. And two ways to mitigate that in our view is, is one, full stop, you have to know the GPs thoroughly, ex ante, heading, and that is typically the case because usually we've already underwritten their funds, their ability to operate in the verticals that they've chosen. And two, you need to have a team of professionals that have honestly been principal investors before as GPs so that they can underwrite those co-invests, call out the ones that come across as the GP is stretching to make a deal work. Takes one to know one in that respect. And in doing the co-invest work and like I mentioned at the front of the call as well, in keeping that funnel really wide, that means you're going down a lot of different

• 19:11Speaker 01

  rabbit holes and there's some dead deal costs that are associated with it and some time sink as well. So having that dedicated team is, is crucial when trying to affect a program where even we're just doing kind of a two thirds, one third split between our fund investments and co-investments today.

• 19:27David Weisburd?

  You've said that family offices under 250 million, so a quarter of a billion dollars should not have their own family office. Why do you believe that? What is the hard truth about going alone at scale at under 250 million dollars?

• 19:41Speaker 01

  With family offices under 250 million, we, we think they face some structural challenges that can limit their ability to operate with the same rigor sophistication of the larger institutions. So we do believe that, you know, joining a larger platform creates some meaningful advantages really in, in four key areas. The one, Access to broader investment opportunities. You know, at sub 250 million in scale, it's it's difficult to source and underwrite truly differentiated investments, especially alternatives. You have minimum check sizes, operational complexity and manager access often locks smaller families out of the most, what we view as compelling private equity, credit and real asset opportunities.

• 20:23Speaker 01

  And so a larger platform solves this by offering the institutional quality deal flow, shared due diligence and the, you know, ability to invest alongside a scaled capital base. So that's one. Two, it actually, and if you're joining a larger platform, you're lowering your costs and you're upping have higher quality infrastructure. You know, running a family office is expensive. With limited AUM, it's it's hard to justify best in class technology, research, reporting systems, or a full house, full in-house investment and tax team. And larger platforms spreads those costs across many families, given each one the infrastructure they'd expect at a multi-billion dollar institution, but at a fraction of the cost.

• 21:04Speaker 01

  Now, the third area for those 250 million family offices to think about is that a larger platform would give you some strength in governance, risk management and continuity. You know, smaller family offices, they often depend on really a handful of key individuals. So you have some real concentration risk in that respect. And a platform ends up bringing you depth within governance frameworks, compliance oversight, succession planning, and consistent processes that then can help you protect that wealth across multiple generations. The final point I would say, like the simple advantage would be that a larger platform gives the family the ability to stay focused on on what matters most. You know, for for many families, the goal of a family office is not to run an investment firm.

• 21:48Speaker 01

  It's to preserve and grow wealth while allowing family members to focus on their lives, their businesses and philanthropy. You know, being part of a strong platform offloads. That operational burden and can deliver peace of mind. So for families below 250, you know, joining a larger platform, it isn't about giving up control. It's about gaining access, stability and expertise that would be nearly impossible to replicate independently.

• 22:13David Weisburd?

  You alluded earlier about two different philosophical approaches to portfolio construction. One is the endowment approach, endowment model. And the second is the total portfolio approach to TPA, which is a newer framework. What are the strengths and weaknesses of those two approaches?

• 22:29Speaker 01

  For the endowment model, it's one that helps set up a framework so that you can think about, as we were discussing earlier, what is that asset doing in my portfolio? And how should I think about what its aim is in the portfolio? To be crude, I think TPA is really a way for CIOs and managers to really loosen a lot of the constraints that they have felt about an endowment model and give them much more discretion on where they can move capital ultimately. Because the endowment model itself and having a strategic policy portfolio and having it set where you're working with a board, it's a great governance framework because you can create a great relationship as you need with the, you know, governance of that particular foundation or endowment

• 23:15Speaker 01

  and the hired hands that are meant to be stewards of that capital. There's this tension about wanting to have flexibility and moving capital across asset classes. And I think that can be built into the endowment model and the ranges that you give each of those asset class buckets. In a vacuum, it's great to think about because you're having every asset or manager kind of compete against one another. And so that is attractive. Like we were mentioning earlier, you're always thinking about the opportunity cost and trade offs. But I think also you have to watch out because you've kind of loosened up a lot of the guardrails in why the endowment model works so well and making you think about having your factor exposure spread out

• 23:57Speaker 01

  or your diversification assets work for you as you, as you had intended. Managers love it because they have more discretion and they have less, you know, belt suspenders and handcuffs as to how they can allocate capital. But you can build that into the endowment model as well.

• 24:12David Weisburd?

  Is there a place to stay out of entire asset class? For example, today, a lot of people are saying, we don't want to be in large buy ups. We just think the entire market is overheated. Is that good investing? Or is that not diversified enough or not risk constrained enough?

• 24:29Speaker 01

  You want to be cognizant about anything that looks like market timing. We know that does not pay off well over longer periods. And you know, the Hall of Fame of investors that are market timers are, there's no one in it.

• 24:44David Weisburd?

  On that, so right now I hear what you're saying in terms of you don't want to pick market timing. But also there are supply and demand dynamics and so much money has been raised and there's only a finite opportunity set. Why wouldn't it be rational to sit out a certain, you know, a certain vintage?

• 24:59Speaker 01

  It's hard to time vintages too, particularly on the private side. That's where we give ranges, what I would end up doing and what we, we ended up doing going into even the 2020, 2021 period hindsight.

• 25:11Speaker 01

  Looking back, it's the case where we had tried to be more tactical in lowering the allocations that we were giving to managers. Managers were increasing the cycles that they were coming back to market. We didn't know that that was a top then, but the prudent thing to do was we were still maintaining that relationship. But yet we're kind of paring back how much we would be committing to the next vehicle. I think it's incredibly hard and that's why we try to set up our program such that clients are investing across vintages. Because as soon as you make the decision that you want to get out of a vintage, the vintage coming out of 2022, 2023, for our private equity and private credit investments have been quite strong. And if it was the case that you chose to kind of sit out both, you're going to miss both the top and picking the bottom as well.

• 25:56Speaker 01

  And so we do try to modulate a little bit is your, you give ourselves a range. And we may not be making as big of a commitment as we were, but to go from a hundred to zero in a particular asset class is, is not one. We're trying to, again, try to educate clients so that they kind of can hold through or stay through rather than trying to time.

• 26:17David Weisburd?

  What is the single most valuable piece of investment advice you took from your time at Davidson's Endowment?

• 26:22Speaker 01

  At Davidson, what was underscored for me was the power of a network effect within the investment world. Within venture, what we found is that GPs with true success in their field were nexus points for that particular subsector of venture, whether in fintech, hard tech, B2B SaaS, marketplaces. The GPs that are viewed by entrepreneurs as those that are knowledgeable, connected nodes or nexus points in those segments, it became a self fulfilling cycle in the sense that they, those nexus points, those GPs, they attracted some of the brightest and best entrepreneurs in that vertical.

• 27:04Speaker 01

  Because those entrepreneurs wanted to get capital from GPs that could truly appreciate what they were doing. And I think one evidence of that in the market, like YC and other incubators are real proof case in that respect. And a reason why that model has been successful in my view as well. But really, an appreciation for that, that piece, the power of that network effect and being that nexus or node within a particular space within venture was one that we took advantage of at Davidson and really started to pay off. To put a finer point on it, it was more saying Mickey Malka at Ribbit Capital viewed as a kind of a nexus or node within the fintech space. That then kind of attracted other entrepreneurs in that space that wanted Ribbit Capital as that partner in GP.

• 27:49Speaker 01

  And so that's where that self fulfilling cycle came together and one that I just have a tremendous appreciation for from a network effect standpoint, particularly in venture.

• 28:01David Weisburd?

  You're at the University of North Carolina Endowment. What's one principle that they really drilled into you at your time there that you still hold on to today?

• 28:09Speaker 01

  At UNC's Endowment, I would have to say the schooling and the endowment model is written up famously in the late David Swinton's Pioneering Portfolio Management would be that single most important thing that was drilled into me. In that book, as I think other guest hosts have mentioned earlier, I mean, he had underscored a few things that I've carried with me. You know, for one, Asset allocation is the primary driver of long-term returns, whereas much of the world focuses on security selection or trying to tie markets. Two, one should harvest illiquidity premium wherever you can find it. And that may mean having to shift and move when capital ends up flooding into certain segments of the private markets. And instead of being in large cap buyout, you're moving more into lower middle market buyout.

• 28:53Speaker 01

  You know, as we were just discussing too, on hedge funds, diversification does reduce risk, but only if correlations between those assets are low. Otherwise, you dilute or you diversify your returns was another point out of that kind of endowment school of thinking. Active management, it works, but only in inefficient markets. And I would say a fifth thing that probably one of the major piece within that kind of endowment model, as Swinson had put it too, was that manager selection is crucial to success and it's difficult. You know, it's a people business. At the end of the day, you're evaluating managers both from a qualitative and relationship

• 29:37Speaker 01

  driven standpoint, but also from a quantitative standpoint. It's both art and science. And so I would say for anyone wanting to learn the endowment model, it's a great book and a lot of those tenants are timeless. And I was fortunate to have the opportunity to live it straight out of college at UNC Management Company.

• 29:54David Weisburd?

  If you could go back to 2004, when you just started at the UNC Endowment, what is one piece of advice you wish you would have known that would have helped either accelerate your career or helped you avoid very costly mistakes?

• 30:07Speaker 01

  It's a good question. And for me, I'd favor the type of advice that would help you avoid mistakes. And I'd tell my younger self to, you know, simply be humble. As investing is a humbling business. You know, I came out of UNC seeking to learn as much as I could about investments and the endowment model, but also looking to make a mark and climb a ladder in a way. And in doing so as a young analyst, I think you're eager to build conviction in particular investments and build up your circles of confidence, but you can. You can mistake that conviction for hubris, though if you're not humble about what you know and don't know, or what you think you know that really ain't so, you know, coming

• 30:48Speaker 01

  in with a more humble mindset would have let me hold those convictions a little more loosely, be aware of data points that don't match up with my thesis, my own, you know, behavioral biases. There's a famous quote attributed to John Maynard Keynes of, you know, when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir? You know, if you're humble, you're more apt to see when those facts change and that that can help you avoid some investing pitfalls. But I'd also tell my younger self that, you know, in the end, markets will humble you.

• 31:15David Weisburd?

  Thanks so much for jumping on the podcast and looking forward to continuing this conversation live.

• 31:19Speaker 01

  Appreciate it, Dave. Thanks. Glad to be with you.

• 31:20David Weisburd?

  That's it for today's episode of How I Invest. If this conversation gave you new insights or ideas, do me a quick favor. Share with one person in your network who'd find it valuable, or leave a short review wherever you listen. This helps more investors discover the show and keeps us bringing you these conversations week after week. Thank you for your continued support.