I appreciate your work. I feel that readers could benefit from understanding which of your recommendations has a track record and which does not. To present MLPI as a gimme is disingenuous--it's only existed for less than a year. A fund family is not a pedigree for fund with a new thesis. Thanks.
The shift from growth to income is a milestone most investors don't think about until they hit it. The $500/month threshold is where dividends go from being a bonus to being a real lifestyle factor. Covered call and option income strategies make sense here as long as you understand the trade-off - capped upside in exchange for consistent cash flow.
There’s a good instinct here around converting growth gains into income. But the piece stays at yield optics and never tests durability. A 9% or 15% payout is not proof of return. It’s just a cash flow rate. The real question is what the portfolio has to earn on NAV to sustain that payout over time. Without that, you risk turning capital into income.
The other issue is hidden concentration. These funds are largely the same trade with tech exposure and call writing layered on top. It looks diversified but behaves similarly in a drawdown. The edge is not rotating between growth and income. It’s building an income engine where coverage, NAV stability, and valuation do the work.
Started buying positions in STK.
Stk is excellent!!
this is awesome, thank you, Cain!!
I appreciate you!!
Yay you mention 4 funds I already have this time. I just wish I had bought the ones you mentioned at the top of the article.
Yeah STK has performed so well recently!
Up 27% since September 19 🤩
I appreciate your work. I feel that readers could benefit from understanding which of your recommendations has a track record and which does not. To present MLPI as a gimme is disingenuous--it's only existed for less than a year. A fund family is not a pedigree for fund with a new thesis. Thanks.
The shift from growth to income is a milestone most investors don't think about until they hit it. The $500/month threshold is where dividends go from being a bonus to being a real lifestyle factor. Covered call and option income strategies make sense here as long as you understand the trade-off - capped upside in exchange for consistent cash flow.
There’s a good instinct here around converting growth gains into income. But the piece stays at yield optics and never tests durability. A 9% or 15% payout is not proof of return. It’s just a cash flow rate. The real question is what the portfolio has to earn on NAV to sustain that payout over time. Without that, you risk turning capital into income.
The other issue is hidden concentration. These funds are largely the same trade with tech exposure and call writing layered on top. It looks diversified but behaves similarly in a drawdown. The edge is not rotating between growth and income. It’s building an income engine where coverage, NAV stability, and valuation do the work.