How a Tangible 60 portfolio fared in the Volcker double-dip
Tangible 60: 30% gold · 30% equities · 15% silver · 15% commodities · 10% cash · quarterly rebalance · physical costs on (coins) · window 1980-11-28 to 1982-08-12 · computed 2026-07-13 with the same engine the app runs.
Solid: this portfolio, real (CPI-deflated) value of $10,000. Dashed: the all-equity baseline.
| Total return (real) | −42.0% |
|---|---|
| Total return (nominal) | −33.8% |
| CAGR (real) | −27.4% |
| Max drawdown (real) | −43.7% |
| Recovery | not recovered in window |
| Purchasing-power ratio | 0.58× |
| Ulcer index | 27.9 |
| Worst calendar year | 1981: −19.3% |
| Physical costs paid | $484 |
| Liquidation value | $6,483 |
A $10,000 stake in a Tangible 60 portfolio (30% gold · 30% equities · 15% silver · 15% commodities · 10% cash, rebalanced quarterly, physical costs on coins applied) entering the Volcker double-dip would have ended the window worth $5,799 in real, CPI-deflated terms: a real return of −42.0%. Along the way it fell at most 43.7% from its peak (not recovered in window), with an ulcer index of 27.9. The same stake in equities alone returned −36.1% real. This allocation trailed it by 5.9 percentage points of purchasing power. Physical ownership (dealer spread, storage, insurance) cost $484 over the window.
Open this portfolio in the stress-tester More scenarios
The link above prefills the allocation. Adjust weights, costs, and windows from there. Sources and formulas: methodology.
Educational estimates, not financial advice