Every market cycle reminds us of the same uncomfortable truth: the events that matter most for portfolios are rarely the ones that were confidently forecast. Crises, regime shifts and liquidity breaks tend to arrive not because investors failed to predict them precisely, but because portfolios were not built to absorb them.
The problem is not that forecasts exist. The problem is the role they are allowed to play in portfolio construction. Prediction encourages a false sense of control. It invites portfolios to be positioned around what should happen, rather than structured to survive what might happen. When outcomes diverge — as they inevitably do — the portfolio is left exposed not just to market moves, but to flawed assumptions embedded deep within its design.
