That brings us to the second question from above: if you operate from the perspective that these “macro” developments are knowable / predictable, how would it impact your decision-making? I think that answer is at least partly dependent upon your investment approach. For example, as discussed in “My Investment Philosophy”, my north star is to own high-quality businesses for the long-term (that’s the approach that feels most appropriate for me given my time horizon, mindset, etc.). I believe this approach, when reinforced by rules around portfolio decision-making, has the necessary inputs to develop an uncommon level of earned conviction / trust, as appropriate, in certain companies and management teams (“you build trust through consistency over time”). That said, it’s an approach that probably isn’t as well suited for trying to avoid those periods of stress (or, in situations that really go poorly, value traps). Put simply, I think your perspective on the “right” way to invest should impact your answer. (As discussed in “The Evolution of A Value Investor”, I used to think about these different approaches in terms of being “right” or “wrong”. I now tend to think about them in terms of trade-offs.)