Flickering lanterns guide my way

One of my main reasons for creating this is to force self-reflection and sharpen my own investment views. I've found writing the best way to structure my thoughts, and be forced to think them through for (even just the threat of) an external audience.

So, what's guiding me through 2026? These thoughts below guide my own portfolio positions, and my approach to investing (and life) overall. My intention is to write small posts addressing each of these points in more detail. I reserve the right to change them entirely along the way, and to change the order. I'm experimenting with the optimal format right now, so watch this space.

Current anchor theses:

We are hurtling towards a sci-fi future.
Which specific Sci-Fi media and which Technology doesn't matter in the grand scheme right now, we will price in the potential. I want a diversified basket of speculative frontiers.
1. Space, Robotics, Drones, Autonomous Vehicles... and of course AI which is both separate from and related to the above.
2. Culture Novels, Hyperion, Deus Ex, All Of the Above. You should read as much sci-fi as you can at the moment to understand the potential and the dystopias. It also helps to understand where lots of innovators are drawing their inspiration (and naming conventions) from.
Despite being hugely optimistic about the technology, negative events will easily disrupt pricing. 2026 will likely see the first 'bad' AI event, as well as a drone attack from terror cells affecting the West.
The arc of technology is heading towards the sci-fi outcomes (Ian M. Bank's Culture, hopefully) - but it will be noisy around that. Political disruption can happen too.
1. One significant issue is that AI is now too right-coded in the US (Thiel/Musk/All-In, etc). Mid-terms and future politics represent meaningful temporary (I think) negative drivers on the pricing of the complex.
Autonomous technology is only appreciated by residents of San Francisco, and most of the world doesn't know what Waymo is.
This environment is similar to the chaos of 1990s Russia writ-larger, as everything is to play for during tectonic movements in economic structures. I hold the view that there is a limited time to accumulate capital before exponential growth of self-improving technology snowballs an accelerating return differential between capital-owners and labour. I've held this view before it was cool (sic), but I realise this is now almost consensus. That doesn't mean it's wrong.
Macro fundamentals have shifted for 'tradi' PMs/analysts/etc.
Bond markets now work like they do in university textbooks, unlike for the previous two decades.
1. Japan is an obvious concern here. Ditto France. But they are not alone.
For many in Europe, it's fashionable to dislike both the US market and "AI" stocks. This is based on a hope it all comes crumbling down - copium.
US capital markets are winner-takes-all for the rest of the Western world. A threat to this is some form of capital control framework. Trump decides RoW can't own US equities? Non-zero probability, but I'm currently investing firmly on the premise this isn't happening.
Some corporates may compete with nation states literally as well as metaphorically in the eyes of investors. Think: Rapture.
The world will split between a Western-aligned and the rest, and this will include physical, virtual and financial barriers. Two separate tech trees will develop. US admin is testing me on this one by alienating Europeans, but I think the long-term will bear this out.
People mistake the impact of 'geopolitics' being about sharp risk-asset reactions following discrete events (e.g. Venezuela, Iran Strikes, etc). Rather, it's about the operating environment for capital, economies and technology in the longer-term.
China's economic weakness is significant overstated, and it's now obviously on par with the best of the rest of the world. This doesn't mean Chinese equities are a good investment for western residents.
Real resources were always the obvious constraint on MMT, and are now moreso than ever.
Energy, defence and broad infrastructure build is an obvious secular theme that will continue to inflows pushing equity prices up. Within that, Solar is at a sweet spot of underloved (unnecessary concerns around rightwing scepticism, and Chinese overproduction) and sci-fi tailwinds (the Sun as the rightful King among energy sources in the Solar System).
Climate change is about adaptation, not stalling. People will come to accept this, and focus will shift to adaptive infrastructure and geo-engineering.
Crypto stays, but I think quantum concern is a huge factor in bitcoin's lag. People will have extremely strong views on whether this is right or wrong. I'm just confident it matters this year, and is an anchor.
Polymarket is the future, and an investment platform of the future will be a one-stop shop for what people are already doing - building portfolios on the anticipated relationships between trad assets, crypto and predictions.
Property investing is over for retail. Complicated topic, but plausibly a new source of structural demand for equities as mom & pop landlords realise the jig is up, and VT & chill is superior return (and return/stress ratio).
1. Separately, this is an issue for the economy. You can't have everyone thinking that just finding ways to maximise ownership in risk assets is better than doing anything actually productive.
Inflation structurally higher - but think 2026 will see a lull (i.e. basically agreeing with market pricing in breakevens/inflation swaps). Longer term the lack of embedded inflation premium is crazy, imo.
The internet is now an economically inflationary force, as opposed to the 1990s and 2000s.
The "VT and chill" crew are right, for the wrong reasons. It is not a good investment because we live in a EMH NG++ world, but because there is a socio-political imperative to keep the SPX marching higher.
Contrarian investing is a legit strategy, but people are reflexively too contrarian. Dumb trend following during exponential moves is actually quite a contrarian strategy.
Value investing is dead (and its body is cold).
Education is going to drastically change, and universities may become irrelevant. I get a lot of pushback on this. AI is already an INCREDIBLE tool for anyone with enough level of willpower to learn whatever their mind desires. Knowledge is not locked behind gated lecture halls, tutorials nor libraries.
1. Imo this massively benefits societies where credentialism is already relatively low (e.g. US > Europe).
These theses will change, and being ideologically inflexible is an awful way to invest.

I'll go into my portfolio thoughts in a later post. High-level: I'm 'risk-on'. "Investing is easy in bull markets" is a truism. I don't blindly or naively expect a march upwards. Yet, as I look at capital allocation right now I'm most comfortable in what many sees as 'highly speculative' assets - in themes I touch on, and mostly in thematic ETFs rather than individual stocks.

Despite 'historically attractive' real yields, I'm still concerned about bonds. QE --> QT only –> QE again when CBs realise the horror of what they are doing. Real yields are relentlessly climbing ex-US despite benign inflation pricing. Debt and deficit concerns will matter. That being said, I can see merit in holding some long dated option structure on ultra long G10 duration (could be deep OTM calls on ETFs for retail).