Is 16 years of consistent data insufficient? I would argue it isn’t. Perhaps you’d argue it is & that’s fine too. But if 16 years of consistent data is insufficient ask yourself how much time would be sufficient. 20 years? 25 years? 30 years? More? I prefer to go all-in on the fastest growing asset class of all-time, Bitcoin. Some people prefer a smaller percentage allocation & that’s fine too. But after 16 years of consistent data it’s getting harder to justify a 0% allocation as time passes.

It's an immature point. If 16 years of exceptional performance isn't enough, how long is? You're doing your clients a disservice