Matt Geiger: Hard Assets at Turning Point, How I'm Investing Now

I'm Charlotte McLeod with InvestingNews.com and here today with me is Matt Geiger, Managing Partner at MJG Capital Fund. Great to have you here. Good to be joining you, Charlotte. It's been a little while since we caught up, so it's good to be here and I hope you're enjoying your summer. Really good to have you here and it has been a little while since we last spoke, but I think it's the perfect time to be speaking with you. We've made it past the halfway mark for the year and you just released your investor letter talking about performance. I believe H1 2025 was your best performance since H2 2020. So I'm hoping we can begin by talking about the factors driving that performance. That's right. It was a strong period of performance for the fund. We were up just under 30-36% through the end of June. And I was also pleased to report to partners that we're beating the S&P over a five and a 10-year basis. I don't have the five-year numbers top of mind, but on a 10-year basis, we're up roughly 420% relative to 260%, give or take, for the S&P. So that's a roughly 18% annualized return for the MJG fund versus closer to 13.5% for the S&P. And yeah, I was happy to report those results. I don't think anybody would argue that it's been nothing short of a phenomenal period for those that are invested in US equities. Whereas if you look at commodities over the past 10 years, sure, there's been bright spots. 2016 was a great year. 2020 was a great year. We've had runs in the lithium price over the past few years. Uranium's had its time in the sun. But really over the past 10 years, decade, it's been really hit or miss on the hard asset front. So I actually made the argument that while returns have been good, I think the best is yet to come in the coming years. And I focused on a couple of points. The first is just the extreme overvaluation in the US stock market relative to pretty much any other asset class globally. And I cited the data point that as it stands, if you look at the global market capitalization, US companies comprise 70%, give or take, of the total global market capitalization. Despite the US economy, the US GDP only being around 26% to 27% of global GDP. We haven't seen this weighting towards US stocks relative to the rest of the world ever. And the only time in recent memory that it's been close or not even recent memory would be the late 60s during the heyday of the nifty 50 bubble. And I made the argument that we don't need to see a huge crash in the US stock market or anything of the sort, though I do maintain that that's a significant possibility. But I would argue that really on Liberation Day, that marked the turning point where we're going to see outperformance from the asset classes that have been left behind largely over the past 10 years. And that includes international equities, that includes emerging equities, that includes emerging debt. And yes, that includes commodities and hard assets. And I would just note over the past 15 years, we've seen over $20 trillion come into US financial markets. Foreign investors were net long around $3 trillion going back to 2010 or so. They're now closer to net long $25 trillion. So again, we don't need to see a full fledged outflow entirely, but even a few trillion dollars would go a long way, especially for the commodity market. So I think we're in for a number of good years ahead. Of course, it will be a rocky road. So we're braced for turbulence and volatility, as one should always expect in the commodity space. But looking at three or five years from now, I think we're very well placed with our position. Right. I think that that point about the best is yet to come really stood out to me as well when I was reading your writing. So are we finally going to start seeing that return of those elusive generalist investors back into the resource space? How do you see that playing out? Well, I do think we've seen a change in character, even amongst the smaller juniors. And the MJG fund is very heavily weighted towards the junior space. We have 19 different positions as it stands. And our median market cap is around 50 million Canadian. So we're certainly on the smaller end of the spectrum. And I think going back to late April, early May, all I want us to do is look at the chart of the TSXV. But the juniors are finally playing some catch up. How long that continues remains to be seen. I would argue that the TSXVs are around 800 or so as it stands. I think there's a pretty clear path to 900 and 1,000. So that's another 12 or 25% move, assuming that the broader markets remain neutral or risk on as they have been. So I'm quite optimistic, absent another liquidity panic like we saw in April when Liberation Day occurred. I'm quite optimistic that we're going to continue this run that we've seen really since late April. So it's been a fun period. I've only seen the returns accelerate over the course of July and into August. So I think we're seeing some of that rotation. And one harbinger, you could say, and I talked about this at length in the MJG investor letter, was Tether, one of the world's largest cryptocurrency players, coming into Elemental Altus. This was announced in early June and taking a controlling stake in the company. They now own over 50% of Elemental Altus. This is a company or a group that really should have no business investing in hard assets or natural resources. So I don't want to draw too broad of a conclusion from a single transaction, but I think looking back a few years to the spring and the summer, one could say that that was a sign that non-traditional mining investors were starting to wade back into the space after what's really been an over a decade long absence of those sort of investors. Because why would you be anywhere else than the broader US stock market or cryptocurrencies, which have also behaved well? That's been what's working. But I think in hindsight, Tether's move may prove to be quite significant. Yeah, I really enjoyed your breakdown of that transaction there and what the implications could be. Should we be excited about this? Should we be wary? How should we be feeling? Anything further you would add, because I think it is worth digging into a little bit more. Yeah, I mean, it's a really interesting deal. I mean, I broke it down from multiple different angles. I guess one of the considerations is what is Tether's aim for Elemental specifically? Are they looking to just be a passive investor? I mean, a controlling shareholder with influence, but stick with their 50% stake and support the company. Are they looking to take over Elemental entirely? And this is the first step to doing that. Are we going to see Tether take controlling interests in other junior royalty players, other peers of Elemental? Is this a play for Elemental and Tether to consolidate the junior royalty space? I think the jury is still out. But if I had to hazard a guess, I think Elemental will prove to be Tether's vehicle, at least in the royalty space. And that Tether will support Elemental both for one-off royalty and stream acquisitions on a deal-by-deal basis, but also if the opportunity presents itself as a group that can help knock some heads together and generate some consolidation within the junior royalty space, which I think is long overdue. There's a good six or seven companies kind of in that 200 million Canadian to $600 million snack bracket. And I think investors in the space and in those companies would be well-served to see that number reduced to three or four different names. So that's one angle as it pertains to the junior royalty space. And then as a broader perspective, as we've touched on, this could be a signpost that generalist capital, non-traditional mining capital is coming into the space. If one wanted to be pessimistic or a little bit cautious, maybe it's also a sign that at least in terms of the gold price or precious metal pricings, maybe it speaks to where we are in the cycle. I don't think we're in the very end stages of the move, but when you start to see non-traditional companies come in to the space to this degree, it could at least signify that we're in the mid-innings and at least provide a little bit of caution. So I think, again, it's risky to draw too broad of conclusions from a single deal, but I was just fascinated by the amount of headlines and attention that the transaction drew, even from those that aren't invested in elemental and even from those that don't have exposure to the junior royalty space. And I think that the attention that was paid to it was worthy. Yeah. It's really interesting to look at all those angles and certainly it'll be one to keep an eye on. I'm sure we'll come back and talk about it with you in the future. Looking a little bit more at the royalty and streaming space, I think that's a good one to get into on the M&A front. So you mentioned where we're due to see more of that. We have seen some interesting deals this year. So I'm wondering if I could get your take on what we've seen so far. Do these deals make sense to you and what we might see moving forward in that sector? That's right. I mean, the past 120 days have been extremely exciting, quite candidly, for anybody following the royalty and streaming space. There've been a lot of talk about consolidation for really a two or three year period and it had not really borne out. But I think what started off the frenzy we've seen was TripleFlag making a move for Origin. And this was late April. It was a transaction of around 420 million Canadian. But really what TripleFlag was after was Origin's 1% NSR covering Anglo Gold Ashanti's expanded Silicon project. It's now been referred to, it's been rebranded to the Arthur project. So we'll try to stick with Arthur going forward. That is a truly world-class development asset. Origin generated that royalty going back 10 years ago, and it had become such a large percentage of their NAV that I think it made sense for Origin to sell at this juncture. And I think that the day that that deal was announced, the gold price had hit at least to what at that point had been an all-time high. So I think that the deal made sense. The rest of Origin's business has since been spun out into Origin 2.0. So TripleFlag was in it for that specific royalty. That was late April. Five, six weeks later, we had the elemental tether transaction, which we've already touched on. Then in early July, right as Rick Rule's conference was kicking off in Boca Raton, we had Royal Gold make its move in one fell swoop, taking out both Sandstorm and associated royalty company Horizon Copper. So that was a big deal. I think it was close to $4 billion in value between those two different companies. And it took one of the few mid-tier royalty companies, which I would define as companies between roughly $1 to $10 billion in market cap, off the table and help beef Sandstorm's market cap up closer to $15 billion. So that was a very significant deal. And in the aftermath of that, I did a couple different interviews speaking about the royalty space. And my best guess was the next shoe to drop was going to be one of two different things. The first was the potential for a merger of equals between OR and TripleFlag. And that has not come to pass, but I still think that is within the realm of possibilities. That's something to keep an eye out in the months ahead. The second one I mentioned did come to pass, and that is Altius Minerals, which is a company near and dear to my heart. It's been a holding of ours going back to early 2020. And it's really the only true buy and hold in the portfolio where I sleep very, very easily with our Altius position. And they announced a couple of weeks back, this would have been late July, that they were selling two-thirds of their royalty covering the Arthur project. So Origin owned a royalty covering Arthur. Altius itself owned a one and a half percent royalty covering Arthur. They sold 1% of that to Franco Nevada for around $275 million US. That's $375 million Canadian. And that deal was relatively well telegraphed. CEO Brian Dalton from Altius had been on the record saying that Altius was going to make a decision on how to proceed there in Q2. And they had quite a few options. They could have sat on the royalty themselves. They could have done a full or partial sale. They could have, in theory, traded that royalty to a larger royalty company in exchange for a non-precious metal royalty, because Altius' bread and butter has been non-precious metals. There's even the possibility that Altius as a whole was going to be taken out by a larger company. They settled on a partial sale, which as a shareholder, I was quite pleased with. I was actually concerned that Altius as a whole was going to be taken out, and we were going to lose one of the cornerstone investments of our portfolio. So the pricing that Franco paid was about a 9% premium to where Origin sold their royalty to TripleFlag. I think the premium made sense because the gold price itself had increased by 12% or 13% between when Origin agreed to the TripleFlag transaction and when Altius transacted. So I think that's reasonable. But I also don't think it was an easy decision for the Altius management team really at all. This Arthur project has the potential to be a generational gold asset. It just keeps getting bigger and bigger in really short order here. So in broad strokes, I think Franco paid for roughly 30 million ounces of gold there. The resource as it stands is at 16 million ounces. So Franco paid a premium assuming that there's going to be significant growth. I think five, six, seven years from now, if the project's at 35 million ounces of gold and there's been no significant snags on the permitting front, then perhaps Franco would have gotten the best of that deal. But I think this made a lot of sense from an Altius perspective. They still maintain a half percent royalty on the asset, so they can hope that it gets as big and as beautiful as possible. But they've also locked in and really taken the burden hand in a respect for an asset that was non-core to them just a few years ago, and yet in recent months had swelled to close to 50% of their NAV. So I thought that was really exciting to see. And the share price reaction from Altius has been strong in the deal. In fact, just yesterday, they hit an all-time high exceeding their previous all-time high that was reached all the way back in 2007. So I think the market has voted with its feet and given the thumbs up to the transaction. Really clear that there's so much activity going on in this space. And yeah, if you are an investor who is looking at all these things happening and maybe trying to position here, how might someone want to approach that in this royalty and streaming space right now? Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, different investors are going to have different answers. I'm always very much a people-first investor that even applies to the royalty and streaming companies. I'm happy to pay extra for a team that I trust, for a team that has a track record of disciplined decision-making that's in the interest of shareholders. Altius certainly falls into that category. Also from a people perspective, I like teams that keep it lean and minimize overhead to the utmost extent. Because for these royalty and streaming companies, the more money you can save on GNA, that goes straight to the bottom line. So I start first and foremost there. And then I think investors have to decide their risk tolerance. Especially at this point in the cycle, there's nothing wrong with buying a Franco, but we're focused much more on the junior royalty space. Our two big bets, as I mentioned, are Altius Minerals and Elemental Altus as it stands. And I feel comfortable growing with both of those companies. Altius, as I mentioned, is a true buy and hold, so I don't worry quite about the valuation there. Elemental, I'll keep an eye on things. If the share price gets too out of hand, then we would consider taking profits. But I'm comfortable giving Tether and the Elemental team a chance to execute on this business model over the coming six to 12 months and seeing how things go. So that's kind of how we're approaching it. But there are many different fish in the sea. There are companies that are much cheaper on a PNAV basis relative to either Elemental or Altius. There could be opportunity there, particularly if you expect more M&A to occur. But I would argue that there are reasons for that valuation disconnect, including lack of trust in the management team or assets that have risk on a permitting or social front. So it's not one size fits all, but these are the two horses that we've chosen to back. Well, good insight on how you're approaching that. And so Royalty and Streaming, this is a chunk of your portfolio, but another big piece of it is the prospect generator companies. And I believe we spoke about this last time we talked. It's a model that I feel like I used to hear quite a bit about. People would talk about it a lot and the potential there. And it seems to have lost popularity in recent years, but it's something that you really like. So can you tell me why that's so compelling for you? That's right. I mean, it is very much out of favor, but that's attractive to me because it doesn't have to even return to full favor. There just has to be a slight change in sentiment and there could be a move in this space more generally. You're right. I mean, as of the end of June, we sat at roughly 36% weighting towards prospect generation between, I think, what were six different holdings. So that's roughly a third of our portfolio. We just added another one. We're participating in the Concora Copper financing that was announced last month that will be closing later in August, early September. So we've only increased our prospect generation exposure since that letter was sent out. I'm excited about Concora in particular. We were able to get in at a good price there. They have four different partners spending money across the Concora project portfolio over the next 12 months. AngloGold Ashanti is the flagship partner there, but they have others that are doing drilling and then also the potential for one to two new parties to come in if all goes to plan. There's a potential for six different projects to be drilled over the next 12 months here. That could even increase if they bring in additional partners in the months ahead. So a lot of shots on goal, which is all you can really ask for as an investor in this business model. But look, the reason I think this business model is going to return more into favor, the first is just the general trickle down that we're just starting to see from the metal prices to the large producers, to the smaller producers. We're finally seeing some interest return to expiration stage juniors and prospect generators fall into that broader bucket. So I think from a general sense, that will be positive. I also know that the larger producers are looking to beef up their development pipelines. And I do think that there is going to be new deals patched, whether it's with Concora in the months ahead, Headwater Gold, which is a prospect generator that I'm following closely. They very recently announced an earn and deal with Oceana Gold. Sentara Gold has been very aggressive taking strategic stakes in prospect generators, such as Kennerlin Minerals, Headwater, Azimut, Midland up in Quebec. So I think we only see the deal flow increase. And then the final point I'd add is not all, but quite a few of these prospect generators actually have hidden early stage royalty portfolios kind of in the background being assigned no value. And we've seen a few different transactions in recent years. We're kind of out of the blue. A prospect generator has monetized one or more of its royalties. One example is Almodex Minerals sold their Elk Gold royalty to Star Royalties. That was a few years back. More recently, I think this was mid to late 2024, Commander Resources sold their royalty portfolio to an Australian private equity group at a price that exceeded Commander's entire valuation. So that was a good example of a value being created just seemingly out of the blue. And so we've seen Eagle Plains is another example. That is a holding within the MJG portfolio as well. They did a spin out of the royalty portfolio into a company called Eagle Royalties. So kind of creating value from where there was none. So I think there's the opportunity in the months ahead for more of this activity to take place. And I think investors, when they're evaluating prospect generators, should also ask management, hey, do you have any royalties that are sitting in the portfolio gathering dust that potentially have value? If so, you have to factor that into your valuation analysis. Very interesting points there as well. And I want to also take a look at your portfolio from a commodity perspective, because if we if we go from that area, copper is really at the top of the list. And I know that you are looking for companies that will do well regardless of what the commodity itself is doing. But I do want to spend a little bit of time looking at the copper market because we had all of this tariff excitement where there was interest prices were moving and then the tariffs were actually announced and it wasn't quite as extensive as we thought it would be. So I wanted to ask you about tariff impact on the copper market. How are you seeing that? Yes, well, you touched on my caveat and I always try to emphasize this. There are many different ways to invest in this space. The MJG approach is to assume flat or even sub spot metal prices and invest in opportunities where there's at least the potential for a significant share price rerating based on company specific catalysts. So we really try to avoid... I do factor in the commodity of focus into the analysis. That's one of the very last things that I consider. And we don't like the optionality plays where you're banking on $4,000 gold or on $8 copper, $10 a pound nickel in order for the investment to work. On the copper front, all of our copper focused investments have the opportunity for a material rerate and share price, either through the drill bit, either through permitting or through M&A. So I always like to lead with that. With that said, you are right. 40% of our weighted portfolio as it stands right now is weighted towards copper. So I'm clearly very comfortable with exposure to the metal. I couldn't tell you where the copper price is going to go over the next six or 12 months. That's really a mug's game. But I feel quite confident that it's going to be a good place to be thinking out three, five, seven years down the line. And a couple aspects that I like about the market. The first is that at 450 or so copper, we're well below the true incentive price. I think astute market observers would say that roughly $6 per pound copper is what's needed to really incentivize the world's largest miners to get going on their late stage development projects and really go pedal to the metal. And this is actually pointed out by Brian Dalton. If you look to previous metal cycles, sometimes you need to see double the incentive price for the big boys to really get a move on. So I think there's at least a 33% move in copper that has to occur just for the incentive price to be achieved and room to run beyond that before there's really that sense of urgency for the big guys to get going on the next generation of development projects. Now, once that occurs, the copper market is so big that you really need a mega project to even move the needle at all. And these mega projects, we're talking three, four, five years from when ground is broken to where nameplate production is achieved. And that's if everything happens exactly to plan, which is very rarely the case with these mega projects. So there's a huge lag, especially compared to gold, like a smaller midsize gold project. If the management team executes perfectly on the build, that can be up and running in 18 months, in 24 months. For these large scale copper projects, you're talking about a multi-year lag before that supply actually comes online. So I think that adds to kind of the appeal of the broader copper narrative. And then I'll just conclude by saying there's a huge amount of interest for copper assets. So if you're a development stage company or an explorer that's made an exciting copper discovery, there's no shortage of potential suitors. From the very largest diversified miners to copper focused producers like the Hudbays or Lundin Minings of the world to gold companies, Newmont, Barrick, have all been very clear that they're trying to up the percentage of copper within their broader portfolios to Chinese parties, to private equity groups. So there's no shortage of potential buyers if you find your hands on an asset that has enough scale to matter. So I like all of those aspects. And just to touch briefly on the tariff situation, I mean, I will say that I was shocked that we didn't see any tariff at all on refined copper imports. Just a few weeks before the formal announcement was made, Trump was making noises that a 50% tariff was going to apply. I think it caught the whole market off guard, including myself, that there did not end up being a refined copper import tariff. With that said, at least as it stands, almost all of our copper exposure comes from projects outside of the United States. We do have a couple names that are exploring for copper, kind of earlier stage ventures within the US, but those are less impacted than kind of the late stage development projects or the producers. So it didn't have a huge impact within the MJG portfolio. But I mean, it was certainly, I think, a surprise to all market watchers. With that said, and sorry to draw on here, but Mitsubishi just today with Hudbay announced a big $600 million investment into Hudbay's copper world project in Arizona in exchange for a 30% project level stake. So I think if there was a hangover kind of with the disappointment of the tariffs not going into place on refined copper projects, this shows that that hangover was perhaps short lived. And the Hudbay share prices responded very well to this latest announcement. I think it's broadly a positive for other later stage copper developers that are focused on the US specifically. Really, really nice overview of your thoughts on copper. And I think it's good to spend some time there since it is such a big part of the portfolio. I did want to make sure we at least touch on precious metals since it's a strong interest for our audience. And I found it interesting. So of course, you've got your exposure to gold, but then ahead of silver, you've got platinum group metals. And I thought that would be interesting to touch on and maybe talk a little bit about special considerations for investors who are looking at platinum group metals, because there's been more interest in those metals lately. And I think people might be less familiar with how to evaluate them. That's right. Well, I will say, and again, going back to that caveat earlier, we didn't make a big bet on PGMs. We made a big bet on a company that happens to be focused on PGMs. And I think that's an important distinction. The company in question is Bravo Mining. They have their Luanga project down in Brazil. And this is a company that I've written about probably for the past four or five investor letters. I've talked about it quite frequently publicly. It sits as our single largest position as it stands. So there's another company that's just approaching it in terms of weighting within the portfolio. But it's been a very significant investment for us for a number of years. We were fortunate enough to get in when Bravo was a private company, pre-IPO. And it's a very strong performer for the MJG portfolio. So again, that's a company where I look at it from a bottom-up perspective. Excellent team. CEO Luis Acevedo there is one of the preeminent mining lawyers in Brazil with two different exits over the past 10 years. Really large, interesting asset with Luanga. It's a PGM dominant deposit. There's also a nickel and a gold kicker there as well. And then on the broader land package, there's IOCG copper potential as well. So it checks the people box. It checks the asset box. And it's a tight structure, catalyst in the calendar. There's a lot to like there. With all that said, it has benefited by being a PGM focused story. There are other metals in the mix as well. But I think if you had to classify Bravo, as I do within the MJG investor letter, it is primarily a PGM focused story. And if we'd roll back the clock six months ago, I would argue that PGMs are one of the most contrarian, out of favor metals that were out there. Maybe I'd throw zinc into that basket, lithium into that basket, vanadium. These are some of the metals that have really, really struggled in recent years, nickel as well. But really going back to April, so it's been a relatively recent phenomenon. The PGM space has caught fire with prices rising. It's quite volatile, but we'll say 40%, 30%, 40% year to date for both platinum and palladium. So while Bravo's creating value on the company level, it's also had a nice tailwind with that PGM move. And so that speaks to its share price performance year to date. I don't think it's quite up 100% year to date, but it's close. So that has been a key driver within the MJG portfolio, no doubt. And that explains our entire PGM waiting that you mentioned. We have no other PGM exposure beyond Bravo. Well, thank you for going into that. And I like the focus of bringing it back to that company first approach. I think that's really helpful for people to understand how you're looking at everything. Also, before I let you go, I want to take a little bit of a at jurisdiction in the portfolio. So I believe you've got Canada, US, and Brazil as the top three jurisdictions. And we can talk about all of them, but I wanted to hone in on Canada because it's one that I think typically we hear about, yes, Canada is a safe, good jurisdiction for mining, but I'm starting to hear a little bit more about, well, there's environmental protections, there's First Nations issues here. So just wanted to get your thoughts on that. And we can speak about the other jurisdictions as well, if you'd like. Sure. Well, yeah, as you note, Canada is our largest waiting by jurisdiction. I think at the end of June, it was in the low 30s. And then if you add the United States and Brazil to the mix, that takes it up to 80% of the portfolio. So we cover eggs pretty significantly in these three different baskets. I would note for any jurisdiction, and this certainly applies for Canada, just given the immense scale of the country, I really hesitate to paint anything with too broad of a brush. Each project should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. It depends on the province that one is located in. It depends on the specifics of where that project is located within the province. Are there clear environmental roadblocks that may be ahead? Are there local communities, whether indigenous or otherwise, that may be very supportive of the project or conversely, dead set on stopping its development? And also, what team are you backing here? Is this a team that has a track record of advancing projects both on the permitting and the social front to where you can actually get licensed there? So yeah, there have been headlines. I know Canada took a little bit of a hit with the most recent Fraser Institute ratings, and that's caused some consternation within the industry. Am I aware of that? Yes. Am I monitoring closely? Yes. Am I making any drastic or dramatic adjustments to the portfolio because of that? No. But again, it bears close watch, but I don't want investors to have a knee-jerk reaction and to consider some of those company-specific variables more so than just the broader narrative about a given country, Canada included. Yeah. I think very fair points, especially for Canada, which as you mentioned, is very big. So great to go into that with you as well. And before I let you go, I wanted to ask, are there any final points you would leave investors with? I know there's definitely a lot to be considering right now. Yeah. I mean, I think we've covered a lot of ground here. I'll end with one of my typical talking points, but I think it's just very important to emphasize. From my perspective, this is a people-first business. And when I'm evaluating a given opportunity, I tune everything else out and just look at the management team and the board. How much skin in the game do they have? How do they get their shares? What's their cost basis relative to the current share price? Have they been buying in the open market or subscribing heavily in recent placements? And of course, are they ethical and do they have a skillset for the task at hand? And if I'm not comfortable on all of those fronts, I don't look at the rest. I don't look at the project. I don't look at the upcoming catalyst. I don't look at the valuation. I think it's a way to quickly screen opportunities, which I think is important because especially as this market starts to pick up steam, there are already close to 3000 juniors out there across North America, Australia, and beyond. And that number is probably only going to grow further. So I think one can fish in a much better pond by sorting opportunities first by the people involved. And if it checks all those boxes, then you can move on to the asset. Then you can move on to the company structure. Then you can move on to the catalyst to create value. Then you can move on to the valuation, both on an absolute value and a relative value perspective. You look at the jurisdiction, look at the commodity. So I think it's important to have a holistic analysis of any of your potential investments. But for me, it really always starts with the people involved. Well, I think that's a great note to end on. You really do have to have a way to whittle it down from all of those companies. And that sounds like a really good place to start. So thank you so much for coming on to go through all these topics. I do think we covered a lot of ground today. Thanks, Charlotte. That was a fun conversation. Appreciate you having me. Of course. And we'll be sure to have you back again soon. For now, I'm Charlotte McLeod with InvestingNews.com and this is Matt Geiger. Thank you for watching. If you like this video, make sure you hit the like button and subscribe to our channel. We'd also love to hear your thoughts, so leave us a comment below.