Modern Investing Techniques — Episode 11

Modern Investing Techniques – Episode eleven April second, twenty twenty-six Target length: approximately two thousand three hundred fifty words (approximately fifteen to sixteen minutes) It’s a new trading day. Welcome back to Modern Investing Techniques, Episode eleven. I’m Patrick, broadcasting from Vancouver, British Columbia, on this second day of April, 2026. Today we’re going to do what we always do: cut through the noise, look at what the actual market data is telling us, and identify thematic opportunities that fit our disciplined, milestone-driven framework. We’ll also talk about why patience in the face of exciting headlines is often the real alpha in Canadian portfolios. Before we dive in, the standard but important reminder: everything we discuss on this show is for educational and entertainment purposes only. The Practice Investment of the Day uses purely simulated trades with no real money at risk. I am not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing in this episode constitutes financial advice, investment recommendations, or solicitations to buy or sell any security. Always do your own due diligence and consult a qualified professional before putting any of your hard-earned capital to work. Markets involve the risk of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Let’s start with the market pulse this morning. The S&P 500 closed yesterday at six thousand five hundred seventy-five, posting a respectable gain of 0.7 percent. The NASDAQ outperformed on a relative basis, closing at twenty-one thousand eight hundred forty-one, up a solid 1.2 percent. Here at home, the T S X Composite finished the session at thirty-two thousand nine hundred fifty-eight, up 0.6 percent. On the surface these are mildly constructive numbers, but the underlying tone feels more like cautious resilience than outright conviction. What’s driving the caution? Geopolitical tension in the Middle East has escalated again. President Trump’s latest statements regarding Iran, combined with the effective disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, have sent oil prices higher while simultaneously putting pressure on broader risk assets. Interestingly, gold is not behaving like its usual safe-haven self in this environment. Instead of rallying as uncertainty rises, the yellow metal has fallen alongside equities, breaking its traditional inverse correlation pattern. That tells us markets are currently pricing this as a supply-shock event rather than a classic flight-to-safety panic. For Canadian investors, this creates a particularly nuanced picture inside our tax-advantaged accounts. Many of us hold both energy exposure and broad equity E T F's inside our TFSAs and RRSPs. A year into U.S. tariffs, Canada’s labour market data has remained stubbornly static. Population growth and immigration have not fully offset the damage in certain key sectors. Now we’re layering rising energy costs on top of that. The interaction between higher input costs, sticky wages, and static employment numbers is something every T F S A or R R S P investor should be modelling when projecting long-term earnings growth for domestically oriented companies. While markets digest these immediate shocks, a major long-term thematic opportunity has quietly surfaced right here in Canada. And it perfectly illustrates one of the core investment frameworks we teach on this show: the “lithium resource validation as a multi-year thematic entry” strategy. Here’s how the framework works in practice. First, we identify jurisdictions that possess truly massive, undeveloped critical mineral resources. In this case, new reporting confirms that Alberta sits on a lithium resource that could be valued in the neighbourhood of one trillion U.S. dollars. That is an enormous number. It puts Alberta on the map as one of the most significant undeveloped lithium districts in the world. But — and this is the crucial part we hammer home every time — resource size alone is never an investable signal. The second step in our framework is to wait for proof-of-concept milestones before we allocate meaningful capital. Those milestones typically include successful pilot production, meaningful permitting progress, offtake agreements with credible counterparties, or clear provincial and federal government support that de-risks the project. Today’s headline moves Alberta into the first phase of this framework. The opportunity is undeniably real. The challenge, however, remains proving that commercial-scale production is technically and economically feasible in the Alberta geological and regulatory context. That process usually takes time, and the market tends to reward patient capital that waits for those de-risking events rather than chasing the initial resource announcement. So what does this mean for Canadian investors using TFSAs, RRSPs, or even non-registered accounts? The playbook is straightforward but requires discipline. We recommend building only a small starter position — typically two to four percent of the overall portfolio — in early-stage lithium explorers or developers that have clear Alberta exposure. Importantly, we do not enter on the headline alone. We wait for the company to announce a pilot plant, a meaningful partnership, or measurable progress on the permitting front. We also screen for issuers that have already secured provincial government support and have published realistic timelines to first production. Once in the position, the real work begins: tracking quarterly updates on resource-to-reserve conversion rates, capital expenditure guidance, and any metallurgical test results. Historically, this exact approach has delivered the strongest returns in the twelve-to-thirty-six-month window following the initial resource announcement, precisely because that is when technical de-risking tends to drive multiple expansion for patient capital. Of course, risks abound. Permitting delays are common in Canada. Commodity price volatility can destroy economics overnight. Execution risk at the management-team level is real. That is why we size these initial positions conservatively at two to four percent of the portfolio and only add on verifiable milestones. Never bet the farm on a resource story, no matter how big the headline number sounds. This exact discipline is why we have no Practice Investment of the Day this week. And honestly, that “no-trade” decision is itself a valuable lesson. This is a simulated trade for educational purposes only. No real money is involved. This is not financial advice. For the Practice Investment of the Day we are officially calling “no trade” this week. We continue to screen lithium and copper supply-chain names aggressively, but we are deliberately waiting for production milestones rather than headline resource announcements. The catalyst is real — Alberta’s confirmation of a potential one-trillion-U.S.-dollar lithium resource — yet the reporting makes it crystal clear that commercial proof remains the gating factor. No specific names currently meet our strict criteria. We are watching for companies trading above their 200-day moving average, with volume at least 1.5 times the 20-day average on positive news flow. We are also mindful that the current macro oil shock and static Canadian labour market data could delay project financing and push timelines further out. Should an opportunity eventually clear our filters, we would only enter with a maximum four-percent portfolio risk and a 12-percent stop-loss measured from entry. Our confidence level on any immediate lithium name is low. This is still a single-factor headline without production proof or technical confirmation. That is exactly why we sit on our hands. This exercise demonstrates the discipline of waiting for the “second derivative” of news — actual pilot results or binding partnerships instead of chasing the first shiny headline. Resource size by itself is not an investable signal. Execution milestones are what matter. Practicing no-trade days like today builds the patience required to outperform indexes over multi-year thematic cycles. That patience is often the difference between mediocre and exceptional long-term returns. Let’s quickly review yesterday’s simulated weekly hold so we can learn from it in real time. Our simulated position was in So-Fi. We took a contrarian mean-reversion stance based on elevated short interest. We entered at last Monday’s open of seventeen dollars and sixteen cents. By Friday the stock had closed at fifteen dollars and eighty-seven cents. That produced a loss of 7.49 percent on the simulated position. On a notional one-thousand-dollar allocation, that equals a seventy-four dollars and ninety-one cents loss. Our running total across two simulated trades now stands at minus seventy-four dollars and ninety-one cents. Win rate is zero wins out of two total trades. Current streak is one loss. The short-interest thesis simply did not overcome broader market pressure last week. This reminds us that elevated short interest alone is insufficient without a clear positive catalyst inside the weekly timeframe. We will be tightening the catalyst filter for future mean-reversion ideas. That same discipline around liquidity and hidden costs becomes even more important when geopolitical headlines are moving markets violently. Let me give you a practical, real-world example most of you can relate to. Imagine you placed a market order for an energy-sector E T F last week when the Iran situation intensified. Your order likely filled eighteen cents higher than the last quoted price you saw on your screen. The bid-ask spread on that fund widened from a normal three cents to nineteen cents within the first forty-five minutes of trading. Liquidity providers pulled quotes amid genuine uncertainty over future Strait of Hormuz shipments. In today’s environment, certain commodity-linked instruments have seen average spreads jump four to six times normal levels. Volume confirmation becomes absolutely critical in these moments. If today’s volume is running only sixty percent of the twenty-day average while spreads are elevated, you are effectively paying a hidden transaction tax. Professional traders always check the Level Two order book or use their broker’s estimated-fill-price tool before hitting market orders on stressed days. Even commission-free platforms still extract cost through widened spreads during volatility. The biggest mistake retail investors make is treating all E T F's as equally liquid. Always verify the average daily dollar volume and the current spread before trading, especially on days when oil is jumping on the same headline. Speaking of Canadian innovation that can actually benefit from higher energy costs, a Montreal-based company just secured fresh capital in a move that fits nicely into the industrial-efficiency and electrification theme we like to follow. Montreal-based SmartD Technologies just closed a fifteen million dollars Canadian-dollar financing round co-led by Hammond Power Solutions and Desjardins Capital. The proceeds will be used to accelerate global deployment of its Silicon Carbide variable frequency drives. For Canadian investors this is a textbook industrial-efficiency play. These drives can meaningfully reduce energy consumption in motors used across mining, oil and gas, manufacturing, and data centres. We will be monitoring the company’s progress toward commercial contracts in energy-intensive sectors. The fresh capital gives the firm substantial runway to scale. Watch for a potential future T S X listing or strategic partnership announcements. Those would represent important milestones in the broader electrification and energy-transition theme. You can track developments through standard financial terminals or by setting up simple news alerts on the company name. While we’re on the theme of future resource and energy supply chains, Chinese mining and logistics firms are making a significant infrastructure move in Africa. They are participating in a one point two four billion dollars railway revamp that will link Zambia’s copper-producing region directly to the Indian Ocean. This project should meaningfully improve future copper supply-chain efficiency and could provide longer-term support for copper prices. That development is relevant for investors who hold copper E T F's or individual miners in their portfolios, as lower logistics costs and improved reliability tend to support higher sustained production levels over time. We also saw Volvo Car AB report that the war in Iran hurt U.S. demand in the first quarter through higher fuel prices. This serves as an early warning signal for auto, auto-parts, and transportation equities. Canadian investors may want to consider reducing exposure to discretionary cyclicals until oil and fuel-price volatility subsides. Higher sustained fuel prices tend to shift consumer behaviour away from larger vehicles and can pressure margins across the supply chain. Gold, as we mentioned earlier, fell sharply alongside the stock market. It is currently reflecting broader risk sentiment rather than acting as a traditional crisis hedge. Investors who rely on gold for portfolio insurance should review their allocation rules in the current geopolitical regime. The old playbook of “gold always goes up when things get scary” is not holding in this particular shock. Finally, a regulatory development that both U.S. and Canadian crypto investors should track carefully. Coinbase’s Chief Legal Officer stated that a Senate compromise on the CLARITY Act for crypto regulation is close. No markup date has been set yet, but any tangible progress would meaningfully reduce regulatory uncertainty. For investors holding crypto in non-registered accounts, this serves as a useful regulatory-risk gauge. You can set up custom alerts on CoinTelegraph or use legislative tracking tools such as Congress.gov or OpenParliament.ca to monitor progress. A clearer U.S. framework would likely reduce uncertainty premia across digital-asset equities and E T F's. Let’s run the simulated portfolio numbers one more time so they’re fresh in your mind. We have executed two simulated trades. Win rate sits at zero percent with a cumulative profit-and-loss of minus seventy-four dollars and ninety-one cents. Average return per trade is minus 3.75 percent. Our analysis is actively learning from the pattern of missing clear near-term catalysts and is adjusting the filter accordingly. This remains a learning journey, not a track record to follow blindly. Before we wrap up, a quick tease for tomorrow. We will continue monitoring lithium developers for those first pilot-production updates that could finally shift our confidence level from low into medium territory. That’s Modern Investing Techniques for today. If you found this episode useful, please share it with a fellow investor who’s trying to move beyond simple index investing. Subscribe wherever you listen, and check the resources page on our website for the tools and platforms we reference. We’re back tomorrow with fresh market insights. Until then, keep learning, keep refining your process, and above all, keep investing with discipline. Thanks for listening. This is Patrick signing off from Vancouver. This podcast is curated by Patrick but generated using AI voice synthesis of my voice using ElevenLabs. The primary reason to do this is I unfortunately don't have the time to be consistent with generating all the content and wanted to focus on creating consistent and regular episodes for all the themes that I enjoy and I hope others do as well.