It’s a question of risk reward. The risk may increase, but if the reward increases dramatically more, then it could make sense.
1 Like
Not proud of it, but this is also what I thought when I bought more Gazprom 2 weeks or so into the war… it didn’t play out well!
I think it was a good call at the time (I did the similar). The consensus was that Russia would win the war in a few weeks.
I’d bought Gazprom and Phosagro GDRs for pennies on the dollar. If they ever ‘unfreeze’ and don’t get expropriated, that will be my retirement sorted out. Big ‘If’, though.
I remember a lot people saying last spring, they are switching to EU products instead of US. There was also a survey from Galaxus and the output was interesting: if there was an identical US and EU product (the EU is due to various reason more expensive), the people chose the cheaper US product.
I will remain with the US etfs (cheaper, broader, more liquid) and I don’t expect people to sell off US products.
I think that’s because it was only a trade war and not a real war. I don’t really think that majority of people will brush aside military conflict and focus on money.
But maybe I am naive 
time will tell.
Totally rational: buying assets you believe to be good when the market doesn’t. I feel you assume there’s morality and camaraderie in 2026. Dumping valuable assets at lower prices is setting money on fire. Ben Felix would not approve!
Your feeling is correct
I believe morality and commaradrie does exist. At least where I am from this will definitely happen.
1 Like
I totally see many people around the world not wanting to be part of/spend money on assets from places/people they don’t like/don’t agree with. There are still places in the world where internal integrity, honour and consistency matter, I just don’t think it’s very prevalent in the “West”. I certainly don’t think there’s any room for morality in Modern Portfolio Theory.
2 Likes