Rules written in calm, followed in chaos.

Every fund, every market day.

Each fund I manage is tracked daily against its rolling high, the highest value it has reached over a recent window. The distance from that high is the drawdown, and it is the framework's pulse. A policy reviewed annually finds out about a problem up to twelve months late. A policy watched daily finds out the same week.

Monitoring is not the same as reacting. Most days the right action is nothing, and the framework says so explicitly. The point of watching daily is that when a threshold is crossed, the response happens on schedule rather than whenever someone next remembers the policy exists.

Buying by tranches at preset levels.

When a fund falls, the framework does not guess the bottom. It commits money in slices at predefined drawdown levels: a first tranche at a modest decline, deeper tranches if the fall continues. If the market recovers early, the first tranche caught it. If it falls further, the next tranche buys cheaper. Either outcome follows the plan, and following the plan is the entire job.

The exact levels and sizing depend on your risk profile and are documented for your policy at the start of our engagement, in writing, where you can hold me to them.

Exits decided at entry, not under fire.

Every position carries its exit from the day it is opened: a trailing stop that rises as the fund rises and never comes back down. Let the winner run; the moment it pulls back a set distance from its post-entry peak, the position is closed and the gain is banked. It is the framework's answer to the oldest investor mistake, riding a winner all the way back down. When the exit triggers, it is executed and you are told why, in plain English.

What this removes is negotiation. No exit gets argued with at midnight because it was agreed months earlier in daylight.

Stress-tested before a dollar moves.

Before I trust any rule, I run it through a Monte Carlo battery of ten thousand simulated market scenarios: long grinds, sharp crashes, false recoveries, sideways decades. A thousand runs is the bare minimum I would trust for any financial framework; PEAK is tested at ten times that, and a small fraction of those ten thousand timelines do lose money, which is exactly the kind of result I will show you rather than hide. I pay the most attention to the runs where the framework loses, because that is where its limits live. Clients see these results during consultation, including the uncomfortable ones.

Crash a market. Watch the rules respond.

Pick a stylised crash and watch PEAK do its job: cash waits, tranches deploy as the fall deepens, and the trailing stop locks the recovery in. The grey line just holds on. This is the whole framework, animated.

What PEAK will not do.