“Don’t forget, the superior Betamax technology did not beat out the substandard VHS technology as the standard format for videotape in the 1980s”
-Simon Sinek
My “handiness” is sort of like my ability as a guitarist/singer: better than most, but paltry compared to the real pros. My dad, having been a professional carpenter most of his life, could essentially build houses from scratch (also true of my brothers and a handful of extended family members), whereas you can bring me in for some demo, minor electrical needs, and finishing work. I know enough to be dangerous, as watching my dad reconstruct our homes was part of what filled the “iPad void” of my childhood.
My dad also helped with many projects for friends and neighbors. And, as a thank-you for helping build a new front porch, our neighbor, Bill, showed up at our house one evening with a VHS player. What a perfect gift! Cutting-edge technology that my parents would otherwise have waited years to splurge for. With the benefit of hindsight, we can be thankful that Bill didn’t get us a Betamax.
While the Betamax has gone by the wayside, today we’ll use it to learn some important lessons and delve into the betamaxxing of modern times. Here we go!
Not a good idea then…
For the “kids” in the room, these are types of video cassette players, and Betamax vs. VHS was like the original iPhone vs. Android debate. VHS was arguably more “open format,” and – while Betamax technically controlled 100% of the videotape-player market upon its launch in 1975, it was down to about 10% of the market by 1987. As this Wiki page goes on to say, Sony incorrectly focused on higher quality that came at a premium (Betamax), when consumers desired the cheaper and more compatible VHS format.
While this sounds like nostalgic rambling (partially because it is), there’s an important business lesson here: You can be first to market and the only game in town – and even have an arguably “better” solution – but it doesn’t mean your product will ultimately prevail. There are fun examples of this, such as Atari, Myspace, and BlackBerry. You must give people what they want and stay relevant, or it’s game over. Write that down.
And probably not a good idea now…
Fast-forward to 2026, and we’ve now got a different sort of “max” on our hands, and now it comes with dos equis (no, not the Mexican beer, but I like where your mind is at). Modern culture has simply added a second X and applied “maxxing” to way too many things – like looksmaxxing, along with “productivity maxxing, moneymaxxing, Chinamaxxing and even meaningmaxxing.” And after you spend your day fitnessmaxxing and careermaxxing, you’re going to really need some recoverymaxxing and sleepmaxxing to be ready for tomorrowmaxxing (I may have made that one up).
Investing done better?
I just did some Copilotmaxxing (okay, I’ll stop now) to identify some of the current investment-related maxxing trends, and – along with moneymaxxing – those include stocksmaxxing, tokenmaxxing, and just broader attempts to “maximize returns, efficiency, or exposure.”
To my surprise, this Parade article paints moneymaxxing in a positive light, based on thoughts from a financial planner, and limiting it to “claiming rewards, earning cash back, increasing savings growth and establishing financial flexibility.” In other words, this focuses attention on frugality and on consistently setting smaller, achievable goals to increase wealth over time, and one might just call it what it is: old-school prudent planning.
Or “investing” done worse?
In contrast, when I hear the various maxxing terms, I immediately think people are attempting to chase the ever-elusive “free lunch” that we know doesn’t exist, and that’s where maxxing potentially becomes the arbiter of wealth destruction. It is ultimately speculation – not investing – and few, if any, will benefit from it. Even if some of these things work out in the short term, the winnings (and more) are typically given back over time. And therein lies the rub. With that in mind, let’s look closer at a few of today’s maxxing trends.
YieldMaxxing: this not only sounds like a cool income trend name; it’s also the name of an actual ETF company designed to – you guessed it – maximize income. Don’t get me wrong, we at The Bahnsen Group are big fans of income-producing investments, but chasing yield (i.e., being tempted by unsustainable high yield that likely will come at the expense of the investment principal) is something that should be avoided.
ChartMaxxing: this strategy is designed to (try to) take advantage of price movements (via analyzing price charts) using options for maximum leverage. I know of some people who seem to sustainably and profitably trade options (I have not seen the “trade confirms,” as they say); however, these traders have trained at it for years, slowly built up their abilities and capital within their trading group to do so, and it still requires discipline and multiple hours per day of commitment. If it sounds like a job, that’s because it is – not a get-rich-quick side hustle.
StocksMaxxing: From what I gather, this isn’t merely about increasing one’s allocation to stocks within their portfolio; it’s about being more aggressive with equity and sector exposure, with the hope that this more concentrated positioning will result in quicker, more significant gains. And where might people try to “maxx” said exposure? Well, in the tech sector and Mag 7, of course. Call this a “concentrated momentum” play, and I think you’re onto something. It will work until it doesn’t. What could go wrong?
BetaMaxxing: according to Google, this can refer to several things, including a Filipino street food (coagulated chicken or pork blood), a slang term for being outdone (because of the Betamax/VHS story), a Python library in software development, or the video game, Beta Max. I’m not using it to describe any of those. Thus, you heard it here first: BetaMaxxing as an investment term, as it is perfect for describing leveraged ETFs. As a reminder, “beta” is used to describe the movement of an investment vs. a benchmark index. If two things move in the same direction and with the same magnitude at the same time (such as an S&P 500 ETF relative to the S&P 500 Index), they have a beta of 1. But, if I add leverage to the mix, I could achieve a beta of 2 or even 3.
Babe, I’m gonna lever you
On the one hand, Betamaxxing with leveraged ETFs could mean gains that are 2 or 3 times the underlying reference investment; on the other hand, leverage cuts both ways, and absorbing 2x or 3x losses is a quick way to set your money on fire. That doesn’t seem to be stopping people, however, as leveraged fund volumes have increased 29% per year since 2020. And 90% of that volume is coming from retail investors – not what we commonly refer to as the “smart money.” As the linked article goes on to say, “as of mid-2025, 452 leveraged funds were listed in the United States across asset classes ranging from equities and commodities to crypto and foreign exchange.” Yikes.
ModerationMaxxing
While I’m poking fun at all of this, I’m hesitant to dismiss the maxxing movement entirely, as I am totally in favor of the improvement of both ourselves and the world around us. Perhaps, however, taking everything to extreme levels will ultimately be defeatist. If every moment of our lives is spent maxxing everything possible, there will be no time left to live the life we’re attempting to maximize. No cap. 😊
Until next time, this is the end of alt.Blend.
Thanks for reading,
Steve
