A long time ago, people used to trade things like gold, paper money (stocks), and digital coins (bitcoin) to buy stuff or make money. This article compares how much money someone would have now if they invested $1,000 in each of these things last year around a special day called Memorial Day. The digital coin (bitcoin) made the most money, followed by paper money (stocks), and then gold. Read from source...

1. The title is misleading and clickbaity. It implies that the reader will learn how their investment choices would have turned out if they had invested $1,000 in each of these assets last Memorial Day (May 31st). However, the article does not provide any numerical data or comparisons for such scenarios. Instead, it focuses on general market trends and conditions that affected all three assets.
2. The article uses vague terms like "return of risk appetite" and "orchestrated by consumer price inflation". These phrases imply a causal relationship between events without providing any evidence or explanation for how they happened or why they matter to investors. A more accurate and informative way to write this section would be to describe the specific factors that contributed to the increase in risk appetite, such as the reduction of inflation rate, the Fed's policy changes, or the positive economic indicators. Similarly, the article should explain how consumer price inflation affects investor behavior and preferences for different assets.
3. The article praises corporate profit growth as a "resilient" factor that supported the market rally. However, it does not provide any data or analysis to back up this claim. How much did corporate profits grow by? What sectors or industries performed better than others? What challenges or risks did companies face in achieving their profit goals? These are some of the questions that the article should answer to demonstrate its credibility and relevance for investors who care about earnings and valuations.
4. The article mentions that the financial markets ended mostly higher in 2023, but it does not specify which markets or segments it is referring to. For example, did the stock market, the bond market, the commodity market, or the currency market perform better than others? How did they compare to their historical averages or expectations? What were the main drivers or factors behind their performance? Providing some context and detail for these aspects would make the article more informative and useful for readers who want to understand the overall landscape of financial markets.
5. The article states that the stock market is trading at record highs, but it does not explain why this is happening or what implications it has for investors. Is the stock market overvalued or undervalued based on its fundamentals and earnings? How sustainable are these high levels of valuation and sentiment? What are some of the potential risks or threats that could derail the stock market rally? These are some of the questions that the article should address to offer a balanced and nuanced perspective for investors who need to make informed decisions based on accurate and up-to-date information.

Based on the article "Bitcoin Vs. SPY Vs. Gold: If You Had $1,000 Invested In Each Of These Assets Last Memorial Day, Here's How Much You Would Have Now", I would recommend the following portfolio allocation for an aggressive investor who is willing to take high risk and seek high returns:

- 50% in Bitcoin (BTC)
- 25% in SPY (S&P 500 index fund)
- 25% in Gold (GLD)