tstewart314
Furthermore, up to this point, we've been completely free for current clients to ensure we're providing value before charging anything.
At the same time, we charge a fraction of the fees vs other "high-performance" oriented managed alternatives: Grayscale at 2%, Titan at 1%, typical hedge fund 2/20, etc
We're VC-backed, SEC-registered, our goal at the end of the day here isn't a quick cash grab, it's to be a long-standing, sustainable, valuable experience for clients in a space (high risk investing) that currently lacks exactly those things.
(and by the way: an AUM fee is just about the slowest way one could "cash grab", decades-old robo-advisors are barely profitable with it. It's not a high-margin business at all).
For these more fun ones (WallStreetBets, Nancy Pelosi) - these are specifically requested from our clients and we provide extensive data and recommendations to suggest portfolios to clients based on their situation. You can see for yourself: the WallStreetBets portfolio is down nearly 40%. Nancy Pelosi is flat - we don't hide that at all and instead make it very clear with large font. Our most popular strategy (pulls the most AUM) is the Quantbase Leverage Flagship, a portfolio based on this paper[0] with nearly 100 years of performance history.
Yes we charge a fee on AUM. All robo-advisors do. This aligns incentives: we make (more) money only when you do. We're not for everyone, and even for those we are for we recommend on our front page to limit investment to a fraction of your total portfolio, but the thesis we believe in is solid: you can improve your absolute returns by taking a higher level of risk. We make it easier to do that intelligently, with proper data, and with the proper risk management. Happy to answer any other questions.
[0]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2741701
Edit: added "more" to clarify the AUM fee incentives alignment.