Being a contrarian, let me offer a bit of a [hedged] defense of Swedroe's article.
The whole question of whether his suggested "alternative" investments will beat equities with less risk all depends on what the returns of equities are going to be. If the stock market returns 0-2% annualized for the next 25 years, then it is entirely possible or even probable that these alternatives will exceed that return.
In the Trinity/Bengen retirement studies, I believe it's 1966 that would have been the worst year to retire and rely on an income based mostly on returns from stocks and bonds. In the succeeding 15 years, both stocks and bonds provided very poor returns. Swedroe is not the sort of writer who will start screaming from the rooftops that it's 1966, only worse. However, he does clearly believe that there is a significant possibility that this is in fact the case. If you're looking at it from that perspective, it's entirely prudent to look for better alternatives. The ones he has suggested are certainly reasonable ones in theory.
With that defense out of the way, I would say that for me costs are the big issue. Comparing the ERs of the Stone Ridge funds to a VG mutual fund is comparing apples and oranges. But even once you do make them comparable, the Stone Ridge funds are still high cost by Boglehead standards. And then you have to add on a second layer of advisory fees to even get access. It seems like the "alpha" is going to Stone Ridge and the advisor. If that problem was fixed, I'd be more open to considering such investments for my own portfolio.
There are better methods of planning to address the challenges of retirement than running first to alternative investments. The 1966 retiree didn't have TIPS. We do. If Social Security forms the base of retirement income, TIPS can provide a second layer of worry-free income (e.g. see this post viewtopic.php?t=71927
or many of bobcat's posts). Annuities (where immediate or deferred) can also be a part of the picture for some folks.
Once you've done that, then you can fund variable costs with more risky assets. But because you've put a good foundation together, you don't have to stress out as much about the returns of those risky assets from year to year. Whether the stock market or alternatives to it provide good or poor returns will mostly depend on future events that we aren't even aware of now.
Bottom line is that good retirement planning accounts for a wide range of reasonably possible occurrences as opposed to making accurate forecasts.