FYI: In "The Active Dangers of Passive Investing," on a website serving financial advisors called Advisor Perspectives, guest columnist Vitaly Katsenelson writes:
"If you own the S&P 500 (or long-term bonds), you implicitly think one of several things is true: 1) Interest rates have a zero or insignificant probability of going up; 2) I'll be able to get out in time; or 3) I have a life-sized statue of John Bogle in my living room, and I have a very, very, very long time horizon."
Purchasing long-term investment assets requires trust. Doing so involves handing over a valuable possession--that is, money--with no guarantee that the sum will be returned in full (as expressed in real terms), except for certain inflation-protected securities. Investing is an act of faith.
However, as Katsenelson suggests, views differ. Your reason for owning long-term assets may not match mine.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/922789/whats-your-investment-faith.html

Who is benefiting is obvious even without reading this WSJ editorial.
State tax-free income became more valuable to those who could no longer deduct state income taxes (SALT limitations), i.e. the very high earners in low income/low property value states and the middle class and above in high income/high property value states.
Consequently, states have to pay somewhat less interest on the bonds. This allows them to borrow more, but also benefits these taxpayers who ultimately bear the cost of state expenditures.
----
Muni bond investors likely know that two of the NRSROs (Moody's and Fitch) "recalibrated" their muni bond ratings in 2010. That is, they changed the curve on which they graded muni bonds, because AA muni bonds tended to be as safe as AAA corporates. So formerly AA munis were changed to AAA and so on.
This editorial challenges the recalibration, asserting that this lowered rates on muni bonds. Of course interest rates dropped. If a bond looks safer buyers demand less interest. However, nowhere does the editorial suggest that the recalibration was inaccurate.
My question is, given this professed concern by the Editorial Board in the accuracy of NRSROs, where was the WSJ back in 2007 when CDOs were all getting great ratings?
https://www.mercatus.org/publication/brief-history-credit-rating-agencies-how-financial-regulation-entrenched-industrys-role
----
Side note: I'm reading the column online at home courtesy of the library at a university in which I'm registered as a student. Registering and not sitting in on classes is actually less expensive than subscribing (not that this is why I sign up for classes - free access is just an added benefit.)

"...The information contained herein is not represented or warranted to be accurate, correct, complete, or timely." ...Pretty effing useless, then. All these outfits and people depend on us. But we don't care to actually be conscientious.

All financial sites have legal disclaimers of one sort or another. That doesn't impute a lack of diligence.
Pear Tree Funds says this pretty well on their site:
https://peartreefunds.com/legal

ALL INFORMATION AND CONTENT ON THE PEAR TREE WEBSITE ARE SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE STATUTES AND REGULATIONS, FURNISHED “AS IS,” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO ANY MATTER WHATSOEVER RELATING TO THIS SERVICE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT.
Pear Tree and its affiliates intend that the information contained in this service be accurate and reliable; however, errors sometimes occur. Pear Tree does not warrant that the functions contained in the materials will be uninterrupted or error-free, that defects will be corrected, or that this site and the servers that make it available are free from viruses or other harmful components

In essence: we strive to be accurate, but in case of error, don't sue us. Literally.

“did you perform your job for free?”
@Mark pretty much echos my thoughts. So, personally, for my own consumption, I make minimal, if any, effort to go around a publisher’s paywall. I want our free independent press to profit and flourish. I subscribe to the WP through Amazon’s Kindle services. But it doesn’t allow me access to their (identical) online stories.
There’s a gray area with the NYT and WP. Both use cookies that enable users to access a set number of articles monthly for free (typically 5 per month). So, when I come across a good story from one of them somewhere else, I’ll link the original from NYT or WP - thinking most might still be able to access it even if I’ve reached the limit. But I’ll often link a decent (possibly inferior) secondary source along side with a note telling readers they might not be able to access the original.
I don’t even attempt to link directly from those publications that allow no free access (WSJ, Barrons, Financial Times). It’s pretty clear they don’t want non-subscribers accessing their articles. However, I can usually find a decent substitute somewhere else (perhaps CNBC) which characterizes the original article and link it.
That approach seems fair to mfo readers and still complies with the wishes of the publisher. As far as simply directing (frustrated) mfo readers to “... Go do a Google search” - WTF?

@JohnN - Thanks. :)
@Catch22, You’re not rambling - just a little too complex perhaps for the intellectually challenged.
What I gleaned from your response to my question is that you’re not so much opposed to @John’s article’s focus on market crash as you are bothered by the often unsupported assertions that pop-up (usually in links) on the board from time to time. Good point. I agree. In fact, by performing a Google Search most any dimwit could dig up whatever predictive scenario they want to. Search for market crash and you’ll dig up half dozen or more compelling articles to that effect.
An equally compelling number of articles can be found making absurd pie-in-the-sky predictions to the contrary. S&P 3000 by the end of last year comes to mind. (We all know how that went.) Same goes for predictions about gold, bonds - or even rare whiskey (something for everyone here). :) https://www.forbes.com/sites/felipeschrieberg/2017/03/24/the-latest-hot-investment-rare-whiskies-hit-a-new-record/
Catch - I think you’re saying (in a nice way) that links are cheap. The internet is filthy with different financial scenarios. But selectivity and objectivity in regards to those links are precious and in short supply. We stand as testament. Thank you.

Must be time to sell, sell, sell the equity side, eh? Catch the equity top right now !

@Catch22 - I assume that’s meant sarcastically?
Rather than trying to get in and out every other week, may I suggest everyone have a well thought out plan? Risk should, as always, be appropriate for age and circumstances. Sure - if you desire to “play” around the edges in an attempt to mitigate losses or take advantage of some opportunity you see, go ahead. But this idea of rushing in or out - particularly based on something aired on TV or published by a financial pundit - strikes me as ill conceived and downright dangerous to your long term financial well-being.
@JohnN - There’s a convenient edit button if you care to correct the spelling of crash. Sometimes appearance matters.

I don't have the finporn on anymore -- it's just a distraction and 'infotainment' at best.
But between the leading finporn channels - CNBC, FBN, and Bloomberg - I prefer Bloomberg any day of the week, as it tends to be far less sensational, 'quiet' and fact/data-driven than the other two. CNBC can become a screamfest with 8 commentators on the screen at the same time. When it comes to financial news on TV and radio, I like it nice and boring ... not too many annoying sound effects, visual effects, or screaming.
Not to mention, Bloomberg really treated me right (ie, respectfully in all ways) when I did truly interactive/well-paced interviews. With CNBC I felt like I was on the conveyor belt and brought on just as a two-sentence prop to fill the other side of the screen from their 'popular' pundit of the time. I'd still think long and hard before doing another one with them.
But when I trade futures I still like having the CME squawk going in the background just as noise. Voice inflections from floor observers, once you get to know them and their style, can be helpful .... not to mention funny. But for me it's just background noise mainly.

Protect Your Portfolio From a Market Crash
https://money.usnews.com/investing/investing-101/slideshows/7-ways-to-protect-your-portfolio-from-a-stock-market-crash?src=usn_invested_nl
April 4, 2019
Signs are emerging that a stock market crash may be coming. The current 10-year bull market is the longest in history.
The bond yield curve is trending toward an inversion, with longer term interest rates lower than short-term yields; historically, the inversion of the yield preceded many U.S. recessions. For example, the curve inverted in 2007 before the U.S. equity market collapsed.
While the only guaranteed way to protect your money from the next crash is to avoid investing in the market, the average 9% stock market return from long-term investments may be worth it. If history is a valid guide, patient investors will profit from risking a portion of their money.
Reduce permanent capital losses. When stock prices decline, investors must pause and think. “The most important strategy for investors worried about the next bear market is to reduce the risk of a permanent loss of capital,” says Daniel Kern, chief investment officer at TFC Financial Management in Boston.
It’s natural to want to ease the pain of a stock market loss by selling and leaving the stock market altogether. Investors who make this fatal step, let their emotions dictate their decision-making and ultimately turn a temporary loss into a permanent one. Research shows that investors who sell after a market drop have lower long-term returns than those who hold on and wait for the market to rebound.
Prepare in advance for a stock crash. Implementing well-respected portfolio management strategies and creating an appropriate mix of stocks, bonds and cash for one’s age, time horizon and risk tolerance can set investors up to handle the next stock crash.
Gage DeYoung, founder of Prudent Wealthcare in Denver, found that a balanced portfolio of 50 percent stocks, 40 percent bonds and 10 percent cash would have lost about 19 percent of its value from November 2007 to February 2009 during the Great Recession; that's based on a study using financial planning software. A conservative portfolio with 20 percent stocks 50 percent bonds and 30 percent cash would have suffered a small 3 percent loss during that same time, according to his analysis. – Barbara Friedberg

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834419005915/fp0040734_497.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
SUPPLEMENT DATED APRIL 1, 2019
TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND PROSPECTUS FOR
THE GRANDEUR PEAK INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND (THE “FUND”)
DATED AUGUST 31, 2018, AS SUPPLEMENTED FROM TIME TO TIME
Effective April 15, 2019, the Grandeur Peak International Opportunities Fund will no longer accept purchases through financial intermediaries unless the purchase is part of:
● a retirement plan which held the Fund prior to this closure,
● an automatic reinvestment of a distribution made by the Fund, or
●a de minimis annual rebalancing approved by a member of the Grandeur Peak client team.
The Fund will remain open to new purchases from existing shareholders and to new shareholders who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

@MikeM's observation that absent the $300 entry fee, people were likely paying fees for just a month or two to get the more costly initial financial planning and then dropping the service makes sense.
ISTM the comments @Derf alluded to on the original site, that question the ability of Schwab staff to deliver services with this reduced pricing are missing the point. These services, whether robo or hybrid represent the industry's attempt to bring "advice" down to the "mass affluent" ($100K+) investors, largely through automation.
https://www.wealthmanagement.com/blog/serving-mass-affluent-market-technology
These services are focused primarily on asset allocation (and selecting securities to match), with only a touch of human involvement thrown in. Easy for Schwab (or anyone) to provide. They draw in customers, and as first mover on flat rate pricing, Schwab can expect to draw in many more customers. In the future some of them will move up to higher level, higher cost services. Regardless, there will be more assets in the managed accounts invested in Schwab ETFs.
Here's the full Schwab disclosure:https://www.schwab.com/public/file/CMS-BDL100049
The Premium program (the one with a fee) is the robo program plus.

The SIP Premium Program combines the discretionary portfolio management of the SIP Program, as described above, with the additional features of financial planning and ongoing access to guidance from Schwab Planning Consultants, as well as to online financial planning tools. SIP Premium Accounts are invested in SIP portfolios and managed on a discretionary basis through the SIP Program. Unless other-wise indicated, descriptions of portfolio management through SIP apply to SIP Premium as well.

A little human interaction and DIY tools.

Thanks @msf for the excellent response to @Ted’s questionable use of MFO board space. :) It’s always a good idea to read some top flight reviews, like you’ve linked, before shucking out money. The NYT is hard to top in that category.
In simpler terms, there are many reasons for attending a play other than to learn about finance or financial history. When one considers the cost of transport to NYC, the outrageous hotel rates, the dilapatated subways, a third world airport (LGA) - and play tickets reaching into the hundreds of dollars (even for a cramped seat), from a purely financial standpoint, attending a play in NYC is a non-starter. Better to stay home and count your dollars.
Largely, @Ted’s linked Bloomberg review sheds little light on investing and misses the mark as a literary critique. I suppose as a look at the profit margins involved in producing a play or a comment on how the consumer chooses to spend his discretionary income there may be some use. Those do bear on investing. But, as presented, the article barely touches upon those areas. I’ll say that the fact that the producer of this play also produced the Broadway revival of Cabaret a few years ago, I’d at least consider attending this one. That is one of the most profoundly meaningful and moving semi-historical dramas I’ve witnessed. Saw it three times in NYC - and regretted its closing.
Critical Reviews of dramatic art, which you mention, rarely concern themselves with historical (or financial) accuracy - though it’s appropriate to note where substantial artistic license has been taken by the writer / producer. As I said earlier, receiving a factual lesson in finance or history would rank low on the list of reasons why one might attend a play.
It should be noted the play isn’t appearing on Broadway (at least yet). It’s location, The Park Avenue Armory, is in the 59th Avenue area of NYC - a dozen or or more blocks away from the Broadway section where most top-flight plays are performed. As the Park Avenue institution appears to have a relationship with the highly respected Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts. I’d expect the play to be top quality.
-
From Wikepedia: “Artistic license”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic_license
[excerpt] “Artistic license often provokes controversy by offending those who resent the reinterpretation of cherished beliefs ... William Shakespeare's historical plays, for example, are gross distortions of historical fact but are nevertheless lauded as outstanding literary works.”
From Wikepedia: Park Avenue Armory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Avenue_Armory
From Marketwatch: For those (like Ted) whose primary concern seems to be finance / financial accuracy (not artistic merit) here’s a quick read - How To Make Money On Broadway.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-to-make-money-producing-on-broadway-2018-07-16

This review from Institutional Investor, focusing on the price of the tickets, the wealth of the audience, the genre of financial plays and so on, assures me that the stereotypical green eyeshaded bean counter is alive and well.
General newspapers published reviews in their arts sections, not their business sections. (Why is this post a fund discussion?) It seems they unanimously praised this play, in stark contrast to the take presented in the cited piece.
The contrast between the dry money-oriented perspective ("absence of drama") of the cited review and the creative, artistic perspective of the other reviews can be seen in this headline from Bloomberg:
Theatrical Retelling of Lehman Brothers Is Big on Drama, Light on Finance
Other reviews:
Washington Post (Theater and Dance), The Lehman Trilogy’ is so good, it expands your sense of what three actors on a stage can conjure
(NY) Newsday (Entertainment/Theater), 'The Lehman Trilogy' review: Rich, rewarding saga of a financial empire
NYTimes (Theater), Critics Pick, Review: A Magnificent Road to Ruin in ‘The Lehman Trilogy’
amNewYork (Entertainment), 4 stars, The Lehman Trilogy' review: Financial epic an unlikely must-see
The Hollywood Reporter, 'The Lehman Trilogy': Theater Review: "The bottom line: Likely to be the theater event of the season."

Basically you could subscribe, use the services to set up your financial plan and opt-out after you had what you needed. Bet this new pay scheme might have been in response to people doing just that.

If one uses their services wisely to set up their retirement, estate planning, and others, the on-going service could be very useful as the client's mental capacity decline slowly over time. The article also questions how deep the advisory team is? Certainly this is beyond a robo type service.

Just a clarification as I understand it, Schwab Intelligent Portfolios (robos) don't have a fee at all to own (Schwab makes its money in robos by using many Schwab ETFs and placing a substantial cash portion of the portfolio in their their own savings account) . Any how, the .28% fee has been for the Intelligent Advisory option which essentially is having a financial adviser via phone or computer to help you with planning. I have not subscribed to the adviser option, but with this lower price I'd have to think about the potential benefits again.
One thing I remember by local Schwab guy telling me when the Advisory option to Intelligent Portfolios came out was that there was no obligation to continue the service indefinitely. Basically you could subscribe, use the services to set up your financial plan and opt-out after you had what you needed. Bet this new pay scheme might have been in response to people doing just that.

I’ve always felt my invested assets did me a lot more good left intact than spent. It doesn’t have much to do with providing for heirs. Just a matter of personal comfort and thinking we don’t know what types of adverse contingencies might be coming down the road. Better to die wealthy, I suggest, than to run out of money a year or two early.

Perhaps better, spend a little money to ensure that you don't run out, so that you're free to spend more and not die wealthy.
Not for everyone (e.g. as you wrote, not for those without additional resources), but insuring that you have enough for necessities late in life can free up some assets for spending. Which is why I think that longevity insurance is that rare bird - a genuinely beneficial financial innovation.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/calculating-longevity-insurance-rates-a-longevity-annuity-comparison-to-stock-and-bond-returns/

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/105563/000093247119006695/ps210320191.htm
497 1 ps210320191.htm VANGUARD WELLINGTON FUND
Vanguard Wellington™ Fund
Supplement to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus
Important Note Regarding Vanguard Wellington Fund
Vanguard Wellington Fund will be closed to all prospective financial advisory,
institutional, and intermediary clients (other than clients who invest through a
Vanguard brokerage account).
The Fund will remain closed until further notice and there is no specific time
frame for when the Fund will reopen. During the Fund’s closed period, all current
shareholders may continue to purchase, exchange, or redeem shares of the
Fund online, by telephone, or by mail.
The Fund may modify these transaction policies at any time and without prior
notice to shareholders. You may call Vanguard for more detailed information
about the Fund’s transaction policies. Participants in employer-sponsored plans
may call Vanguard Participant Services at 800-523-1188. Investors in
nonretirement accounts and IRAs may call Vanguard’s Investor Information
Department at 800-662-7447.
© 2019 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor. PS 21 032019

I've had a few items regarding inverted yield curve stashed in the laptop for a few years. I've retrieved those and looked around for other, newer related information.
I suspect there may others with theories from much earlier dates; but this look starts with Campbell Harvey from 1986. A Arturo Estrella link is also included.
I can not offer a formal financial education suggestion as to what is ahead for the markets. I can only personally rely upon what I see with market moves; being bonds and equity. Some equity market actions in 2018 (Feb. 2018 and Dec. 2018) had flashes of late 2007 market swings.
I'm one of those bad boys who watches the markets and the portfolio, daily; if time allows. Does this make me an emotional trader? The answer would be a big NO. But, I sure as heck know more about changes and trends in the investing road upon which I am driving.
Charts, charts; those darn charts. Yes, I look at these. They're not some magic back testing event view. They are the investment roads that have been and are being driven with real money. Charts just happen to be a comfort area for me to view trends to mix with other news and intuition; meaning whatever is still in my brain cells from experience.
We remain 34% U.S. focused bond fund (mostly corp. and Treasury) , 33% equity; being tech. and health related and 33% money market cash at about 1.7% yield.
These links are quite broad and could require more time than one is willing to expend on the topic; so you may pick and choose a link of your choice.
Campbell Harvey
Campbell Harvey, related videos
Campbell Harvey, direct search at YouTube
Arturo Estrella
A yield curve chart below, from my post on Wednesday. The below chart..... Treasury(s) is for 30, 10 and 5 year; as well as the 3 month. It looks a little busy if viewed on anything smaller than an Ipad size screen. The critical color is the mauve, which is the 3 month yield. So, keep in mind; this is not a price chart. If one is using a laptop/desktop with a pointer/mouse the cursor can be hovered on the lines and will display the yield %, date and percentage change from the begin date of the chart. Looking at the cross-over points will provide information as to when the inversions were taking place.
Yields, Feb. 2006 - May, 2009
Another 1,000 words could be expressed; but gotta do some other work.
Take care,
Catch

FYI: The 4% retirement withdrawal rule has enjoyed a ubiquitous presence in the world of financial planning ever since William Bengen proposed it in 1994. Mr. Bengen's rule states that individuals should withdraw no more than 4% of their retirement savings annually to ensure they will not outlive their assets.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=ccmcXPu3F4ezjwSUmLCIDg&q=Outside-IN:+Why+the+4%+rule+may+be+irrelevant+&btnK=Google+Search&oq=Outside-IN:+Why+the+4%+rule+may+be+irrelevant+&gs_l=psy-ab.3..33i299l3.3412.3412..20335...0.0..0.169.337.0j2......0....2j1..gws-wiz.....0.Zy569NjMjVs

FYI: Unless you spend your day glued to a Bloomberg terminal or mainlining CNBC, you might have missed the news late last week that the yield curve for U.S. Treasury bonds “inverted” for the first time since 2007. This dry-sounding development has led to a great deal of speculation on Wall Street and in the financial press about whether an economic downturn might finally be on the way. As the Wall Street Journal’s James Mackintosh put it, “The market’s most reliable recession indicator is finally flashing red.”
Why does this have people so worried? The yield curve has inverted in the lead-up to all nine U.S. recessions since 1955. As the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco notes, there has only been one instance in the last six decades when an inversion wasn’t followed by an official recession within two years or less. That was back in the mid-1960s, when growth slowed, but the economy didn’t technically shrink. Since then, there hasn’t been a single false alarm.
Regards,
Ted
https://slate.com/business/2019/03/recession-indicator-yield-curve-economy-worry.html

( The Closing Bell will be updated sometime after 4:00 PM CDST to include the latest update from IBD and Bloomberg Evening Briefing, and will be moved to the top of the Discussion /Board.)
FYI: U.S. stocks shook off some of their recent doldrums to trade higher Tuesday as energy and health care sectors buoyed the market. A resumption of U.S.-China trade negotiations also helped to reignite some optimism that the high stakes protracted dispute is coming to a close.
However, tepid housing and consumer-confidence data dragged key indexes off intraday highs.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 1140 points, or 0.55%, and the S&P 500 added 0.72%, while the Nasdaq Composite gained 0.71% in recent trading. All three indexes remained lower than their levels a week earlier.
Technology, financial and energy stocks were driving U.S. stocks’ gains on Tuesday.
Apple AAPL +1.07% shares rose 1.3% after announcing a raft of products aimed at boosting its services revenue, including new TV and news products on Monday. Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, has a commercial agreement to supply news services to Apple.
Banking stocks also outperformed in early trading after taking a beating late last week, with Goldman Sachs GS +0.68% rising 0.7% and JPMorgan Chase up 0.2%. Goldman’s collaboration with Apple on its new credit card adds to the recent pressure on financial-sector stocks amid ebbing market expectations of aggressive monetary policy from central banks.
Shares in energy companies helped lift the Dow industrials higher, with Exxon XOM +0.98% rising 1.3% and Chevron gaining 0.9%, as oil prices continued to rise following a difficult end to 2018. U.S. crude-oil futures rose 2% to $59.98 a barrel in recent trading, putting its year-to-date gains at more than 30%.
The yield on 10-year U.S. Treasurys was 2.434%, up from 2.418% late Monday and on course to snap a four-day negative streak. A recent slip in 10-year U.S. Treasury yields below the level of three-month Treasury bills has been seen by some investors as foreshadowing a potential U.S. economic downturn.
Germany’s DAX index rose 0.7%, while the broader Stoxx Europe 600 index climbed 0.8%.
U.K. assets remained little changed despite lawmakers’ decision late Monday to wrest control of the Brexit process away from Prime Minister Theresa May.
The gains in Europe followed more mixed trading in Asia. Japan’s Nikkei Stock Average climbed 2.2% thanks to buoyant pharmaceuticals and transportation stocks, while mainland China stocks fell ahead of the resumption of cabinet-level trade negotiations between the U.S. and China.
All eleven of the S&P 500 Sectors led by Energy And Financials were in positive territory.
Regards
Ted
Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-26/your-evening-briefing
MarketWatch:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-stocks-extend-rally-11553591028
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-stocks-extend-rally-11553591028
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-25/stocks-in-asia-look-mixed-as-yields-extend-decline-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/solid-gains-stock-market-today/
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-lifted-by-gains-in-techs-energy-idUSKCN1R719C
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/stock-market-economic-worries-take-center-stage.html
U.K.:
Europe:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-stocks/european-stocks-claw-back-up-after-four-day-drop-idUSKCN1R70SB
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/asian-markets-mostly-gain-after-mondays-slide-2019-03-25/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/us-bonds-treasury-auctions-and-economic-data-in-focus.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/forex-market-brexit-vote-global-economic-slowdown-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/oil-market-opec-supply-cuts-us-sanctions-in-focus.html
Gold
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/gold-market-us-recession-concerns-brexit-vote-in-focus.html
WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
https://markets.wsj.com/us
Major ETFs % Change:
https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/etf-monitor
SPDR's Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
SPDR's Bloomberg Sector Performance Pie Chart:
https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/sectors
Current Futures:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx