Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
  • Life Estate document, anyone familiar; creating, using, either as Grantee or Grantor ?
    Sources please. The cut and paste section came from:
    https://smartasset.com/financial-advisor/michigan-inheritance-laws
    Its inheritance and estate taxes were created in 1899, but the state repealed them in 2019.
    Its estate tax technically remains on the books
    I know my post above wasn't my best writing, but I don't think I wrote anything inconsistent, like saying that a law was both repealed (in 2019) and still on the books.
    It appears the law remains on the books, but that because of the way it is linked to federal estate taxation, the maximum amount of the estate tax is $0. Something like the ACA mandate still being on the books, but the amount of the penalty being set to $0.
    Quoting from a late (Oct) 2019 bill that would have repealed the Michigan state tax but died in the legislature:
    Repeal the law authorizing a Michigan estate tax. For a number of years this tax has not been collected because language in the law links it to a discontinued state estate tax credit in federal law. Should this federal law change the Michigan estate tax could go back into effect.
    https://www.michiganvotes.org/2019-HB-4922
    That's why it matters whether the estate tax was repealed (no longer off the books) or merely dormant. (Think of another old law in Michigan, this one from 1931, that was nearly resurrected when Federal law changed this summer.)
    The more interesting piece IMHO concerns the Lady Bird deed. This piece came from the Rochester Law Center, and as such the errors and omissions on that page are somewhat disappointing.
    https://rochesterlawcenter.com/services/michigan-lady-bird-deed/
    A Lady Bird deed is not a type of quitclam deed (though depending on how it is written, it could be used as one). The salient feature of quitclaim deeds is that they enable the person transferring property to do so while disclaiming any title. That is, "I give all my interest in BlackAcre to A, whatever that interest is, which may be nothing at all. Lots of luck."
    Quitclaim deeds offer no warranties of title, and title companies may offer very limited coverage or none at all if asked to issue a title policy based on one. A ladybird deed may transfer title with warranties in the deed whereby the grantor warrants that he has full ownership of the property at the time of the conveyance
    https://legalbeagle.com/8083490-comparing-deeds-lady-bird-deeds.html
    Most of the advantages stated for the Lady Bird deed (i.e. the ones apart from being able to change beneficiaries) are the same as for the simpler (once and done) non-enhanced life estate deed. IOW, had the Law Center said, rather than a Lady Bird Deed being a type of quitclaim deed that it was a type of life estate deed, it would have been essentially correct. But see below (notable Medicaid difference).
    All life estate deeds, enhanced or not, keep the property out of probate. In this respect, there's nothing extra special about the enhanced (Lady Bird) deed in avoiding Medicaid recovery.
    What differentiates an Enhanced Life Estate Deed from a (nonenhanced) Life Estate Deed is that the grantor retains control over naming beneficiaries in the former. That is sufficient to make the gift (deeding the property to the life tenant and the remainderman) "incomplete".
    Rochester Law Center writes: "a Lady Bird Deed allows for you to qualify for Medicaid benefits while preventing the government from going after your home. " That's misleading. In looking at assets to determine Medicaid eligibility, Michigan doesn't count your home if your equity interest in it is under $636K.
    https://www.medicaidplanningassistance.org/medicaid-eligibility-michigan
    However, and this is where the Lady Bird deed can come into play, any asset that is transferred, including a home, within five years of applying for Medicaid, does count.
    https://www.michiganlawcenter.com/blog/2020/august/transferring-assets-to-qualify-for-medicaid/
    But since the Lady Bird deed is an "incomplete" gift, even though the home is transferred it isn't counted as an asset for Medicaid eligibility purposes.
    Finally, though this has focused on Michigan, it's worth noting that Michigan is one of only five states that allow Lady Bird deeds. There are 30 states (Michigan isn't one of them) that allow TOD deeds.
    https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lady-bird-deeds.html
    https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/avoid-probate-book/chapter5-1.html
  • TBO Capital
    Let's all detail out the steps that we have taken and suggest other steps that should be taken.
    Maybe if we raise enough stink to the SEC or the State of NY or the NYPD or the FTC or the FBI maybe something will happen.
    Here are the steps and results I have taken so far:
    Contacted several attorneys and recovery agencies....I am still vetting them, but I have gotten good information from one attorney. He is a former USMC and spent 14 years with NYPD in Brooklyn. 10 years with a unit: Street Crime Suppression. He suggested I call NYPD since it looks like these criminals operated in NYC. He said
    "call NYPD Midtown North Precinct 212 767 8400. Tell them what has happened, the FBI has been notified and ask if they can check and see if there is anyone from that company still at that address. It is an apartment building per picture on Google."
    I called NYPD but they were not very helpful. The detective I spoke with just kept saying to call my local police (I am local to Dallas TX).
    But I finally pressured him for a name and he gave me the name of Detective Criollo. Corillo is in charge of cyber crime and fraud for that division. So I will call him on Monday.
    I have filled out the form at IC3 and also with the FTC. No response from either yet. I need to contact the SEC on Monday.
    I have contacted the 2 banks that I used to wire and send the checks out (so pissed) and they have started their steps. They are trying to recall the wires (obviously the money is gone but that is their process) and they are also filing complaints with the receiving banks for the wires and the checks. I also asked my banks for all original documentation for the wires and checks. Just so I have all the paperwork.
    It looks like my wires went to 2 different banks. Fifth Third Bank and Wells Fargo Bank. I will try to contact both of them and raise a stink.
    If I think of more I will post. Sorry again to all who have been victimized. We could all come together and hire a lawyer or a Private Investigator? Just thinking outloud......
  • GQHPX
    I've been with firstrade for many years, never had an issue and they provide access to institutional shares of many mutual funds at low minimums and transaction cost free.
  • Barron’s Funds Quarterly (2022/Q3–October 10, 2022)
    Barron’s Funds Quarterly (2022/Q3–October 10, 2022)
    https://www.barrons.com/topics/mutual-funds-quarterly
    (Performance data quoted in this Supplement are for 2022/Q3 and YTD to 9/30/22)
    Pg L3: Good ACTIVE mutual funds that are OPEN, BROAD-based, in the TOP 20% of peers in various timeframes, have average ERs and have manager succession plans: LC-growth OLGAX, FDSVX; dividends PRDGX, IHGIX; SC-value BRSVX, AASMX; international MIEIX, DPWRX; fixed-income DODIX, SCCIX.
    Pg L10: Large-cap GROWTH funds have disappointed in 2022 (-4.1% in Q3; -32.1% YTD to 9/30/22) and there were outflows (but some related ETFs had inflows (VUG, SPYG, etc)); as expected, there were funds that did much better (BPTRX, etc) or worse (MSEQX, etc) than the averages. Large-cap VALUE also disappointed in Q3 (-5.9%) but was relatively better YTD (-16.6%). Several funds with large losses and outflows may have large YEAREND CG distributions (bad in taxable accounts; not relevant in tax-deferred/free accounts). MANAGED-FUTURES did well (after several disappointing years) and attracted inflows (QMHNX, PQTAX, etc). COMMODITY funds also saw inflows (DBC, FTGC, etc). Interestingly, despite the market selloff in both stocks and bonds, several INDEX funds had inflows, stocks (VOO, IVV, VTI, etc) and bonds (TLT; IEF, BND, LQD; SHY, VCSH, etc) (bulls will point to this as strength, bears as lack of capitulation yet). (by @LewisBraham)
    EXTRA from Part 2: Pg 22: Katrina DUDLEY, EUROPE TEMIX. Things couldn’t be worse for Europe but that is how opportunities develop. Costs have risen sharply due to supply-chain disruptions, energy crisis, Russia-Ukraine war. However, Europe wasn’t overvalued before all this, jobs are holding up so far, and any recession may be short and shallow. Be selective as countries are following different paths. Lower currencies (vs DOLLAR) are hurting the returns of the US investors. She LIKES telecom, energy, industrials, insurance, aircraft leasing, etc; she is AVOIDING travel, entertainment, etc. CHINA will remain a global growth engine despite pause or slowdown, so European companies with China exposure would be fine. RISKS include the ECB polies, energy crisis.
    Pg L37: In 2022/Q3 (SP500 -4.88%): Among general equity funds, the best were SC-growth -1.61%, MC-growth -1.65% (yes, it was BAD Q3, following terrible Q2) and the worst were equity-income -5.75%, multi-cap-value -5.64%, LC-value -5.60%, MC-value -5.45%; ALL general equity categories were negative. Among other equity funds, the best were short funds +6.54%, Lat Am +5.28%, and the worst was China -21.55%. Among fixed-income funds, domestic long-term FI -2.72%, world income -4.16% (not very refined in Lipper mutual fund categories listed in Barron’s).
    LINK
  • Worst. Bond. Market. Ever.
    [also posted at Bogleheads.org, and maybe a few more to come, but I've gotten good value here at MFO and wanted to post it to give back.]
    Here at the end of the 3rd quarter, the statement has become true, period, with no qualifier other than “as regards investment grade bond markets in the US and Britain.”
    The statement can be evaluated over four time frames, in all cases treating the first nine months of 2022 as if these were 12 month returns. Tickers used to determine 2022 returns are in parentheses. All are nominal total returns and year-to-date as of 9/30/2022.
    1. Since December 1972 (total bond, BND)
    2. Since December 1925 (intermediate Treasuries, VGIT, and long Treasuries, VGLT)
    3. From January 1793 to January 1926 (long investment grade bonds, mostly governments, BLV)
    4. August 1753 to December 1918 (British Consols, EDV as the comparison)
    Charts and brief discussion follow,. Red dashed line shows 2022 return, bars show historical returns over rolling twelve-month periods.

    [b]Total Bond[/b]
    image
    This one is a staple of 3-fund portfolios and Vanguard Target Date funds. It’s probably the most shocking outcome within the Boglehead universe. As of 9/30, BND was down 14.50%. The worst previous 12 month return on the Bloomberg-Barclays Aggregate was the 12-month roll through March 1980 at minus 9.20%.
    I think it fair to say that few 3-funders had any conception that BND could decline by double-digits in the space of a year.
    But then again, a fifty-year record is not a lot to support a claim like “ever.”

    [b]Intermediate Treasuries[/b]
    image
    This is where investors go if they find BND holds too much risk for comfort, whether duration risk or credit risk. VCIT is down 11.46% in 2022. That’s head and shoulders below the worst previous 12-month return of minus 5.55% ending in October 1994. So much for “safe.”
    And 96 years maybe does qualify for “ever.”

    [b]Long Treasuries[/b]
    image
    VGLT really took it on the chin in 2022, down 28.51% thus far. It’s a reminder of why long bonds have a bad reputation in the eyes of some. Maximum duration, maximum price decline in an adverse environment. Turns out, the bad times in the 1960s and 1970s don’t really hold a candle to 2022. The worst previous 12-month return on the SBBI long bond was minus 17.10% for the period ending March 1980. That’s in nominal terms, as are all these comparisons. I’ll look at real returns at the end of the year, since most of the older inflation data (pre-1913) are only available on an annual basis.
    Again, 2022 produced the worst return on long Treasuries seen over any 12-month period in the past 96 years. By far.

    [b]Long bonds[/b]
    image
    This is a spliced series:
    1. My index of long corporates from 1925 back to 1897; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3805927
    2. My aggregate of corporate, municipal and Treasuries to 1842;
    3. Municipals to 1835; Treasuries and municipals to 1825; Treasuries to 1793.
    You have to go back over 150 years, to the 1840s, when states defaulted on their debts, to get a result that even comes close to the 2022 results for BLV (which pegs toward the midpoint of VGLT and VCLT). BLV saw a decline of 28.41% in 2022; the worst previous decline was the minus 22.88% decline for the period ending in January 1842. In April, 2022 was only a contender for worst ever in this bond category; it took bad returns in June and again in September to push 2022 returns below even those seen in 1842.
    I’d say 228 years is a good approximation of “ever.”

    [b]Really long bonds: British Consols[/b]
    image
    These were perpetuities, so the proper comparison would appear to be the Extended Duration Treasury fund. EDV got slaughtered in 2022, down 37.40%. That would be a mighty bear market even in stocks, much less safe government bonds.
    Nothing in the British Consol record comes close, not even the worst months of the Napoleonic Wars. The chart shows 12-month rolls from 1753 to 1823. An earlier examination December on December annual returns had shown all the worst returns to fall within in this stretch. Later years, in the heyday of the British empire, were mostly fine. WW I returns, nominal, in particular did not plumb the depths of Napoleonic returns.
    Consols down 20% plus? Happened more than once in the Napoleonic Wars (and before, in the American Revolution, and almost, in the Seven Years War). The worst case was minus 23.17% for the period ending July 1803. A Consol total return worse than minus 25%? Never happened. Return worse than 30%? Never approached, not even close.
    2022 EDV returns stand alone at the bottom of a chasm.
    And if 269 years isn’t a good proxy for “ever,” I don’t know what qualifies.
    [b]Summary[/b]
    image
    Unprecedented, across the board.
    [b]Why has 2022 been so bad?[/b]
    One word: duration, my boy, duration!
    Technically, modified duration, or the price sensitivity of a bond to a change in interest rates.
    Duration is a function of maturity (as everyone knows) and of coupon/yield (which most people forgot or never knew).
    1. Long bonds fall more when rates go up.
    2. Low coupon bonds fall more when rates go up.
    3. Low coupon, long bonds plunge when rates go up.
    [b]What that means in practice[/b]
    The last big bond bear market occurred at the dim horizon of memory for most investors active today, i.e., in the late 1970s. Rates on the 20-year Treasury rose from about 6% in 1972 to over 14% at one point in 1981.
    The 2022 bear market (so far) has seen a much smaller rise in rates, a little more than 200 bp since the beginning of the year. Why then has 2022 clocked in as historically awful?
    First, note the pacing: it took nine years for rates to rise 800 bp in that hazily remembered bear market, an average rise of less than 100 bp per year. 2022 saw more than twice that rise in just nine months.
    And the real kicker: in that long ago bear market, rates were already higher at the start than almost any observer expects to see in the current cycle. High rate equals more coupon income to defray price drops, and a more favorable total return, since duration is also less at high coupons.
    Back to 2022: an achingly low rate to start, less than 2.0%, and a rapid price drop, combine to produce a potent, toxic brew for bond total return.
    Next, the last time long Treasury rates were as low as in 2020-2021 falls outside the lived memory of most investors. It was just under 2.0% in early 1946. And it took 12 years of drip-drip declines before that yield rose as high as the current 4.0%.
    Now you have some sense of why 2022 has been so much worse for bonds than ever before.
  • Nowhere near as bad as ‘07-‘09 - Yet
    Unlike 2008 and the GFC, I don't have that 'existential sense of dread' that the system was in real danger of coming apart at the seams and that the very fabric of the world economic system was failing. This seems, I think, to be a more 'normal' sort of bad economic times -- at least for the moment. Could that change since the world has gotten used to essentially free money and cheap debt? Perhaps. But I'm keeping my eye on the long-term, mostly buying, and certainly not panicking.
    Interesting tidbit: BBG guest (CIO from MS, IIRC) this morning said that existing long-term home mortgages were averaging 3.X% fixed and corporations had refinanced much of their debt over the past several years so she thought both were in 'decent' shape these days. We'll see.
  • 2% swr
    Some of these comments make me wonder if the poster read the MW article (Hulbert is a smart and prudent cookie, in my long experience of reading him) , much less the original paper, downloadable here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4227132 , and hugely sobering if the case.
    Still a rank newbie here at MutualFundObserver and I will take instruction as to whether it is appropriate to point to related discussions on another forum.
    Hoping that it is, I started a discussion on this paper over at Bogleheads.org: https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=387165
    Although some posters defaulted to a thumbs up/ thumbs down stance, there are also some quite searching criticisms of the paper. I would say on balance that good reasons were given for not accepting the headline withdrawal rates in the study. Much depends on how to treat war loss years.
    I'll monitor any responses here in this thread and respond here if I can.
  • 2% swr
    Hmmmmmm. I have an additional question: The lion's share of our stuff is all in T-IRA. Reported income (SS and Defined Benefit pension) puts us in a "no tax due" status in terms of our 1040. My annual withdrawals from the T-IRA are small enough so that we still owe no tax due. And in a declining market, I will simply not take my customary annual withdrawals. But RMDs will surely have to be paid. (starting at age 72 now, right? 4 years from now, for me.) Does a conversion to Roth make any sense at all for us? Wife is 19 years younger. Her T-IRA is just 5% of our combined total. And after I'm gone, her plan is to move back to her home country. We have a house there already. Expenses will be ridiculously low---- except for the constant begging from the extended family.
  • Are you checking your portfolio too often?
    If one is mentally and emotionally stable (a large positive asset in life and investing); determining how frequently to review one's investment positions should not cause a problem.
    I/we worked hard for the money we have invested; and treat investing as an ongoing education. If we don't pay attention, the learning stops and it is time to contact an advisor who you think has as much skill as you.
    With observing selected market information; not just one's holdings, it is possible to develop some amount of intuition that won't cause one's investments great harm and should be a positive.
    And as @Mark noted; there is satisfaction in growing a garden and investments, too.
    I review markets at least once every business day, if I'm home. A weekly review of the portfolio finds its place on the weekend.
    From the paper print days some 40 years ago through the value I find at Bloomberg and MFO; I'm a wiser person to investing.
    Satisfied I am.
    Lastly, writing about advisors above......I'm trying to imagine their phone calls and emails to clients about the choices made, and the YTD returns.
    Remain curious,
    Catch
  • 2% swr
    @BaluBalu
    Some of the items @Anna has been digging through.
    --- How many years does Irmaa last?
    The Social Security Administration (SSA) determines if you owe an IRMAA based on the income you reported on your IRS tax return two years prior, meaning two years before the year when you pay the IRMAA. For example, Social Security would use tax returns from 2021 to determine your IRMAA in 2023.
    --- How long does the Irmaa surcharge last?
    Unlike late enrollment penalties, which can last as long as you have Medicare coverage, the IRMAA is calculated every year. You may have to pay the adjustment one year, but not the next if your income falls below the threshold.
    IRMAA related search topics, if you're inclined to know more.
  • Are you checking your portfolio too often?
    I feel it’s educational to follow a portfolio. By so doing one comes to understand and appreciate the interplay among many different types of investments. However, to a degree, it’s also counterproductive. Suspect a lot of us could post better returns if we stopped looking for at least 5 years.
    A scatterbrained article citing a half dozen or so knowledgeable investors. But there seems to be a few pertinent take-aways. One relates to the mental stress of checking too often. Another suggests that we are prone to sell too early after a quick gain - diminishing the potential for far greater gains.
    Another Good Link - Study shows nearly half of all investors check their performance at least once a day.
  • RIP Independent Advisor for Vanguard and Fidelity Investor
    I have subscribed to Dan Weiner's newsletter for years, although I have moved farther and farther away from Vanguard. I also used the Fidelity's news letters in the past.
    Weiner was especially useful of the background politics and nuances of Vanguards manger selections and recent stumbles.
    Unfortunately it appears that both Weiner and Jim Lovell on the Fidelity newsletter were both "Cancelled" by the parent website "Investorplace" Monday. There was no notice to subscribers although both indicate it has happened in their October newsletters.
    In it's place I am being deluged with emails from crypto, options, "hot trader" and of course, good ol' Louise Navellier, in addition to about ten other newsletters.
    After no response to my email and being unable to cancel online, I did get through to a live person who says they will cancel this stuff.
    This is a rather shocking way to treat long term customers, especially people who have been long term subscribers. I am disappointed that in whatever deal Weiner and Lovell cut to get out and obviously sell their mailing list, they would not give us the courtesy of a "Thank you" and an opt out.
    As they both got the axe at the same time, it may have been a done deal they were handed as take it or leave it.
    Weiner's assistant, Jeff DeMaso has started a new Vanguard service independentvanguardadviser.com which is the same price but it is unclear whether Weiner will be in charge.
    Just another loss for individual investors. I bet Vanguard is glad to see him go.
  • 2% swr
    A bit off topic -
    Are there any exceptions for IRMMA if in one year you have a spike in income from a sale of business or selling your your primary residence? I have to assume many people live in their houses for 20-30 years and downsizing to a new house will trigger a lot of income, notwithstanding the 250K exemption from gain.
  • 2% swr
    @bee
    Thanks for a re-do of Roth conversions. These have been discussed here for many years; but a good reminder for those who may not be familiar and new to this investment area.
    @davidrmoran
    I presume you're referencing, in part; a non-spousal inheritance of your Roth's, that Secure Act provisions require non-spousal inheritance amounts be withdrawn within a 10 year period, but will not be taxed upon withdrawal. As long as the Roth has been in place for 5 years. Yes?
    @msf
    Good reminders for everyone regarding charity and IRMAA.
    et al Keep in mind that tax rates will become "different" after the Trump era tax changes expire in 2025. Whatever the rates become, could impact some of your taxable income, which would include RMD's. Yup, not that far away for planning purposes.
    Below links do not require a log-in.
    Fidelity Roth conversion Q & A
    Fidelity Roth conversion calculator
    Lastly, relative to the thread topic; everyone's monetary needs and asset base are different.
    Remain curious,
    Catch
  • 2% swr
    For the most part I agree and have been incremental Roth conversions for years. But there are also reasons to retain some traditional pre-tax funds. Two charitable issues come to mind:
    - It is much more tax efficient to leave T-IRAs to charities than to leave other assets to charities. Compare bequeathing $100 in a T-IRA with converting that $100 to a Roth (leaving, say, $88) and bequeathing that to charity. The direct T-IRA donation does better even than donating appreciated assets. Sure you avoid the cap gains tax on appreciated assets, but you still purchased those assets with post-tax dollars. So those assets cost you more than what you paid for assets in a T-IRA.
    - If you're older than 70½ you can donate up to $100K/year to charities from a T-IRA without having to pay any income tax on the withdrawals. If you are already itemizing it is close to a wash, because then you can add the contribution to your deductions and that balances out the extra income generated by withdrawing the T-IRA money. But most people can't itemize, and even if you are itemizing, that two step process (withdraw and then contribute) increases your AGI which can impact other things (e.g. increasing income subject to 3.8% Medicare surtax, increasing IRMAA, etc.).
  • 2% swr
    @BenWP,
    … Starting SWR prior to RMD may actually help lower RMD. Roth conversions early in retirement might also help lower RMDs. If SWRs come from tax deferred accounts they are a component of RMD. If SWR withdrawals are lower than RMDs, the remaining RMD dollars (after taxes are paid) could be contributed to a Roth IRA (if you or your spouse have work income).
    This has been a point of friction in my household. I want to do Roth conversions while my wife thinks it is crazy to pay taxes today that will otherwise be due in 12 years. I tell her the tax will be higher then. She is unfazed.
  • Huge bump-up today, but...oct. 3rd, '22.
    Yes, i'm sitting back, just watching it all with (no doubt) some very temporary glee.
    Glad I found BHB when I did! ...I'm dying to see my PRISX pick itself up out of the ditch. ...It's only a relief-rally, anyhow.
    *bumped into KIT JUCKES last night on Bloomberg TV. He's always interesting, to my mind. He's the FX guy at Societe Generale.
    From a Linked-In profile:
    "I have been busily ignoring Linkedin for years. Linkedin have created another profile of me, as 'bloke what works for Societe Generale'. I am slowly going to start trying to figure this malarky out so if I ignore you or fail to connect with lifelong friends, it's cos I'm rubbish....
    My random thoughts can be found on twitter (@kitjuckes), or by finding my occasional blog on any search engine.
    I was born close enough to Eldoret to be slightly disappointed I can't run a marathon in anything like 2 hours. After that, I spent a lot of time in France, some in boarding school and then some in London, studying economics (though I seem to have spent an awful lot of time playing hockey, tennis and bridge, instead of studying). About a week before my finals I worked out that I really, really like economics, and some time later I worked out that what I am really interested in, is economic history. By then I'd decided to spend six years studying the wrong bits of economics. If I'd worked it all out earlier I'd be an academic, and my wife and children would have deserted me…..so it's all for the best."
    image
  • Stock and Bond Bears of 2022
    Thanks @Yogibearbull. Hopefully, a few years from now we will not look back and conclude Archegos was part or start of the process of collapse of financial excesses.
    I did not buy anything today, though based on weekend research I wanted to buy some stuff. I got tempted but thought may be everybody else too came back from the weekend with a buy list and jumped in from the get go. The market was already racing by 5he time I woke up.
  • Commentary
    This fantastic ride for I-Bonds started on Nov 1, 2021. There have been skeptics all along - from "too good to be true", to "this cannot last", to "they may be bad few years from now", to "it is only for $10K/$20K/$25K", etc.
    Well, enjoy the ride, and if it ends, sell in a year, or two, or three...with penalty for 3-mo interest (-:)
    I got on it as soon as Treasury Direct could confirm my new account (by 12/2021).
  • Stock and Bond Bears of 2022
    In 2022, both stocks and bonds had bear markets simultaneously. This caused heavy losses in allocation/balanced portfolios as well as risk-parity portfolios. Bonds failed to moderate declines due to stocks and, instead, contributed significantly to portfolio losses. Reasons were many - rapid Fed tightening, strong dollar, high inflation, post-pandemic fragile economies, recession fears, Russia-Ukraine war, supply-chain disruptions, chaos in oil/gas markets, etc. Purpose here is to record how bad things were by 2022/Q3.
    Allocation/balanced portfolios were the 2nd worst with -21% 2022YTD (the record was -27.3% for full 1931). Other bad (full) years with double-digit % declines were 1930 (-13.3%), 1974 (-14.7%) and 2008 (-13.9%). Table below is from Twitter LINK1
    Risk-parity portfolio performance was among the worst in history. These portfolios try to equalize volatilities of stock and bond portions and then use leverage. Twitter LINK2
    There is growing appreciation for multi-asset funds that include stocks-bonds-alternatives. Prominent examples of these are FMSDX, VPGDX. These have to be battle-tested in future, but by 2022/Q3, their performance was FMSDX -16.80%, VPGDX -16.12% and that compared well with traditional moderate-allocation index fund VBINX -20.85% (active moderate-allocation funds were around this).
    It was bad, but far from the worst year for SP500. Twitter LINK3
    Image with 60-40 Table https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeJ8OKuXwAMqguu?format=png&name=small
    image