Gents - I was dabbling in CCOR a while back and then sold...interday it was all over the place...it was somewhat unpredicatable as to how the fund would perform vs markets any day.
What made me (overly cautious, nervouse nelly investor) give pause, it appears to me that many of the Bitcoin Bros/Gals are trading options like crazee. How do you explain ARKK going up by like 15% over two day last week. Heard on a podcast, maybe it was Wealthion guest that a lot of very short term options are being put on...folks trying to get rich quick with options rather than holding the JNJ, MRK, WMT, Rattheon's. etc.
Also I am starting to get real nervous re the futures/combo funds out there....the BLNDX, MAFIX, still waiting for the hard trendreversals to take place when the interest rates go down or dollar goes down...could be a whammo moment.
Have taken my CCOR monies and put them in FORKX, Abraham Fortress Fund...run by Salem Abraham...yes, some futures/hedgey part of portfolio, but only a 25-30%. Il like his experience investing over many different market cycles and his no nonsense Texan background. We'll see how it goes.
Also started small entry position in TWEIX and added to smaller position in TSUMX recently.
Still way way heavy into rolling T bills, laddering CDs up to 5 years.
Good Luck to All,
Baseball Fan

Good Morning - any thoughts why you would (assuming you still could, they don't seem to be available any longer)...but comparing brokered 5 yr CD vs a SPIA annuity fixed term 5 year from A++ rated NY Life...4.9%APY
brokered CD is FDIC insured, can't touch the monies without taking a ding until 5 years are up
Annuity, you can do partial withdrawls, something like up to 10% of funds ea year if you desire or need to.
The Annuity seems to be a better yield...if you go with an A(+), Nationwide etc, you can get 5.15% APY
I see you can get with 7 year SPIA, A+ rated co, 5.25%...
I've been very conservative past several years, always thought markets were kind of "artificial" due to money printing CBs etc, those rates above are kind of appealing...I've never had any annuities before so kind of cold feet. Also thinking that maybe, just maybe going forward, PMEFX and maybe PVCMX will outperform those SPIAs, dunno?
Baseball Fan

2. My specific question is > some for the distributions show as at loss - others are at a gain . I can identify and cherry pick and sell off a few of the distributions that are currently at a loss . This would then raise the gain of the remaining position

When specific shares ("cherry pick") and average cost ("raise the gain ... of the remaining position") appear in the same sentence, it suggests that some clarification might be helpful.
It is true that if one sells the most expensive shares in a position, the average cost of the remaining shares is reduced, thus increasing the average gain of those remaining shares. But so what?
---
Consider a position with two shares, one purchased at $2/share, one purchased at $6/share (perhaps via div reinvestment). The average cost is $4/share. If the current price is $5, then what one has is:
- Share A, cost $2, worth $5, unrealized gain of $3.
- Share B, cost $6, worth $6, unrealized gain (loss) of -$1.
Total unrealized gain = $3 - $1 = $2.
Average unrealized gain = $2/2 = $1. As shown below, this average gain doesn't matter.
---
Suppose you sell one share now, and the other share later after the price rises from $5 to $8.
Sell Share B first, recognize a $1 loss.
Sell Share A @$8, recognize a gain of $8 - $2 = $6.
Total gain on portfolio = -$1 + $6 = $5.
Sell Share A first, recognize a $3 gain.
Sell Share B @$8, recognize a gain of $8 - $6= $2.
Total gain on portfolio = $3 + $2 = $5.
No difference in total gain. The difference is in the timing. Sell B first and you get to use a $1 loss now (offsetting other gains). You don't have to pay taxes now out of pocket. So you get the use of that tax money until you sell Share A.
Sell A first, and you have to pay taxes on $3 of gain now. You don't have the use of that tax money any more. This is why one generally sells more costly shares first.
---
Don't get confused by average cost. With mutual fund shares, one is permitted to use the average cost of shares when computing realized gains. But then there's no cherry picking, no selling of most expensive shares first. And total gain still comes out the same.
With average cost:
Average cost = ($2 + $6)/2 = $4.
Sell oldest share first (required) @$5: recognize gain of $5 - $4 (av cost) = $1.
Sell newest share @$8: recognize gain of $8 - $4 (av cost) = $4.
Total gain on portfolio = $1 + $4 = $5.
Notice that the average cost used doesn't change for the second share, even though there's only one share left in the portfolio after the first sale.
And the total portfolio gain of $5 is the same as before. The difference, once again, is in the timing. You pay taxes on $1 gain now. That's more than you'd have to pay up front if you used the shares' actual costs and sold the most expensive share (Share B) first.
---
Finally, to get back to the idea of using $3K in losses to offset ordinary income. This is the most valuable use of losses. It's more valuable than using a loss in one share to offset the gain of another share. So if there is a way to generate a cap loss one year, that's usually optimal. To do this, you usually sell your most expensive shares in one year and your shares with gain in other years.
Again, the total gain remains the same regardless of the order of selling. What differs is when you have to pay your taxes (generally the later the better) and whether you get to use some losses to offset ordinary income (better).

Thanks y'all.
My understanding is > 1. Capital losses that exceed capital gains in a year may be used to offset ordinary taxable income up to $3,000 in any one tax year. Net capital losses in excess of $3,000 can be carried forward indefinitely until the amount is exhausted.
2. My specific question is > some for the distributions show as at loss - others are at a gain . I can identify and cherry pick and sell off a few of the distributions that are currently at a loss . This would then raise the gain of the remaining position . Is that still an advisable thing to do ?
The only way to avoid the cap gains on liquidation would be a gift or DAF - this fund throws off huge year end Cap gains distributions and as I have owned for about 25 years - it has huge embedded gains .

There are lots of numbers in the tax code that aren't indexed to inflation. ISTM that automatic (as opposed to manual) inflation adjustments are a fairly new concept, given that the modern tax era (16th Amendment, first 1040) started in 1913. Why, for example, is the IRA catch-up amount fixed at $1,000? The proposed SECURE 2.0 Act (H.R. 2954) would index this figure for inflation, as well as raise the RMD starting age above 72 and a slew of other changes.
Here are some other aspects of this $3000 tax benefit that one might question:
- Why allow a capital loss to offset ordinary income, as opposed to treating the loss as a negative cap gain (i.e. get back 15% in taxes on the $3K instead of, say, 22% in taxes)?
- Why allow individual taxpayers to carry over cap losses indefinitely? (Until 2011, mutual funds could only carry forward cap losses eight years.)
- Why did H.R. 1619, sponsored by Zoe Lofgren in 2001-2002 fail to reach a vote? It would have amended "the Internal Revenue Code to increase, from $3,000 to $8,250, the annual capital loss limit applicable to individuals [and provided] for an annual inflation adjustment."
https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/1619
- Why should one have to hold a security for a full year before treating the gain or loss as long term? Through 1976, the holding period was 6 months, then 9 months in 1977. The Tax Reform Act of 1976 changed not only the holding periods, but the amount of loss carry forward permitted, from $1K in 1976 to $2K in 1977, to its present $3K in 1978.
https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/98-473.html
These are not rhetorical questions. Virtually every piece of legislation involves horse trading and compromise. One needs to delve into the legislative process to find out what happened. Likely there will be another opportunity in the next couple of months to watch the process in real time, as SECURE Act 2.0 is raised in the lame duck session. Or not.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/landmark-retirement-bills-see-opportunity-in-lame-duck-congress

@rforno- Since you had steak for dinner it would seem to suggest that you didn't have a lot of money "invested" in this silliness.

In 2021 I setup an account w/Gemini in NYC due to how heavily regulated it was and low-key. They didn't sponsor NBA teams, run TV ads, or get stadium naming rights. I dabbled in some active-trading of BTC for a bit to see how it compared to futures trading back in the day, and then I parked $50K in their Earn product to get 8.05% interest. In early May of this year, when its interest rate dropped to 6.5% as rumors started swirling about 3AC, I started getting weird vibes in my Spidey-Sense and withdrew everything into (insured) cash in the account. Finally, I pulled 99% of it out to help pay for 2 bathroom renovations that just wrapped up -- but I am keeping the account open for possible future use....I think Gemini will be one of the few folks that survive this stuff given their fairly conservative approach to crypto investing, regulation, and stability. But for now, apart from a tiny slice of BTC that wsa part of my sign-up bonus with them, I hold no crypto assets.
Bottom line, I took away a modest amount in profits/intrerest for that initial forray into crypto, but the money was far better spent on home improvements -- plus that 'fun' fund (money i could 'afford' to lose speculating, not my life's savings) and some extra $$ coming in from work meant I didn't need to dip into other investments to pay for it, so double-win. It's the same approach I used years ago when I closed my active futures trading account and used the proceeds to pay cash for a new German car. :)
As to getting in/out of crypto lending: the lessons of the GFC about doing deep due diligence about counterparty risk controls, transparency, and listening to my risk-aware gut feelings paid off for me in several ways. I knew it was risky[1] going in ..... but a lot of people drank the kool-aid, bought into the hype, threw caution to the wind, had TONS of money in these types of products across many often less-risk-oriented ompanies (3AC, Voyager, Celsius, and now FTX), only saw profits but never considered the risks, both obvious and quite possible --- and in the end either lost it all, only retrieved some of it, or are waiting for the outcome of investigations/litigation to be made semi-whole again if even possible.
[1] I viewed crypto-lending's risk profile akin to junk bonds -- it was an either/or outcome about getting my money back on that speculatative position in my portfolio.

OK, I understand the suggestions implied by the historical yield cure inversions. But were any of those historical inversions preceded by four or five years of extremely low interest rates (approaching zero) during a period of pretty decent growth?
Isn't it possible that the present inversion could simply be predicting a return to that low interest rate environment rather than a full-fledged recession?
Please understand that I have absolutely no background or pretensions to take a side in all of this. My question is an honest one, hoping to prompt am expanded discussion by those of you who are qualified to do that.

Sven, why preferably long term? I know typical capital gains are long term but I think the IRS lets us use remaining short terms capital losses to offset long term capital gains on schedule D once the short term losses have offset short term capital gains. I am not certain about this and that is why I am hesitating to harvest a capital loss in a fund I have held for less than a year. There will not be much short term gain for me this year and I know I can use "left-over" losses in subsequent years to offset gains but I'd rather use them *this* year.

I am selling those with negative cost basis (preferably all long term cap gain) but we don’t have many despite a poor year. Quickly we buy the equivalent ETFs to avoid future headache.
Donation is always good at this time.

I used to be exclusively at M*, and for years, resisted posting elsewhere. But various M* platform changes, and loss of contents with each move, forced me to change my web/social-media approach.
Now, I am at several platforms. Each has its unique flavor and circle of people. Some stuff is duplicated but not much.
Covid downtime in 2020 also gave me time to reconstruct lot of my lost content at M* that I put on the YBB Site (a refence site, NOT a discussion site) and now just refer to it rather than posting same/similar stuff repeatedly in response to Qs.
BTW, some at Twitter are pointing out that Twitter may have saved us from WWIII, an overstatement that has some validity. Early mainstream media reports on the Russian missile strike in Poland and possible use of NATO Article 5 (when many world leaders were at G20 in Bali, Indonesia) were not based on facts. I saw at Twitter that several posters from Ukraine, Poland and elsewhere (including the US) posted conflicting info. My earliest posting on a related MFO thread was based on those reports (but there was no single link for them). Musk has tweeted (with obvious self interest) that the coverage of the recent missile event and FTX-Alameda collapse in the crypto universe have been more timely and better than in the mainstream media.

And now for a potential China "bull case"...
The following excerpt is from the 'Points of Return' newsletter (John Authers) published today.
That leads to a final question: Why would anyone be bullish about China at present? Its problems are evident, and most international investors will justifiably hate the current political direction. Andy Rothman, investment strategist and veteran China-watcher at Matthews Asia, agrees that watching for progress on Covid Zero, and particularly for a pickup in vaccination rates, which have been falling, is most important. Providing the country can find a way out of lockdowns, he offers the following “bull case” for 2023:
China is likely to remain the only major economy engaged in serious easing, while much of the world is tightening.
Chinese households have been in savings mode since the start of the pandemic, with family bank account balances up 42% from the beginning of 2020.
Those funds should fuel a consumer rebound, and an A-share recovery, as domestic investors hold about 95% of that market.

I've been following Andy since his days at CLSA. I'm a fan of his story telling. However, he's lost a lot of credability over the years. When have you EVER heard Andy NOT be BULLISH on China? There is optimism...and there is being biased or saying what you want to happen. Andy has become much more the latter.
Plus...he now works for Matthews, which has a vested interest in saying "China is a great asset class". Perhaps the combo of Andy being now at Matthews makes me more skeptical (plus, Matthews has had a mass exodus of portfolio management talent...yet Andy for some reason stays).
Andy has to change things up every once in awhile or he sounds like a biased broken record.

I still know a few fund managers at Matthews...there is hardly anyone good left there, and the good ones are actively looking for new opportunities (or so I hear).
Not suprising. The firm has gone down the toilet unfortunately. They brought in a new CEO this summer, but way too late as former CEO Bill Hackett and his management team were apparently asleep at the wheel for 10 years, which finally drove a number of key portfolio managers to greener pastures.
I agree with others. New CEO obviously trying to make up for lost time and try new products. However, the foundation of the firm has departed and the remaining lot is rotten. When they'll get rid of Robert Horrocks is a question I've been asking for years now.
I've moved my clients who seek Asia and Emerging Markets exposure to other managers. 20 years ago, Matthews was the only game in town. Thankfully, competitors have really improved their Emerging Markets expertise, meanwhile Matthews never evolved. There are plenty of other good options out there.
A sad story of how not to lead an investment firm, but as investors, we're fortunate to have plenty of other options.

@Crash, @msf I am with Andrews in their 60 months CDs that were offered a few years back and yes I saw this promo.

sma3: "Maybe the "smart money" assumes that interest rates are going down in 2 to 4 years."
Personally, I have chosen to not go longer term in CDs. I will stay with a small ladder of shorter term CDs, and if I see the market conditions improving for bond oefs, I have several CDs maturning in the next 1 to 6 months, that will afford me several options for investing decisions. As retired investor in my mid 70s, I just want to preserve principal, and produce a nice total return, with low risk opportunities.

Go to page 10 here: https://riverparkfunds.com/assets/pdfs/rpsthyf/commentary/RiverPark-Cohanzick_3Q22_Shareholder_Letter.pdf

Those yields, if realized, would result in the fund's best performance ever and would exceed any return short-term CDs are going to offer with, one hopes, the relative safety the fund has afforded since its inception. But would they stretch over the following few years, the way locked-in, medium-term CD rates would? I wish I knew.

there is USBank 4.58% 3 year CD non-callable. Several other 3 years CDs, but all callable
I skimmed through the other bonds
Almost all either corporate CDs etc being offered at Schwab are callable.
Maybe the "smart money" assumes that interest rates are going down in 2 to 4 years.
Maybe better off in longer term treasuries even though yield worse. Have to do the math to make sure.

I ended a Prime membership in part because packages are delivered ahead of estimates anyway (and I'm just not that impatient) which suggests to me lots of deliverers making fewer deliveries. Still, I live in a condo and already the daily Amazon drop-off looks like we're heavy into the holiday season.

WIth at least 18 warehouses within my city (as of 1½ years ago), I get free delivery as fast as Prime, including on Sundays.
Package clutter is a common problem these days for multi-unit buildings. It can even become a safety issue and a fire hazard. Solving the problem isn't easy and may not be cheap to do.
In my building it's a year round problem, only worse around holidays. Our condo board has been "investigating" solutions for nearly three years and AFAIK has stopped trying for now. (I finally quit the board out of frustration.)
Kudos to OJ for planning well. Often people seem to go out of town and let their packages pile up for days or even longer.
I don't get Amazon doing deep cuts - they seem to be quite diversified
Notable in the Amazon announcement is that while Amazon is cutting development ("technology"), it isn't (yet) cutting warehouse or delivery staff. At least so far Amazon doesn't appear to expect its sales or our package clutter to diminish.

the souring global economy has put pressure on [Amazon] to trim businesses that have been overstaffed or underdelivering for years.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/technology/amazon-layoffs.html

Crash I don't think it's as simple as scrambling a bunch of jets and/or cruise missiles and having a go. The human cost could be huge and Putin might possibly obliterate Ukraine with a nuke or two because he's that crazy. I'd like to think that we (US, NATO) are prepared to protect Ukraine if that happens before responding. I know what I'd like to do but I don't know the right answer here despite 2 years of combat duty.

Hi @Sven et al
The current % data is two weeks after the first data reported in the October 24- October 28 period of this thread. As the current large price percent gains are likely mostly reflected from a more favorable CPI report (FED backing off???), which caused yields to move down a lot within a short time frame.
Yield % changes last week:
--- 30 year = -6.5%
--- 10 year = -7.3%
--- 5 year = -7.5%
--- 1 year = -3.3%
SO, for me; I would/will watch price changes in the Gov't issues in the list; if it was understood/known/announced that the FED was slowing down rate increases.
AND looking at the moves from last week, the top gainers were the longer duration issues.....10 years +. And if one has some sleepy money laying about, you could take a walk on the wild side and go for TMF. This etf will fly high.......although for how long would not be known and the investment would need to be carefully watched.
Remain curious,
Catch

There is much I don't understand regarding crypto, therefor I don't invest/speculate in it. Over the last handful of years I have tried to educate myself about crypto a bit as my neighbor is a national sales manager for a company now owned by NCR which sells software for among other things, ATM machines at which individuals can purchase crypto for a fee.
I just read an article that states FTX "invented" a token (FTT) to ease trading on its platform.
What the heck does that mean or work?