The savings bond calculator will display the value of a savings bond as of any given month. To find the net amount of interest credited to the savings bond between two given months ask for the values on those two months and take the difference.
Note: this shows net interest credited. One doesn't get credit for the last three months of interest until the savings bond has been owned for five years.
For example, if you input your month of purchase, 03/2022, and an amount of $1,000 (since $10K paper bonds are no longer issued), you'll see $6.00 of interest both total and YTD (useful if you're electing to pay taxes yearly). Multiply by 10 to show the interest on a savings bond worth ten times as much (i.e. $10,000).
Unlike TIPS, with savings bonds there is no adjustment to principal. The entire increase in value is due to interest.

Right about Montpelier; the state capital with the fewest number of inhabitants, a sweet town. That splurge was many years ago, when I had a metabolism like a volcano.

Several prominent fund managers and the CIO exited Matthews Asia since 2020.
Bill Hackett, the CEO for 13 years, retired on June 30, 2022.
From the July M* FundInvestor newsletter:
"Cooper Abbott joined Matthews International Capital
Management as CEO on June 13, 2022, succeeding
Bill Hackett, who had served as CEO for 13 years and
is retiring on June 30. This development is unsur-
prising, because Matthews announced in December
2021 that Hackett was planning on retiring in
mid-2022 and that a search was underway for
his replacement."
"Abbott has more than 20 years of senior investment
management experience. He previously served
as president and chairman at Carillon Tower Advisors
(where he led that firm’s acquisitions of several
asset managers during his tenure) and as executive
vice president of investments and co-chief operating
officer at Eagle Asset Management (which is an affil-
iate of Carillon Tower Advisors)."

Ah, B&J. I remember going nuts years ago at their 'seconds' store in Montpelier, in their pre-Unilever days.

As I said before, I read many articles that claimed you can't do it. I have been using my system over 20 years. Well, if you don't care, you don't. Over the years, I have learned a few techniques on several boards + my own interpretation.
As I said before, in order to swim, you got to be in the water. My system is explained (here) + actual results that were copied directly from my brokerage.
BTW, my portfolio (think 10/90) as of 7/5/2020, beat VWENX(about 64% stocks) for 1-3-5 years with SD for 1-3-5 year at 1.96-2.57-2.31.

I think we do need to revisit the very term "liberal". Its use in the political arena a few hundred years ago was those persons who wished to "liberate" individuals from government overreach (i.e. "tyranny").
That of course is exactly the opposite of the inclination of self-proclaimed liberals in the West today. What we call "liberal" are those who wish to remove freedom from people by enacting ever more regulations/laws which restrict individual action. -- I cannot recall President Biden using the word "freedom" in public statements when he is discussing domestic political goals...
What liberals are, really are "statists" -- favoring the centralization of power around the chosen few who run the govt. -- They no longer are our servants, but our masters.
The above is in no way partisan. I would classify Bush 43 as a statist too. -- delivering new govt largesse (Medicare Part D) with no funding attached to it. And enacting the "Patriot Act" legislation which codified much of the surveillance state we now have.

Crash :
The Fed's money printing has been the biggest contributor to IN-equality during the past 20 years or so. --- As they have blown asset bubbles, everywhere. Who owns most of the stocks and bonds which have had asset bubbles? -- The wealthy.
Its not the same as "printing counterfeit money". -- No one believes bitcoin is the USD. People want OUT of the USD. So your counterfeiting argument is easily discarded. Is gold "counterfeit money"? Of course not.
Crypto the "invention of the criminally-minded". You sound like an expert. --So you must be aware that most financial institutions (banks, etc) are working feverishly to incorporate the underlying blockchain technology which is the basis for crypto, to service their existing businesses. --- So will you ban them from using blockchain technology? If not, then there goes your whole IN-equality argument: you want the wealthy to benefit from blockchain, but not the little guy.
As for liberals spending for more libraries etc, fine, let them propose/pass tax increases, rather then debase the currency. --- Its the debasement of the currency which is the raison d'etre for crypto.
Do you have an alternative to prevent sovereign currency debasement? Or is that crickets I hear?

Rant, rant, rant. Liberals are not the enemy; they just want to see us collectively aim higher than the status quo. Better libraries, education system, equitable economy, HEALTHCARE. Their big problem is that they can't get out of their own way, and some of them just plain advocate for some trivial and silly shit.
Conservatives? Too many of them simply need brain transplants, and maybe then they'd be able to look beyond the Fox "News" propaganda bullshit. In my golden years, I am becoming more conservative, but I don't drink the Fox Kool-Aid. Perfect equality will never happen. Yet a more equitable society would be a vastly better arrangement than what we live with currently.
Crypto? A tool to avoid debasement of legal tender currency sponsored by governments? It's the same as printing counterfeit money. ...What this all comes down to is the very purpose and function of government: to serve the people. If government(s) are doing a stinky job of it, that does not obviate the need for (good or better) government, to maintain order, provide for roads, schools, hospitals, transportation, military and all the rest of it.
My wife comes from a shit-hole country where the whole economy seems sometimes to be "underground," to avoid taxes. At the airport, they won't let you on the plane before you pay the airport tax. Every individual. Why? Because gov't there cannot trust the airline to collect the fee and then hand it over to the Treasury. I know about deep distrust of government. I have seen the way that ostensibly legitimate businesses, including airlines, operate as if taxes are for everyone ELSE to pay.
Crypto is the invention of the criminally-minded. Yes, I say that, even knowing that some countries are actually establishing crypto-currency for themselves. The Marshall Islands and a few others... It's simply unethical. The perfect example of the distinction between what's legal, and what's ethical.

Marks is sharp. -- I agree that "nibbling" is in order. But not going in "whole hog".
Find it curious that in a businessinsider article date June7, he declares "we (Oaktree) are not market timers...(because).. we never sell to prepare for a market decline."
Well, OK, but if you happen to have material amounts of investable cash lying around before the market sells-off, and then you "buy low" (as he now recommends) that kind of makes one a "market timer". I just think Howard should not try to rhetorically run away from who he is -- from whom most well known investors are. Even Buffett has maintained unusually large amounts of cash underployed for years. He could have just deployed a lot of into collateral-backed S&P futures. Why didn't he? He was timing the market -- in his case by maintaining a mountain of dry powder for a crash he could reasonably predict would happen at some point.
That's not a criticism of the Sage, simply an observation that the captains of finance engage in the "market timing" which they suggest we little folks should not..
One more thing re Marks, for those who may be interested. His Oaktree does have a readily available public vehicle, ticker OCSL. It trades every day the stock market is open and pays a fat distribution:
https://www.oaktreespecialtylending.com/about/investment-strategy

A bit too late to the game and priced too high. Their China ETF will be 20 bps higher than CNYA and underperforms it by a wide margin in 1, 3, 5 year trailing periods.
Numbers aside, the more alarming issue at Matthews is the exodus of portfolio manager talent that has occured over the past 2-3 years. For a small team, they've lost 10+ really important portfolio managers to competitors in a very short amount of time, including Tiffany Hsiao, Juanyuan Ji and Beini Zhao (all left for Artisan). This has been discussed ad nauseam in other threads. Never seen anything like it in all my years.
Sometimes the real story is not in the performance numbers!

Some poster on YT did a more detailed summary than did I:
2:11 In my career I've said many things that didn't turn out
4:00 The last 10 or 11 years we've had $30 trillion in QE
4:35 This business is about guessing
5:11 We've only pulled off 2 or 3 soft landings in history. The one I remember was 1994/1995
5:20 We've never had a soft landing after inflation has gotten above 4.5%
5:56 Anything is possible. I've been wrong plenty of times in my career
6:25 Once inflation has gotten above 5%, it's never come down unless Fed Funds has gone above CPI
(but this time that will probably be broken, because Fed Funds would have to go above 8% this time)
7:24 Once inflation has gotten above 5%, it's never been tamed without a recession
8:23 We have $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion in excess savings (who? households or the Government?)
9:53 I was a dropout of a Ph.D program at the University of Michigan
9:57 I don't use what traditional economists use to predict the economy -- things like employment
10:17 The inside of the stock market has a prescient message regarding future economic activity
10:27 Stocks lead fundamentals by 6 to 12 months
11:00 We listen to companies and do a bottom-up analysis
11:14 If leading industries are turning up or down, that's a signal
11:27 The bond market used to be a prescient signaler,
but the last 10 or 11 years it hasn't signaled because the Central Banks have manipulated bond prices
12:04 Last summer when the 10-year yield dropped from 1.70 to 1.15, I didn't anticipate that
12:15 Central banks were buying trillions of dollars and manipulating price of bonds
13:15 Home builders with good fundamentals have declined 50% from their highs (might actually be around 36% drop)
13:28 Trucking is down 40% from their highs (might actually be around 30%)
13:49 Retail numbers are tainted. Can't just accept them blindly
14:48 A lot of these signals have long lead times, 6 months to a year (meaning, recession might not happen until 6 months to a year)
16:10 When I first got into the business,
if a company reported bad earnings but still closed the day positive, that stock was going to be up 6 months from then (and vice versa)
16:28 If the economy looked great and bonds were rallying, that meant the economy was not going to be great
16:55 Price versus news is weakened these days compared to 20 years ago
17:21 I started in this business in the mid 1970s
17:27 Traditionally, I learned that during bear markets I had to morph into bonds, commodities, foreign currencies
17:45 Maybe this says something about my dysfunctional personality but I've always made more money during bear markets
17:55 the way I did it was by ignoring equities and taking them off the table, and buying bonds
18:00 But I've never seen a situation like this where inflation is over 8% and yields 3%
18:21 Referring to golf, I feel like I'm about to play without a driver or wedge, because bonds which have been my go-to may not work this time
18:50 Investing is an art form and you have to innovate from cycle to cycle
20:29 I've lived through enough bear markets to know that if you get aggressive shorting, you can get your head ripped off with rallies
21:03 Side-stepping a decline is not the worst thing in the world (that is, getting out rather than risking losing or gaining)
21:31 I'll be surprised if sometime in the next 6 months the dollar DOESN'T weaken
23:09 There's a strong correlation between crypto and NASDAQ
24:00 My 69th birthday is in a few weeks
24:32 I feel like my predictive power is better but I'm not making as much money because I'm not as aggressive (with investing)
26:34 If we're gonna have a bull market, I want Bitcoin. If we're gonna have a bear market, Gold
27:35 You gotta know your own biases
28:10 I was lazy in college, but I'm passionate about investing.
I'm intellectually stimulated imagining the world and prices 12 to 18 months from now
31:15 Business school says that if you're highly diversified, you have less risk. I don't believe that at all
31:26 People get in the most trouble when they have stale longs or shorts
31:42 You have to have ruthless discipline and be paranoid
32:09 What I learned from George Soros is that it's not about whether you're right or wrong,
it's about how much you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong
32:25 I believe in streaks. One of my number 1 jobs is to know when I'm hot or cold
35:41 When you hear a good idea, within 2 or 3 weeks it may be too late

Anyone can open a conventional taxable brokerage account at TIAA.
https://shared.tiaa.org/private/mytcbrokerageaccountopening/aobrokerageapp/secure/required
It gives you access to what you'd find at most brokerages - stocks, ETFs, mutual funds. Like those other brokerages, it does not give you access to mutual funds sold through annuities.
Most brokerages offer retail IRA accounts that, aside from being wrapped up in an IRA, are virtually identical to their retail taxable accounts. TIAA does not. It used to but stopped offering such an IRA account a few years ago.
What TIAA does do is sell retirement annuities. To colleges, that's a 403(b) annuity. Like most variable annuities, TIAA's have a limited set of funds that are sold only through annuities. Notably the CREF funds, like CREF stock. And like some variable annuities, the TIAA annuities offer a fixed annuity option. Here, that's TIAA Traditional Annuity.
For individual investors, TIAA offers two variable annuities. One is your typical VA, called TIAA Intelligent Variable Annuity. It offers "funds" (typically VA clones) shown here. The other VA is effectively the equivalent of the 403(b) annuity (plus brokerage window). It's that one that gives you get access to TIAA Traditional, CREF, and TIAA Real Estate.
That annuity is only offered to "eligible" investors, and only as an Individual Retirement Annuity. Unlike typical VAs, you can't buy it for a taxable account.
https://www.tiaa.org/public/retire/financial-products/annuities/annuity-ira-benefits
As Yogi mentioned, the TIAA Traditional Annuity (fixed annuity investment option) that you can get though this limited access IRA annuity comes with a lower rate than paid to 403(b) participants. It is paying 2.50%, and has a guaranteed floor of 1.0%. I believe the IRA annuity contract restricts Traditional withdrawals to one per quarter.
An IRA investor is at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to the CREF funds. Several years ago, TIAA split these into three share classes, with large institutions getting cheaper shares and small institutions getting the most expensive shares. As an IRA investor, you're thrown in with the small institutions. It could be worse; TIAA could have created a fourth share class for IRA investors.
IMHO the only significant benefit to this IRA annuity is access to TIAA Real Estate Account (TREA).
You can find the VA options (including those for this IRA annuity) here. The IRA doesn't give you access to the non-TIAA VA subaccounts listed (except for Nuveen, which is owned by TIAA).
https://www.tiaa.org/public/investment-performance
Since it is structured as an annuity, this IRA can be difficult to deal with. You can't do transfers in kind (e.g. for RMDs, or IRA-to-IRA). When transferring money out of this annuity, you have to initiate the transfer from the TIAA side; typically one initiates transfers from the receiving side. These are attributes normally associated with employer-sponsored plans (401(k)s, 403(b)s), not with IRAs.
The website is atrocious. I'm won't go into details. Suffice to say that people who complain about Vanguard's website likely haven't yet had the "pleasure" of dealing with TIAA's. And you won't know what funds you can buy through the IRA brokerage window until you actually open an account.

@MikeM - It’s not a “negative call” on the fund. Aware of its stellar record. But I do have quite a bit in DODBX (similar risk / reward level). That’s directly with D&C. We’ll see how things pan out. I did regret leaving PRHYX many years ago believing they would reopen it some day.
Thanks for chiming in.
@Sven - Thank you also for your comment.

I always find @LewisBraham’s articles excellent. Several of his have been very helpful to me over the years. This week’s “9 Funds That Could Beat the Market” is no exception.
My sweeping remark was a reaction to the cover story only. IMHO they tried to cover too much. Glad @Yogibearbull and others found it useful. As Yogi intones, the appeal is likely stronger for those with a special interest in this type of investment. I look forward to Barron’s every week, and sometimes it’s hard not to not weigh in on articles mentioned on the board. Hope many others share their reactions to this and other intriguing articles.
Remark not directed at any particular individual. Ben’s assessment is what prompted me to weigh in - sparked my interest so to speak. But I’d been thinking about what I said for some time.

With M* Portfolio (free/Basic and Premium) going away soon (2022), and its replacement M* Investor having very poor portfolio analytics, I have collected several TIPs based on my use of FREE Portfolio Visualizer (PV) over the years. It may serve as a primer for new PV users and refresher for experienced users.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/311/portfolio-visualizer-pv

What I tried to do was look for a similar historical period and see how different stock allocations would perform under those conditions. The cash buffer was a conceptual attempt to mitigate most, but not all impact of market swoons.
In essence, I started with a traditional 60/40 portfolio and swapped some or all of the bonds for more equity and cash, figuring (hoping?) that the cash would add stability allowing for a higher equity allocation.
Intuition says that if one has too many market corrections/bear markets in a span of a few years, preserving one would be better off with cash. I tend to agree with this intuition. However, it turns out that this risk sometimes vanishes if there is a full recovery between the periods of market decline.
Looking at the 1968-1980 period (assuming withdrawals and reallocations are done on calendar year boundaries), at the end of 1972 (right before the 1973-74 bear market) the allocation methods (including withdrawals) all are in the black. The portfolio values (nominal dollars) range from $101,402 (all stock) to $102,728 (90/10 with a cash buffer). A 28% cash buffer (7 years @4%/year) ended in the middle of the pack with $101,964.
Since all methods ended 1972 above their high water marks, they would rebalance to their "normal" allocations. It would be as if 1969-1972 hadn't happened, except that some portfolios would have a few hundred dollars more or less than others.
The reason why starting with 1969 instead of 1973 seems to make a difference is that this moves the ten year mark. If one ends after 1978, one ends just before the market has a big run up: 18.52%, 31,74%, -4.70%, and 20.42% from 1979 through 1982. It's the arbitrariness of the time periods and not the method that's the problem here.
Finally, a mea culpa. In looking more closely at the two sets of results, I realized that I erred in building the results for 40/60 in 1973-1982. That method (stocks/bonds, annual rebalancing) came out pretty well. The 30% bond return in 1982 (vs. 20% for stocks) and 8% return in 1981 (vs. -5% for stocks) surely helped.

  Year	December 31 Balance							
100% stock	90/10		90/10		75/9/16		75/9/16		60/40		55%-40%		40/60
single asset	annual rebal	cash buffer	annual rebal	cash buffer	annual rebal	glide path	annual rebal
1972	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 	$96,000.00 
1973	$77,916.04 	$79,964.65 	$79,964.65 	$82,774.63 	$82,774.63 	$84,941.86 	$85,820.08 	$88,454.77 
1974	$52,849.69 	$57,065.02 	$56,366.89 	$62,757.74 	$62,779.42 	$66,449.90 	$68,565.60 	$73,770.73 
1975	$67,177.97 	$71,171.20 	$71,526.14 	$75,940.95 	$75,586.94 	$77,923.98 	$78,943.98 	$82,707.22 
1976	$77,709.51 	$81,312.30 	$83,093.89 	$85,862.08 	$86,793.31 	$89,157.97 	$89,949.56 	$93,980.77 
1977	$66,440.91 	$70,788.22 	$71,449.48 	$76,681.03 	$76,733.21 	$81,584.58 	$83,607.73 	$88,682.57 
1978	$64,393.97 	$69,072.33 	$69,728.56 	$75,016.17 	$74,903.38 	$78,784.24 	$80,338.99 	$85,247.72 
1979	$69,100.59 	$74,061.67 	$75,423.11 	$79,380.19 	$80,871.40 	$80,108.79 	$79,673.90 	$84,001.59 
1980	$82,907.47 	$87,939.43 	$91,236.47 	$91,378.46 	$95,352.49 	$86,229.83 	$81,409.15 	$84,953.48 
1981	$70,161.78 	$76,604.00 	$79,004.86 	$82,044.34 	$85,902.92 	$77,823.31 	$74,781.73 	$78,754.87 
1982	$75,302.27 	$82,308.84 	$85,951.03 	$89,100.42 	$94,318.06 	$87,801.30 	$85,465.37 	$90,618.38 

Appreciate the post ... Where to Invest Now? That is the question. If you're not in retirement and you have some cash on the sidelines, where do you invest? You definitely want to avoid any companies that are not generating profits. It's impossible to call a bottom. Yes. Ok, so will the recession (we are in one) last 18-24 months? If so, should you wait for another 12 months before deploying cash? DCA into index funds? Which ones? S&P 500 or Small Cap or both?
Kiplinger article "The good news is that stocks tend to do well in the first year of Fed rate hikes. Looking back some 65 years, Deutsche Bank found that 12 months following the first hike, the stock market was up 91% of the time, by an average of 7%." <-- that's some positive data.
I'm keeping an eye on the labor market. It's a strong point at the moment but we're seeing a lot of hiring freezes and offer letters being rescinded. It appears the Tech companies are gearing up for a slowdown. Interesting times.

I enjoyed all of the presentations in the July commentary. Lynn's commentaries regarding retirement planning will allow me to have more "ammunition" to "prod" a few folks who still don't realize how fast the years move along; and suddenly find themselves a lot closer to retirement than they had remembered. The psychological aspect being as important as the investment aspect.
Remain curious,
Catch

Mark Freeland wrote a very good analysis of the returns of different asset allocations during the inflationary 1970s He estimates the expected results of withdrawals from various allocations of equities 100% equities to 40%/60%.
The best results were a 79/9/16% ( latter is cash) which allows withdrawals for four years without selling equities at the bottom, or when they are below their high
This "cash stash" keeps you from the largest draw on performance, selling into a declining market at the low. This approach is similar to James Cloonan at American Association of Individual Investors, who proposed five years expenses in cash and withdrawing from equites only when the SP500 was within 5% of it's high.
I looked carefully to see it four or five years is enough and I am not sure it it, because the market took 3.2 years to recover from 11/68 high but then less than a year later, ( 1/11/73) it peaked again and took 7 years to recover (7/16/80). The 68 peak to the 80 recovery was over 11 years.
Similarly from a high in 3/2000, the recovery took 7.1 years but less than 5 months later crashed again and didn't recover until 3/2013, a combined total of 13 years.
Consequently, I believe that the customary 4 or 5 years is not enough to cover these prolonged declines. Seven years of expenses in cash or short term bonds seems to be the minimum.
Maybe the withdrawals would have been during those short period of market highs, and the withdrawals if below the peak would have been at least pretty close to it. You also have to withdraw enough to replenish your "cash stash".

My thoughts on the topic:
-The Fed would prefer to just jawbone the capital markets to do the heavy lifting of slowing demand. (i.e. talk tough, but carry a wet noodle).
-That might have worked if Jay "Helicopter Cash" Powell had begun tightening in mid-2021, instead of mid-2022. But Jay was all about being re-appointed to a 2nd term. By waiting a year ("transitory" talk), inflation expectations are now strongly embedded in the behavior of economic actors.
-The only way to "kill" inflation is to kill demand. The asset bubbles need to be "pricked" to do so. Obviously some of that has happened. The Fed has a lousy history of avoiding recessions. To be fair, its a tough, nearly impossible job to "thread the needle" -- dampening demand "just enough", without pushing the economy into recession. Frankly, I wish Ben Bernanke were still running the show.
If not for the scheduled Q/T, I would think the bond market would be through correcting. It still may be: if stocks continue to grind lower --- due to downward earnings revisions -- a good chunk of the capital may move into bonds -- thus offsetting the Fed's Q/T sales.
_if the Fed is serious about killing demand -- and doesn't waiver, then a recession is my "base case". OTOH, if the Fed chickens out and "pivots", then a recession may be avoided --- but the cost will be higher, longer inflation, and a loss of confidence in the USD.
[[An aside: there may be bigger issues than "just" the economy this time, geopolitical issues. How can the West "de-fang" Putin? - crashing oil prices. How might that happen? -- a global recession. And which currency benefits from a de-risk trade? The USD. The USD has been very strong (against fiats, but not commodities). But a higher USD (prompted by higher rates) would tend to exert further downward pressure on oil prices. This would put incrementally more "hurt" on Russian oil revenues.
-So, I think bonds will find their final bottom b4 stocks. (Though stocks can have a countertrend rally any time, and July is usually an up month.)
- I always remind myself to "be mindful of the calendar". Even if we get a relief rally, the damage YTD has been extensive. -- Traders will want to register tax losses b4 year-end. (For many institutions, the tax year ends 10/31). So price-action in the weeks before Halloween may provide an opportunity to put money to work as institutional sellers close out their loss-positions.
-Mid-term election results may also provide a boost to the market in November -- assuming the SCOTUS Roe-reversal doesn't jinx a Red Wave result.
-Housing prices have not fallen yet. But that is one big asset bubble which needs to be popped to dampen inflation. If mortgage rates continue to climb, I would expect some of the corporate buyers (e.g. Blackstone, etc) to unload some of their holdings, in favor of bonds. That might precipitate downward price action, as inventory (finally) expands.
Given how 2022 is unfolding, 2023 may be lining up to be a good year. (3rd years of the Presidential cycle usually are)
Just my 8 cents.