SCOTUS is complicit. If they were to actually rule that his tariffs are illegal, it would be a small miracle.
It will takes many years to undo all the damage that Dump & SCOTUS are doing now.

#2 Here are the major details of the agreement:
Tariff rate: A 15% tariff will be imposed on most EU goods imported into the US, including automobiles, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical goods. This is a reduction from the previously threatened 30% tariff rate.
EU commitments:
Energy Purchases: The EU has agreed to purchase $750 billion worth of American energy, specifically liquefied natural gas (LNG) and nuclear fuel over three years. This is intended to help reduce Europe's dependence on Russian gas.
Investment: The EU will invest an additional $600 billion in the US on top of existing expenditures.
Market Access: The EU has agreed to open its markets to US exporters with zero tariffs on certain products.
Military Equipment: The EU has also committed to purchasing "vast amounts" of US military equipment.
Exclusions:
Steel and Aluminum: The existing 50% tariffs on European steel and aluminum will remain in place, though there are suggestions they could be replaced by a quota system in the future.
Pharmaceuticals: Pharmaceuticals are also excluded from the 15% tariff, and their tariff rate will be determined globally, according to von der Leyen.
Zero Tariffs: Specific products like all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generic drugs, semiconductor equipment, some agricultural products, natural resources, and critical raw materials will have zero tariffs.
Wine and spirits: The tariff rate for wine and spirits is yet to be determined.

@catch22
Thanks for the detailed information.
I've read WSJ and Reuters articles regarding the EU agreement.
Much of their information corresponds with what you have posted (quoted above).
Energy Purchases: Dollar amounts are the same. Energy sources were unspecified.
Market Access: "Trump also said the EU had agreed 'to open up their countries to trade at zero tariff.' Von der Leyen said the two had agreed to zero-for-zero tariffs for certain strategic products including aircrafts and their parts, certain chemicals, semiconductor equipment and certain agricultural products, among others, and said the two sides would work to add more products to that list." (WSJ)
Military Equipment: Military equipment wasn't mentioned specifically in either article.
Steel and Aluminum: "Trump indicated in comments to the press that his global steel-and-aluminum tariffs, which are currently at 50%, would remain unchanged. Von der Leyen said the two had agreed to a quota system that would keep tariffs lower for some EU metals exports to the U.S." (WSJ)
Pharmaceuticals: Von der Leyen said that 15% tariffs will apply to pharmaceuticals according to both articles.
Zero Tariffs: Reuters reported the same information (almost verbatim).
Wine and spirits: Von der Leyen: "'We will keep working to add more products to this list,' she said, adding that the situation on spirits was still to be established." (Reuters)
The EU trade agreement resembles the Japan agreement.
We still have not reached trade agreements with several of our largest trading partners:
Mexico, Canada, and China.
U.S. and Chinese officials are meeting in Stockholm on Monday and Tuesday—
it's anticipated that their trade truce will be extended beyond the Aug. 12 expiration date.

I did two searches for the EU US tariff deal using slightly different wording. The results are below with some redundancy.
#1 A trade deal between the US and EU was announced with a 15% tariff on most European goods imported to the US. The deal also involves the EU agreeing to purchase $750 billion of American energy and increase investment in the US by over $600 billion. Steel and aluminum tariffs were not included in this deal and remain at 50%.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
15% Tariff: Most European goods exported to the US will now face a 15% tariff.
Energy and Investment: The EU agreed to purchase $750 billion of American energy and increase investment in the US by more than $600 billion.
No Tariffs on Some Goods: Some goods, including pharmaceuticals, will not be subject to tariffs.
Steel and Aluminum: The 50% tariff on steel and aluminum remains in place.
Temporary Resolution: The agreement temporarily resolves months of tense negotiations between the two trade partners.
"Big One": President Trump described this deal as "the biggest of them all".
EU Concessions: The EU agreed to accept US imports without tariffs.
"Rebalancing" Trade: The agreement aims to "rebalance" trade between the US and EU.
#2 Here are the major details of the agreement:
Tariff rate: A 15% tariff will be imposed on most EU goods imported into the US, including automobiles, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical goods. This is a reduction from the previously threatened 30% tariff rate.
EU commitments:
Energy Purchases: The EU has agreed to purchase $750 billion worth of American energy, specifically liquefied natural gas (LNG) and nuclear fuel over three years. This is intended to help reduce Europe's dependence on Russian gas.
Investment: The EU will invest an additional $600 billion in the US on top of existing expenditures.
Market Access: The EU has agreed to open its markets to US exporters with zero tariffs on certain products.
Military Equipment: The EU has also committed to purchasing "vast amounts" of US military equipment.
Exclusions:
Steel and Aluminum: The existing 50% tariffs on European steel and aluminum will remain in place, though there are suggestions they could be replaced by a quota system in the future.
Pharmaceuticals: Pharmaceuticals are also excluded from the 15% tariff, and their tariff rate will be determined globally, according to von der Leyen.
Zero Tariffs: Specific products like all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generic drugs, semiconductor equipment, some agricultural products, natural resources, and critical raw materials will have zero tariffs.
Wine and spirits: The tariff rate for wine and spirits is yet to be determined.
This deal is seen as a way to bring stability and predictability to the transatlantic trade relationship and prevent a potentially damaging trade war. However, it's important to note that the agreement is still preliminary and further details need to be finalized. It is also worth noting that the 15% tariff rate is still significantly higher than the 2.5% that applied before the Trump administration took office.
Lastly, the Japan and EU deals both indicate $600 billion each investments into the U.S. over a period of years. We shall find what becomes of this, eh?

It's been available at ML for years (and still is)

Judging from individual price boosts in my little world between last month and now, I'll be surprised if July's reports don't show at least a moderately significant tick up.
As a customer of a gas & electric utility with no effective regulation (gerrymandered state regulatory body), which is piling on double-digit rate increases, I'm damn glad I put in rooftop solar ten years ago.

PE firms struggle to list holdings or find external buyers.
Some PE firms have resorted to selling assets from funds they manage to newer funds they also manage.
These so-called continuation funds accounted for 19% of all sales in the first half of 2025—
60% higher than a year ago.
"Private equity groups sit on more than $3tn in unsold deals and are nearing four consecutive years
in which they have returned only about half the cash investors traditionally expect."
“'We’re in our third or fourth year of low distributions, the exit environments are challenging
and the IPO market is dormant,' said Todd Miller, Jefferies global co-head of secondary advisory.”
Article may be paywalled
https://www.ft.com/content/88a4e3e3-cefb-48d8-ab81-75cf85039b83
Note: I don't have an FT subscription but was able to read this article.
Input "Private equity firms flip assets to themselves in record numbers" (without quotes) into DuckDuckGo.
The corresponding ft.com article should be presented near the top of the results.
Click on the article and accept cookies.

Junkster,
I never claimed my way is the only way. I'm just sharing what I’m doing—others can take it or leave it.
What a fund did a year ago or four years ago reflected the market conditions at that time. I rarely invest in emerging market bonds—last time was over 10 years ago, and only briefly.
But this year I did, because I saw several weeks of steady upward movement with minimal downside volatility, and that's the key for me.
As always, my investing decisions are based on the trends from the last several weeks. This is why I owned HOSIX in 2024 and not HOBIX.

I hardly ever invested in BL and definitely not for over 6 months.
I never used them as a "sub" for MM either.
My goals since retiring in 2018 is to never lose more than 3% from any last top; I did under 1%. Since 2024, it's just 1%. This means I sell any bond fund that loses over 0.5-08% which means more trades.
So while I invested a huge % in 2023-4 in CLO first time ever, in 2025 it's mostly in international bonds. In the last couple of weeks, I've only been 60+% international bonds.
BL is a subset of HY with lower SD because the duration is much lower. But, BL can go down pretty quickly 2-3%. I want to own bond funds that give me longer time to get out in time.
On the other hand, a good trader disregards the past and looks for current opportunities.
Suppose I wanted to own a fund in the last 3 months and my options were EIFAX(BL) vs RSIIX. I will select RSIIX every time based on these funds history, even if EIFAX would do more, see the chart (https://schrts.co/BWtwQURA)
Another example:
Suppose I wanted to use a very stable fund. I prefer HOBIX YTD performance over BL. I refuse to invest in volatile funds (PIMIX) even if I can make more. If PIMIX makes 9% and HOBIX makes 7% in 2025, I would always select HOBIX.
BTW, PIMIX was the first bond fund I bought and mostly held for 7-8 years (2010-2018). It was one of the easiest hold and one of the best risk/reward funds, but the magic has long gone.
See YTD chart of HOBIX,PIMIX, and EIFAX(BL) funds. https://schrts.co/NIbsQtrh
You can see how EIFAX was down 2.5% in March-April and PIMIX was down several times 1.5-2.5% in 2025.
Disclaimer: I currently don't own any of the funds above.

Sometimes you post stuff you wish you hadn’t posted. Bank loans were a transitional trade in lieu of cash. Since April it hasn’t been the time to be conservative. I still like bank loans in lieu of cash but long gone there having made last week my fourth and hopefully last tranche in the emerging market equity fund I mentioned I was in back in April. Sure has beaten the Yugo trading of bond funds. At my age this may be my last hurrah trading equity funds. I mean it has been like 25 years since I was an equity fund centric trader. The smart ones here are those who saw the promise in emerging markets before the herd and have stayed put, @Sven comes to mind. So does @Mona.

Re DODBX
Morningstar is showing:
47.01% U.S. equities / long only
17.26 Non-U.S. equities after factoring in a 0.15% short position
32.35% Fixed income
2.44% Cash
1% (+/-) Not classified
M*’s listed PE on the equities is 14.36 which is in the same ballpark as OAKBX and LCORX which I referenced earlier. I was aware 2-3 years ago of a larger short position. Helped them in ‘22. Looks like they might have pulled back.

I'd still be asking questions here for real world, brain power resolutions.
Enjoy.....
--- Based on statements from MIT researchers and experts, there's a strong belief that AI could be capable of managing financial accounts autonomously within approximately five years.
Specifically:
Andrew Lo, a finance professor and AI expert at MIT, believes large language models (LLMs) could have the technical ability to make real investment decisions for clients within five years. He envisions a future where AI can meet fiduciary standards, understand human emotions, and learn from feedback.
He also emphasizes the importance of human-machine collaboration, suggesting that combining human intuition with AI's capabilities could lead to optimal financial strategies.
Other MIT Sloan researchers highlight the increasing use of AI in finance, particularly for research, automation, and personalization of financial strategies, making insights more accessible and affordable.
While there's enthusiasm, it's also recognized that implementing AI in this context presents challenges, including reliability in high-stakes decision-making and ethical considerations, according to Bloomberg AI.
In summary, MIT experts like Andrew Lo foresee the potential for AI to autonomously manage financial accounts within the next five years, emphasizing the crucial role of AI meeting fiduciary standards and the benefits of human-machine collaboration in this evolving landscape.

I just had a talk with a friend about diversification etc... He was talking about 60/40 US/INTL and I was talking about just US. So I went and did some back testing using VTSAX (total stock) and VTIAX (total intl) Since 2010, US/INTL only beat US 4 years including this year so far. $10K in US/INTL = ~$44k, $10K in US = ~$64k. I think I'll stick with just US.

I haven't had an INTL component in my portfolio for a decade. And have not regretted it. The reason I am curious now about international is the massive 1st half 2025 out performance. I also wonder if, as some expect, U.S. stocks hit a rough patch in 2nd half, will INTL continue to outpace. I took a small portfolio position (1%) in an international large cap index fund. I am watching closely. The thesis being that U.S. stocks are overvalued and facing some uncertainty/headwinds. But, INTL is undervalued and may benefit from a sort of decoupling effect.

Oddly, D&C reportedly just added a skootch of international stocks to DODBX to help stabilize returns. Looks like a "skootch" is 15-20%. M* did something on the changes at DODBX a while ago, IIRC.

+1 We all could use more ”stability” at this time!
Off the rails perhaps … but I’ve never worked so hard to diversify. As many have noted, that’s more then just 60/40 or 40/60 or whatever. I like to include one or two “odd-ball” holdings in the portfolio, even if they’ve lagged the markets and even if I couldn’t honestly recommend them to someone else.
Back to D&C - A first class outfit. Sounds like they’ve done a lot to try and stabilize DODBX in recent years. And I never understood why a lot of balanced or allocation funds have such skimpy exposure to non-U.S. holdings. Never made sense. Keeping expenses lower is all I ever figured out.

Outperformance for U.S. or international stocks is cyclical and has lasted an average of 8 or 9 years.
Until recently, U.S. equities outperformed for approximately 14 years.
Earnings growth for U.S. companies was stronger than that of overseas companies.
But it's important to note that multiple expansion and currency tailwinds
(for U.S. based investors) contributed considerably to performance.
How will foreign and domestic equities perform during the next 10 years?
https://www.thebostonadvisor.com/us-vs-international-stocks/

I wonder if the recent outperformance of international stocks can continue and begin to reverse this circumstance?

What is recent?
In the last 3 months, VOO+SPY did much better than VXUS. In fact, QQQ doubled XVUS.
https://schrts.co/SvWkQybv
Early in 2025, XVUS did much better.
===================

gman57; I think I'll stick with just US.

That worked in 2010-2024. In that times I consistently posted about investing in the US.
Is it going to work in the next 10 years?
It stopped working in 2025.
While the SP500 could lag, other US categories might not, like VTV=value.
Why not diversify starting at 10% with VTV+VXUS?
BTW, VGK(Europe) has been doing better than international.

I just had a talk with a friend about diversification etc... He was talking about 60/40 US/INTL and I was talking about just US. So I went and did some back testing using VTSAX (total stock) and VTIAX (total intl) Since 2010, US/INTL only beat US 4 years including this year so far. $10K in US/INTL = ~$44k, $10K in US = ~$64k. I think I'll stick with just US.

I wonder if the recent outperformance of international stocks can continue and begin to reverse this circumstance?

To a large extent that’s a result of the dollar falling against foreign currencies over past year or so. But not all is attributable to just that. Stack’s model portfolio (a collection of ETFs plus cash) hasn’t included specific international holdings since I’ve been reading him for 3 or 4 years. But no doubt holdings like XLE (energy sector) do have foreign components.
Re “ I wonder if …” Well, if the U.S. extremes (high valuations) are as bad as some speculate then it would seem like there are better values abroad. I’m not sold on that. Have actually reduced foreign exposure (Europe) over past several months.
This link below to a Meb Faber show might work. Whitney Baker worked alongside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent until he left to join the Administration. I haven’t heard too many pundits more bearish than Baker. Whether you agree or not, she does present some interesting analysis. I haven’t changed anything in how I invest based on this one interview.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-meb-faber-show-better-investing/id1128955736?i=1000712723958

Not sure know which “market” the following numbers represent. But I dug them up in Stack’s latest newsletter. Possibly the S&P 500?
From James Stack (July 18): Current Market Price-to-Earnings 28.3 / Average since 1928 17.7
I’ve checked with M* and found that the P/E for the equity holdings of OAKBX which I recently bought at 13, with the average P/E for this class of funds at 20. (Fund has over 40% in fixed income.)
For reference, LCORX (which I don’t own) comes in at a P/E of 16 according to M*, again with its peer group at 20.
I realize P/E can be measured in different ways and that there are several other measures of market valuation besides P/E. Stack notes several other valuation metrics, all indicating an expensive market.
Bottom line: Are there some funds that might hold up well during a market rout, even considering the apparent “bubble” more generally speaking? ISTM after the March 2000 “Tech Wreck” many other markets recovered in a year or two’s time compared to the NASDAQ which remained below its 2000 high for 15 years.

The stablecoin accounts have 24/7 access from anywhere in the world & may be great for international travelers. They would also lead to democratization of the dollar in that dollar-backed stablecoins can be held by anyone anywhere.
**************************************
Yet, I understand that stablecoins cannot be converted into the dollars allegedly backing the stablecoins' value.
Not for me. No how, no way. Smells like a dead rat.

Not true. When I dabbled in crypto-staking for interest payments several years ago* I was in the Gemini dollar stablecoin and was able to convert it into USD easily and move it into my bank account without problems. Even now, at my new BTC exchange, I can cash the BTC into USD and move it easily.
* and thankfully got out intact a few months later, as the deeper I dug, the more queasy I got over things like black-box counterparty risks which turned out to be 100% prescient and very reminiscent of the conditions leading up to the GFC. And just like in '06-08, lots of (generally clueless) folks got burned, too,

"We were wrong. We are wrong. And we're going to be paying for it for a long, long time." - A sentiment held by both Randolph Duke and many MAGA voters.

The above was a perfect statement in 2022 and 3 years later.
Who gave us the biggest inflation in the last 4 decades? :-)