There's no sale involved in a reverse mortgage (who would the buyer be?). You may be conflating Yogi's two paragraphs. One is about reverse mortgages where you gradually borrow money against the value of your home. The other is about seller financed transactions where you loan the full sale amount and are gradually repaid.
Since they are different types of transactions, the mechanisms for continuing to live in your home are different. With a mortgage (forward or reverse) you continue to own the property so long as the mortgage isn't foreclosed. With a sale (seller financed or other), the buyer owns the home. You need to make some sort of arrangement (as a renter or as the holder of a life estate or owner for some period of years, or ...) to continue to use the property.

A reverse mortgage loan, like a traditional mortgage, allows homeowners to borrow money using their home as security for the loan.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, What is a Reverse Mortgage?
FHA-approved reverse mortgage lenders
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/housing/sfh/hecm/hecmlenders

@Derf,
I remember the chip was at eye level on the driver side. It was 5-10 years ago. The fix has held up. The kits are sold by all chain auto parts shops (Amazon might have it too). You have to use it before the chip becomes a spreading crack.
@Davidrmoran, So sorry for what you went through. I hope you make full recovery. I will keep the uninsured motorist insurance. I keep both bodily injury liabilities at $300/600k.

If workable, legally sell the house to a relative or trusted friend & live on mortgage payments. Terms could be mutually beneficial.
Except for the mortgage payment part, this sounds like the deal Harlan Crow made to buy Clarance Thomas' mother's house (formerly owned by Clarance, his mother, and his deceased brother's family). Gives a whole new meaning to "trusted friend".
Thomas' mother got to stay in the house rent free by retaining a life estate. That's where she still owned (had exclusive right to use/occupy) the house until she died. Using a life estate as partial payment for the purchase introduces a couple of tricky items:
- The holder of the life estate (being owner of the moment of the house) is still responsible for property taxes. Crow's company paid the taxes.
- Since the buyer paid not only the dollar amount agreed upon but gave the seller(s) a life estate, ISTM the sale price is the dollar amount plus the value of that life estate (based on life expectancy). The Thomas sale was supposedly structured where the life estate was part of the deal. Alternatively, if the life estate is not part of the purchase price, then it is a gift from buyer to seller, triggering gift tax filings.
Instead of using a life estate, the seller could simply pay rent. That often happens short term in real estate sales. The old owner needs a few extra days to move out, so they pay rent to the buyer starting on the closing date.
Regarding capital gains on any seller financed sale, the IRS provides a nice loophole. (I learned about this just a couple of years ago when a relative looked into selling some property and financing the sale.)
You and I might think of a seller financed sale as a completed sale (complete with recognized cap gains) plus a mortgage held by the seller. But the IRS looks at this as no different from an installment sale. As such, the seller recognizes cap gains in parts over the lifetime of the mortgage.
https://www.sellerfinancedream.com/resource-center/seller-financing-tax-benefits-and-seller-financing-tax-implications
This can help tremendously if the seller would have a large taxable gain (in excess of the $250K/$500K home sale exclusion).

Question: How many have turned to annuities or "annuity - like" strategies to increase your income spending?
When I retired 13 years ago, I attempted to project my future spending needs. Over these years I have meet my spending needs with a combination of pension income (with a COLA), an Annuity Income (Savings that I converted to an Annuity), and some part time work. Since retirement, I have continue to contribute to my HSA and my IRA with contributions from part time work income. Recently I began managing one of my properties as a seasonal rental for additional income. I will work part time spending some of that work income and saving some into an IRA until age 73. My RMDs will then become a forced taxable event that may turn into an income source if needed or taxable savings if not needed.
What type of a portfolio would you design as an "Annuity - like" strategy for yourself? Maybe a combinations of Balanced mutual funds/EFTs that distribute periodically? Am I describing the 4% rule?
Shifting from a mindset of saving for retirement to a mindset of confidently spending in retirement is a huge challenge we all face.
Sourced through Ron Berger's Weekly email Newsletter:
https://robberger.com/newsletter/
Working Paper:
Retirre's Spend Lifetime Income, Not Savings

Abstract: The shift to defined contribution savings plans means that more retirees must fund spending
from savings. Prior studies find that there appears to be a behavioral resistance to spending down
savings after retirement in a manner that is consistent with life cycle models. We explore how lifetime
income, wage income, capital income, qualified savings, and nonqualified savings are used to fund
retirement spending. We find that retirees spend far more from lifetime income than other categories of
wealth. Approximately 80% of lifetime income is consumed, on average, versus only approximately half or
other available savings and income sources. Overall, the analysis suggests that converting savings into
lifetime income could increase retirement consumption significantly, especially for married households.

Edit: Re-reading @Old-Joe post, I now realize that I only restated what he succinctly stated.
I would rather the women in this forum rebut / agree with some of the assumptions (assertions?, even through surveys) made about women.
Have you guys noticed that just in our life time alone the difference between men and women behaviors, roles, skills, etc. has progressively become narrower and narrower? Closing the gap is continuing.
(Specific family and social backgrounds / dynamics being contributing factors is a different thing.)
For every skill (or the lack thereof) I was inclined to attribute to women, I could find so many exceptions that I just could not bring myself to posting those.
Women CFOs and CEOs have to continually grapple with allocation of capital and maximizing ROI. I personally do not think wealth management is a distinctly separate aptitude from Finance. If one has the aptitude and interest, skill can be learned / taught and practiced. There are a lot of men and women that have an aptitude but do not show an interest to gain skills related to (or that emanate from) the aptitude because they choose to allocate their time and energy else where. It is a choice they make - does not mean they do not have the aptitude.
In all the investment forums I have been to, I came across only one poster who ran a concentrated portfolio of individual stocks (and no fixed income and no funds), and it was a retired woman and she did not work in Finance. She posted all her portfolio B/S/Ws. Very disciplined. I forgot what her husband did but she posted so little about anything other than her portfolio. You could ask her to elaborate on her Whys and she was happy to oblige.
20 years ago I used to work at a company and an immigrant lady colleague also had a stock portfolio and she did better than any person in the Finance department. Her husband worked as a handyman. In fact, every person in our Finance department was more aggressive with the company finances than with their own portfolio but she was the opposite.

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

I don't think it is a gender issue. I think is a marital relationship issue, and what is unique in that marital relationship regarding finances and investing.

Per this source, um, it is at least part gender issue, or at least it can be stratified as such:
https://www.newyorklife.com/newsroom/2024/survey-highlights-existing-financial-confidence-and-knowledge-gaps-between-men-and-women
Excerpt (BOLD addded):
NEW YORK - The latest findings from New York Life’s Wealth Watch survey provide insights into the existing financial confidence and knowledge gaps between men and women. Confidence is the top emotion that men report feeling toward managing their household finances (45%) while stress is the leading emotion for women (38%). The survey found that women report feeling the most knowledgeable about paying bills, maintaining good credit, and saving for emergencies. However, they report feeling significantly less knowledgeable than their male counterparts about building wealth, creating investment portfolios, understanding protection products like insurance, and legacy planning.
Plenty of other stratified M/F data included in study for anyone interested in facts over opinions.
That said, the data pretty much ties to what my 40-50 years of work and investing experience has taught me and what I've posted previously here.
Aside: I worked in audit shops my entire career. By chance, the composition was generally skewed more towards women than men. Many were VERY bright people, including plenty of MBAs, CPAs and CAOs, with our reports going to upper mgmt and high level clients.
I always wanted to discuss investments, portfolios and wealth management with anyone else interested, including auditees and those to whom we reported. So did the vast majority of the men I worked under/managed. Conversely, the women, many highly educated and certified in high level finance positions, were largely uninterested, uneducated and inexperienced in wealth mgmt.
Puhleeease don't take these remarks as sexist. They are not and I am not. Take them for what they are: my real-life experiences in the financial world. These experiences are what convinced me the best way to tend to my wife's financial future if I pass first was to educate her as best I could on wealth management.

an advisor friend of mine was talking about how great these buffer products were for their clients. They use innovators but I'm like the outcomes since these became things have been awful. the 2020's have given us +18/+29/-18/+26/+25 market returns. This completely obliterates the return profiles of defined income and buffered ETF's. anything with floor/caps.
These seem reasonable to an investor IMO because they don't realize the market doesn't fall into these buffer zones as much as they think they do. When you see the market returns 9% historically, its easy to assume that most years fall in that range but they don't. its like 33% of all years are in the typical floor/cap returns (-10% to 15%) and like 60% of them are in the above 15%.

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

Good point BB.
I've (gratuitously) managed ports for at least 10 women over the past 40+ years. The most often cited reason from them for not wanting to manage their ports is FEAR.
Yeah, ALL CAPS! True FEAR! FEAR of all kinds of things related to management of investments or doing anything of material financial consequence.
FEAR related to investment portfolio mgmt is as really tough obstacle to overcome. But as part of managing their ports, I've had as a goal for each of them to one day be confident and capable of managing their own ports. I've only been able to do that with one woman who took over the mgmt of her port and is doing remarkably well. Conversely, with a couple of others, we know that we can only even talk to them about their ports for about five minutes before they nearly pass out or break out in hives.
Both widow's ports who had spousal written plans that we currently manage are the same:
Intense FEAR of everything related to the process, especially their own acumen
Distrust, near hatred, of their dearly departed (sic) hubbies handled their finances
Which is all to say, whatever a spouse has written in their plan for their surviving spouse stands a reasonable chance of not being executed/executed as planned due to FEAR, distrust and/or a lack of acumen.

We have the option to discontinue the medical part of auto insurance in Michigan. Having a good health plan, I opt-out. Unfortunately, for my insurer this involves signing and mailing in a form every 6 months or you default back to the more expensive plan. The opt-out is somewhat hidden inside a 5-6 page document, extremely confusing to read through with several different options one may check off (most of which don’t apply to you). I made a paper copy of one before mailing it and simply pull that out every 6 months as a model rather then wading through it all over and over. Looks like a game to me to keep those w/o the reading skills or interest in the matter continuing to pay higher premium for insurance they don’t need or can’t afford.
I have generally adhered to the advice @msf’s father related to him. 5 years (+ -) would seem a reasonable time to stop collision coverage. Maybe a bit longer with today’s more expensive to repair “computers on wheels.” With comprehensive coverage, however, ISTM you get quite a bit for a small price. Covers storm damage, glass breakage, stone chips from debris and striking a deer or other critter. I carry a $2500 collision deductible. Have considered going even higher for a bit greater savings. At some point it becomes a comfort issue, as most here could probably afford to replace a totaled vehicle.
One element that gives me pause is that my insurer covers collision damage to rented vehicles up to the amount your own car is covered. I had a rental totaled in Florida 15 years ago by a distracted commercial truck driver who took out 3 passenger vehicles that were waiting at a red light. My insurer picked up the entire bill. Did not have the expensive insurance from the rental car company. So, I’d not want to drop collision unless prepared to pay for coverage at the rental counter.
Added - If you finance your vehicle all bets are off. Lenders often mandate full collision / comprehensive coverage. That’s one good reason not to finance a vehicle. I’ve never leased, but would imagine terms are similar when it comes to insurance.

@Crash: kudos to you for helping your niece get an education. My hasty reading the first time through had me wondering if sending money to Australia was a new idiomatic expression for kissing money goodbye. Au contraire! I, too, will fund education, but I become very stingy when relations want dough for something else.
@rforno: way back in the late sixties when my wife and I were building castles in the sky, we heard of an Aussie scheme that would pay us to settle there in return for teaching for two years. Naïve at the time, we had no idea that trying to attract « people like us » was part of a plan to populate the country with whites as opposed to Asians. It’s quite ironic now because Madame and I ended up with 5 Asian adoptees. When we lived in Berkeley, a friend told me we fit right in because no one looks like their parents there. Sadly, I can’t say that level of tolerance can be found just anywhere in the US of A.

Great post @yogibearbull.
Me and the missus have been together since we were kids. Back in the 70's-80's, she easily (and proudly for her) would have been on a Top 10 List nationally of spouses who had ZERO interest in all things financial, especially investments.
After all these years, that interest level of ZERO might now at least be a ONE or TWO.
Yeah, her interest level is still a challenge for me.
BUT, over all these years, I felt it was my duty and obligation to not concentrate on her interest level, but rather address her acumen by educating her on all things financial, especially investments.
So I did, albeit with her kicking and screaming in the early years!
And now, after ~50 years, despite still negligible interest, she is a walking, talking authority on US stock OEFs and ETFs and CDs (our investment vehicles of choice), well, at least the ones that are worthy of our investment dollars.
Leaving a written plan might help the dying spouse feel that they've done their part in the marriage. But good luck to the surviving spouse with all that, as yogi has so eloquently detailed.
Aside: We currently manage the portfolios of several friends and relatives, including two widows whose hubbies had left them written plans that they had ZERO interest or ability in following.
YMMV. As may your take on how this critical element should be handled.

Rick, Why did you decide not to become a dual (Aussie + US) citizen? Australia would have happily given you a permanent residency under their point system. It is a nice place to retire if you have access to it.
I know a couple of Aussies who moved to the US and work in Finance. They do not want to work in Australia.
I am told that the police in Australia is so much community friendly than the cops in the US (the Aborigines might disagree with that statement).

I'm not close to 'retirement age' but yes, the the thought has crossed my mind and is on my plate as a possible destination. I know at a holiday party a few years ago the Oz ambassador was joking about how they "could always use people like you" and that having an Aussie degree was a great thing. So ... who knows what the future holds? (They've got their own political crazy happening, of course ... but it's nowhere as bats---t insane as ours is, that's for sure.)
Full disclosure: There was a moment back in mid-Nov 2016 when I was coming back from a consulting trip in Melbourne and was really really reaaaallllly tempted to walk out of the airport, crash with friends for a bit, and do exactly that ... but being a professional, I knew I had too much going on work-wise back home to do that in the middle of a semester --- and it wasn't an existential crisis for me (yet). Darn you, professional ethics! (The uni was actively trying to recruit me for an interesting position, too ... but the job had too many weird 'hooks' from its industry benefactor that didn't sit well with me.)

Planned early January annual chunk taken from the portfolio. This year, it's bigger: sending the (foreign) niece to go to school (and eventually permanent immigration) in Australia. Nice to be able to do it. The satisfaction is worth more than the money. I wanted to spread it out, so:

I did my PhD at a uni in Perth, and still consider Australia my second home given the # of times I've been down there over the many years then and since ...

Uninsured motorist bodily injury covers not only the driver (covered by Medicare and presumably Medigap, else potential losses are unlimited) but also other passengers who might have high deductibles. It also covers pain and suffering. Whether these matter enough to you to be worth the cost is a personal decision.
Note that I'm describing uninsured motorist coverage in Calif. It means different things in different states, especially in no fault states (Calif. is a fault state).
My father used to tell me that after five years or so, I should drop collision and comprehensive. The car will have depreciated so much that it's not worth insuring - the insurance company may just "total" it. The OP's car is worth virtually nothing, so recovery under collision or comprehensive would also be next to nothing.
OTOH, I don't follow my father's advice. I drive my car so little that I have to buy new tires (rubber dries out) before they need to be rotated. Little driving and proper maintenance mean my car still has significant value. Replacing it (not a concern of the OP) would be costly, as car prices have soared in the past few years.
Finally, just because a car has about as much mileage as one driven by a little old lady doesn't mean it hasn't been stressed (tends to refute my thinking that this enhances car value).

Planned early January annual chunk taken from the portfolio. This year, it's bigger: sending the (foreign) niece to go to school (and eventually permanent immigration) in Australia. Nice to be able to do it. The satisfaction is worth more than the money. I wanted to spread it out, so:
Small-ish bites from:
PRWCX
PRCPX
TUHYX
WCPNX (in taxable.)
The tax lady assures that I STILL will not reach taxable income level necessary to BE a federal taxpayer, again, for 2025. Nice. RMDs must start in 3 years at age 73. But in a backhanded way, these yearly withdrawals keep the portfolio from appreciating too much, thus reducing the amount of future RMDs. In the meantime, good things get done with the "green." :)

@dtconroe- Well sir, while I surely respect your thoughts on all of this, I must demur with respect to the "spousal" element of the conversation. From my many years of frequenting MFO I can confirm that this question is actually a very important one with respect to older investors, and one which has been discussed numerous times over the years.
I personally have a similar situation, and have attempted to simplify and structure our financial resources to accommodate my wife's abilities to deal with the various financial "systems" that must be involved. I'm always very interested to read about how others might handle this subject, as there's always something to be learned here.
Thanks for initiating this thread.
OJ

Hmmm... Years ago, Horrocks was a genius, and Lou Rukheyser interviewed him as Manager of the year. Was it M* that selected him for the honor? I owned MACSX. Since then, I wonder if he has become the sand in the gears? Is the problem child making his exit? Or just moving to a different desk in the office?

If I had to make a guess: problem child finally getting ousted. I met Robert a few times over his tenure, once when he first joined matthews in 2009. He was energetic and passionate about the opportunity in Asia. I last met him in 2018 and it seemed he had gotten quite lazy, didn't really provide in depth answers and had an attitude of "couldn't be bothered". I got the sense he made his money and was just coasting.
Under his leadership as CIO at Matthews, a number of talented PMs left for other firms. Artisan in particular took a number. I recall Capital Group also taking one of their lead PMs for Japan equity. You gotta wonder why they'd leave a boutique like Matthews given their backgrounds and areas of interest. My guess? Poor leadership and lack of belief in the company. Remember, these are investment people. They likely were getting some of their compensation in company stock.
Matthews assets are now below $8bn. They were $30bn only 3 years ago. Looks like the PMs that departed were smart assuming they were able to get their equity out of the firm before it started sinking.

msf, you are absolutely correct! My Schwab assigned Personal Account Representative has previously informed me that there is a list of local FAs, that they can provide to me, if I want to work with someone locally. We have not gone down that path "yet", but we have discussed it as an option. The important thing for me is to involve my wife in these decisions, and to ensure she is part of the decision, whatever that may be. And concerning the "option" of switching my banking arrangement to an online experience with Schwab Brokerage, that has been discussed periodically on these financial forums in the past, and it has been adopted by a few posters I know very well. If it was just a decision I was making for myself, then I would look at it in more detail. But Banking in my situation, is always "joint" banking arrangements, and I always have my wife's input/participation in those decisions. We have been married over 50 years, and I know how frustrated my wife is with online financial processes, and she would never agree to online, joint banking systems. Just because it is possible to do it, does not mean it is something that you should do, especially if it will upset and be resisted by your wife.

"Excellent" observations by the quacks.
I didn't beat the SP500 in 2023-4. Not even close, and I don't need it.
It's all at (https://fd1000.freeforums.net/post/446)
I know that none of you can do it; just keep quacking. I already have heard it for at least 15 years.
Remember, I was told that I don't have a clue; I will never retire, I will never make it in retirement and timing + low SD could not be done.
The reality is completely different. I only need about 1% from my portfolio to keep my nice lifestyle for decades without any pension or an inheritance.
Observant1: hindsight?
FD: It's much easier to throw stones. Many of my trades and analysis are on my site. You may learn something.
I also have several trades I made in the past several years where I sold before major meltdowns in 2020 and 2022 and when I bought back.

NOTE: This is the FINAL report for 'The week that was'. All numbers for the shortened week and final totals for the 2024 year ending data is accurate, to the best of my knowledge, from sources.
FOR YOUR USE: Most of you are familiar with M* and the performance page. This LINK is set with FDGRX. Scroll down to the 'Trailing Returns' section for the most current data. BE SURE to verify the DATE of the data. Usually, the new data is available within 8 hours of the markets closing.
ADD: This is directed towards possibilities into the new government period arriving January 20, and monetary/fiscal actions.
--- Bond vigilantes are investors who sell government bonds or threaten to do so to force policy changes and discipline excessive government spending:
--- Explanation
Bond vigilantes use their market power to drive up borrowing costs for the government. This can happen when they protest against expansionary monetary or fiscal policy.
--- Origin
The term was coined by economist Ed Yardeni in the 1980s to describe traders who sold Treasury bonds to protest Federal Reserve policies that were considered too inflationary.
--- Example
In the "Great Bond Massacre" from 1993 to 1994, US 10-year yields increased from 5.2% to over 8% due to concerns about federal spending. The Clinton administration and Congress responded by reducing the deficit, and 10-year yields dropped to around 4% by 1998.
NOTE:

My intention, at this time; is to present the data for the selected bond sectors, as listed; through the end of the year (2024). This 'end date' will take us through the U.S. elections period, pending actions/legislation dependent upon the election results, pending Federal Reserve actions and market movers trying to 'guess' future directions of the U.S. economy. As important during this period, are any number of global circumstances that may take a path that is not expected; and/or 'new' circumstances.

FIRST: NOTHING TO ADD/ALTER regarding 'Never-Never Land'. The pre-DC world shift of January, 2025 remains 'interesting' at this time! We're in a 'Never-Never Land' (events you never imagined) of potential large impacts upon various economic functions emanating from a central government in the coming months and years. What comes next for the investing world of bonds is not yet known or fully understood, except for those have a better guessing system than I. I can only watch and listen a little bit and let the numbers try to bring forth meaningful directions.
W/E December 31 , 2024. Bond NAV's Most positive. FINAL REPORT
--- 'Course, all the bond sectors in the list find their reasons for price movements, and we find most bond sectors HAD SMALL GAINS for this 2 day week's pricing to END the 2024 year. The majority of bond sectors were UP for the 2 days of the week. So, depending on where you're 'hanging' your bond market monies, the pricing this week, was mostly UP. The MINT etf, to the best of my recall, has maintained a positive price for the year, each and every week; and this remains for this week/year.
A few numbers for your viewing pleasure.
NEXT:
*** UST yields chart, 6 month - 30 year. This chart is active and will display a 6 month time frame going forward to a future date. Place/hover the mouse pointer anywhere on a line to display the date and yield for that date. The percent to the right side is the percentage change in the yield from the chart beginning date for a particular item. You may also 'right click' on the 126 days at the chart bottom to change a 'time frame' from a drop down menu. Hopefully, the line graph also lets you view the 'yield curve' in a different fashion, for the longer duration issues, at this time. Save the page to your own device for future reference. NOTE: take a peek at the right side of this graph to find the yield swings of the past week, and for the current yields for the last business day.
For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, December 30 - December 31, 2024
***** This week (Wednesday), FZDXX, MM yield continues to move with Fed funds/repo/SOFR rates; and ended the week at 4.28% yield (+4 basis points for the week). Fidelity's MM's continue to maintain decent yields, as is presumed with other vendors similar MM's. SO, one is still obtaining a decent MM yield. MOST MM's found a positive .04 basis change in yield for the week.
--- AGG = +.27% / +1.31% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.08% / +5.94% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = +.21% / +3.92 % (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = +.39% / +1.81% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = +.40% / -.64% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +.17% / +1.65% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = +.17% / +4.74% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = +.25% / +4.30% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = +.15% / -4.80% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = +.27% / -8.06% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = +.67% / -12.74% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = +.37% / -16.13% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = -.61% / +27.55% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = +.65% / -35.93% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 2x version of EDV etf)
*** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
--- BAGIX = +.31% / +1.85% Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- USFR = +.06% / +5.46% (WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury)
--- LQD = +.18% / +.86% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- MBB = +.26% / +1.31% (I-Shares Mortgage Backed Bonds)
--- BKLN = +.10% / +8.20% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
--- HYG = +.13% / +7.97 % (I Shares High Yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- HYD = +.56%/+4.94% (VanEck HY Muni)
--- MUB = +.26% /+1.31% (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
--- EMB = +.28%/+5.54% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
--- CWB = -1.07% / +10.06% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
--- PFF = +.67% / +7.24% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
--- FZDXX = 4.28% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MM fund
*** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022. (For reference to current date)
Comments and corrections, please.
Remain curious,
Catch