I think the White Coat Investor's target market is not us. Its doctors and good gravy many of them need the help in the world of investing. anectodatally i know a few that a a 800 dollar course may have saved them millions. the one i'm thinking of off hand invested all of their money starting ebay businesses. He opened 3 offices and 2 years later closed 3 offices.

Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

Just to set the record straight here there was a nearly 20% decline in 1990 during the Gulf War. Regardless I am still in the bull camp based on what occurred on April 9.

It is true that the SP500 went down in 1990, but it was before the war.
The Gulf War started in Mid-January 1991 and the SP500 went up over 25%.
Surprisingly, markets are nervous before the actual war but not after the start because there are no more unknowns. It was clear the US would win the war.
https://schrts.co/TTZMpgVH
BTW, EIS=Israel ETF is up 5% since the beginning of the war last Friday, June 13.

Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

Just to set the record straight here there was a nearly 20% decline in 1990 during the Gulf War. Regardless I am still in the bull camp based on what occurred on April 9.

On Hedge Funds (a year old. Still may be of interest)
Excerpt: ”JPMorgan showed current use of leverage - at roughly 2.7 times - is close to a peak reached since 2017 and higher than 98% of the time it has been tracked since then. Morgan Stanley also said leverage in the U.S. was higher only 2% of the time when tracked in the last fourteen years”
Leveraged stock ETFs with AUMs
Leveraged bond ETFs with AUMs
”Best Trading Leveraged Equity Mutual Funds”

Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

I happened to watch the “stupid liar” remark on Bloomberg TV this morning. Bloomberg followed it immediately with a Liz Ann Saunders interview. What a contrast in class and decorum.
Saunders fears that if Powell or some new Trump appointed Fed Chair aggressively pursues rate cuts, the longer end (10+ years out) might actually move higher as it did a year ago. Sure wouldn’t be good news for the housing sector.

Thanks for your input @Old_Joe. I’m hesitant to list funds I own because what’s appropriate for me might be too aggressive or too lame for another. But one I’ve watched for years and finally picked up recently is BAMBX. the “Geritol” of funds. Lewis Braham did a very nice write up on it in Barron’s in November 2020.

Post-FOMC Notes
Rates: Fed funds held at 4.25-4.50%, bank reserves rate at 4.40% (generous), discount rate at 4.50%. Treasury QT continued -$5 billion/mo, MBS QT at -$35 billion/mo.
Inflation-expectations remain high now but should be headed down longer term. Rate increases cannot be ruled out, but they have very low probability for the next few years. Prospects of tariff-inflation are unclear. GDP growth has been distorted by abnormal imports/exports ahead of tariffs. Oil & gasoline prices have move up on Israel-Iran skirmishes, but those hikes may not stick (or, may). The US is almost self-sufficient in oil & gas, so it's less vulnerable to external disturbances.
Labor market is solid. Wage growth is moderate. The unemployment rate of 4.2% is still near full employment. Both labor supply & demand have deteriorated, but they remain in balance. This may explain why tougher immigration hasn't affected the labor data yet. However, it's harder to find new jobs or replacement jobs.
Housing has additional complexity in that its short- and long- term outlooks are different.
Uncertainties have diminished but remain elevated due to tariffs, trade, immigration & geopolitics. These have caused wider dispersions in the SEPs. However, pay more attention to short-term projections.
Effects of AI may be positive (general prosperity) or negative (deflationary). AI may augment the labor or replace it. But changes would be transformational.
Fed is data dependent but also forward-looking, so he couldn't be tied down to what the past data showed.
Economic data collection is important because good data benefits all - public, businesses, government. It's an investment in the future.
US fiscal policies & big global economic changes aren't within the purview of the Fed, so it will wait & react to those as they come.
New SEPs (summaries of economic projections) were released.
5-yr review of the Fed about policies & communications is almost complete. These reviews have been done since 2012 - they were done annually at one time, but now every 5 yrs. It's not affected by changes in Fed leadership. Fed staffing level has been reduced as the government shrinks overall. Powell declined comment on whether he will stay on as Fed Governor after his term as Chair expires (that may determine whether the new Fed Chair after 05/2026 may be internal or external); he also declined to address President Trump's comments about him in the media.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/2048/thread

PIMCO All Asset and PIMCO All Asset All Authority funds are just so so funds after tracking for many years.

the most amazing thing regarding barry ritholtz is his ability to get top-of-the-line guests.
there are several exchanges where barry pits his years of investing heuristics against bill's more probabilistic backed approach. it did not appear barry was going to let go regardless.
but as a middle-of-the-road conservative, nothing was more telling than barry's inability to understand the likely mid-long term disaster of trump. barry tried to portray big panics (dotcom, 9\11,covid...) as regular things investors survive, but history mostly forgets those that didnt survive.
so while economic outcomes of panics may be the same, this is a singular cause by the most powerful person in the world with unprecedented incompetence.
then both went on to giggle over the infamous clip, where trump (& family) at the peak of his mental powers, could not do simple math, and expended more time defending his error then attempting a correct recalc.

but as with other topics, i doubt barry walked away agreeing trump is uniquely highly probable disaster.

One article on the question
A late night listen prompted me to consider the possibility. Guest was Whitney Baker (audio linked at end). Among the concerns she noted is the amount of leverage (borrowed money) in the system. I’m playing that game myself on small scale by (1) carrying a recent home upgrade on a (interest-free for 18 months) credit card so the money can stay invested in a Roth as long as possible. And I carry a small 3% mortgage on my home preferring to risk the money in the markets rather than pay off the loan. Suspect I’m not alone here in that thinking. Of course these are minuscule amounts of “leverage” compared to what hedge funds or CEFs engage in.
Alan Greenspan famously said in the 90s that you can’t recognize a bubble until it has burst. He’s been laughed at for the remark. I get it. But he’s not a dumb person. I won’t list them, but several “authorities” believe there is a market bubble (and they have been scorned in recent years). Bill Fleckenstein is one. Fleck cites passive inflows into retirement savings plans along with index investing. Don’t laugh too loud. He’s certainly been right for several years on gold which has more than doubled over only 2 or 3 years. And highly respected James Stack has his investors at 57% invested and 43% in cash or T-bills. That’s very conservative for him.
Of course, you can cite even more “authorities” who insist there is no bubble. Honestly, I’m not making the case either way. But the question is one worth considering. In a real market crash it’s very hard to “log-in” and sell your plummeting investments and virtually impossible to speak to your friendly fund rep. It gets very crazy. We had a small sneak-preview in late March.
I’ve looked up the P/E (one measure of relative value) on M* for some funds of interest. They all seem tame to me - not signifying a bubble. I have no idea how M* calculates these.
PRWCX: 21.91
DODBX: 13.65
LCORX: 14.08
PRFDX: 14.73
OAKBX: 13.04
Link to Meb Faber May 2025 interview with Whitney Baker

Here’s an improved link to the transcript
Audio Link
Thank you @Mark. I hope above audio link works for those wanting to listen. I did a very quick read.
A Barry Ritholtz podcast with guest Bill Bernstein. - Bernstein’s credentials:” Efficient Frontier Advisors Co-Founder & Neurologist “
It’s a casual rambling look at stock market risks over many years and how various investors deal with the risk. Bernstein is interested in the part of the brain that instinctively tells us to flee when the going really gets bad. Very hard instinct for most to repress. They discuss different portfolios that are easier to stick to than 100% equities. One is a portfolio designed to endure “the worst 98% of all markets”. They debate whether an all-stock approach is best, but both seem to doubt most individuals could stick to it in prologued bear markets - even if they were 30+ years away from retirement.
Sounds like at any given time you have 5 chances out of 6 that stocks will go up. But how to deal with the 1 in 6 probability they will tank? Bonds enter into the discussion. Jim Grant and Charlie Munger are a couple big names they weave into the discussion (along with William Shakespeare). There are some references to Trump’s tariffs and the risk to markets they pose as well as his family’s general financial acumen - but not the dominant theme.

Looks like I'm having a computer malfunction.

The board’s software is really difficult to work with this evening!

This ties into what I was saying a few weeks ago about the dollar's dominance on the world stage being questioned due to FOTUS and his policies....coupled w/America's blooming debt.
I still think over the next several years global trade/economics will be restructured around, but not necessarily through, the US and USD.

@FD1000: Concerning your comments (just above), I am in close agreement.

Thank you.
We should concentrate on investments and money on this site.
=======================
Watches: In the last 10 years, I kept buying cheap Chinese watches that look like Apple Watches and have about 80% of their capabilities for about $25-30. Every 3 years I threw them away and bought a new one with better technologies.
I bought 2 Seikos in my life. They are just indestructible. They got banged, fell on the floor, and still work, but I haven't used them for years because I like digital and lighter watches. I also like to read my messages and receive phone calls.
Seikos are great watches; anything more expensive than that is just a showoff. Just call it men's jewelry. Most people carry their phone everywhere; you really don't need a watch.

I drive an M Roadster. I bought it 25 years ago. Used. Paid cash.
Well, yes, we also have a Volvo, bought in 2015, At the factory. Cash.
To my son's considerable distress, I don't feel a need for the most modern car.
At the end of my career, we got a new VP. She called us together for a chat. "When you first graduated, you drove a Toyota, but now you would certainly drive a Lexus." I was driving a Honda. Yeah, I didn't think much of her other ideas, either. This is the part where having a larger investment portfolio came in. Picture my hands in a weighing motion. I was fairly sanguine with the conclusion - I don't need this (the VP experience).

European stocks have underperformed U.S. stocks for more than a decade.
The S&P 500 gained more than 500% since 2010 while European stocks
were up less than 150% during the same period.
Conversely, European stocks gained 220% during the previous 15 years
(1995 - 2009) while the S&P 500 went up only 130%.
What has changed during the past 15 years and will these changes revert?
"The trade-off confronting investors: The U.S.’s biggest stocks are more innovative and profitable
but also far more expensive, while Europe’s are much less interesting but are cheap and have stimulus,
plus an appeal to investors looking to diversify away from their highly concentrated U.S. holdings."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/it-s-a-scary-world-but-investing-abroad-has-new-attractions/ar-AA1GJfVH

Individuals and family groups can also invest with Bowen, Hanes & Company.
The minimum required investment is not disclosed on their website.
"The firm operates according to a carefully formulated strategy, and is dedicated to our primary mission,
meeting the needs and long-term objectives of our clients, including pension funds,
profit sharing plans, foundations, endowments, individuals and family groups."
https://www.bowenhanes.com/

I ain't got fifty years to work with anymore anyway.

- The only two sources of financial stress are risk and debt.
FD: It depends. Risk is in your head; change your thinking or maybe change your style.
The right debt is healthy and welcome. Example: buying a house with a loan.
- A home is not an investment.
FD: Home is the best investment for most Americans. Most retirees have small portfolios.
- Trying to get ahead by cutting down on expenses is a loser’s game.
FD: Cutting expenses is one of the best choices for most people because Americans spend too much money and have small portfolios at retirement.
- Increasing income is the key to financial happiness.
FD: If income is a higher salary, probably. Increasing investment income isn't the key.
If someone makes $150K annually, is she happier than another who makes $100K?
If someone's portfolio is worth 10 million, is she happier than another who has "only" 5 million?
- A dwelling under 1250 sq. feet represents a meager existence / lack of success in life
FD: Again, if you are a student or just started working in NYC, you are doing fine.
- Driving a 10-15 year old (rusty) vehicle also represents a lack of success in life.
FD: Really? So, why did Sam Walton drive an old vehicle?
- Never finance a new vehicle. Always pay cash.
FD: Know how to negotiate new vehicles and always finance it when the rate is low at 0-1.99% while your investments do much better.
- Don’t skimp on insurance.
FD: too generic. You need the proper insurance.
We always had Home, Auto, and Umbrella. When we had young kids, we had term life insurance. As retirees with grown kids, we stopped it years ago.
- Always give large outsized tips for services well rendered.
FD: Please define "well rendered."
Wait, I have one. Save a million by age 35. The devil is in the details :-)

I have a couple of Citizen watches along with a Seiko watch.
Inherited an Omega gold watch that my father earned in 1976 for 25 years of service with his employer.
This watch is in mint condition and has never been worn.
Might be worth a decent amount but I think I'll keep the Omega
for sentimental reasons plus it's a very nice looking watch.

I got a lot out of reading their massive reports years ago. However, when they sold the firm to that "fund" manger ( I forgot the name) and justified it for "estate planning purposes ( even though two of them were bachelors) I lost all interest.