https://www.businessinsider.com/retirement-saving-advice-2020-from-blackrock-bond-cio-rick-rieder-2019-12
BlackRock’s $1.7 trillion bond chief explains why it’s about to become much harder to save for retirement — and shares his best advice for doing it successfully
Safe, high-yielding investments are shrinking in availability at a time when retirement savers need them the most, according to Rick Rieder, the global chief investment officer of BlackRock’s $1.9 trillion fixed income business.
He estimates that 1.8 million people in the US will hit the retirement age of 65 every six months — double the pace from 20 years ago.

My task this year will be to start, in baby steps, to take T-IRA money and convert it into taxable accounts. I know I'm doing this prematurely, before RMDs must be taken, in 5 years' time. But when the time comes, my required RMDs will be not so big. A back-handed blessing. I'm tracking several funds that y'all suggested to me. Thanks.

Bobpa: "Any opinion on LALDX or HOBEX? Thank you for all your input." .
Bobpa, I owned LALDX for years through an employment retirement menu--I considered it a good, relatively low risk, fund, with a large AUM (likely due to its being marketed through company retirement plans). I think Lord Abbot is somewhat more aggressive in their asset management approach for this fund, compared to funds like DBLSX and DHEIX. I think it can be a good fund for ballast portfolio roles, and for a conservative bond oef investor, it looks like a very viable option.
Regarding HOBEX, it is a relatively new fund (about 3 years old), generally looks to be a High Risk/High Return fund for its category. Focuses heavily on Corporate bonds, and with a bit higher volatility than most of its peers. I don't like its very high Expense Ratio (1.81) and I don't care for a relatively steep peak to trough loss in 2018 for this category of funds. It would not fit my criteria for investing, but certainly has had a high return for its category in its 3 year existence. It is not a fund I follow, not a company I am familiar with, so I personally would be careful with what I know.

I second Gary1952, AKREX it’s an excellent fund.
I’ve been transitioning POGRX into AKREX for two years and am very happy that I did.
The risk/reward profile is far superior to primecap. It is a bit pricey though.

Thanks again. Sounds to me like a fund group in chaos. Hope they get it right. I have little there and it will be even less in a couple weeks. :)
In October I received a letter saying their Infrastructure fund OQGAX was dropping Australian based Macquarie as outside manager and would be serviced in-house. I sold all my shares shortly thereafter. I can’t recall any mention of closing the fund or merging into a different one. . Maybe it was hidden in some fine print. Curiously, Oppenheimer had opened that fund only about 2 years earlier, although it was essentially the same fund Macquarie had run on their own (with likely higher fees).

" For retirees who rely on their investments for retirement income, [the time at which one starts drawing on investments] is also one of the riskiest, if not the riskiest, time in an investor’s life."
If you agree with that (I do), then it must follow, as the night the day, that your later years of retirement are less risky times. Thus it makes sense that you invest most conservatively when you begin retirement, and more aggressively as you move through retirement. In part that is to make up for the very conservative portfolio you start with.
That's the point and conclusion of work by Pfau and Kitces on rising equity glidepaths in retirement. There have been many reports and refinements of that work. I offer just one link below for the basic idea.
https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Pages/Reducing Retirement Risk with a Rising Equity Glide Path.aspx

For those who are interested in investing in a Traditional IRA, that is where the majority of my investment assets are located. I try to use a bit more risky, and higher TR options than in my taxable account. However, I am very conservative, focused on preservation of principal, and using funds that will have a good chance at recouping my RMD distribution each year. In 2019, we had a very good market, and I was able to recoup my RMD, plus increase my overall IRA investment total by a healthy amount. I tend to use a large number of multisector bond oefs in my IRA. I have categorized multisector bond oefs that I follow in the following manner:
Conservative Multisector bond oefs: ANGIX is one of the more conservative lower risk multisector bond fund, and has been around for many years. VCFAX/VCFIX is probably my favorite fund, and has had a solid but shorter history than some other funds. IISIX/ISIAX is actually a nontraditional bond oef, but I consider it a very low risk multisector bond oef. I also include PIMIX/PONAX in this conservative category, have held it for many years, but it has become a bit more inconsistent in recent years, as it has had to branch out into more risky HY and EM bond categories, to help deal with huge AUM--it use to be a predominantly mortgage oriented fund with an emphasis on nonagency mortgages, but not so much anymore.
More risky but attractive multisector bond oefs: PUCZX is one of the more interesting funds, with a very attractive total return history--it use derivatives heavily and has a little higher SD than the more conservative bond oefs. JMSIX/JGIAX is also an interesting fund, highly recommended at Schwab because you can get the Institutional share class very cheaply--its performance history is a bit inconsistent, but it has been doing well this past year. JMUIX/JMUTX is also a very interesting fund, with a great TR history, and a very strong 2019--it has more appeal to me than PUCZX and JMSIX because it appears a bit less risky. PTIAX is a barbell type fund, focusing on longer term Munis and Nonagency mortgages--it has some inconsistency in my opinion, probably because of its barbell holdings. PTIAX pays a nice yield. IOFIX is a multisector bond fund, that is relatively new, and has phenomenal TR history, but it focuses primarily on one risky mortgage category, so I consider it more risky but very tempting.
Not sure what others are doing in this category, but I am "considering" stepping up my risk a little, but not considering any major changes in my overall very conservative holdings. I have this love/hate relationship with PIMIX, which I hold in a small portfolio percentage, and I am trying to determine whether I want to increase my investment in this fund, or possibly add a new fund I don't currently hold like JMUTX.

From the AAII Journal, January 2020. Written by Julie Jason.
"For those who are soon to retire or have recently retired, there is an inflection point between receiving a paycheck from an employer and a paycheck from your portfolio. For retirees who rely on their investments for retirement income, it is also one of the riskiest, if not the riskiest, time in an investor’s life. After all, you won’t go back to work for 45 years to recover from mistakes.
What type of financial service is best for the retiree who needs to “live off of” their investments?"
ARTICLE

https://www.newsmax.com/t/finance/article/947882?section=robertross&keywords=history-longest-bull-market&year=2019&month=12&date=31&id=947882&oref=www.google.com
Why History's Longest Bull Market Is Just Getting Started
'Doom and gloom predictions about the stock market drive click. I get it.
But those predictions have fallen flat for 10 years straight.
U.S. stocks keep marching higher, and history’s longest bull market keeps getting longer.
Here’s a chart of the S&P 500 since February 2009. It’s climbed 325%:'

In NYS your tax bracket won't be that much lower in retirement - the first dollar of taxable income is taxed at 4%, and it doesn't take much ($23K for couples) to see that go up to 5.25% or even 5.9% (at $28K).
Of course NYS doesn't tax SS, so let's say that you'll be saving around 2% on the difference in rates between now and when you retire. (NY recaptures the deduction by taxing the past contributions when you make nonqualified withdrawals. See IT-201 Line 22.)
Assuming that the excess contributions earn a cumulative return of at least 20% over the years, the 10% penalty on the earnings will more than wipe out any savings on the NYS side.
Beyond that, what you've got is essentially a non-deductible IRA. The money goes in post-tax (federal), the earnings are sheltered, and then taxed as ordinary income rather than cap gains/qualified divs when withdrawn.
Post-tax contributions can make sense if you're planning to invest in very tax-inefficient funds, like the 529 Income Portfolio. But if you're planning on investing in something more tax-efficient, I don't think that nondeductible contributions pay off.
Here's another way to ask the question: are there readers who would contribute to a nondeductible IRA if they could not convert it to a Roth? If this is not a winner, and if the 10% penalty consumes any benefit you get from the (temporary) NYS tax deduction, then there's not an obvious benefit in making the excess contributions.

PRNews for immediate Release...... there will be some sort of change in investment markets over the next 10 or 20 years...........end of text !

I've contributed to my grandkids 529 Education accounts for years, and there's probably more than will ever be used. Yet I still contribute to take advantage of NYS's $10K income tax deduction (6.57% marginal tax bracket). I know there's a 10% penalty on earnings for unqualified withdrawals. I figure I can leave the money in the accounts until after I've retired and in a lower tax bracket, but wonder if I should just stop funding and lose the deduction. Any comments?

I oversimplified. EMs today are much different than 30 years ago when I was first immersed in the vocabulary of investing. Some, like China, are highly industrialized economies, global leaders in technology, and growing military powers. Much different from 30 years ago. EM economies differ greatly. Those rich in natural resources might better survive a global downtrend if the price of energy and precious metals remained high. I’ve noticed increased civil strife / unrest in some EMs - notably Latin America. That, coupled with often endemic government corruption works against investors.
Re: 2000. That was an unusual crash. Tech had been hyped out of sight. NADAQ toppled and led the other indexes (Dow, S&P) on the way down, even though those weren’t nearly as overvalued. I wasn’t aware EM held up better - but makes sense. It was well over a decade, I believe, before NASAQ ever regained its 5,000 level

I started to answer the above questions. But tossing in a term like forever really makes them undebatable. Infinity is a very long time. I’m told by scientists that given enough time, virtually anything can and will occur.
I am deeply concerned about #10. Wish this was a poli-sci or sociology class so we could explore that one. FWIW, my vague recollection from doing some Masters work in history back in the 70s is that Hitler, after coming to power, boosted the German economy for a number of years, through huge infrastructure spending and arms buildup. The frightening thing to me is that that was during the Depression and an outgrowth of it. Seems to be different reasons at work for the regression today (speaking more of Europe). Immigration looms large among people’s worries worldwide.

Honestly honestly honestly, and yes, I know it’s the next level of complexity for most people above individual stocks even (let alone equity and bond mutual funds)—I think preferred stocks could be an answer for many people. Especially if needing monthly, or steady but not necessarily monthly, income.
Yes many of the companies that issued these are not common stock SWAN investments, but keep in mind that preferred stock dividends HAVE to be paid before common stock dividends. So for many REITs and BDCs and CEFs and the like, it doesn’t matter how much their “common equity” dividend is, or how much it changes up or down, just that it IS paying a dividend, which these companies tend to do. And the preferred stock holder has to be paid before the common shareholders are paid (sorry for the repetition there).
Some examples of monthly paying preferred stocks (you buy them just like individual stocks, from a broker....most now don’t charge a commission to buy or sell!):
ARR-A: pays high 7% every month (a crappy mortgage REIT but just need it to continue to be a going concern to continue to pay)
ECCB/OXLCO: low-to-mid 7% every month (the common, ECC and OXLC, own CLOs and other Wild West type investments, and definitely have fleas, but same as above)
LANDP/GOODM/GAINM: all from companies managed by Gladstone something or other, and all pay 6% or better, monthly (similar parenthetical to ARR-A....though LAND is a farmland REIT, GOOD is a mixed property REIT, and GAIN is a BDC)
VER-F: pays high 6% monthly (keeps getting partially called, so there is a chance your share counts would slowly decline as the company is able to have the cash available to partially redeem the issue; VER is a middling triple net REIT that was a poor company in a past life)
Certainly these aren’t “can’t lose” investments, and there’s always chances that the issuing company goes belly up, and you have to deal with call risks, where the company buys the preferred shares back at par (generally $25), all of these are trading over $25 par price, and the prices definitely can fluctuate up and down a couple percent or more, based upon interest rate policies and market fears, but if you are interested in decent monthly income that you can count on during most economic times, preferreds are one solid option, in this posters humble opinion.
I dont mean ti redirect the thread (and I realize this is MFO, not preferred stock observer lol), so PM me if any more interest. Definitely not an expert in all the nuances of these securities, but visit several sites dealing with them, and have traded them for a few years. :)

All fund risk and return metrics, ratings, and analytics have been uploaded to MFO Premium, reflecting performance through November 2019.
We went live the morning of 10 December, which is typically the longest it takes. The first Saturday of the month, when Lipper (Refinitiv) drops the monthly data, occurred on the 7th.
The year-end data and attendant ratings should post the weekend of 4 January. It will mark the 60th year of Refinitiv’s database. How many funds have been around at least 60 years? Just 65. That’s right. Best absolute performer? T Rowe Price Small-Cap Stock (OTCFX) at 12.6% … per year! Or, how to turn $1,000 into $1,200,000.
The more interesting news is what went live on 24 December, including: Data Across Ten Decades, Allocation Indices, and Expanded Rolling Averages.
You can read more here.

Anyone seeking to play this?

Love the terminology. I do enjoy combining gaming with investing on those rare occasions where the deck is clearly stacked in my favor. Get in. Get out. Pocket what you can over a few months
(or possibly years) before the market wakes up to the obvious mispricing. Works best with sectors or specialty funds. A fund that’s down 40% in a single year or 30% a year over 3 years is generally worth placing such a bet on. However, scanning TRP’s 150 or so funds, I can see only one fund that’s even negative for 2019. That’s their Dynamic Global Bond fund (RPIEX) - off only about 1%. And looking at a the 3-year chart, all I see there is PRNEX - off slightly - which I already own.
Price isn’t the whole universe. But they have enough funds that I can usually spot major trends there. Nothing worth laying money on the table for IMO. I realize the type of investor Lewis is addressing is the one who exists somewhere in between the extremes of short-term speculator and long-term buy and hold investor. I like to think that that kind of gradual shift in/out of different areas based on relative valuations is something a good manager of allocation funds normally does. None of us can match the depth and breath of market knowledge Price’s global network of analysts is imbued with. (And many other managers as well) So, other than liking RPGAX a lot because the managers have some discretion in underweighting / overweighting different market components, I won’t be throwing money at emerging markets.

Despite high volatility at times, 1987 produced positive total returns in the S&P 500. The losers are the ones who sold and never got back in.

Agreed. And it's probably the same for 2000 and 2009. I know a few people who got seriously burned in 2009 and one or two still haven't recovered the confidence to return to the market. They will probably buy in again at the top....
This "reversion to the mean" concept is interesting. I think it has some major limitations today. And isn't "the mean" always fluid, always changing? What is "the mean" in today's world? As Old Skeet mentioned, P/E ratios are constantly expanding. I see no problem with that. I think value sectors will struggle again this coming decade because growth can be achieved very quickly and easily with the application of new technologies. You could wait 5 or 10 years for the reversion to the mean. Or it may never come at all.

Agreed their forecasts have been inaccurate of late, but I have been around long enough to know that wasn’t always the case, particularly in the post 1999 era when GMO’s predictions were spot on. It comes down to that terribly difficult question: When will valuations matter again? Or are we to presume the next ten years or in this case seven years will precisely mirror the previous seven? What is interesting is leading into the 2008 crash everything pretty much was overvalued. Now like in 1999 there is a real spread in valuations between one part of the global market and another. For those who believe valuations still matter and in the notion of “reversion to the mean” that presents some interesting arbitrage opportunities. The question that folks like Arnott and GMO always struggle with is they don’t know what will trigger the reversion. It has to be something major. Overvaluation alone is never the trigger.

In 12/31/2010 GMO 7 year forecasted US large cap would make 0.4% + 2.5% inflation = 2.9%. The SPY made over 14% annually (link).
Bogle was wrong about the SPY too and Arnott was very wrong and why PAUIX lagged badly.
Many experts were wrong in the last 10 years.