Why look at EXDAX when ICMUX performance for 1-3-5 years is so much better with a lower SD.
ICMUX doubled EXDAX for 1 year and more than doubled for 5 years.

Smallish nips of NSRGY & FLO. Like the X girlfriend or wife you can’t quite get over. Happy New Years guys. Thanks for keeping this thread running. I don’t mind wading through multiple pages at all to read the latest..

Manning & Napier was bought out by Callodine Group LLC in the middle of 2022. I'm only guessing, but possibly the acquistion didn't go well or sit well with Manning & Napier fund annalists and managers. Just a guess.
Manning & Napier was a great but very small boutique bond investment firm in Fairport NY, a very nice suburb of Rochester. It went public about 10 years ago, which may or may not corollate to the other turnover mentioned in your post.

The problem with Marks and many others is in the details.
How do you control risk in real life when markets punch you in the face?
If you know your goals, risk, volatility and are willing to tolerate it, and you are a buy-and-hold investor, you should have less of a problem. That's a lot easier for the accumolator.
In retirement, things get more difficult. When to retire? when to take SS? future taxes, pensions, LTC?. Are you really needing the future risk/SD? If you have enough?
I have been thinking, practicing, tweaking, and testing performance under risk/SD for about 25 years. This is what has worked for me.
1) The best way to avoid losses is to sell to MM. I couldn't find any fund(s) that can minimize the losses for the entire portfolio to under 3%, not even 5%, and still have reasonable performance as 50/50.
2) Investing based on what happened months ago or 1-2 (or more) years is a no-go. The worst years present great opportunities because of item 1 above.
3) There is almost nothing 100% safe. Stocks go down, bonds, even treasuries go down (2022). Not all MM are safe too; some can limit your access when you want to trade, others can break the $1.
4) Diversification doesn't save you either. IMO, investing in just 3-6 funds is all you need to make your life simpler.
5) Valuation and others are another trap.
The solution:
Do almost nothing
or
Know what you are doing, be a good trader, and know the risk/SD, it is different many times; expect the worst and hope for the best. Expect the worst is the key. A 5-10% decline can end in 20-30% and even 50%. If you wait too long, you are too late.
This is the main point: you can't define the risk/SD, it's not predictable.

You may have seen the news that the 39th President Jimmy Carter passed away after about 2 years under home hospice care.

U.S. stock exchanges will close on Thursday, January 9 in observation of a national day of mourning in honor of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who died on Sunday at the age of 100.
The New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq announced the closures on Monday, a customary gesture to honor deceased presidents.
The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association has recommended an early close on Jan 9 for the U.S. bond market at 2:00 p.m. ET/1900 GMT.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/wall-street-close-jan-9-honor-president-jimmy-carter-2024-12-30/

M* has what looks like an absolute risk scale (1-100) for funds. Unlike its category risk scale (low, below average, ..., high), funds are not measured against their peers.
The methodology talks about target allocation benchmarks, but from what I've seen these "portfolio risk scores" are not rescaled according to fund type. Equity funds are inherently more risky and thus always seem to rate mid to high scores. Ultrashort funds seem to always score in the single digits regardless of their risk relative to peers.
RPHIX - 4
CBLDX - 5
DHEAX - 6
This ordering comports with my understanding of their relative risks. The Dave Sherman funds are managed to have very little volatility.
CBLDX has a longer effective maturity (1.01 years) and higher volatility (1.57) than RPHIX (2.7 - 6.8 months and 0.80 respectively).
DHEAX has a higher standard deviation of 2.38, and an effective duration of 1.47 years. Even without considering that a fund's duration is shorter than its maturity, this is already longer (worse) than CBLDX's 1 year effective maturity. It had a worse drawdown in March 2020 and lost money in 2022 while the other funds have never had a losing calendar year.
Portfolio Visualizer confirms the relative rankings, Feb 2018-Nov 2024, the funds' std deviations are 0.92, 2.76, and 4.27 respectively, while max drawdowns are 1.09%, 5.50%, and 9.74% respectively.

Hospice Coverage
Hospice care is palliative (not curative) care for comfort & pain relief for terminal illnesses. The hospice care is under Medicare Part A, but the room & board aren't covered. The care can be at hospice facilities or at-home. Medicaid-eligible trusts (MAPT) may be used with advance planning.
You may have seen the news that the 39th President Jimmy Carter passed away after about 2 years under home hospice care.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/306/thread

Historical precedent imo does not hold much value.
Others beg to differ. They look at how a fund performed in specific economic environments (such as the 2008 GFC you mention) and/or over full economic cycles to get a sense of how the fund might behave going forward. These are not guarantees but data points that help gauge risk.
Prior to the 2008 GFC, real estate prices had NEVER gone down nationally and the "pundit" consensus at the time was it could not happen (real estate pricing is local blah blah...) and yet.
2008 demonstrated that diversification is not a cure-all. Geographic diversification did not prevent losses in the real estate sector. Actually, in 2008 even diversification across sectors would not have improved matters much.

Real estate investment trusts wrapped up 2008 with negative returns, including dividends, of 37.3% on average, according to a report released Wednesday by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts in Washington. The performance was in line with the broader indexes, such as the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index, which was down 37%, the Russell 2000 Index, which was off 33.8%, and the Nasdaq Composite Index, which declined 40.5%.

https://www.investmentnews.com/alternatives/reit-returns-fell-373-in-2008/19418
A minor point on your datum for completeness. Real estate prices did go down (Y/Y) prior to 2008. It's just a specific slice of real estate - housing transactions involving conforming Fannie May/Freddie Mac loans - that hadn't dropped before then. Case-Schiller's broader housing index dropped in previous years (1991, 2007), as did commercial real estate.
Assessing the Credit Risk of CDOs Backed by Structured Finance Securities: Rating Analysts’ Challenges and Solutions: fn 5 and Figure 1.
AAA CLO can incur a loss regardless of the prior 30Y history
Of course. And MMFs can break a buck - retail funds had a 37 year run, 1971-2008 before incurring a loss. But that didn't make their history useless.
The 30 year run of AAA CLOs without losses doesn't prove they never will lose money. Rather, it serves as evidence that these relatively complex structured vehicles are not brittle. They have not collapsed in a variety of stressful environments. Nevertheless, there may be a latent design defect that will show up when the exactly right conditions arise.
I wouldn't bet my last dollar on that never happening, just as I wouldn't bet my last dollar on MMFs never failing or being frozen. But that possibility doesn't deter me from using MMFs for some of my cash. It's a matter of what risks you perceive (it's never zero) and how sensitive you are to those risks.

Human beings need reminding the same thing every few years to protect them from themselves. By now, in the minds of many, GFC is just an acronym devoid of the depth of its true meaning.

All the more reason to understand the difference between CDOs which caused the 2007-2009 financial crisis and CLOs which did not.
If you were invested to a significant degree when the GFC began (late 2007) it’s pretty hard to forget. I recall a chance meeting on the street in early ‘08 with an aquantence from my high school years, then retired, who recounted the pain he and his wife were going through having lost about half their life savings in a matter of months, (Some “high-yielding” mutual fund as I recall.)

"I would trust AAA rated corporates over AAA rated securitized stuff."
Human beings need reminding the same thing every few years to protect them from themselves. By now, in the minds of many, GFC is just an acronym devoid of the depth of its true meaning.

There weren’t many investment grade CLOs available at retail prior to 2020 when JAAA opened. HSRT came up in a web search. It gained +3.77% in 2020. I would never recommend one as a cash substitute. I confess to having misread the original post as at least opening the door for something “more active” (aggressive) then the safety of cash. If you want safety, short-term T-Bills are usually regarded as the safest investment, with insured bank / credit union accounts a close second. How a chaotic government shutdown (budget related) might upset that assumption is sometimes a topic of conversation.
True, cash is what one desires for absolute safety, especially if it’s to fund near term commitments (housing, medical care, child support, etc.) As an investor I have sometimes “stretched” the definition of cash as a part of a diversified portfolio. ”Relatively safe” compared to most other investments I hold works for me. Willing to take a short term haircut in pursuit of longer term goals. Like OJ, I’m getting up there in years, so “long term” still exists but in a different way. My current risk perameters allow me to hold about 5% in JAAA alongside 5% in a money market fund. But that’s not for everyone.
As @Junkster says, CLOs are not substitutes for cash (as defined in the strictest sense). I’d submit that neither is the River Park fund often mentioned. And he is correct that CLOs took a brief clobbering in March 2020 and for a few months beyond. Even my quite respectable ultra-short fund (TRBUX) at the time got knocked down. Truth is corporate bonds of every stripe got hit hard for a short period until the Fed stepped in and took the unprecedented step of backing investment grade debt. A black-swan like the Covid affair can strike at any time. They’re all different and usually unexpected. As bad as the hit was for CLOs for a month or two, equities got hit much harder. My p/m mining fund fell out of bed overnight. I’d go back and check how much it lost in a day or two, but it would be too painful.

Regarding CLOs, what is conveniently not mentioned is like most everything else in Bondland they melted down too during the Covid meltdown. Investment grade CLOs from AAA to BBB had drawdowns from 10% to 30% while below investment grade drawdowns were 40% to 45%. As recently as 2022, while investment grade CLOs eked out a small gain (JAAA) of under 1% below investment grade lost money. The longest tenured bond fund primarily into CLOs ( an interval fund) lost money 4 years since its 2014 inception. In 2020 it had a multi week drawdown of 30%. As recently as 2022 this CLO fund lost 4.48%. 2023 and 2024 just happened to be “the right place right time” for CLOs. I hold slightly under 50% in CLOs but I am more than cognizant of the risks. A substitute for cash they certainly aren’t.

What is cash? If one is thinking "checking account" (instant liquidity w/o loss), then even CDs don't qualify.
On the other end of the spectrum there is cash as an investment - locking up cash in fixed rate investments for longer periods of time (typically years). You can still get at that cash for emergencies, but at a cost. However, the cost is much less than the risk of investing in the market, and the cost is often known in advance (e.g. CD early withdrawal penalty).
Representing the first perspective is this piece by M*: Why Ultrashort Bond Funds Aren’t Cash Substitutes. "[I]n 2008 ... the average ultrashort bond fund dropped 8.4%. ... [In 2020] [w]hile most investment-grade bond categories posted positive returns during the market’s flight to quality, the average ultrashort bond fund lost about 1.8% in the first quarter.
And the 2020 losses peak to trough (March 6 - March 23) were much greater.
These relatively extreme (for their category) losses occur when the economy experiences severe jolts (GFC, pandemic). For "checking account" type cash, even these short lived, though sharp, jolts are unacceptable. For longer term "investment cash", the short term disruptions may be acceptable.
A difference between ultrashort bond funds and IG CLOs is that the CLOs are more complicated investments. In theory, AAA tranches should hold up well in any environment other than one where everything gets hit. And they should recover better. There's some solace in JAAA doing just that in 2022. But that's only one stress test and there are many ways the economic system can get jolted.
Junkster mentioned CLOs doing poorly in 2020. Was their behavior distinctive or just in line with (though more severe than) the rest of the IG market? That is, can we glean anything about their special risks from 2020? If not, then all we can say is that, yes, bonds of all ilk can get hit by system shocks and recover similarly.
If that is unacceptable, only invest in guaranteed principal vehicles (Treasuries, CDs, credit union time deposits, bank accounts, etc.).

ADD #1: SOME BOND funds had distributions this week, which should be reflected in this weeks numbers, as provided by their sources.
ADD #2: 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. In the 'cooking pot' we currently have the big ingredients of the middle east and also, how much damage Ukraine may inflict upon Russia and the response.

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 27 , 2024. Bond NAV's Mixed/Down for most + distributions
--- 'Course, all the bond sectors in the list find their reasons for price movements, and we find most bond sectors HAD ANOTHER 'SMALLER' HEAD SLAP for this week's pricing. The majority of bond sectors were down most days of the week. Short duration were the better performing for the week, with longer duration continuing to get 'thumped'. So, depending on where you're 'hanging' your bond market monies, the pricing this week, was mostly DOWN. 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.
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 23 - December 27, 2024
***** This week (Friday), FZDXX, MM yield continues to move with Fed funds/repo/SOFR rates; and ended the week at 4.24% yield (-.13 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 negative .10 - .13 basis change in yield for the week.
--- AGG = -.33% / +1.04% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.08% / +5.85% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = +.04% / +3.70 % (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = -.21% / +1.42% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = -.57% / -1.03% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = -.16% / +1.48% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = +.06% / +4.56% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = -.02% / +4.05% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = -.67% / -4.95% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = -1.37% / -8.30% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = -2.02% / -13.32% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = -2.33% / -16.45% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = +2.92% / +28.35% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = -4.27% / -36.35% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 2x version of EDV etf)
*** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
--- BAGIX = -.40% / +1.54% Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- USFR = +.08% / +5.40% (WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury)
--- LQD = -.31% / +.68% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- MBB = -.24% / +1.05% (I-Shares Mortgage Backed Bonds)
--- BKLN = +.24% / +8.10% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
--- HYG = -.04% / +7.83 % (I Shares High Yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- HYD = +.83%/+4.36% (VanEck HY Muni)
--- MUB = -.04% /+.89% (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
--- EMB = -.29%/+5.55% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
--- CWB = -.30% / +11.25% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
--- PFF = -1.33% / +6.52% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
--- FZDXX = 4.24% 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

BaluBalu: "What is going on? Over the years, I have seen some meaningful posts from you and I am surprised you are seriously considering a CU term deposit of any meaningful duration with the level of superficial information you shared as a reply to my post."
BaluBalu, when I got this post from you, in response to trying to give you some additional information about Credit Union Share Certificates, I was caught off guard, I felt attacked for just trying to be helpful to you. Credit Unions have been around for a very long time, and almost every major city has several of them. They are covered in several of the major Deposit Rating Services. To question my decision of "considering a CU term deposit of any meaningful duration" in such a well-known, long established, investment institution, sounded very strongly like you had fear and trust issues with them. When I read YBBs short little post to you about Credit Unions, there was nothing of significance in it that I had not previously included in my post to you about Credit Unions.
At any rate, I tried to be helpful and I am sorry it was not received by you in that way.

Our CD/Treasury ladder is only out to three years, but I'm 85 and don't want to go too far out. Our Schwab SUTXX MMKT is currently at 4.35% and falling, the CD/Treasury ladder is at 4.81%. I'm replacing CDs and Treasurys as they mature, which will gradually move out the ladder.
At the moment the allocation is CD/Treasury ladder 43% and MMKT 57%. The main difference that I consider between CD/Treasury ladder and MMKT allocations is the possible need for "instant cash" due to future major medical issues. If it weren't for that I'd put almost everything into the CD/Treasury ladder. When we were younger we never kept this kind of money in either CDs or MMKTs.

Old_Joe, I have a very similar position on my Fixed Income positions. I have kept my CD Ladder at no more than 2 years, as I want my CD ladder to have ongoing CDs maturing pretty frequently, and have some liquidity issues better addressed with frequently maturing, short term CDs. I also have a wife who has very strong wish to have shorter term CDs in case she needs it "for a facelift"! Her way of saying that she may want a new car, a facelift, or surgery/treatment for one of the many "health related" issues we are monitoring closely! We also are dealing with a couple of Adult children and their families, who are continually needing financial support for health issues, losing jobs, needing money for an array of creative and surprising needs that crop up. In short, the shorter term CD ladder works fine for my situation, but may not be what others need, with their personal and financial situation.

Our CD/Treasury ladder is only out to three years, but I'm 85 and don't want to go too far out. Our Schwab SUTXX MMKT is currently at 4.35% and falling, the CD/Treasury ladder is at 4.81%. I'm replacing CDs and Treasurys as they mature, which will gradually move out the ladder.
At the moment the allocation is CD/Treasury ladder 43% and MMKT 57%. The main difference that I consider between CD/Treasury ladder and MMKT allocations is the possible need for "instant cash" due to future major medical issues. If it weren't for that I'd put almost everything into the CD/Treasury ladder. When we were younger we never kept this kind of money in either CDs or MMKTs.

AI Overview:
Kelly Community Federal Credit Union (KCFCU) in Tyler, Texas has been described as one of the most financially sound credit unions in the United States. KCFCU offers monthly and annual financial reports that include financial performance summaries, goals, commitments, and questions from members.
Credit unions are insured by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), which is similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) that insures banks. Most credit unions and banks are insured for up to $250,000 per customer.
KCFCU was founded in 1963 by employees from the Kelly-Springfield Tire Plant to provide a safe place for workers to save and borrow money. The credit union's mission is to treat members like family and prioritize relationships over transactions.
=====================================
dt, KCFCU appears to be a worthy place to invest your money.
That isn't the issue I have been beating to death on these threads which is duration.
Let me try a different angle:
What position do you think you are going to be in with interest bearing investment options in the 6-12 months after the investment you buy now matures?
Given the current rates and current trend, do you think you are going to be able to find an interest bearing investment of any duration paying 4+% in 6-12 months?
=======================================
Aside FWIW: You don't seem to care too much for my input, but buddy, I've been playing the CD ladder game for 12-13 years and I've not lost yet. I'm sitting a 5-yr, CP CD ladder paying a wee bit over 5% that was there for taking a year or so ago. Today, a 5-yr, 4+% CP CD ladder is there for the taking, for anyone who can step away from the tree and see the forest.

"I don't have your fears or trust issues."
You are making big, big assumptions about my fears and trusts. I have no reason to be fearful or have trust issues about something I do not have any knowledge about.
In this thread posters shared how a AAA rated insurance company can take years to get resolved, how FDIC banks are resolved and the duration depositors have to wait to access their funds and the relevance of the legacy deposit interest rate, how AAA CLOs are not like Treasury issues, @stillers explained why he sticks with bank CDs, and when and to whom insurance annuity products, CLOs, and other fixed income products may be appropriate. I applaud all these posters for taking the time to explain their POV, even though they are not trying to gain anything and sometimes in the face of (overt and implied) criticism about relevance.
Many posters in this thread have suggested to you choices but you discarded all of them (your have a right to do so) and in turn you mentioned about CU term deposits as a replacement for FDIC bank deposits. I have no reason to learn about CUs because I have plenty of other options, as I have stated in earlier posts, but I thought it would be good to the readers / lurkers to learn about why you thought it is a good idea to go to CUs (for a few more basis points relative to banks) in lieu of the other suggestions made in this thread or even FDIC bank deposits. Hence, my ask of the posters "Please educate us with examples of how depositors of CUs were protected (or not protected) when CUs got into trouble." If you do not know the answer to this, you do not have to reply but let someone who knows or wants to explore the ask reply. The ask is very much relevant for CU term deposits - may be not for you personally.
FYI - I have edited my post you quoted.
YBB, thanks.

@dtconroe,
What is going on? Over the years, I have seen some meaningful posts from you and I am surprised you are seriously considering a CU term deposit of any meaningful duration with the level of superficial information you shared as a reply to my post. (I plan to delete this para after you read.)
I shall wait for @msf or YBB to reply to my post. I know it is an imposition on them because neither of them is seeking to invest in CU deposits but their reply would be a public service (as was my post).

Sorry you are disappointed with the information I sent. I am not going to spend extensive time educating posters about various investment options, but Credit Unions have been around for many many years. I have had Credit Union accounts at numerous credit unions, and I actually set up a credit union account for a company I worked for back in the 1990s, as a fringe benefit option for employees at my place of employment. Credit Unions act very much the same way as Banks, but instead of FDIC Deposit Insurance, they have a National Credit Union Deposit insurance. The local Credit Union I am looking at is the Kelley Federal Credit Union (if you care to look at it), but there are a huge number of credit unions all over the US. If you don't trust credit unions, or for any other reason are not comfortable with credit unions, then by all means stay away from them. Since I consider them almost identical to banks, I don't have your fears or trust issues.

Most of us know how FDIC insurance works and troubled banks are resolved but most of us have no understanding of how deposit insurance works at credit union level. Please educate us with examples of how depositors of CUs were protected (or not protected) when CUs got into trouble.

See excerpt below from a Google Search on Credit Union "Share Certificates";
A credit union share certificate is a type of savings account that offers a fixed interest rate for a set period of time:
How it works
You deposit money into a share certificate for a set term, usually between 3 months and 5 years. In exchange, you earn a higher interest rate, called a dividend, than a regular savings account. The longer the term, the higher the dividend.
Benefits
Share certificates are a good option if you want to earn interest on money you plan to use in the future. They can be a safer investment than stocks or mutual funds.
Risks
You'll incur penalties if you withdraw money before the term ends.
Insurance
Share certificates are federally insured by the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) for up to $250,000 per depositor, per ownership category, per institution. This is similar to the coverage offered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for banks.
Comparison to certificates of deposit (CDs)
Share certificates are similar to CDs, but are offered by credit unions instead of banks. The main difference is the name.