@Crash, especially in the case of public parks, Republicans have been cutting park budgets for thirty years, forcing the park managers to enact entrance fees and raise them time after time. That's the price we're all paying (elections have consequences). So yeah, that's your choice and your principle, but please realize why it's that way.
I don't know about libraries generally, but they may run into budget shortfalls and have to add or raise fees to stay open. The library where I live is a city gov. property but has both a friends group and a foundation that raise money for it. A lot of money, and that's what it takes to be free for the public, even in a town that totally supports libraries and education.

YBB,
Thanks for the perspective.
Good to know a AAA insurance company can keep one up at night for years.
During GFC, I had many times over the FDIC limit in a savings account at a money center bank. I did not lose any sleep because I know this industry but I never had an opportunity to know the insurance industry the same way. So, understanding risks goes a long way in one's risk assumption and risk diversification.

Bond rating and insurer ratings have very different criteria. And different things happen in cases of failures.
If a company issuing bond goes under, bond investors are in line with other creditors depending on where the bond is in the capital structure. They can get something or nothing.
If an insurer goes under, its state regulator works as the lead regulator with the other state regulators to come up with a rescue/rehabilitation plan.
State regulators don't have ready reserves to pay out like the (underfunded) FDIC does for banks.
So, a failed bank may be shut on Friday and account access may resume on Monday. Forget about anything like that for failed insurers.
When my 403b plan insurance MBL-NJ went under (I think with AAA rating & 150 years of existence), all of our 403b annuity accounts were frozen. We could immediately withdraw/shift at 40% haircut (i.e receive 60c for $1), or wait for things to settle. While waiting, the frozen funds earned m-mkt rates that were about half of what MBL was paying. The money was unfrozen after 4-5 years. Technically, there was no loss, but only the lost opportunity. In my asset allocation at the time, I treated this frozen money as forced-cash.

Fixed rate deferred annuities, if used as savings vehicles (and not annuitized) are very much like CDs. Like CDs, and unlike funds, stocks, etc., their value cannot go down.
https://www.blueprintincome.com/fixed-annuities-cd-comparison
There is the risk of the insurer issuing the annuity going under, just as there is the risk of a bank failing. In the case of a bank failure, a government agency (FDIC) steps in, tries to get another bank to assume your bank's liabilities. If it succeeds (almost all the time), you may be forced to choose between taking you money (including interest to date) and running, or accepting a lower return for the remainder of the time on your CD.
In the case of an insurer (the issuer of your annuity) failing, it is a state government agency that steps in. As with banks, states first try to "rehabilitate" insurers - either get them back on their feet or have another insurer take over their liabilities. Should they not succeed, the insurer is liquidated.
Here's Pennsylvania's general description (not state-specific) on how that proceeds. A state-created guaranty association pays for losses not to exceed state limits. Again, similar to what the FDIC does for banks. A key difference is that state guaranty associations are typically underfunded. So it is important to stick with better rated insurers. (Rehabilitation/liquidation is to be avoided in any case.)
Pennsylvania FAQ on insurance company liquidations
Single Premium Deferred (fixed) Annuities are rather simple vehicles if one does not annuitize (i.e. one uses them like CDs). The key numbers are:
- guarantee rate,
- number of years rate is guaranteed,
- floor for annual renewal rate after that (insurer might offer more depending on market),
- penalty each year for early withdrawal (e.g. 7% in year 1, 6% in year 2);
- amount/percentage that can be withdrawn annually without penalty
There should not be a penalty for withdrawing everything once the multiyear guarantee period is past.
Something that has been added in the past decade or two is MVA - market value adjustments. Suppose interest rates have gone up since you purchased your annuity. Then, like a bond, the value of your annuity has dropped. If you close out your annuity early (effectively "putting" your policy), you are forcing the insurer to overpay (i.e. pay 100% of face value minus any early redemption charges). MVA lets the insurer adjust the payout accordingly, so that it doesn't overpay.
Conversely, if interest rates drop, your annuity is worth more than face value (plus interest). MVA adjusts the payout upward, so you "win". Many annuities but not all these days come with MVA.
https://smartasset.com/financial-advisor/market-value-adjustment
MVA seems to enable insurers to issue policies that pay a bit more. But they're shifting market risk onto you, in case you redeem early.
Here are Mass Mutual's rate sheets for its 3-5 year Stable Voyage Policies (no MVA) and for its Premier Voyage Policies (with MVA). The latter have higher rates, e.g. 4.25% or 4.35% on policies under $100K, while the Stable Voyage Policies (no MVA) pay 4.2%.
Stable Voyage rate sheet (Dec 30th)
Premier Voyage rate sheet (Dec 30th)
Important: These rates are dated Dec 30th. They are less than the rates I found quoted today. So rates on these annuities are about to drop.

You are absolutely correct that each poster/investor is unique in their own ways. I was directing my thread to other similar posters with "maturing CDs", and I was curious as to what CD investors were choosing to do with that cash. But there are no rules on these threads about posts, as long as they are civil.

As you you like it. But I didn’t get the impression initially your intent was to limit the scope of the thread to CDs and to rule out other types of investments. Perhaps the reference below from your OP was to some “more active” variations of CDs? I don’t invest in CDs, so wouldn’t know.

At 76 years old and happily retired, I have been investing in CDs for the past few years. About 1/3 of my CDs will be maturing in the next month. It appears that the renewal rate, for "noncallable" CDs, will be around 4.3%. That is about 1% lower than the maturing CDs. I am wrestling with renewing at the 4.3% rate, with almost no stress, or jumping back into the more active investing options. Anyone else in a similar situation?

@msf,
"No loss of principal, "high" rate that cannot drop, some liquidity, and tax deferral."
Could you please elaborate on your “No loss of principal” comment? I know next to nothing about annuities, except having looked at them superficially about 20 years ago when I was debating about my DB plan and not getting comfortable taking on credit risk of the insurance companies. I probably missed a good opportunity if there was no risk of loss of principal but it is never too late for me to learn and try invest in new things.
Hopefully, YBB will join the annuities conversation with you and stillers, as I recall YBB commenting about annuities over the years.
P.S.: I am yet to read the links posted in both msg and stillers posts and educate myself.
Thanks.

Great stuff by @msf on annuities. I agree they are a viable option at this time. Guessing they were even more so about 6-12 months ago when rates were at/near their peaks.
That said, annuities have always been a 4-letter word to us. Too high fees, loss of control over your money, difficult if not impossible to understand terms, etc.
Not saying all of the drawbacks can't be overcome, but any prospective buyer MUST identify and understand all of the many mistakes they can (and others often do) make when buying them. Or things may not go as planned/expected.
Here's some primer links in the event anyone here is so inclined. If it's our money, I wouldn't stop with reading just these:
https://annuityguys.org/five-annuity-mistakes-you-should-avoid/
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/022316/5-mistakes-avoid-when-shopping-annuities.asp
https://www.neamb.com/retirement-planning/7-common-annuity-mistakes-and-how-to-avoid-them
EDIT: Barron's does an annual review and report by annuity type that I consider the best on the planet and would absolutely use as our primary guide if ever seriously considering an annuity.
(Note: A few years ago we did consider one and passed.)
https://www.barrons.com/topics/best-annuities

Another observation. Do Fidelity, Schwab, and Vanguard have their own Dow Jones funds? No, they don't. Do they have the SP500? YES.
Years ago, back when Vanguard was providing free financial plans, my mother had them work up a plan. Several years prior, Vanguard had introduced its own index funds (working with MSCI to develop more tax efficient indexes). Yet the plan used Vanguard 500 rather than its broader based, better performing (at that time) large cap index fund.
I asked the planner why. As near as I could decipher the response, it was because Vanguard 500 was better known/more popular. Financial decisions are often made by "popular demand" and not by objective analysis.
This is not to say I think the DJIA is especially representative of "the market". Just that looking at who is offering what is not the best way to validate that.
OTOH, which market index does Fidelity display by default on its home page? Clue: it's up 200 points today and it's not the NASDAQ.

I've invested in so many cash, short term, and fixed rate vehicles that I've lost count. The ones that come to mind are: prime MMFs, government MMFs, Treasury only MMFs, national tax free MMFs, single state MMFs, ultra short bond funds, short term bond funds, short term national muni bond funds, short term single state bond funds, short term government funds, short-intermediate national muni funds, T-bills, short and intermediate CDs, liquid CDs, callable CDs, short term muni bonds, callable muni bonds, SPDAs, and GICs (stable value).
I've used some of these when the idea of losing even a single penny was an anathema to me, and I've used some when I was seeking a better multi-year return. So I appreciate different objectives, especially the concern about share prices declining. (What, you mean I could actually lose money? I've had those thoughts.)
Some people here have said that they would not use a prime MMF - too much risk for the small additional return. Actually, the risk goes further - scores of MMFs have been propped up by their sponsors over the years, including several that would otherwise have broken a buck. Regulations have changed since then; still, prime MMFs remain more risky.
https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2013/10/twenty-eight-money-market-funds-that-could-have-broken-the-buck-new-data-on-losses-during-the-2008-c/
One used to see SNGVX mentioned as a safe short term fund (see, e.g. here) - it never had a losing year. That was before 2021, when it lost almost 1% followed by 2022 when it lost nearly 4.5%. So when it comes to OEF bond fund risks, your concerns are understandable.
ISTM David Sherman manages his short term funds in an unusual if not unique way, resulting in his CrossingBridge funds as well as RPHIX never having had a losing calendar year over their lifetimes. Admittedly, they are not without some volatility as your 2020 experience attests. That you pulled the trigger so quickly then also attests to the great importance you place on preservation of principal.
@stillers wrote: "4% guaranteed interest is our threshold vs bond OEFs. 5+% is pretty much nirvana." That seems to be your thinking as well: "I want to lowest risk option to produce 'at least' 4%." Further, you seem willing to make a multi-year commitment (you're considering callable CDs that if not called, will take several years to mature).
Based on that, welcome to nirvana. Another poster mentioned MYGAs, aka fixed rate SPDAs.
https://www.blueprintincome.com/fixed-annuities-cd-comparison (fixed annuities vs. CDs)
You can get a 3 year fixed annuity with an A rated insurance company yielding over 5%. Depending on your state it may even allow 10% of balance withdrawals without issuer penalty, mitigating liquidity concerns. One does need to be over 59.5 to take withdrawals without tax penalty.
If you want a policy from an AA+ rated insurer, MassMutual is paying around 4.65% for three years, depending on your state of residence. All of these policies have the added benefit of tax deferral (for taxable accounts), including the ability to "roll over" the proceeds (1035 exchange) to extend the deferral period. No loss of principal, "high" rate that cannot drop, some liquidity, and tax deferral. Seems to check all your boxes and more.

@PRESSmUp: even tho we live in a metropolitan area of SE MI, our house might as well be in rural MI for connectivity purposes. The neighbors have Xfinity, but that company wanted $3500 in 2008 to connect our house. We tried a TV dish antenna for 2 years with cell phone hotspot for internet and had spotty results. The only provider serving us is ATT; the internet, TV, and landline services depend on our phone line. We are almost 3500’ from ATT’s distribution box, so we can have 2 HD channels on at the same time, but not 4 because of the distance. This matters when I might be taping a sports event and watching another one. We don’t watch many movies; Netflix on the smart TV meets our needs there. As for the price, even with modest internet speed and the second tier of TV offerings, it has risen to $335 per month. Talk about a screw job. I am an inveterate channel switcher so going from one streaming service to another in the time it takes the pitcher to deliver the next slider is an obvious impossibility. We could easily drop the landline and save a bit, granted. When I have to call ATT for billing or service problems, I follow a friend’s advice: keep saying over and over, “I want to speak to a real person.” It has worked before, although the service rep may not share my way of speaking English.

I received notification of class action suit today & was wondering if others here had TRF's at Vanguard. Sold my TRF's shortly after getting the shaft a few years ago.

@hank- I was under the impression that you were using Musk's Starlink. Have you switched to fiber optic? If so, is that service relatively new around there?

Yup. I was early by 1-2 years in my neighborhood in having high-speed broadband when I put up a Starlink dish in November 2020 (rooftop mounted due to the tree line). Was very proud to have been an early (beta) user. Was miles ahead of the 4G cellular I’d relied on for internet. However, Musk kept jacking up the monthly rates (from around $99 initially to $135 over 3 years) and then announced plans to impose rather tight data limits.
Fortunately, by that time fiber had been installed here. Not burried but strung on poles. Less expensive & no data cap. So ditched Starlink about a year ago. A story of progress! Actually, when I retired in ‘98 and moved to this area all we had was dialup internet. Took 3-6 hours to download a single music album! I bought a DirectTV kit back then at K-Mart for about $50, nailed it up on the side of a garage, burried cable to the house, and had access to great TV for that day. Something like $29 a month back then.
* I should add that prior to 2020 there were a couple satellite based internet companies who had a few subscribers here. But the reports were poor. Essentially, slow connections and high prices.

Some depends on what you need. Low-lying lake shore area here. Can’t pick up any of the locals due to nearby hills + forest - even with a substantial tower mounted antenna. I’ll bet most of you folks can receive your locals. Not that the locals are that great. But if you want the major networks / local stations out here you need to subscribe to something.
I’ve gone from DirectTV (rooftop dish receiver) to Hulu / Disney / ESPN (internet based) to UTubeTV (internet based) over the past 5 years. Prices fell with each change. UTube TV’s live TV package just jumped from $73 to $85. But it’s a very inclusive package with ESPN, TNT and lots of other sports channels. No complaint. Don’t mind commercials for regular programing. Hate for movies. Rent an occasional movie from Amazon Prime for $5 or buy the CD DVD used from E-Bay. Also, you can buy movies at Prime, save in your library and view them as often and for as long as you like.
I haven’t noticed any difference in the number of commercials among the 3 sources I’ve tried. DirecTV was horrible to work with. Glad to be rid of them. Hulu / Disney were fine to deal with. The Hulu / Disney package included commercial free movies. But you tire of the Disney branded eventually.

I haven't been active in M* Discussions for several years.
It was previously a good investing forum until M* started making "improvements."
Tis a shame...

raq,
That's correct if someone has risky stuff, DT doesn't. I respect DT decisions and his choices.
When I used to own both stocks and bonds, my bond funds were never the "safe" ones. My first bond fund that I bought in 2010 was PIMIX. Then, I prepared for my retirement in 2018. By the end of 2017, PIMIX was over 50% of my portfolio.
All my funds must be top performers ALL the time in their category based on risk-adjusted performance.
RPHIX vs MM. I'm with msf. As I said before, when rates fall, and they will eventually, RPHIX would do better.
But, why stop with RPHIX? Let's look at DHEAX+CLOI. For one year...VMFXX(MM) made 5.3%...DHEAX made 9.1%...CLOI 8.2%. Both volatility max loss was -0.5%. See chart (https://schrts.co/zbSQiQxp).
BTW, I've not been in the TR camp for years now. My portfolio volatility is very low, but performance is still good. I'm not arguing about CDs or not; just offering another option. I understand that this thread started as a CD one, but why not discuss the next step, especially when there is not much to talk about CDs?

mark: Oh man, the Dow must matter to someone otherwise why is it still a market marker after all these years? Also I'm not so sure there are any serious analysts but there are motivated ones.

There are other market markers but any time someone says THE MARKET it is the SP500 or VTI.

YBB:Correlation between DJIA and SP500 is 95%

Correlation still doesn't mean equal. Example: One year (as of 12/22/2024)...The Dow = 14.7%...VOO = 27.7% (https://schrts.co/gIHYNViK)
For 5 years: The SP500 doubled the Dow (https://schrts.co/INEenHhQ)

msf: "It is true that RPHIX did not return more than 4% before 2023. I suggest that a better way of looking at it is how much it outperformed cash. According to Portfolio Visualizer, it usually beat cash by 3/4% or more, with larger margins coming in years when cash returned under 2%. So it is not surprising that RPHIX has not exceeded 4% until recently. Cash has not exceeded 3% until recently."
msf, there are many low risk bond oefs, that "outperformed cash" in the past couple of years. But even when I was very active bond oef momentum investor, I held my "cash" in MMs or high rate Savings Accounts. RPHIX use to be in my "low risk" bond oef category, but RPHIX has gone through periods of losing principal, which was the case when I dumped it in 2020 with the market crash. RPHIX "risk" is much higher than MMs, CDs, Treasuries, and I will not use it in my portfolio, when I get comparable returns with "lower risk" fixed income alternatives. I would argue that the 2023 and 2024 TR performance of RPHIX are aberrations in the RPHIX performance history, and do not expect that to return anytime soon.
For the purposes of this thread, my maturing CD money will be very briefly in a cash account at my brokerage and bank, but after a very short period of a few days/weeks, it will be re-invested into much less risky options, compared to RPHIX, like noncallable CDs, MMs, treasuries, and maybe a callable CD. I would only use RPHIX if I thought it was going to significantly outperform CDs, MMs, treasuries, etc. who have much lower risk. Of course, others have a much different TR/Risk criteria, but I want to lowest risk option to produce "at least" 4%, and there are several fixed income options to accomplish that with risk lower than RPHIX. Others are encouraged to define their TR/Risk criteria, and dive into low risk bond oefs if it meets their criteria.

I appreciate your interest in low stress places to put cash for 2-3 years. Different people have different objectives and that leads to different choices - as you said, that is okay.
2-3 year brokered CDs (callable) paying no more than 4.6%. A non-callable 2 year Treasury (coupon 4.25%) is expected to yield 4.3% at auction. In a taxable account, the Treasury note yields a similar amount after tax if your state has an income tax. And it comes without call risk.
Though the Treasury has reinvestment risk every six months on its coupon payment. OTOH, the CD has reinvestment risk on its principal if the CD is called. I find the former less stressful (not much cash is subject to reinvestment risk). You may feel differently - it's a matter of personal preference.
It is true that RPHIX did not return more than 4% before 2023. I suggest that a better way of looking at it is how much it outperformed cash. According to Portfolio Visualizer, it usually beat cash by 3/4% or more, with larger margins coming in years when cash returned under 2%. So it is not surprising that RPHIX has not exceeded 4% until recently. Cash has not exceeded 3% until recently.
Portfolio Visualizer comparing RPHIX and ^CASHUS.
The question becomes: what do you expect cash to do? You've answered that. You expect cash to be flat or drop slightly. (Not saying this is right or wrong - no one really knows - just restating your perspective.)
Cash (as represented by 3 mo T-bills) is currently (12/20/24) yielding 4.34%. Lop off another 1/2% (assume the Fed "aggressively" cuts rates), and we're looking at 3.8% next year. Conservatively, add 1/2% for the RPHIX yield. That comes to 4.3%. This is not the worst possible case, but a fair estimate of the worst reasonably possible case.
It looks like RPHIX won't do much worse than a CD and could do better. Should short term rates plummet beyond what I suggested above, then the CD will get called.
Either way, for me I find RPHIX less stressful. Fully liquid and no need for a plan B if the CD is called. You may not care much about those factors (i.e. they don't cause you stress) and find yield volatility vis a vis a CD stressful.
I just finished a 3 year electricity contract - no stress. I'm now on a 9 month contract - more stress. There's something to be said for locking in rates. Everyone is different, and each situation presents its own types of stress.
[CD rates from Schwab and Fidelity. Treasury expected yield from Fidelity.]

Oh man, the Dow must matter to someone otherwise why is it still a market marker after all these years? Also I'm not so sure there are any serious analysts but there are motivated ones.

Although this thread is about CDs, the bond oef RPHIX keeps getting mentioned as a viable alternative. I was a bond oef, momentum investor before I sold all my bond oefs in 2020. RPHIX produced a consistent TR of 1% to 3% almost every year before 2023. In 2023 and 2024, it had a TR of slightly over 5%. I invested in CDs during 2024 that made about the same as RPHIX. I still own a large number of CDs paying over 5%. As a previous bond oef investor, I do not believe RPHIX will make over 5% in 2025, but instead I expect it to have a TR in the 3 to 4% range. I can get that in 2025 wirh callable CDs with no stress, so I am not inclined to use RPHIX for my very conservative portfolio when CDs will produce comparable or better TR, with less risk. If I want a solid investment for the next 2 to 3 years of at least 4%, I will invest in a noncallable CD that pays 4%, not RPHIX with no history of making 4% except for 2023 and 2024. I am well aware that posters/investors who are opposed to CDs will likely not agree with me--that is okay!