Ed Slott: When Roths May Not Be Right " When he says “Roths,” he's talking about Roth conversions as opposed to Roth contributions."
This is largely an artificial distinction. If one shouldn't be converting to a Roth, then one shouldn't be contributing to a Roth either. This is because that Roth contribution is essentially a (deductible) traditional contribution followed immediately by a Roth conversion. And he's saying not to do that second step - the conversion.
Okay, there are minor differences. That Roth contribution for 2018 can be done until April 15, 2019, while if you take the contribute/convert route, it only goes on the record for 2018 if you do the conversion before Dec 31. And while you can't undo a Roth conversion, you can undo a Roth contribution (treating it as a contribution to a deductible IRA). But these minor differences don't affect his major concerns.
Whether the money goes into the Roth from a conversion or a contribution, that amount is going to be taxed as ordinary income. Thus from a tax perspective, there's no difference between converting and contributing directly.
IMHO for many people the biggest reason to keep some pre-tax IRA money around is to be able to make qualified charitable distributions (QCDs). He points this out, but I'd like to emphasize and amplify it.
First, under the new tax laws, it is harder to take charitable deductions, because it's gotten harder to itemize. QCDs get around this problem. Second, unlike taking a distribution and then deducting the contribution (assuming one still itemizes), a QCD reduces top line income. (It gets rid of a taxable distribution.) That can have a favorable effect on how much of SS benefits are taxed, or whether you have to pay IRMAA - an increased Medicare premium due to higher income.
Don’t believe stocks always beat bonds? Read this Hi Guys,
Peter Lynch was referenced earlier in this exchange, and
5 of his famous 20 investing rules were provided. For those who are interested in the complete set of 20 rules, here is a Link to an article that lists all of them:
https://www.gurufocus.com/news/341584/peter-lynch-golden-rules-for-investing-That's a lot of wisdom accumulated over a lifetime of market investment experience. Enjoy and prosper.
Best Wishes
Don’t believe stocks always beat bonds? Read this Thanks Ted. If one uses that to look at rolling ten year periods (there are 81), in 65 of them stocks (S&P 500) outperform 10 year Treasuries and 3 month Treasuries, in 9 of them the 10 years outperform, and in 7 of them cash (3 month T-bill) is king.
Vanguard Global Credit Bond Fund in registration
New Details About Wilbur Ross’ Business Point To Pattern Of Grifting - Invesco Coming to a theater near you: The MAGA-lo-Don, corruption consuming the body politic:
Re : teds Comment/Post on re-Balancing - Looking for advice "Morningstar rates its sustainability to be in the top two percent of its category."
That seems like a bit of a non sequitur. I mean it's correct, and would make a lot of sense bringing up in the thread on PRBLX (ESG funds in general). But here, it doesn't seem to be addressing any question raised.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/745467/morningstar-sustainability-rating.htmlIf you're concerned with how M* views the prospects of this fund are going forward, its analyst rating is Neutral, which is actually pretty low. (FWIW, I place very little stock in M* analyst ratings, though I do care about the thinking behind them - which I may agree with or disagree with.)
Re : teds Comment/Post on re-Balancing - Looking for advice So you have read and studied the fact sheet along with understanding that it is a dividend strategy fund? It seeks to invest in the highest dividend companies and employees the Dogs of the Dow strategy for about one third of invested assets ... and, the other two thirds is invested choosing high yielding stocks from the broader market. Below is what Sun America states as to the funds objective.
Fund Objective: Seeks total return (including capital appreciation and current income) by employing a “buy and hold” strategy involving the annual selection of up to 30 high dividend yielding common stocks from the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and broader market.
In addition, Morningstar rates its sustainability to be in the top two percent of its category. My own experience is that it has performed well, in the past, during market downdrafts. Will it continue to do that? Most likely; but, there are no guarantees when it comes to investing.
In checking the funds holdings (again at Morningstar) I am finding its two largest holdings one being Macy's is up ytd 61.35% and the other Darden Restruants is up 16.53%. You might wish to view the Morningstar report on the fund's portfolio holdings while performing your due diligence as it will give you a list of its top holdings along with their year to date returns.
I am not going to debate the attributes of the fund or defend it. It one of three funds that I hold in my domestic equity sleeve found in the growth and income area of my portfolio. The other two funds held within this sleeve are American Funds Fundamental Investor (ANCFX) and Federated Strategic Value Dividend (SVAAX).
Again, I wish you well in doing your due diligence.
I'm thinking if you have great concerns with the fund then perhaps it might not be for you. But, again I'm happy with it for it has generated a good income stream since I have owned it (and now being in retirement that is important to me) paying out last year about $2.00 per share in dividends and capital gains distributions combined. That computes to better than a 10% distribution yield. Plus its ten year (full market cycle) rolling total return is 12.82% putting it in the top one percent for its category.
And again, if you are not happy with it perhaps you will find something more to your liking.
New Details About Wilbur Ross’ Business Point To Pattern Of Grifting - Invesco
Re : teds Comment/Post on re-Balancing - Looking for advice While FDSWX isn't my cup of tea, it doesn't look to be an especially bad fund. As you noted, its performance this year has been particularly poor.
If you exclude this year, its five year return (i.e. from Jan 2013 to Dec 2017) is very good. Total return of 111.6%, vs. 108.1% for the S&P 500 and 84.4% for large cap value (all data from M*). So current numbers showing poor long term performance are somewhat deceptive.
If you feel that this seven month swoon is not just a part of the routine ups and downs that a fund has, then do consider liquidating. If you think it might be temporary (e.g. because of annual reconstitution) but want to lighten your exposure, you could sell your highest cost shares.
Based on the numbers alone, I'd be inclined to take that second path if I were to sell. But I'm not that familiar with the fund. Skeet seems to have a better sense of where it's heading, though I might not give so much weight to performance within the past three months. For example, its one month performance, while reassuring (1.88%), nevertheless underperformed its peers by 1.26%.
Value has been underperforming growth for some time. So one would expect value funds to have negative alphas relative to the market (S&P 500). It's got a nice alpha relative to value funds: 1.05 vs. the Russell 1000 Value. Though with just mediocre correlation (R² around 0.7), the figures may not be all that meaningful.
Another alternative peer to consider is VEIRX.
Re : teds Comment/Post on re-Balancing - Looking for advice I am having pulling the trigger myself. I just took back an account previously managed by and advisor.
I am having trouble pulling the trigger to sell out of positions, especially those with a capital gain. By the MFO premium analysis FDSWX - looks to be underperforming last 5 years, especially this year. Ditto BPIRX which is a long short - (might this do better in the brewing storm ?). Both are in taxable accounts with gains . Advice on how to proceed is welcome.
PRBLX finally dumps WFC omg,
that is funny. Tyvm.
I am going to go watch all of the new "until we lost it" / "earning it back" stagecoach ads at once, and start believing. I mean, trust is purchasable today, right? That's today's motto. If second time is farce, what's the third time?
Taibbi is always one to turn to:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/taibbi-an-ode-to-the-feeble-corporate-apology-629452/ Here’s a picture of a cowboy. We opened 30 accounts in his name. Just kidding.I know msf will find comparables. And Taibbi does address why the other guys are not running such ads.
I feel better already. Back to the burning world.
PRBLX finally dumps WFC
New Details About Wilbur Ross’ Business Point To Pattern Of Grifting - Invesco
PRBLX finally dumps WFC WF failed to offer mortgage modifications to 62
5 homeowners because of an error in computing attorneys' fees. Sure we can consider this as evidence of how bad WF was in processing modifications, regardless of whether the causes were intent or plain ineptitude or a combination of both.
So then add those 62
5 to the 800,000 other homeowners who "could have qualified under the administration's mortgage modification program if the banks had done a better job ." Remember, the recent WF disclosure pertains to old errors, some dating all the way back to 2010.
That eight hundred thousand figure comes from a Sept. 2012 study done by people "from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the government's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Ohio State University, Columbia Business School, and the University of Chicago."
Not surprisingly, while the study doesn't name names, it clearly lays most of the blame at the feet of the TBTF banks:
A “few large servicers [have offered] modifications at half the rate of others,” the authors say The largest mortgage servicers are Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citi.
https://www.propublica.org/article/foreclosure-fail-study-pins-blame-on-big-banksSo were the TBTF banks all just as bad, or does one stand out among them? Turns out that one was much worse that the others.
Wait for it ... wait for it ...
Bank of America in particular (the largest of all the servicers when HAMP launched) has been far slower to modify loans than even the other large servicers, as other analyses
we've cited have
shown.
Ibid.
PRBLX finally dumps WFC Phony accounts:
Wells Fargo isn't the only bank where heavy sales pressure led employees to open fake accounts.
A federal review triggered by the Wells Fargo scandal found that "weaknesses" at other banks led employees to open accounts without proof of customer consent — just like Wells Fargo did — according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
... Citigroup (C), US Bank and Bank of America declined to comment.
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/06/news/companies/wells-fargo-fake-accounts-banks-occ/index.html Emission tests fraud:
Collusion Between Germany's Biggest Carmakers
The diesel scandal is not a failure on the part of individual companies, but rather the result of collusion among German automakers that lasted for years. Audi, BMW, Daimler, Volkswagen and Porsche coordinated their activities in more than a thousand meetings.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-cartel-collusion-between-germany-s-biggest-carmakers-a-1159471.htmlThe motor industry was embroiled in a new diesel emissions scandal last night [June 11, 2018] after 774,000 Mercedes-Benz vehicles were found to contain cheating software.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mercedes-faces-mass-recall-for-cheating-diesel-software-l0378ctf3The raids on Tuesday, in which about 100 investigators targeted BMW offices in Munich and an engine factory in Austria, suggested that all of Germany’s top domestic automakers may have evaded emissions rules, although perhaps not to the same degree as Volkswagen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/business/energy-environment/bmw-diesel-emissions.htmlFord became the latest company to become embroiled in the issue, with drivers in a U.S. lawsuit claiming some 500,000 Super Duty pickup trucks were rigged to beat emissions tests.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/why-carmaker-cheating-probes-stay-in-high-gear-quicktake-qanda/2018/01/10/318b6d5a-f632-11e7-9af7-a50bc3300042_story.html?utm_term=.da98430847adIt's not so easy to pick and choose less bad from bad.
With respect to the 400 or so WF foreclosures - these were the result of an "automated miscalculation of attorneys’ fees that were included for purposes of determining whether a customer qualified for a mortgage loan modification." (From
WF filing.) That's ineptitude, not malice. Not that the government didn't facilitate this:
No Republican sign-off was necessary for Obama’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). The Treasury Department alone decided to run it through mortgage companies that had financial incentives to foreclose rather than modify loans. Treasury never saw the program as a relief vehicle, but a way to “foam the runway” for the banks, allowing them to absorb inevitable foreclosures more slowly.
Obama Failed to Mitigate America's Foreclosure Crisishttps://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/obamas-failure-to-mitigate-americas-foreclosure-crisis/510485/As to how long to hold the companies responsible (I agree with sending the execs to prison), how about at least as long as the effects of their acts endure? Which can be a mighty long time. We
still don't know the extent of
long term effects of all the fraudulent foreclosures.
Food for thought when considering duration:
How Redlining’s Racist Effects Lasted for Decadeshttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/upshot/how-redlinings-racist-effects-lasted-for-decades.html
10 Funds To Buy For High-Yield Preferred Stocks NPSAX is the Nuveen fund with a 4.75% load, and available ntf at Fidelity and Schwab.
That's the one...thanks! Any thoughts on that one?
10 Funds To Buy For High-Yield Preferred Stocks NPSAX is the Nuveen fund with a 4.75% load, and available ntf at Fidelity and Schwab.
