It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
@MikeM, seems to me that depends on how comfortable you are with where you want to be. Some folks might feel the need to accumulate more. Some folks might be fine with where they are. Everyone has their own mode of travel.Adding to Pressup's comment: The adulation for CDs is turning into lost opportunity cost in hindsight. Not the once in a lifetime proclaimed by some. Take a MFO favorite RSIVX bond fund for example: up +9.3% the past year. 3.4% in the past 3 months. Even the very conservative RPHYX (discussed as a cash alternative) is up 5.7% 1y and 1.6% 3mo.
John Stark, a former SEC enforcement chief, cuts to the chase:One of crypto's erstwhile doubters is helping to take bitcoin mainstream. Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, called bitcoin "in index of money laundering" back in 2017 ... today he says he is a big believer in bitcoin. His firm managers the fastest-growing bitcoin fund and has forged partnerships with some of the largest players in the digital-assets industry. (Vicky Ge Huang, "BlackRock Does U-Turn on Bitcoin," 3/11/2024)
(N.B. he might be speaking ironically when he asks "what is more decentralized than BlackRock" or the article might contain a typo, which the intent is the bitter but non-ironic "which is more centralized than BlackRock?")The irony is transparent and glaring in that it's supposed to be decentralized, yet what is more decentralized than a Wall Street behemoth who is taking fees from every single possible angle and peddling something that nobody understands.
It’s good you limited the GQGPX vs CD ladder comparison to 3 years, since at 5 years you’d be facing an 10.68% annualized bogey for GQGPX. So yes, it’s not a valid comparison.FWIW, not that it's a valid comparison, but since such a comparison was mentioned, our CD ladder with its just below 4% APY, outperformed GQGPX with its 3.4% average annual return over the past 3-yr period.
;-)
I agree with you @KHaw24. Comparing every stock sector, geographical area and cap-space investment to the SP500 is just, well, silly. With that reasoning, why diversify? All those different style investments are supposed to be different and excel at different times and blend together long term....see zero reason to comp (EM) the performance to the S&P 500. It's comparing Apples to Mandarins... one is entitled to their opinion and whether it's 9.36 or 10 %, still beats Bonds, Cash, CD's despite their inflated yields currently
Morningstar reports that its fixed income securities have an average discount (weighted) of under 1%. That is, its average weighted fixed income price is 99.27. That's essentially par. In comparison, on average, moderate allocation ETFs have portfolios with an average discount of 7% (92.90 weighted fixed income price).
From my following and researching CGBL, I have been pleased with its behavior. Its fixed income sleeve Core Plus. The only reason I have not invested in it is because of potential high distributions from its fixed income sleeve (bonds with market discounts) if I were to put it in a taxable account. But may be with good inflows, some of that distribution will be picked up by shareholders coming in later. Any thoughts?
I know of a poster on another investing board whose portfolio is a 50/50 mix of Wellesley and Wellington.@fundly. +100. DO NOT LOSE IT. you speak the truth. If you use portfolio visualizer try a 50 / 50 mix of vanguard Wellesley and Wellington which becomes a 50/50 allocation. Its worst year is less than WBALX and the return is much higher. And of course the ER is way less.
[snip]
I like and own WBALX for the more conservative part of the portfolio. 50/50 and quite conservative. Small 230K AUM. When the s--t hits the fan this should lose less. In retirement I hold the mantra, "Do not lose it " in high esteem.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved. Powered by Vanilla