YBB NOTES
Rates were held - fed funds 5.25-5.50%, bank reserves rate 5.4%, discount rate 5.5%. 1 more hike is possible. Dot plots aren't policy, but just an indication of the current FOMC thinking.
QT continues at -$60 billion/mo for Treasuries, -$35 billion/mo for MBS; total QT -$95 billion/mo. No plans to tinker with it. Its impact on LT rates is small and indirect.
Fed intent is for monetary policy to be restrictive so that it can slowdown from above-trend economic growth to below-trend growth. Moreover, the Fed policy works with some lag. The Fed is not devoting lot of time to theoretical matters such as the neutral rate, etc. The Fed is aware that there will be some pain from its policies. Housing has already been impacted by 8%+ mortgage rates. Small businesses are also suffering. But the inflation target remains at +2% average. The base assumption is still soft landing, not recession.
Job market has been strong. But wage growth has moderated.
LT rates have moved up due to a variety of factors, but the Fed only controls the ST rates directly. Higher LT rates do add some to monetary tightening.
Banking conditions are being monitored for stresses (including for their HTM & AFS holdings losses). Sufficient liquidity will be provided and the current programs will be reviewed on expiration. Basel III capital proposals are still in the comments period. Caps on card swipe fees are also in the comments period.
Risks include higher oil prices, labor strikes (UAW just settled), geopolitical - Israel-Hamas, Russia-Ukraine, etc.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1238/thread

Subscription for mutual funds/OEFs by Vanguard is a bad idea. Money will just sit in a m-mkt fund & then be deployed on/after 10/14/23. Interested buyers can just buy it then.
Instead, Vanguard should seed new funds with its own money ($50-100 million) for immediate launch & take that out later.

Maybe VG feels they can get some extra float from the $$$ sitting in MMFs until it launches....?

Subscription for mutual funds/OEFs by Vanguard is a bad idea. Money will just sit in a m-mkt fund & then be deployed on/after 10/14/23. Interested buyers can just buy it then.
Instead, Vanguard should seed new funds with its own money ($50-100 million) for immediate launch & take that out later.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1004655/000168386323007471/f36564d1.htm
497 1 f36564d1.htm VANGUARD INTERNATIONAL DIVIDEND GROWTH FUND SUBSCRIPTION PERIOD 497
Vanguard International Dividend Growth Fund
Supplement to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus Dated November 1, 2023
Subscription Period
Vanguard International Dividend Growth Fund ("Fund") will hold a subscription period from November 1, 2023 through November 14, 2023. During this period, the Fund will invest in money market instruments or hold its assets in cash rather than seek to achieve its investment objective. This strategy should allow the Fund to accumulate sufficient assets to construct a complete portfolio and is expected to reduce initial trading costs.
The Fund reserves the right to terminate or extend its subscription period prior to November 14, 2023.
During the subscription period, you may invest in the Fund online (if you are registered for online access) or you may contact Vanguard by telephone or by mail to complete this transaction. Please see the Investing With Vanguard section of the prospectus for more details about requesting transactions.
© 2023 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
PS V021A 112023
Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor.

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1012968/000174177323003590/c497.htm
Summary prospectus:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1012968/000174177323003594/c497k.htm

@MikeM - I’m not in Warren Buffett’s league. Nor do I expect, or even hope, the 3 equities I hold (3.33% each) will perform better than Buffett’s Berkshire. So, for those who want to duplicate Buffett’s return, they should put 100% into BRK. They would, ISTM, be assured of earning whatever Buffett does.
You also make the case for owning funds over individual equities. I agree on that point as a general rule. 90% of my assets are in funds. What I see in having some limited stock holdings are (1) an opportunity to dampen the volatility of an “all fund” portfolio and (2) a way to reduce average management fees across the portfolio. To be sure, those potential benefits come at increased risk. No two ways about it.
I have no long term record of owning individual stocks (umm …only 2-3 years). So you might be right that “average” retail investors (like you and me) should not own individual stocks - that it’s an area only for professionals like Buffett to participate in. I really can’t say. I was simply trying honestly to answer your earlier questions which I took as:
- Has exposure to individual stocks helped or hurt your overall return? (both)
- Have you compared your individual stocks’ performance to a broader index? (no)
To Mike’s point - Re ”comparative indexes”.
Mike, I track about 20 mutual funds / etfs (and 1 stock) daily for clues about volatility. I especially like to look at VWINX, PRWCX, BRK.B, PRSIX, AOK, ABRZX, TMSRX, BAMBX.
For performance longer term I like to watch TRRIX, PRPFX, VWINX. But - No, I have no objective measure of how I’m doing. Take whatever the market gives me. Keep volatility low. Enjoy the ride.
Hope that answers your question. :)

The comparative measure doesn't necessarily need to be an index @hank. Heck, you have said you use comparative benchmarks before. It's essential I think. If someone wants to trade stocks, measure results against a stock portfolio like BRK.B for instance. If you beat that over time you should be doing stock picking for a living. But couldn't an amateur stock picker be fooling themselves to think they are doing better picking stocks than say a professional manger? Say, Warren Buffet, again a comparison reference to BRK. Especially true for smaller less traded stocks I would think. And I believe if reducing volatility is a goal, buying individual stocks, especially small stocks, flies in the face of that goal in my opinion.
I do think 1 stock at 10% of a portfolio is pretty significant. 5 stocks? Yeah I still do. 10 stocks? Less significant I suppose, only because of reduced volatility and the greater chance to get ETF-like results.
I do agree it boils down to comfort level in the end.

SEC yields per M*
IEF ( 7-10 year treasury) 4.7
TLH ( 10-20) 5.09
TLT (over 20) 5.0
ITWY (only 20 year treasuries) 5.12
Worth thinking about!

For those who do like to own individual stocks as a main investment tool to your overall portfolio, have you compared your stock selections to a broad based index fund like the S&)500 for large US stocks or a small stock ETF or a global ETF if using foreign stocks? It may be hard to compare and answer, but are you winning?
I'm comfortable playing individual stocks as a hobby but nothing more. And for me, alas, it's generally an expensive hobby.

@MikeM - Not sure a 10% weighting to individual stocks counts as “a main investment tool”. Maybe others can better answer. Last year it helped my overall return to hold some individual stocks. Beginner’s luck. And I traded a lot more last year which helped as there were some extreme movements in stocks. Gets tired fast though. This year the individual stocks have worked against me. As I noted earlier, the global food conglomerate has been hit by both the strong dollar and the hysteria over new weight reduction meds. There’s a fear people will eat less. Also, the new med seems to curb drinking. So, without checking, I’d guess brewers have been hit. A lot of other sectors have been hit as well. But - at just 10% of portfolio, individual stocks are not that significant.
Could care less about the indexes. Try to stay as far as possible from the S&P. Herd mentality ISTM. The goal has never been about beating an index. Goal has always been to do somewhat better than cash over time with very low volatility. Of course, with cash, volatility is 0. And returns are predictable. Boils down to comfort level in the end.

If BB Fan means he’s 85% T-Bills that’s pretty conservative. Here: 47% equity / 30% bond / 15% short term and the rest “other”. I’ve always worked hard to keep volatility in check. The equity exposure is mostly through L/S funds & others that hedge in various ways. Very low volatility. Probably something along the lines of VWINX for daily and long term volatility. (Happy to say performance is superior - but VWINX seems to have fallen off a cliff lately). With some confidence volatility will remain low I’ve not much incentive to hold a lot of cash. I certainly understand the appeal of cash and would not question anyone’s decision to hold a lot. Just not how I’ve always done it.
Crash is correct that one advantage of including individual stocks is that they often move opposite the broader market and can help hedge volatility shorter term. Of course, it can sometimes work in reverse. And selection is important in that regard as well.

We bought our two homes when interest rates were 10.5% and 8%. We refinanced the second mortgage when rates dropped to 6% and eventually paid it off at that rate. We survived.

IOW, a plan with a $300 deductible is not a high deductible plan.
By design, high deductible, HSA-eligible health plans discourage use. Aside from free (no deductible) preventive care, they may cost so much to use that they are effectively just catastrophic insurance.
They work for people in excellent health or those who expect to require major care (premiums + out of pocket cap can be smaller on these plans). They typically don't work as well for those approaching Medicare age, or more generally for people who use some but not a lot of health care goods and services.
These two plans are very good, and the HDHP plan may be (slightly) better in most cases.
Illustrating, where low use means just premiums and free annual preventive care and high use means premiums plus out of pocket cap. For medium care I add deductible and a few routine visits including specialists (say 6 specialist visits CPT 99213, quarterly PCP). For the regular plan, the copays come to 6 x $50 + 4 x $30.
Regular plan: Low use $2400, medium use $3100 (approx), high use $5400
HDHP plan: Low use $1200, medium use in the middle, high use $4200
With the HDHP it's easy to hit the $4200 ($100/mo + $3000 cap) max, especially with Upper East Side doctors, even in network. So say in the medium case (just office visits, minor testing, nothing special) you're comparing $4200 to $3100. That's a difference of $1100. The tax savings (32% bracket) with an HSA is around 32% of $4K or around $1300.
The HDHP may be close to a wash in the middle use range and better on both ends. That's not typical (usually the regular plan works out better in the middle).
Regardless, it may not be a big enough difference one way or the other to be worth pursuing. Your friend might check with a Social Security office to see if Medicare disenrollment is possible. Out of curiosity if nothing else :-).

For 15+ years, we have been in a Bull Stock Market, bolstered by government stimulation and zero interest rates. That looks like an artificial set of conditions that was overdue to end. If you are holding your "breath" expecting those conditions to return anytime soon, I don't see that as likely. It appears that Banks are projecting 5% interest rates for quite a few more years, so stocks will likely have a formidable alternative for many investors' cash. I am breathing just fine with 5% interest rates, and I am not interested in "guessing" if we have hit the bottom of the stock market.

My friend sat down with HR yesterday and they had no experience with an employee unenrolling from Part A.
However, they told her that if she is interested in an HSA that she would need to change healthcare plans. With her current plan, approximately $200 is taken out of her paycheck monthly. $300 yearly in-network deductible, $3,000 maximum out-of pocket limit, and mostly copays. $30/visit for her primary, $50/visit for a specialist, $30/visit for x-rays, and $10 copay / $25 copay for generic drugs. With the HSA eligible plan, it would cost her approximately $100 per month. $1,500 yearly in-network deductible, $3,000 maximum out-of pocket limit, and the coverages change from smallish copays to 20% coinsurance pretty much across the board.
The combination of uncertainty regarding unenrolling and reenrolling with Medicare Part A and the inferior healthcare coverage, she decided pass on an HSA. Thanks all for your input!

I often find that my single-stock selections ying when the market in general yangs. Lately, that's often been a backdoor blessing. Biggest ever, so far? One just peeked its chin above 5% of my total portfolio. I hold 5 single stocks. A couple of them are still very tiny. I D-C-A into them in tiny bites. That suits me. It's my only option, strategically AND tactically. So, why beef about it? I get free money to play with every couple of weeks from the spouse-person. :)
Total single-stock portion is still less than 13% of the full portfolio.

Great interview on BINC.
https://www.cnbc.com/etf-edge/

He knows what he's talking about. I like to listen to him. So much crammed into 12 minutes, eh?

PEOPX and DSPIX are two different funds, not two share classes of the same fund. PEOPX is projected to distribute "just" 5.7% of NAV.
Useless trivia: PEOPX ticker comes from the Dreyfus fund's old (1990s) name: People's Index Fund. (A fund for the people? Your guess is as good as mine.)

Google books search will dig up old copies of Kiplingers for info like this.

Forgot to include BNY Mellon U.S. Equity Fund with a estimated total distribution of 38.6%.
The STSCX distribution is expected to be $16.675 plus a small STCG. The closing price on 9/29 was $52.79 so the estimated distribution would be an estimated 31.72%.