https://www.yahoo.com/now/worlds-largest-hedge-fund-founder-180310822.html
I found this opinion interesting in the context of our discussions in and around TIPS. Basically, if you take all the bs out of crypto and coin and what not, Dalio is suggesting a future where we hold cash indexed to inflation. TIPS are just that minus the cash in the bank part. TIPS Bond holders get inflation + real yields. If one likes inflation linked cash, that means Real Yield = zero. Right now TIPS offers Real Yields of +1.4-1.7% depending on the maturity. This is part of the reason I am leaning into TIPS. As @yogibearbull has often written, he prefers 5 year TIPS. There too one gets 1.4% Real yield and much less duration than the 30 year TIPS which makes the 5-year bonds less volatile.
In any case, increasingly I feel the inflation priced into the bond market of around 2.25% and the inflation I feel all around me are such different things. I don't quite know what's a good answer to the problem except holding a healthy amount of TIPS. Of course if you hold stocks for the very very long run, eventually the earnings and dividends are in excess of whatever yields tips will generate.

For the week ending on 2/8/23, bullish became the top sentiment (37.5%; average) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (25.0%; below average); neutral became the middle sentiment (37.5%; above average & tie); Bull-Bear Spread was +12.5% (!; below average). Investor concerns: Inflation (moderating but high); economy; the Fed; dollar; crypto ice-age; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (50+ weeks); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were mixed, bonds down, oil up, gold down, dollar up. Bull-Bear spread became positive for the first time since 3/31/22 (the negative run was for a record 44 weeks). #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/141/aaii-sentiment-survey-weekly?page=9&scrollTo=924

TIAA annuities within 403b are low-cost. For example, CREF Stock VA has all-in ER of 0.23% only (AUM $112 billion). Post-retirement, money can remain as-is in TIAA Traditional (like SV; current crediting rate 6.00%) and TIAA and CREF VAs, but can also be rolled into IRAs.
CREF Stock VA https://www.tiaa.org/public/investment-performance/investment/profile?ticker=268555492
TIAA Traditional - RA https://www.tiaa.org/public/investment-performance/investment/profile?ticker=47933630
There is discussion on Secure 2.0 implications at the thread below at the M* TIAA Forum. When one annuitizes from TIAA 403b, TIAA issues a separate contract for it and it isn't clear whether the money is still part of the original 403b contract (it should be, IMO). My guess is that TIAA may modify its setup to benefit from Secure 2.0; the language is very specific on split annuitized-unannuitized $s within the same account. Beware that early discussion on this M* thread was based on some erroneous info provided by Fidelity at its website; I contacted Fidelity and was informed that the info at Fidelity website has been corrected.
https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o00006OFGTRCA5/update-on-secure-act-of-2022

From @msf quoted,

"hold an annuity in an IRA"
Teachers have had this dreadful option for years...
Variable Annuities (products) wrapped in a 403b.
Wonder if these VAs will get the same RMD treatment (relief) as QLACs?
Some teachers contribute to a mixed bag of Variable Annuities and non-VA mutual funds as part of their 403b portfolio. After retirement, the VAs get annuitized and the non-VAs often get rolled over into Traditional IRAs.
TIAA CREF Summary:
https://tiaa.org/public/pdf/Consultant_SECURE_Act_Summary_Flyer.pdf
403b QLAC:
https://businessofbenefits.com/2015/05/articles/uncategorized/the-403b-qlac/

+1
Since my OP I’ve seen reports of anywhere from 25% - 40% of stocks held in AAPL. So the 40% I mentioned earlier might not be correct. Not sure. Lots of cash - ISTM in the 20-25% range as a % of portfolio. Of course there are delays in reporting. Current figures may be accurate as of September (as reported in November).

@msf, K&LGates link is a good in that it collects various IRA related changes by Secure 2.0.
I think that QLAC, being DIA from retirement accounts, solved one RMD issue in 2014; prior to 2014 change, the DIAs from retirement accounts involved complex RMD calculations by using phantom present values and many just avoided those. All the while, DIAs from taxable (nonretirement) accounts were picking up. Now, the Secure 2.0 (aggregation of RMDs in split accounts) makes QLACs it even better in 2023.
Your last link for "Original QLAC regs" just goes back to the OP of this thread.

Link is fixed. I truncated it when I cut and pasted, and it seems that without the complete link the browser just goes back to the current page.
K&LGates is a site I've run across a few times and seems quite solid. It's not on my top three list (haven't gone there enough times). But if it shows up in a search, i would definitely glance through the page found.
I believe by "phatom present value" you're referring to the "entire interest" (value) of an annuity inside an IRA. It's not so much that QLACs solved this problem as that they were (and are) so restricted that their meger benefits (like return of premium) were already excluded from PV calculations.
The original QLAC exclusion is described here:

When a plan account or IRA holds a deferred annuity, the account balance must include the actuarial present value (APV) of certain benefits that are not reflected in the annuity’s cash value. In the case of a DIA, which may have no surrender cash value, the APV requirement effectively precluded such contracts from being offered in the qualified plan and IRA markets. ...
On February 3, 2012, Treasury and IRS released proposed amendments to the section
401(a)(9) regulations (and various related regulations) that would facilitate the purchase of DIAs providing annuity payments that commence at more advanced ages, as long as the contract meets the definition of a QLAC in the regulations. Under the proposed regulations, the value of a QLAC held under a plan or IRA (other than a Roth IRA) would be excluded from the account balance used to determine RMDs, meaning that no RMDs would be required with respect to the contract prior to annuity payments commencing thereunder.

https://www.sparkinstitute.org/content-files/summary_of_final_qlac_regulations.pdf
Effectively, the original QLAC regulations bifurcated IRAs - there would be an annuity (QLAC) portion and a "regular" portion. The QLAC value would not be included in calculating RMDs and the monthly payments from the QLAC would satisfy the RMD requirements for that portion of the IRA. The remaining "regular" potion of the IRA would be handled normally, as if the QLAC (and its value and its payments) didn't exist.
This is what SECURE 2.0 changed. If the QLAC monthly payments exceed what the annuity value require, the excess may be applied toward satisfying the RMD requirement of the "regular" portion of the IRA. Rather than simplify calculations, ISTM that SECURE 2.0 made them more complicated (though optional).
From CCH:

The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 relaxed some RMD rules to make it easier to hold an annuity in an IRA. Effective December 29, 2022, the SECURE 2.0 Act eliminates the requirement to bifurcate the portion of the account holding the annuity for purposes of the RMD rules. As a result, the account owner can elect to aggregate distributions from the annuity portion and the rest of the account, which may result in lower minimum distributions.

https://answerconnect.cch.com/topic/2ce76cc47c6b1000ad2490b11c18c902026/required-minimum-distributions-rmd-from-iras

The other new twist is you can convert up to $200,000 ( used to be $160,000 I think) or 25% of your IRA into a QLAC tax free, so you can lower your RMD. I have not dug into it yet, but I think you can pick an annuity date at anytime in the future, and one that would still return money to your heirs.

I feel that deferred income annuities are one of the rare positive innovations in financial services in years. But that doesn't make QLACs a great idea.
As Kitces wrote in 2015, using QLACs for the purpose of reducing RMDs, doesn't pay off. It's their value as longevity insurance, not as an RMD reduction mechanism, that makes them worthwhile.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/why-a-qlac-in-an-ira-is-a-terrible-way-to-defer-the-required-minimum-distribution-rmd-obligation/
He also suggested that the 25% limit helped people to avoid a liquidity squeeze - where they didn't have enough left in their IRA to fund retirement before their deferred annuity started monthly payments.
What SECURE 2.0 changed:
- instead of a $125K limit, adjusted for inflation (that's where the $160K figure comes from), it is reset to $200K, still adjusted for inflation;
- the 25% limit is removed
- QLAC monthly payments, once they begin, can be used to satisfy not only the RMD requirement of the annuity but also of the remaining IRA balance, potentially lowering the RMD withdrawals required of the non-annuity portion of the IRA.
https://www.klgates.com/SECURE-20-Act-Legislation-Includes-Significant-Changes-to-Individual-Retirement-Accounts-1-31-2023
What did not change:
- must start payments by age 85
- return of principal to heirs is permitted
Original QLAC regs

Inflation = rising prices, disinflation = inflation going down, deflation = prices declining.

Simple and clear. :)
Yes, D. Rubenstein is smart and is a good interviewer, indeed. I don't often catch him, but I do often see excerpts. (When the channel runs out of silly commercials to show you, they fill-in the gap by showing the viewer a self-promoting bit.) I can't get CNBC, but I can get Bloomberg, and put it on whenever I'm sitting down to a meal or a snack. And Rubenstein is not without a sense of humor. Refreshing.
This is one investor who likes to keep abreast of everything, but I act to make changes quite seldom.

Self-directed IRAs can hold a variety of nontraditional/alternative assets - real estate, precious metals, commodities, collectibles, cryptos, private placement securities, etc. These types of investments may be unregistered (with the SEC, etc), illiquid; may have limited disclosures, withdrawal restrictions, stale or book value prices (plus markups), unreasonable but meaningless guarantees. The main point of this Alert is that for regular IRAs, the custodian firms/sponsors have some restrictions and safeguards, but for self-directed IRAs, they have none, and they are basically the asset holders and administrators. This allows some bad operators (many are unlicensed promoters) to exploit customers, and customers may have limited or no recourses. The self-directed IRA custodian could even be fake; fees/ERs may be high. Some fraudsters may hide behind the complex rules for IRAs.
https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-alerts/investor-14
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/395/sec-alert-self-directed-iras

Can't make this up - new ETF's
By: Jason Capul, SA News Editor
"Think U.S. lawmakers have the inside track when it comes to the stock market? Now there are ETFs that allow investors to track moves made by politicians of the two major political parties.
Unusual Whales, in conjunction with Subversive Capital, unveiled two politically charged exchange traded funds that cater to both the Republican and Democratic sides of the aisle. The two funds are the Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic ETF (BATS:NANC) and Unusual Whales Subversive Republican ETF (BATS:KRUZ).
NANC: Plans to invest insecurities purchased or sold by Democratic members of Congress and their spouses.
KRUZ: Offers exposure to securities purchased or sold by Republican members of Congress and their spouses.
From a holdings point of view, NANC’s top three positions are in Microsoft (MSFT), Amazon (AMZN), and Alphabet (GOOG) (GOOGL) at weightings of 7.31%, 6.67%, and 5.91% respectively.
KRUZ on the other hand has its top three stakes in Magellan Midstream Partners (MMP), Microsoft (MSFT), and Energy Transfer (ET), which have weightings of 3.44%, 2.55%, and 2.24% respectively. Additionally, both funds come attached with a 0.75% expense ratio."

Bank of Princeton was to be acquired some years ago by Investors Bank in NJ; however, the deal fell through. Investors was later acquired by Citizen Financial Group early last year.
Earnings news release from the SEC website:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1913971/000119312523016226/d441956dex991.htm

David Rubenstein (Bloomberg) preempted Powell’s speech by interviewing Powell in front of an audience at 12:45. Really pressed him on a number of issues. Especially the 2% inflation target. Near as I can recall, Powell said it was a firm target. Hence, I’m not sure why the markets seemed to react positively (initially, anyway).
FWIW - the sources I follow - even the typically bearish ones - seem to be growing more positive on the markets, including gold. Seems to me that there was more negativity 3-6 months ago when valuations were 10-20% lower. Heck, even the IMF recently upgraded / improved its global outlook. Go figure.
(Not intended as investment advice)
Video of interview:

I've turned the page on the big monopoly Canadian banks. If I could have thrown the money at them maybe a decade ago, it might have turned out nicely. I still own none of them. CM. BNS. RY. BMO. TD.
I love to hunt for regional banks that are not in the headlines and don't get mentioned by CNBC or Bloomberg. I think Zion and Regions and Huntington and the like have all outgrown their britches.
PRISX: TRP Financials. in the middle of the pack vs. peers, YTD. Still nothing to write home about. I've redeployed a bunch of it on the way up in 2023. I'm still holding it, much reduced, so I can curse at it. PRISX did nothing but chew my ass for a whole year, through 2022.
After some digging, I'm hoping that "slow and steady wins the race." Still holding BHB. Still pleased with it, though it's encountering resistance near its 52-week target price. Slow and steady seems to be their style.... I went to school in Princeton. I thought: check what's there. BPRN. Bank of Princeton. It's lately on fire. I'll wait for a pullback. They only put shares on the market in 2019. Still young. Over the maximum time-frame for BPRN, BHB beats it handily.
After much looking, it appears that banks have almost ALL done well YTD, so an underpriced one is like finding a needle in a haystack. But these are on my watchlist:
AROW Upstate NY, Glens Falls region.
CAC. Camden, Maine.
COLB and UMPQ are in the middle of merging, out West. That's going to be a huge powerhouse.
FNLC. I'm just about ready to cross this one off my list, as well as CMTV. The latter is just too illiquid. And FNLC doesn't hold up when compared to BHB...... UNB out of Morrisville, Vermont seems to have eaten a poison pill. Its numbers have turned south in a big way. UBCP is Martins Ferry, Ohio and environs. After catching my eye, it's not impressing me.
I insist on a dividend. It's gotta be 3% or more, unless there's something else in the numbers that really blows me away, in a good way. My method? LOL. I often look for out-of-the-way resort areas and/or elite neighborhoods where there is apt to be established old money, or incoming, up-and-coming new money arriving. (Thus, the Maine coast.) But that strategy only goes so far.
Otherwise, I'm just "living the Life of Riley" here.

.....So THAT'S what happened. Ya, my bonds got their clocks cleaned. I'm down to 59% stocks, 33 bonds, 7 cash. But that's misleading because I'm using the sweep account as a savings account for a particular thing. It will be empty, almost, again, soon enough.

Always something, Will be interesting to see if markets zig or zag in response to whatever utterance he shall make. They’ve really been “wired” of late - if you haven’t noticed. Big news today appears to have been interest rates which rose sharply. 10-year Treasury back above 3.6% … Dollar strengthened. Dinged international holdings and some commodities. Little reaction in the precious metals however.
Excerpt from linked story: ”A speech from Powell before the Economic Club of Washington on Tuesday remains top of mind for investors. Markets interpreted a slew of his disinflation comments during last week's post-meeting press conference as dovish and stocks rallied. Many view the appearance as an opportunity for Powell to offer more clarity on where rates are headed, or clarify some comments made after last week's 25 basis point rate hike. ‘I think you will likely see an attempt to perhaps dampen some of the reaction to the statements in the press conference,’ (Sinead Colton Grant, global head of investor solutions at BNY Mellon Wealth Management) said.”
CNBC

Fidelity CRE is really new to the scene. May be a while to find something on it. Did find DoubleLine has a registration filing for a commercial real estate ETF filed last month.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1886172/000119312523008255/d313200d485apos.htm

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834423002217/fp0082102-1_497.htm
Brent Clayton

Private real estate has too much friction and illiquidity. Paying 1% management fee + 12.5% over 5% hurdle is a perfect product for advisors. Bond like returns, opaque pricing, low mark to market volatility. Meanwhile, the public real estate is too volatile. Wonder if the private guys use the public real estate as a hedge in turn increasing the volatility of the public. maybe just stay from it all till its becomes out of favor.

Yeah, not good for this cowboy either. I wonder how long one must keep up with those $5K monthly additions.

Fidelity has jumped into private commercial real estate (CRE). This FIDELITY CORE REAL ESTATE FUND fund requires investor accreditation, $25K initial minimum, +$5K additional monthly additions, ER 1.0% plus 12.5% of performance over +5%.
Fund will not be listed or traded on exchanges.
After 3 years of operations, quarterly redemptions up to 5% of fund assets allowed at the option of Fidelity.
It is suggested as an addition to traditional 60-40 stock-bond portfolios.
Note that Blackstone BREIT and Starwood SREIT have been in the news due to reaching their quarterly 5% redemption limits.
TIAA Real Estate Account VA QREARX is different in that it its Liquidity Guarantee (from TIAA) allows quarterly redemptions of any amount.
Listed real estate funds behave differently due to their leverage and market factors. Examples include VNQ, XLRE, FRESX, and hybrid FRIFX. Fidelity also has multi-asset FMSDX that combines stocks-bonds-alternatives.
An interesting time for Fidelity to enter private CRE area.
May be @TheShadow can find more information on its filing.
Video https://www.fidelity.com/go/alternative-investments-core-real-estate?ccsource=em_Promo_1057918_1_0
Video Transcript https://media.fidelity.com/assets/Fidelity.com_VMS/868/695/CoreRealEstateVideoTranscript_1.17.23.pdf
Limited SEC/Edgar Info https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1953520/000195352023000001/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml