Comments below on Medigap are from what I remember from helping someone a couple of years ago. Little time to check all of the details now, so not everything may be spot on:
IMHO what is most important is type of pricing, attained age, issue age or community pricing. It's hard to control for age because you don't know how quickly attained age policies will increase rates for each extra year of age. OTOH if you ever switch policies, I think you reset your issue age with the new policy.
As I recall, plans get around community rating by offering discounts based on age. Sort of like saying: here's the price of a gallon of gas, but we'll give you a discount if you pay cash. So you really have to dig into the pricing details.
Regarding excess charges, terms of art to know are "participating", "nonparticipating", and "opt out". Providers who "opt out" have opted out of Medicare and cannot provide service. While that sounds the same as "nonparticipating", nonparticipating means that they are allowed to impose excess charges. In all but 8(?) states nonparticipating providers can charge, as Mona wrote, 15% extra. Some of those eight forbid any excess charges, while others allow a smaller amount. For example, NYS allows 5%.
https://nyassembly.gov/write/upload/req/physician_charges.pdf?v=1726590590
While Medigap policies are standardized, for the past several years they have been allowed to offer extra benefits similar to Medicare Advantage plans. Gym memberships, vision care, etc. All Medigap Plan Gs are equal; some are more equal than others.
See, e.g. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2021/small-share-medicare-supplement-plans-offer-access-dental-vision-and-other-benefits-not
https://www.goodrx.com/insurance/health-insurance/medigap-gym-membership
Since I've no experience with using Medigap plans, I'll phrase this as a question. What difference does the quality of the insurer make to you? Some insurers are particularly slow and that can put a burden on the provider waiting for payment - that affects the provider, not you. True it can even be annoying to have to wait months for the EOBs to arrive. Other than that, what difference does the quality of the Medigap insurer make? They don't determine whether a service is covered. Medicare does that. They just fill in the gaps.

We keep jars of Planter's peanuts for nibbling... they just went up 50¢ from last week. Must be Trump's new tariffs on stuff from Georgia. :)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809593/000113322825012021/abamaf-efp19173_497.htm
497 1 abamaf-efp19173_497.htm AMERICAN BEACON AHL MULTI-ALTERNATIVES FUND - 497
American Beacon AHL Multi-Alternatives Fund
Supplement dated November 12, 2025, to the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus, and Statement of Additional Information
each dated May 1, 2025, as previously amended or supplemented
The Board of Trustees of American Beacon Funds has approved a plan to liquidate and terminate the American Beacon AHL Multi-Alternatives Fund (the “Fund”) on or about December 30, 2025 (the “Liquidation Date”), based on the recommendation of American Beacon Advisors, Inc., the Fund’s investment manager.
In anticipation of the liquidation, effective immediately, the Fund is closed to new shareholders. In addition, in anticipation of and in preparation for the liquidation of the Fund, AHL Partners LLP, the sub-advisor to the Fund, may need to increase the portion of the Fund's assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for the Fund’s expenses and to meet redemption requests. The Fund may no longer be pursuing its investment objective during this transition. On or about the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders. These shareholder distributions may be taxable events. Thereafter, the Fund will terminate.
The Fund will be liquidated on or about December 30, 2025. Liquidation proceeds will be delivered in accordance with the existing instructions for your account. No action is needed on your part.
Please note that you may be eligible to exchange your shares of the Fund at net asset value per share at any time prior to the Liquidation Date for shares of the same share class of another American Beacon Fund under certain limited circumstances. You also may redeem your shares of the Fund at any time prior to the Liquidation Date. No sales charges, redemption fees or termination fees will be imposed in connection with such exchanges and redemptions. In general, exchanges and redemptions are taxable events for shareholders.
In connection with its liquidation, the Fund may declare distributions of its net investment income and net capital gains in advance of its Liquidation Date, which may be taxable to shareholders. You should consult your tax adviser to discuss the Fund’s liquidation and determine its tax consequences.
For more information, please contact us at 1-800-658-5811, Option 1. If you purchased shares of the Fund through your financial intermediary, please contact your broker-dealer or other financial intermediary for further details.
****************************************************************************
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
AHLMA-11122025

Comparing pricing on medicare.gov for Plan-G Medigap. We will not be signing up until late 2026 at earliest.
If all Plan-G cover exactly the same by law (I am told), why would anyone choose other than the cheapest plan? (Attained age and community pricing held constant.)
I see plans from ~$140/mo all the way to $600+ per month. What is the practical difference?
some plans are from insurers that I have never heard of, that does make me uneasy.

@DrVenture Medigap Plan G is the Cadillac. The only thing that it does not cover is the Part B deductible, which in 2025 is $240. Once you pay that, Plan G covers the rest of your approved Medicare costs for the year.
Medicare Plan N is good. Again, you pay the $240 Part B deductible. Plan N has what is called Part B Excess Charges (providers can bill excess charges (up to 15%), though in practice, most don’t. Over 95% of U.S. doctors who see Medicare patients accept assignment). Some states do not allow Excess Charges. I know someone who resides in a state that does allow Excess Charges and in 10 years, she has never been billed for these charges. Also with Plan N, you are responsible for a $20 doctor visit and up to $50 for an ER visit if you are not admitted (25% - 30% less than G?).
High-deductible G has the same benefits as G, but you must first pay an annual deductible before the plan begins paying. For 2025, that deductible is $2,800. The monthly premium for HD-G is considerably less than G (65% Less?).
Yes, by law, each companies G must provide the same benefits. Same with N, HD-G and so on. My opinion is to stay with a name brand company. You want one that has good customer service, has a good reputation for processing claims, is financially strong, etc. You will find a name brand company that will be very competitive. Ask your doctors/hospitals which insurance companies they like best (the ones that pay claims promptly!). What you don’t want to happen is to end up with a “bad” company, you have a bad year medically, and you have to go through underwriting to change carriers. You may be stuck with the bad company.
Post and/or read some threads on the Bogleheads forum. Very knowledgeable people regarding Medicare and these three different plans.

Michigan just reset the state liquor commission controlled “minimum price” that merchants can’t sell below. It’s a weird system with the state grabbing off a 65% markup on package liquor sales.
I was struck today by how steep the recent price reset was. It’s across the board. But, for example, a month ago a 750 ml bottle of JW Black was priced at about $38.00 - though some retailers charged more. The new minimum price is closer to $44.00. That’s a 15% price hike overnight. Not sure how often prices reset. Twice yearly best guess. Thinking of switching to something cheaper. Picked up a few samplers of Jim Beam today. Guess that would be like going from having 5 dolls down to only 1 or 2. But I digress …. :)
Not the best article. But attempts to explain Michigan’s weird package liquor pricing system.

I previously owned RLBGX in my employer's H.S.A. plan.
CGBL is an interesting fund which is somewhat similar to RLBGX.
I may use CGBL in my H.S.A. account (now at Fidelity) sometime in the future.
But it's not really a global fund.
The following data is from 10/31/2025.
U.S. Equities: 55.4%
Non-U.S. Equities: 7.6%
U.S. Bonds: 31.8%
Non-U.S. Bonds: 3.4%
Cash & Equivalents: 1.8%
Information Technology: 18.3%, largest sector exposure
Financial: 10.9%, second-largest sector exposure
https://www.capitalgroup.com/individual/investments/exchange-traded-funds/details/cgbl

@msf: This 4% extra increase is the result of healthier people who previously had enhanced subsidies losing them and deciding to go without insurance. The remaining pool of insured people are on average sicker and more costly to cover.
I dream of a 4% annual increase. Currently, without my CGs included, I'm estimating the cost for my Anthem health plan (same features as this year) will be 50-60% higher. I'm a fairly healthy and active person (not yet Medicare age) and I don't really complain much, but it's hard to justify that increase simply for an annual checkup, shots, and bloodwork. Anyway, I will diligently pay up since the Wheel of Fate tends to favor more visits to the doc as we age. Place your bets!
I appreciate your thoughts and info. Thx.

I
For the past 4 years, I've been selling ICLN as an offset to significant reinvested Tech/SP CGs. For some bizarre reason, global clean energy ETFs performed horribly under Biden but did well (and are doing well) under the orange buffoon's administration. Go figure. Any thoughts on that? Anyway, I've returned to investing in clean energy rather than selling.

Bloom Energy for one reason. Dinky linky. It's 11.5% of ICLN, and it's up 839% over the past 12 months.
So some AI utility whizbang. And the fund is 60% foreign, where people still invest in clean energy.

Instead of making my normal annual contribution to SP500 (SPY/IVW) and Tech (VUG/TRLGX) funds/ETFs, I've decided to pile more into Global Clean energy (ICLN) and Waste Management (EVX).
For the past 4 years, I've been selling ICLN as an offset to significant reinvested Tech/SP CGs. For some bizarre reason, global clean energy ETFs performed horribly under Biden but did well (and are doing well) under the orange buffoon's administration. Go figure. Any thoughts on that? Anyway, I've returned to investing in clean energy rather than selling.
Also, my "hard pass" (LOL) bond fund, WAPSX, still performs consistently...4.8% return over the past decade...and I continue to reinvest the divs monthly. Thought about moving it all into WABSX (a similar fund, but M* 5-rated) after receiving feedback here, but I'll stick with my lowly M* 2-rated WAPSX for now.

Worst case: if coverage becomes an issue, you can relocate or establish residency in another county to qualify for Original Medicare.

In your situation, the Humana Gold Choice H8145-069 (PFFS) plan is available in several counties across Georgia and South Carolina. If you "relocate or establish residency in another county" where this same plan is offered, you will not receive a guaranteed issue right for a Medigap policy. In that case, you should be prepared for possible medical underwriting.

It turns out that even if your new county is still within your plan's service area, there could be another out. You won't be permitted, midyear to switch to original Medicare, but you might be able to switch to a different MA plan. An obscure rule:

I moved to a new address that's still in my plan's service area but I have new plan options in my new location.
What can I do?
Switch to a new Medicare Advantage Plan (with or without drug coverage) or Medicare drug plan.

https://www.medicare.gov/basics/get-started-with-medicare/get-more-coverage/joining-a-plan/special-enrollment-periods
For example, in DeKalb County, Humana offers PPO plan H7617-092 that it doesn't offer in adjacent Fulton County. So if you moved from Fulton to DeKalb county, it seems that you'd be able to pick any other MA advantage plan. It would make more sense if only the added MA options were open to you. But that is not the way the text seems to read. (On the next line it does say that, in addition, if your old plan isn't offered at your new location, then you can switch to original Medicare.)

Warren’s successor has to prove himself as the chairman. The Buffet premium on the stock is gone. Greg Abel, from what i read, is a very capable manager. We will miss Warren Buffet.

Depending on how hard BRK tanks after Warren passes, I would be tempted to buy into it for the long term...

Why would BRK tank after the inevitable occurs? Warren is 95 years old and hasn’t really run Berkshire for a number of years. His passing will not be a surprise to anyone. As a many decades long shareholder, I can say that neither Warren nor Charlie were ever interested in running Berkshire’s sprawling business. They are both very hands-off when it comes to management. Berkshire has always been run in a very decentralized manner.
As much as I love Warren, I’m more optimistic about the company’s future now and after he’s no longer with us. Berkshire needs someone with different skills. It needs a strong operator who will hold subsidiary businesses accountable for performance. This never really occurred on Warren’s watch. I could see Greg selling businesses that are perennial poor performers, which is something Warren wouldn’t do.

@sma3. Good info....but.
As usual, you need to know what you are doing.
Worst case: if coverage becomes an issue, you can relocate or establish residency in another county to qualify for Original Medicare.

Indeed, you do need to know what you are doing.
In your situation, the Humana Gold Choice H8145-069 (PFFS) plan is available in several counties across Georgia and South Carolina. If you "relocate or establish residency in another county" where this same plan is offered, you will not receive a guaranteed issue right for a Medigap policy. In that case, you should be prepared for possible medical underwriting.

The flaw in most definitions is that they’re just labels.
What truly matters are quantifiable performance metrics:
TR (total return), SD (standard deviation), Sharpe ratio, Sortino ratio, max drawdown, and others.
Then: set measurable goals, track them rigorously, evaluate honestly, identify improvements, and implement changes.
Repeat every several years.
Everything else is unmeasurable noise.
BTW, a true goal must be challenging.
Example 1: At age 30, aiming for 7% annualized returns over the next 30 years while the S&P 500 averages 10% isn’t a real goal; it’s underperforming by design.
Example 2: If your bond allocation was in BND over the past 15 years and returned just 2.2% annually, that’s dismal performance, not a success.
All my meaningful goals over the years were hard to beat. That’s how I improved. On the flip side, many missteps taught me exactly what to avoid.

I am satisfied with what we have, so I must be a satisfier. But as Benz alluded to, there are many things that even a diehard Boglehead can do to push towards maximizing.
Just in tax planning alone, Roth early in life? Or tIRA early and Roth later, or not at all? Start pulling from 401k the day you retire or hold for age 73. TLH? Or no?
Then there is asset placement - traditional Boglehead wisdom is bonds in your tax deferred (beating SPX, of course) / VTI in your Roth / BRK, maybe, in taxable. But does that always hold?.
Finally, age in bonds or now, 120 - age in stock or stress test need, ability and willingness to take a 50% loss on your stock holdings.
Two more - One is REITS? Or no? Two is bond funds or a bond ladder? I used to be convinced that the 2 move in opposite directions, but I don’t know if I still believe that.

HMO or a Medicare Advantage Plan
People tend to conflate these terms. An HMO is a type of policy, whether it is an employer plan, an ACA plan, or a Medicare Advantage Plan. Likewise, PPO, EPO, PFFS, etc. are types of policies that may be packaged under ACA, Medicare Advantage, etc.
HMOs are the most restrictive because in most cases they won't cover out of network services. EPOs are almost as bad, because their only difference is that they don't require referrals to see specialists. That makes them easier to use but they likewise cover only in-network providers. With either you risk losing coverage for your doctors if they are kicked out of network midyear.
PFFSs require providers to accept the terms of their policy in order to be covered. Some out of network providers will accept those terms. From what sma writes, I imagine that Mass General would laugh if a PFFS policy holder asked it to accept the PFFS payment terms.
MA PPOs cover all providers that accept Medicare. You'll have higher coinsurance payments with out-of-network providers, but they'll still be covered. Including Mass General.
In the worst case, original Medicare + Medigap (Supplement Plan 1A in Mass.) + Part D might come out less expensive than a MA PPO. Or not.
The Mass. Medigap plans run around $3K/year plus a couple hundred bucks for Part D. A Humana PPO with a $60/mo give back (reduction in Part B premium) has an out-of-network cap of $7750 (net $7K after premium reduction). It also gives $4K in dental benefits along with a variety of small benefits (vision, transportation). Net, in worst case it's hard to predict which costs less.
If you don't use hospital services, the MA plan could come out much less expensive. Even when seeing out-of-network doctors.
There are towns that come to mind where the entire health care system is under one umbrella like Rochester MN or apparently FT Wayne IN,
I think San Francisco is another such town. It seems that Sutter Health has bought up all the hospitals.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/article/sutter-health-charged-30-hospitals-new-study-19731388.php
I think you have to do your homework very carefully
That's clearly the bottom line.

@Crash and @Observant1 et al
Only a question to AI and what 'it' can find.....
Question: BBB bond quality over past 5 years
----- Over the past five years, the quality of BBB bonds has seen mixed signals: yields have decreased overall, but their risk profile has been a subject of debate. Some sources suggest that while yields have declined from historical highs, the underlying corporate fundamentals of many BBB-rated companies are stronger, with a notable increase in the overall market share of BBB bonds, often attributed to a shift from higher-rated bonds and an abundance of issuance in shorter-term maturities. However, the increasing popularity of this market segment raises concerns about the potential for a future downgrade, especially as market conditions fluctuate.
Yields and returns
Decreased yields: The effective yield for US corporate BBB bonds has fallen over the last five years, though it remains above the long-term average, according to data from YCharts.
Mixed returns: ETFs tracking BBB-rated corporate bonds have shown a range of returns over the last five years, depending on the specific fund's focus, such as maturity or duration. For example, the Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF (BBBS) had a 5-year return of 2.49% while the iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) has a 5-year return of 0.00% as of a recent reporting date, highlighting the impact of bond-specific factors, such as maturity, on performance.
Higher income: Despite lower yields, some analyses suggest that BBB-rated corporate bonds have historically provided higher average coupon income compared to other investment-grade bonds.
Quality and risk
Increasing market share: The overall market share of BBB-rated debt has increased, as a larger number of companies issue more debt within this rating bracket, potentially making it a more accessible and liquid investment class.
Mixed fundamentals: Some analysis suggests that the quality of BBB-rated companies has improved, with many former A-rated companies maintaining strong cash flows despite their lower credit rating.
Contingent risk: The shift in the market toward BBB-rated bonds has sparked concerns among some analysts about potential downgrades in the future, particularly if market conditions were to worsen.
Focus on specific segments: Some sources recommend focusing on shorter-dated BBB-rated bonds while avoiding the long end of the maturity curve to limit downside risk, especially in more leveraged sectors.
Low default rates: Despite concerns about potential downgrades, BBB bonds still have historically low default rates, typically below 0.36%.
Key takeaway
Increased market share: Over the past five years, BBB-rated bonds have become a more prominent part of the investment landscape, driven by factors like increased issuance and a shift toward shorter-dated maturities.
Divergent performance: Performance has been mixed, with some ETFs showing positive returns while others have been flat or even negative, underscoring the importance of evaluating individual bonds or fund holdings based on their specific characteristics.
Mixed quality concerns: While some BBB-rated companies are considered fundamentally sound, the increased market share has raised concerns about potential future downgrades and market volatility.
Need for careful selection: Investors should conduct thorough due diligence before investing in this asset class to identify the highest-quality issuers and mitigate risks.

...Then you have the question of what quality is BBB nowadays.
This is merely anecdotal, but what I hear over and over is that even below BBB-rated Junk these days
is generally of better quality than it once was, particularly leading up to the GFC in '08 or so.
My source = listening to BBG's "Real Yield."

I've read and heard similar claims for BBB bonds.
Multiple sources — which I don't currently recall — stated that the overall quality
for BBB bonds in 2025 is higher than it was during certain prior periods.
I don't know whether or not this is actually true.

@larryB
I know of them but little else? Have you used them?
There are a few little odd things. For example AOM although 60/40 is 27% tech, although SP500 ( 35% tech) is only 23% of the portfolio.
Can anyone make sense of M* other methods of listing Asset allocation such as "economic exposure
"The Economic Exposure View displays the sensitivity of portfolio return to various asset classes. Economic Exposure will model the impact of these instruments based on their inherent leverage rather than solely based on their market values. Compared to the Classic Asset Allocation, this view provides additional clarity to investors around how funds use derivatives to adjust the portfolio’s risk profile in addition to more clearly depicting sources of risk and return."

Following are some unbelievable excerpts from a current report in The Wall Street Journal:
President says notion that GOP performed poorly in recent elections because of cost of living is Democratic ‘con job’

WASHINGTON—Republicans in Washington came away from the recent elections with a clear takeaway: focus on the high cost of living or risk big losses in next year’s midterms. President Trump said this past week that Republicans aren’t talking enough about his administration’s successes, and he dismissed questions on voters’ concerns regarding the economy. Most prices are on the downswing, he argued.
“Our energy costs are way down. Our groceries are way down. Everything is way down. And the press doesn’t report it,” Trump said. “So, I don’t want to hear about the affordability. Because right now, we’re much less.”
Trump’s optimistic perspective on the economy is at odds with government statistics and the views of many voters, according to pollsters and analysts. The Labor Department reported last month that consumer prices rose 3% in September from a year earlier, marking the fastest pace since January. In recent surveys, voters said the cost of housing, groceries and utility bills is unmanageable. Democratic candidates who focused their messages on affordability came out on top in Tuesday’s elections, handily beating their Republican challengers.
In the Oval Office on Friday, Trump lashed out at reporters who pressed him on the cost of living: “We are the victors on affordability.” The president called Democrats’ contention that affordability played a role in Tuesday’s election a “con job”.
Privately, Republicans said they are worried that Trump seems reluctant to empathize with voters’ economic pain. Some in the GOP have been raising red flags for weeks about Republicans’ vulnerabilities over the economy. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R., Ga.) said in a recent interview with CNN, “Affordability is a problem.” “I go to the grocery store myself. Grocery prices remain high. Energy prices are high,” she said. “My electricity bills are higher here in Washington, D.C., at my apartment, and they’re also higher at my house in Rome, Ga.—higher than they were a year ago.”
Trump has focused in part on legacy-building projects such as peace deals abroad and a $300 million ballroom. Democrats are planning to say in ads that Trump is out of touch. Rahm Emanuel, a former top adviser to President Barack Obama, said “He is telling you he doesn’t really care”... “He does a very good impersonation of Marie Antoinette in drag”.
"Trump is showing all the hallmarks of being isolated. “Every president loves the people who come in and tell them how great he is doing,” Emanuel said. “It is an illness of the Oval Office.”

The above excerpts have been edited for brevity, and the link to the original Wall Street Journal report should be free.
No comment is necessary- Trump's remarks loudly speak for themselves.

@larryB, thank you. I see that. I will be evaluating buying one or the other next week. I like the safety of Wellesley, but Wellington is only 15% in technology.