Sometimes it’s better to cut bait. I messed with IVZ (Invesco) midway through last year. Couldn’t take the wild gyrations - mostly down. Dumped it fast. I don’t use stop loss. If I have a lot of confidence in something I’ll buy down in increments.
If anybody has money making suggestions (other than cash) pass them along. Markets are starting to rot. Vix at 17. Even Barron’s had commentary that it’s become “Dullsville” of late. I suspect a Fed pause in May (widely unexpected) would push markets higher.

Getting 5% is pretty good. When I take into account of inflation (6%), I am behind by 1%. Right now I am adding to intermediate term bonds before the FED will pause after May ‘s rate hike. It is counterintuitive, but I think the longer duration bonds move independent from the short term bonds. If US enter a recession later this year or 2024, bonds will do better than stocks.
China’s visit to France is embarrassing to himself and to the world. They are just to justify if and when they invade Taiwan. That is the reason Warren Buffet exited his entire position of TSM quickly.

The maturity date, 5/15/23 indicates it is a 3 months CD when it was issued on 2/13/23. As of today, 4/24/23, it is approaching the maturity date.
No you are looking at the secondary market prices and you will not get the stated rate.
Best is to look at new issues at your brokerage and pay the par value and collect the full interest at maturity. I am seeing 12 months CDs at 5.0% from Schwab and Goldman Sach from Fidelity brokerage.

I'm looking at an FDIC insured brokered CD issued by TIAA FSB (FLORIDA) that was originally issued 02/15/2023 and matures on 05/15/2023.
Yield to maturity is shown at 5.225%. The coupon is shown as 4.5%. The price is shown as $99.96.
If I deposit 1000.00 into this, am I really going to get back $1052.25 in just 21 days?
This seems to good to be true. What am I missing?

Yesterday, updated MFO Premium site through March using Lipper's 21 April datadrop.

BlackRock screener finds 11 active ETFs, but some may be factor-ETFs.

”Yeah. I think we actually rate 12 different strategies as Gold-rated. It starts with Rick Rieder. He recently received the Morningstar Outstanding Portfolio Manager award. He took over the fixed-income operations in 2010 and has really built a very strong competitive bond lineup.”
Rieder appeared on Wall Street Week Friday for a short segment. Hard not to like. I have a tad in a CEF he manages.

@yogibearbull,
Dan Ivascyn, Rick Rieder, Rajiv Jain, Daniel O'Keefe, Aswath Damodaran,
Liz Ann Sonders, and Lawrence Summers (among others) are scheduled
to participate in the 2023 Morningstar Investment Conference (MIC).
MIC Agenda
Edit/Add:
Joel Dickson from Vanguard (Global Head of Advice Methodology)
and Philip Green from BlackRock (Head of Global Tactical Asset Allocation Team)
will both participate in "The 60/40 Portfolio..." session on April 26.

Morningstar’s specialist discusses the firm’s iShares ETFs, the company’s strengths,
and what investors need to know about the world’s largest asset manager today.
Video

Morningstar’s Vanguard specialist talks about the firm’s funds and ETFs,
costs, and new initiatives that investors should know about.
Video

Difference between short and long-term thinking. Banks CEOs like most CEOs of publicly traded companies often only think from quarter to quarter. To accept zero yields in 2020 and 2021 as Buffett did would be unacceptable to such CEOs trying to hit quarterly earnings estimates in 2020 and 2021 and collect their sizable bonuses for hitting those quarterly numbers. Ultimately, such short-term thinking is bad for everyone but the CEOs and the analysts setting the earnings targets. Investors suffer as Buffett rightly pointed out. But society suffers as well. Banks go bust, we bail them out, people lose their jobs, etc.
Vanguard’s John Bogle called this the “agency society” in which the agents of investors, i.e., executives are the only ones who benefit. This problem could be alleviated if CEO bonuses and other compensation were shifted from short- term ones to long-term ones based on, say, a company’s three-year or five-year profitability and if analysts and Wall Street in general stopped being so short-term oriented. Raising the taxes on short-term capital gains from 20% to 30% or even 40% and lowering the taxes on long-term gains for stocks held 5 years to 15% or even 10% might “inspire” or incentivize Wall Street analysts, traders and money managers to think differently.
Importantly, most of Buffett’s wealth comes from his long-term ownership of Berkshire stock. His salary is minimal and I don’t think he receives a quarterly bonus.

”In a recent CNBC interview, Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) CEO Warren Buffett criticized banks for investing in mortgage securities at historically low yields, calling them a ‘very dumb holding for banks.’The problem for mortgage securities holders is that effective maturities lengthen when interest rates rise, the opposite of what the banks want. It leaves banks with relatively low yielding portfolios for potentially long periods. BofA's bond holdings yield about 2.6%, which could weigh on its returns, particularly if it has to pay more for deposits. The portfolio has an estimated average life of eight years. Unlike the banks, Berkshire chose to invest its cash of over $100 billion largely in short-term U.S. Treasury bills. It accepted rates near zero in 2020 and 2021 but is now getting 5% on its holdings. If Bank of America had taken more of a Berkshire-type approach, it now could be earning twice the current rate. Berkshire is Bank of America's largest investor, with a roughly 13% stake—some one billion shares. It's notable that Buffett has decided against putting new money into Bank of America this year even after the stock's weakness.”
Excerpted from Barron’s April 24, 2023 (Print)
Article: “Bank of America’s $99 Billion Bond Problem” - Andrew Bary

New CBOE VIX1D Index
The CBOE will use the current methodology for a new VIX1D index that would capture both 0DTE and 1DTE options. As these are business days, VIX1D could be, say, 2DTE (for weekends) or 3DTE (for long weekends) with calendar days. Other VIX indexes have distortions due to weekends and holidays, and those would be even more noticeable with VIX1D. The CBOE may introduce VIX1D futures later.
CBOE VIX1D https://www.cboe.com/us/indices/dashboard/VIX1D/
https://twitter.com/6_Figure_Invest/status/1649850486890332161
https://twitter.com/pat_hennessy/status/1649158280923742212

Don't getting too misty-eyed over that time. Congress passed some of the most detailed, constraining legislation (even by Congressional standards), because it didn't trust Nixon to faithfully execute the laws if they gave him any wiggle room. I've studied the key statutes a little can attest to that characterization.
Two parties working together? Trust Nixon? In 1972 he vetoed the Clean Water Act. Congress overrode the veto.
An example of what an administration can do given any wiggle room is the Trump administration revocation of Obama's 2015 Clean Water Rule that clarified (and partially restored) the scope of the Clean Water Act.
But sometimes that wiggle room doesn't really exist - administrations can't just ignore details of the statutes:

U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Marquez in Arizona, an Obama appointee... determin[ed] that the Trump administration’s rule last year improperly limited the scope of clean water protections. Marquez said the Environmental Protection Agency had ignored its own findings that small waterways can affect the well-being of the larger waterways they flow into.

https://apnews.com/article/environment-and-nature-2998bdb80aadc14ef8d4c6d2fe040988
https://earthjustice.org/brief/2021/clean-water-protections-restored-for-millions-of-streams-and-wetlands
Current status (for now): https://www.npr.org/2022/12/30/1146355861/epa-water-protections-wetlands-rule

21 April, 2023: Mid-show, we are re-introduced to a new batch of "elves," stealing a page from uncle Louis Rukeyser. At the moment, they predict, on average, that the SP500 will end 2023 at 4,025.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-04-22/wall-street-week-full-show-04-21-2023

In the lead/feathers test, I bet people are quite sensitive to the inertia (both linear and angular) when lifting the two supposedly identical boxes and the experimenters neglected this.

Linear inertia is the resistance of a body or collection of bodies to altering its linear motion. That is, linear inertia is mass. It doesn't matter whether a box is filled with a single lump of lead or a collection of many feathers. So long as the total mass of each box is the same the linear inertia of the two boxes is the same.
Angular (rotational) inertia, more commonly called moment of inertia (which you mentioned in the pre-edit version of your post), plays the same role in rotational motion. But unlike linear inertia, angular inertia depends on the location of the individual bodies constituting the total mass. It is calculated as the sum of each mass times the square of its distance from an axis of rotation. It's that second moment (squaring) that makes the difference.
Think about the two boxes. Assume that the feathers are uniformly distributed in one box and that the lead mass is held in position at the center of the other box. Further, assume that the axis of rotation we are considering is through the center of the box.
Then the angular inertia (moment of inertia) is greater for the box with feathers. Equivalently, the box with lead has lower angular inertia.
You are suggesting that the box with lower angular intertia (easier to rotate, i.e. needing less torque to achieve the same rotation) will feel heavier. That strikes me as counterintuitive. Even if the lifters were rotating the boxes.
I bet ... the experimenters neglected this

Weight illusions--where one object feels heavier than an identically weighted counterpart--have been the focus of many recent scientific investigations. The most famous of these illusions is the 'size-weight illusion', where a small object feels heavier than an identically weighted, but otherwise similar-looking, larger object. There are, however, a variety of similar illusions which can be induced by varying other stimulus properties, such as surface material, temperature, colour, and even shape. Despite well over 100 years of research, there is little consensus about the mechanisms underpinning these illusions.

Getting a grip on heaviness perception: a review of weight illusions and their probable causes, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24691760/ (cited on the originally linked page)
I'll take that bet :-)

21st April, '23.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-04-21/-bloomberg-real-yield-04-21-2023

+1 Good article, Mark. Hard to imagine the two parties getting along like that today to solve a real problem, but one can dream.

@hank - good one!
@msf - Yup, mass distribution messes with one's perception. STUDY

Earth Day is a good day to bring these proposals to the forefront. I'll let Heather Cox Richardson tell you why. Enjoy.
Happy Earth Day