There is piece in the current Barron's on annuities by @LewisBraham.
Summary from LINK1
Secure Act, 2019 made several favorable provisions for ANNUITIES within 401k/403b such as annuities within the framework of target-date funds (TDFs) (but the commercial movement on these has been slow). There are many types of annuities: Basic and cheap immediate-income annuities, fixed-annuities, variable-annuities, deferred-income annuities (buy now for income later), QLACs (from tax-deferred accounts), annuities with inflation riders and GMWB/GLWB riders (very expensive but limited flexibility for access to principal). Mentioned are sample products from AIG, AlliancBernstein, BlackRock, Brighthouse, Fidelity, Income America (supported by a consortium), J.P Morgan, Lincoln, Nationwide, State Street, TIAA. (In general, annuities are complex insurance products and more bells and whistles one gets, more one pays. Insurance companies can sell you almost any coverage for a price.)
Original article LINK2 (may require subscription)

4/15/22 Episode:

We are in a new era of higher inflation and the pressure is on the Fed! Inflation is running at 40-year highs and it’s coming from every angle: food, energy, services, goods, rents, and wages which are all increasing.
Is the Fed up to the challenge? Can it rein in inflation without causing a recession? What can we expect as borrowers and investors?
We have lots of questions to ask this week’s guest but we know from his past performance he can take them all in stride.
Paul McCulley is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown Business School where he teaches a very timely multi-disciplinary course combining law, economics, monetary policy, global finance and behavioral finance.
McCulley says this Fed has the courage to defeat inflation despite recession risk.

The index (13 wk T-Bill) rate re-sets every week. Assuming the spread rate is zero, a two year FRN is expected to yield about 0.8% currently. It was at 0.4% only a month ago. Given the Fed expects to keep raising the Fed fund rate and otherwise remove easy financial conditions (inflation or not), seems like a two year FRN is a good place for cash lovers (like a MM with a 13 wk T-Bill rate that resets weekly as a result of Fed policy, rate level, indirectly from inflation, etc. The question is, is there enough liquidity for the 2-yr FRNs in the secondary market to able to liquidate at the implied value at any time before the time of maturity?
P.S.: I am interested in buying and holding this instrument - it is not just an intellectual curiosity.

@Hank. Detroit guy here …

+1 My family moved to the Detroit area for a few years after I was born (roughly ‘48-‘52). Dad worked at Dodge Main and than the Warren Tank plant.

If you're planning to buy and then sell after 12 months, you can compare your choices:
If you buy now, you'll get 3.56% (six months) + 4.81% (six months) - 1/2 x 4.81% (3 mo. penalty) ≈
1.0356 x 1.024 ≈ 1.060 or 6%
If inflation over the next six months is 3.35% (6.8% annualized) or less, then by buying in May you'll get no more than: 1.0481 x 1.01175 = 1.060 or 6%.
So if your plan is to hold just for a year, you'll do better waiting if inflation over the next six months runs hotter than 3.35% (6.8% annualized).
-----
An alternative is to wait an extra three months, so that you get the full year's interest and then the penalty just means that the extra three months are interest-free.
In that case, the question is simpler. Do you expect inflation over the next six months to be more or less than 3.56% over six months (7.2% annualized), i.e. the rate you'd get today?
-----
Another alternative is to hold the savings bonds until there is no penalty. Then the question is similar to the last one: At the time you redeem, do you expect rates to be more or less than 3.56% (7.2% annualized). If the final period has lower inflation, you'd be better off locking in the current 3.56% rate. If the final period has higher inflation, then you'd be better off skipping the current rate and instead getting the rate from that last period.
Me, I'm satisfied getting 3.56% over six months, and don't feel the likelihood of doing better outweighs the risk of doing worse, perhaps a lot worse, than that. Others may feel that inflation has just begun and prefer to wait 'till May to get even higher rates going forward.

+1. Yes, thanks, @TheShadow. Appreciate you keeping us abreast of things. However: Matthews? Naw. They have simply lost their mojo, their juju. I would not go back there.

How does SCHY compare in this segment?

SCHY. + YTD 0.23%. .........It's very young.
I see divs for June and Dec (2 of them) in 2021.
https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/schy/performance
IDV is a quarterly payer.

Many foreign funds have the PFIC issues and IDV is no exception, https://www.ishares.com/us/literature/tax-information/pfic-2021.pdf
Basically, rules for the US funds to hold physical assets (real estate/property, bullion, etc) are different from those for foreign funds. So, to make things even, there are US PFIC regulations. These require that unrealized gains related to physical assets flow through earnings/income and some related realized losses also be distributed. THAT makes distributions variable for the US investors.

Thanks, Yogi. I just learned another lesson in how incredibly crazy, arcane, complicated and stoopid the US Tax Code is. ;)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312522106626/d333595d485apos.htm
Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF
Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF
Matthews China Active ETF

Linked below is commentary on the survey and some interesting "conditions" the sentiment presents investors.

Some analysts criticize the AAII’s survey methodology, and with good reason. The participants in the survey volunteer themselves, as opposed to a random telephone poll for example. And the participants may change from week to week, as individuals decide to cast a vote or not. This is not how a proper survey should be done, but doing a proper survey is a lot more expensive. And even a “proper” survey is still going to be a flawed representation of the whole population; that’s just a feature of any type of survey.
With all that said, we can move forward and look at this week’s readings of 15.8% bulls and 48.4% bears, confident that these numbers are not going to be perfectly accurate. But they can still probably be seen as useful to contemplate as a statement about investor sentiment. Sentiment reflects a “condition”, not a “signal”.
Even more noteworthy than the bull-bear spread being the worst since 2013 is the observation that the bullish percentage alone was the lowest since 1992, and it was the 9th lowest bullish percentage ever. The AAII survey only began in July 1987, so we do not know what it would have told us during any period in history before 1987.

learning_center/weekly_chart/multiyear_records_for_aaii_survey

Can anyone remember when a nickel would buy a nice sized candy bar ?

@Derf Yes. I was 4 or 5. Could buy a very nice sized candy bar for 5 cents.
A quarter back than bought you a delicious ice cream soda, malt or banana split at Sanders in the old J.L.Hudson building in downtown Detroit. Now you might get the banana for a quarter - but not the split. - Also, single scoop cones were a nickel. Double scoop 10-cents.
Problem growing older is you can remember the price of something 70 years ago but not where you put the car keys 5 minutes ago!

She will need her own Treasury Direct account. In the meantime, you can buy gift I-Bond for her and hold them in your account. You can even buy more than $10K to be distributed slowly later into her Treasury Direct account. See details here, https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/577/thread

Here’s another I-Bond question, rather than starting a new thread. I opened a Treasury Direct account in January and purchased the maximum individual amount ($10K). I would like to purchase another $10K in my wife’s name. Do we have to create another TD account in her name, or can I purchase the bonds through my existing account? Or could I purchase the bonds for her as a gift?
I searched through the FAQs at the TD site but couldn’t find any questions addressing this issue.

M* puts hedge-fund like strategies in mutual fund wrapper under liquid-alts and says that despite renewed interest (and inflows), these funds haven't delivered. https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1087561/liquid-alternatives-funds-belong-on-most-investors-too-hard-pile

Many foreign funds have the PFIC issues and IDV is no exception, https://www.ishares.com/us/literature/tax-information/pfic-2021.pdf
Basically, rules for the US funds to hold physical assets (real estate/property, bullion, etc) are different from those for foreign funds. So, to make things even, there are US PFIC regulations. These require that unrealized gains related to physical assets flow through earnings/income and some related realized losses also be distributed. THAT makes distributions variable for the US investors.

Thanks @bee - I suspect few need convincing at this point that inflation is real and not entirely of Mr. Putin’s making. But the detailed insights into various markets are valuable.
Some bio on the author from Linkedin:
“Frank Holmes is the CEO and Chief Investment Officer of U.S. Global Investors. Mr. Holmes purchased a controlling interest in U.S. Global Investors in 1989 and became the firm’s chief investment officer in 1999. Under his guidance, the company’s funds have received numerous awards and honors including more than two dozen Lipper Fund Awards and certificates.
Mr. Holmes is a native of Toronto and is a graduate of the University of Western Ontario with a bachelor’s degree in economics. He is a former president and chairman of the Toronto Society of the Investment Dealers Association.
Mr. Holmes and his team at U.S. Global Investors publish a free … newsletter, the Investor Alert, which highlights the week’s market movements in a SWOT format each Friday evening for its more than 50,000 subscribers.”

The March commentary reads like Cathie Wood on steroids. Generational opportunity in the current portfolio. I hold out hope, but what a shellacking YTD! That being said, it's the type of fund that can make up 15% in a week.

And there’s nothing wrong having a few sticks of dynamite in your portfolio - as long as you know it’s there! For dealing with high explosives I might prefer a stock - or two or three - over a fund.
Not a recommendation, but I’m using QLS as a long / short fund. It’s off a bit over 6% YTD and about even over one year. The problem with any LS is that the manager has to determine which stocks to short and which ones to go long on … (Duh)

@BaluBalu, 2-yr FRNs float in a different way (-:), not directly with inflation. So, FRNs rate is 13-wk T-Bill rate + a spread that doesn't change (but is fixed at issue). So, the floating is from 3-mo T-Bill rates (really, discounts) and those will fluctuate due to various factors (Fed policy, rate level, and indirectly from inflation). So, FRNs are not inflation-protected instruments.
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/frns/res_frn_rates.htm

The March commentary reads like Cathie Wood on steroids. Generational opportunity in the current portfolio. I hold out hope, but what a shellacking YTD! That being said, it's the type of fund that can make up 15% in a week.