By Alpha Gen Capital at SeekingAlpha.com
Summary
° Retirees have an over-reliance and spend far too much time on rates of return. Instead, investors should focus on cash flows, both in and out of your household.
° This is a construct of Wall Street who wants you to be placing all your investable assets into the market, while placing all the risk on your retirement on you.
° We think the next few years will show a significant shift in the way investors/retirees manage their financial retirement.
° It is our belief that a focus on cash flows, not rates of return, will be the future, including the use of income annuities.
Article Here

How is TIAA for a broker? I only have my work 403(b) with them (holding 1 American Fund - RWMGX) but have thought about moving some of my retirement investment acounts from TD there to consolidate things and let TIAA be my 'retirement account broker' so to speak. My other taxable longterm accounts at TDA/Schwab and WF are probably going to stay put, though.

I enjoyed reading about Dr. Madell's five year rolling periods of stock market returns. I've noticed this, as well, and have incoropated the five year rolling total return period principal, to assist me, in setting my portfolio's rate of distribution.
What I do is a relative simple strategy. Generally, I take a sum of no more than what one half of my five year average annual return has been. With this, my current distribution rate is now at about 3.25% since my total return on my portfolio has averaged about 6.5% annually for the past rolling five years. In this way, I have found that principal grows over time since the residual is left to increase and build capital formation. In addition, I'm running a 20% cash/40% income/40% equity portfolio which generates enough income without having to sell securities to meet my current distribution needs.
I realize that this distribution strategy is not for everyone as I'm just sharing how I govern and what I have found that has worked well for me and my family through the years. I used this strategy, years back, whan I was running my parents money, when they were retired, and I now use it for me and my wife.
Pretty neat and information packed study by Dr, Madell.
If you are retired and in the distribution phase of investing perhaps others can learn if more investors post how they set their rate of distrbution coming from their portfolio. Naturally, there is the RMD withdrawal requirement that is in place on retirment accounts. But, many of us have money invested outside of retirement accounts. Perhaps, Dr. Madell can write more on some strategies in an upcoming newsletter.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet
cc: @tmadell

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadepfau/2020/01/23/laddering-with-individual-bonds/?ss=retirement#2880c6ce3a3f
Laddering With Individual Bonds
Wade PfauContributor
Retirement
Professor @ The American College; Principal @ McLean Asset Management
Duration matching is not straightforward for bond funds when shares of the bond fund must be sold to meet ongoing retirement expenses. If rates have risen, shares of the bond fund may need to be sold at a loss, with more shares sold to meet a given spending objective. This triggers sequence risk and locks in losses. Immunization only works if interest payments can be reinvested at a new higher interest rate to compensate for capital losses. But not all the funds are fully reinvested when a spending goal is met, so reinvestment risk and interest rate risk do not get neutralized. The return on remaining assets would need to be even higher to keep the retirement liability funded. Immunization is harder when there is also a spending goal to support.

https://money.usnews.com/investing/funds/slideshows/best-vanguard-funds-to-buy-and-hold
7 Best Vanguard Funds to Buy and Hold
Vanguard funds can offer consistent returns and low costs for the long-term investor.
By Rebecca Lake, Contributor Jan. 24, 2020
U.S. News & World Report
More
In this June 7, 2018, photo the logo for the Vanguard Group is shown on correspondence in Zelienople, Pa. Vanguard said Monday, July 2, that it will stop charging commissions to trade most of its competitors’ exchange-traded funds.
Picking low-fee funds.
Vanguard funds are a popular choice among investors who favor an indexing strategy. With index investing, the objective is to match the performance of a stock market benchmark, such as the S&P 500 or the Nasdaq. This approach may appeal to the buy-and-hold investor who's seeking the best funds to own for retirement. Vanguard's fund selection offers an advantage over competitor funds, in that they boast some of the lowest expense ratios around. Lower costs mean investors can hold on to more of their returns over time. Here are seven of the best Vanguard mutual funds for a buy-and-hold strategy.

Thanks @bee. This is what I most enjoy about MFO - the free exchange of ideas. I am not a financial advisor or expert. Just my “gut” reactions (worth maybe a nickel).
#1: Put It All In One Fund - Not me!
#2: Create Your Own Yield - I like the term “stream of return” better. One needs to have a reasonably steady stream of return in retirement as averaged out over the short / intermediate term. This may be accomplished with a broadly diversified portfolio and some prudent hedging and / or cash reserves. Unless it’s a tax consideration, I don’t think it matters whether that SOR comes from “income” or capital gains - particularly in tax-deferred accounts.
#3: Don’t Buy A Long-Term Care Policy - I’m agnostic on this one. Don’t know enough about the subject.
#4: Cut Your Portfolio Management Costs - Yes. Of course. But I won’t be driven into index funds. I still retain confidence that the good actively managed funds will do comparably well over longer time spans, in spite of indexing being all the rave today. Active is what I grew up with. I’ll stick with what I know (but have owned index funds on some rare occasions).
#5: Pay Off Your Mortgage Rapidly - Both sides are right. No correct answer. I’m happy to be carrying a small 3% fixed-rate mortgage on main residence. Also own a couple parcels that are paid off. Knock on wood - but I’ve been able to pull much higher than 3% annual on my (tax sheltered) conservative investments over more than 20 years in retirement. There’s an added advantage in having more liquidity at your disposal than if that money were sitting in the home. Like I said ... I can see both sides of this one.
#6: Moonlight - Hell no (not me)! - but others will feel differently. I’ll say here that I perform a lot of home maintenance which others would pay to have done. So, in a sense, I am working. But it’s my schedule - not somebody else’s.

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2020/01/22/the-top-12-401k-mistakes-to-avoid.aspx
The Top 12 401(k) Mistakes to Avoid
An employer-sponsored 401(k) account can be a wonderful thing, helping you amass hundreds of thousands of dollars for retirement. Don't make any of these mistakes, though, or they could cost you -- a lot.
Most people can't sock away $26,000 each year, but the table below shows how much you might amass over time investing various sums regularly and earning an average annual return of 8%:
Years of 8% Annual Growth
Balance if Investing $10,000/Year
Balance if Investing $15,000/Year
Balance if Investing $20,000/Year
5 years
$63,359
$95,039
$126,718
10 years
$156,455
$234,683
$312,910
15 years
$293,243
$439,865
$586,486
20 years
$494,229
$741,344
$988,458
25 years
$789,544
$1,184,316
$1,579,088
30 years
$1,223,459
$1,835,189
$2,446,918
401(k) mistakes that can cost you a lot
It's clear that you'll need to be diligent if you want to build wealth with your 401(k) account. You'll also want to avoid common pitfalls. Here are 12 common 401(k) mistakes that could cost you a lot, followed by a closer look at each:
Not participating in your 401(k) plan
Not contributing enough to your 401(k)
Not increasing your 401(k) contributions regularly
Not contributing enough to get the full employer 401(k) match
Loading up on too much company stock
Staying with your 401(k) plan's default investment choices
Picking the wrong mutual funds and investments
Ignoring fees in your 401(k)
Not considering the Roth 401(k)
Ignoring important 401(k) rules
Cashing out or borrowing from your 401(k)
Not appreciating the downsides of 401(k)s

"Soupkitchen">I have a full position in PIMIX and am debatting whether or not to invest more money in PIMIX or start a new position in JGIAX for diversification. I'm near retirement so I want to build my income stream. It seems like PIMIX is the less risky fund, but who can be sure? Most of my bonds are in plain vanilla type funds. Any advantages in diversifying into JGAIX?
Soup, I am not inclined to act like a financial advisor, and I believe the answer to your question has a lot to do with your personal portfolio objectives, how important "diversification" is to you, and what kind of risk factors enter into your decision. From a personal standpoint, I look for funds that fit my very low risk, conservative style of investing. There were several threads at M* that discussed JGIAX, JMUTX, and PUCZX, as possibilities in portfolios, often in comparison to PIMIX. My personal conclusion is that from a risk analysis, the least risky of these 4 funds is PIMIX, followed by JMUTX, JGIAX, with the most risky fund being PUCZX. At the end of calendar year 2019, I personally decided to keep PIMIX, and not add the other 3 funds to my portfolio, especially dismissing JGIAX and PUCZX as having more risk than I personally preferred. I came close to adding JMUTX as a fund to complement PIMIX, but ultimately decided to go with a lower risk non-traditional bond oef IISIX, which is very nicely diversified but fit my risk and return profile better than JMUTX. I will note that PUCZX and JGIAX produce more yield, which you may prefer, at a higher risk level than PIMIX, so it boils down to your own personal risk/return criteria for your personal portfolio.

"I dare say a "cyclical" bull market has little meaning to a retiree or anyone within 5-10 years of retirement. 20% pull backs are what people worry about when you use your savings for income or are planning on a retirement date."

@MikeM- This "cyclical bull market" concept with major unspecified pull-backs strikes me as so much baloney. Viewed from that perspective, there has never been anything other than a "cyclical bull market", as long as you adjust the time frame to whatever you need to make that appear to be true.

I have a full position in PIMIX and am debatting whether or not to invest more money in PIMIX or start a new position in JGIAX for diversification. I'm near retirement so I want to build my income stream. It seems like PIMIX is the less risky fund, but who can be sure? Most of my bonds are in plain vanilla type funds. Any advantages in diversifying into JGAIX?

@VintageFreak, when @Simon says the bull market will last another 15 years I believe he refers to a 'cyclical bull market'. A confusing play on words I think. There can be numerous bear markets within this cyclical bull.
I'm with you. We are do for a "secular" bear market (a 20% or more drop) because of valuations. Whether this happens in a month or a year, it will happen. Just needs some catalyst to start the trend. I dare say a "cyclical" bull market has little meaning to a retiree or anyone within 5-10 years of retirement. 20% pull backs are what people worry about when you use your savings for income or are planning on a retirement date. IMHO

ALL CAPS SUBJECT LINE, well; OK !
We're biased at this house; so this will show in the write.
Understanding that value investing is a "buy it low"; we prefer a buy it low, when present into the growth sectors. However, I'm sure decent money has been made with the more stellar value funds.
The below chart compares two active managed funds in the value and growth areas. I can not vouch for the quality of the value fund relative to other similar funds. And the growth fund is a proxy look only, as this fund is closed to new money, with exceptions being inside of retirement plans, existing owners and such.
From Sept. 5, 2008 to March 9, 2009 the following losses were in place for these two funds:
FSLVX = - 49.2%
FDGRX = - 41.9%
Value may yet have a sustained period of superior performance, vs growth. There is much investment ground to be made up.....by value I won't be there to enjoy.
The chart below is a longer view of total return performance.
Chart of FSLVX v FDGRX , begin Nov. 2001 to date.
As always, be curious in life.
Catch

Thanks for sharing @equalizer.
For the price, I’m impressed with some of the things Kiplingers does. Can’t compete with Barron’s of course. Two different leagues. (And it’s easy to access Kiplingers free online.) If anyone’s interested in the print edition, Kiplingers’ site offers it at $19.95 for a year (12 copies). https://personalfinance.kiplinger.com/pcd/Order?iKey=I**W03. Amazon is offering one-year print for $23.95. https://www.amazon.com/Kiplingers-Personal-Finance/dp/B008YJXZLK.
Don’t know if the above offers auto-renew at a higher price - but likely. Amazon’s good at allowing cancellation of subscriptions thru their website. Don’t know about Kiplingers. In the past I’ve had a lot of trouble getting some publishers to stop auto-renew / quit billing my card. Hope this doesn’t come across as a sales pitch. Just trying to share some useful information. Recently subscribed to the Kindle edition - and for $1 monthly (ad-free), quite happy to receive it.
As for the list of funds - an impressive lot. I’m sure many here own some of them. However, I’m not about to dump my much more conservative bunch (suitable for mid-late retirement) to load-up on these high flyers. Brings to mind the old, “Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda” .
Wonder how many of these are closed to new investors anyway or have high minimums?

Comparing VFINX to DODFX was an error, it should be VFINX vs DODGX. The link and numbers are based on DODGX. SP500 beat DODGX.
I also agree that low fees are important and if I have to select funds for the next 20 years I would only select index funds. FXAIX ER(expense ratio)=0.015 and Fidelity also introduced zero ER. This means DODGX ER is still 0.5% higher.
The only exception is VWIAX which is a great fund for retirees with ER=0.16%.
==================
DODGX doesn't only own "value" companies. They own growth companies too. If you can't beat the index claim your style is a bit different.
I always believed in investing in the index for US LC(The Bogle way). If I want to beat it I would use QQQ, after all, for several decades now high tech is where you find a lot of growth and where the biggest ones take so much more. I also prefer QQQ (for my explore part) because over 50% of the revenues come from abroad.
==================
Risk isn't volatility. That subject had been discussed for decades but Risk doesn't have an accurate definition. Volatility, Sharpe, Sortino, Martin, Ulcer, Up/Down ratio and others can help you find better funds. Sure, they are not perfect or a guarantee but you got to start somewhere. I have been using them now for about 20 years. I have used SGENX, FAIRX, OAKBX most years in 2000-2010. As I got older and prepare for my retirement I have used PIMIX and PRWCX several years since 2010.
I also found that low SD + higher performance is a quick search with a high correlation for finding great funds and great funds also have better Martin, Sharpe, Sortino. They all work together most times.
MFO also uses the above for finding better funds.
==================
As a retiree bond funds are more important to me. Stocks are "easy" just use an index. Bonds is where great managers can make more money with better risk attributes. You will never find bond funds like PIMIX,PIGIX and IOFIX at D&C and you definitely will not find much higher distributions which are very important to most retirees.
It also works better for covering expenses and rebalancing.
When stocks go up a retiree should use stocks for expenses when stocks go down use bonds for expenses and rebalancing should be a part of it.
My style was always to invest in my best ideas in order to try and get better results if you own 3 funds in every category chances are you won't.

I enjoyed the reads... very thorough, simple investment advice.
Keep it simple. DCA into VBINX...move on to other things...check back in 40 years.
7-rules-for-a-wealthy-retirement

Mark: "I'm not trying to be snarky (I know, I'm shocked along with everyone else here who knows me) but you responded like a politician. I asked specifically about your 'discussion board' comment which you mostly if not entirely dodged around. I'll wait until you're ready.
As for the rest of your response, MFO doesn't even pretend to offer all of the things you find appealing about M* so yes, comparing the two sites on that basis is apples to oranges."
Mark, I have been out for a few hours and just got back home. I am sorry my absence has led to your conclusion that I somehow have "mostly if not entirely dodged around", and somehow you are calling my response "like a politician". I am a bit confused by your choice of words and the tone of your response.
At M*, the Discussion section is divided into various subcategories, called Investing Forums. When you start a thread, you go to the appropriate Investing Forum, that fits your Thread Topic. So, if I want to start a thread, or read someone else's thread, associated with Bonds, then I simply go to that section of the Discussion section, and I can avoid threads associated with other Investing Forum topics, not related to Bonds, that I have no interest in. Among the many Investing Forums, where you can focus your posting and reading interest, include: Dividend and Income Investing, Investing in Retirement, Mutual Funds, Fidelity Funds, Vanguard Funds, Off Topic discussions, Market Insights, etc. etc. etc.
At MFO, there is only one Discussion section, with no subcategories. Every conceivable thread topic gets introduced daily and goes to the beginning of the Discussion Section. Older threads get buried under an avalanche of new threads, with many thread topics that I have no interest in. There is one particular poster, John, who introduces about 4 or 5 or more new threads every day, that goes straight to the beginning of the Discussion section. I have a few Bond related threads, in addition to the one I started, that I try to find, but they are often on the 2nd or 3rd page of the Discussion Section, buried under a large number of new threads I have no interest in.
I simply like the M* platform, because it is kind of like a newspaper, divided into a variety of sections, found in the newspaper index on the front page. In the newspaper, I don't have to go through massive sections of the newspaper I am not interested in, to ultimately find the section I am interested in. If I want to read the Sports section of the newspaper, I can find where that is by just looking at the index to find where it is located. At MFO, you have no subdivision of similar thread topics---you have to dig through all the other stuff, to hopefully find what you are interested in.
I hope this explanation meets your criteria for directness and clarity!

@Sven echos my thoughts. I was with D&C when the roof fell in (‘07-‘09). Remember it well. But I wonder if worrying about a repeat is tantamount to “fighting the last war”. I don’t see much in their style that says their funds must always lead on the downside. In fact, their domestic equity funds are hedged against interest rate shock by being overweight financials. A lot depends on which way the wind blows.
Oh - You can fault D&C plenty if you wish. Not as cheap as index funds. Most of their funds are bloated, making it harder for them to make tactical moves. Fewer alternatives exist under their roof (just six funds / no money market fund) than for most of the big players. And DODBX typically holds less in fixed income (around 30% currently) than similar funds. I’d prefer they received no publicity at all - because part of the ‘08-‘09 problem seems to have been that many short term investors who had been attracted by their outperformance fled in the face of falling prices, exasperating the problems.
Being of the “stable genius“ variety :), I prefer to invest directly with just a limited number of fund houses. Avoids the temptation to constantly seek out a “better” fund for any particular category - in effect jumping ship to ship. And that “stay put” style is anathema to many today. For equities and bonds my choices boil down to TRP and D&C. I suppose one might do better in selecting two houses to entrust with the bulk of their long-term retirement money. But one could also do a lot worse.

Pimco Real Return PRRIX provides worthwhile inflation-protected bond exposure, which can help preserve purchasing power in retirement. By Miriam Sjoblom, (CFA) for M* ,Jan 16, 2020
"Despite some noteworthy team turnover, Pimco Real Return's experienced management team and extensive supporting cast of global-bond specialists continue to give it an edge in the inflation-linked bond arena. Given the importance of low fees in this competitive field, the fund's cheapest institutional share classes earn Morningstar Analyst Ratings of Silver and Bronze, while its remaining shares are rated Neutral."
Article Here

This retiree prefers to separate strategies so he sees the moving parts he's betting on -- I mean investing in.
So if I want derivatives, corporates, and securitized fare I'ld buy them separately.
Per the M* link:

It employs macro-driven strategies (driven by real growth, inflation, and country-specific analysis) and micro-driven themes (including Consumer Price Index seasonality, on-the-run/off-the-run premiums, and implied inflation volatility). Although U.S. TIPS and, to a lesser extent, other global inflation-linked bonds dominate the portfolio, the strategy can invest up to 20% in other sectors, such as corporates and securitized fare.
The approach has led to sizable off-index bets at times, a trait that distinguishes it from its more-constrained peers, including use of Pimco's bonds-plus techniques, by which the strategy gets exposure to its primary sectors via derivatives and invests the cash collateral in short-term bonds. The team may also make meaningful and swift maturity shifts, though the portfolio's overall duration has generally stayed within a year of the benchmark's. The strategy's adventurous nature can cause its performance to diverge from that of the U.S. TIPS market at times. But overall, its flexible approach, which benefits from the insights of Pimco's broad, deep bench of global-bond experts, earns a High Process Pillar rating.

But for people that don't like to own too many funds this offering from PIMCO is probably safe enough.

Pimco Real Return PRRIX provides worthwhile inflation-protected bond exposure, which can help preserve purchasing power in retirement. By Miriam Sjoblom, (CFA) for M* ,Jan 16, 2020
"Despite some noteworthy team turnover, Pimco Real Return's experienced management team and extensive supporting cast of global-bond specialists continue to give it an edge in the inflation-linked bond arena. Given the importance of low fees in this competitive field, the fund's cheapest institutional share classes earn Morningstar Analyst Ratings of Silver and Bronze, while its remaining shares are rated Neutral."
Article Here

@dtconroe
Regarding Tax Cost Ratio (TCR), I don't recall what tax rate / bracket M* uses to calculate the value. The definition M* provides is silent on the topic. For munis, with a TCR of 0% the issue is moot. Perhaps I don't understand TCR fully, but for taxable bond funds, the tax impact is tied to one's specific tax situation / tax rate and whether they are close to a breakpoint in tax brackets. The tax impact of interest / dividends for someone in the 15% tax bracket is different than for someone in the 22% bracket or higher. State and local taxes also need to be considered to get a full picture. Seems like TCR is more a relative vs. absolute measure and one needs to do further due diligence to get the full picture for their particular situation.

Bingo. There is no more 15%. It goes 10,12,22,24,32,35,37.
Most USA households will be at 22% and under because MARRIED FILING JOINTLY is up to $186.4K and especially retirees with lower income at retirement compared to when they used to work.
Let's see how it works in reality. If we compare MWCRX to VCFAX for 3 years. Looking at M* tax tab (link)
Performance pre-tax MWCRX 3.5% VCFAX 5.7%
Performance after-tax MWCRX 2.3% VCFAX 3%. The after tax numbers are way off for tax bracket 10,12,22 and even 24 which goes to $321.45K for Fed income
The above means that the difference between MWCRX to VCFAX is not only 0.7% but much higher.