High levels of margin ,,,, scapegoating the Fed

Right! The Fed scapegoating is blatant. Anyone buying into it is either dim or incapable of non-partisan thought - cultish even. The data has not supported these complaints of "late". Either they are data-driven or they are not. The FED is not supposed to act as Nostradamus to protect anyone from the free market fundamentals, or poor decision making, private or public.
So many say that both jobs are inflation are fine, and so is the stock market, so how do you justify complaints of the Fed being "late". I do feel that inflation, even at 3ish percent is a worry. And that layoffs are high. But, the data does not support an aggressive loosening policy. Unless one is fearful of tariff impact!
And that is self-inflicted.

High levels of margin ,,,, scapegoating the Fed

does anyone use this for allocation\buy\sell decision making?
1,3,5,10yr ? weighted?
annoying m* doesnt provide this simple analytic.

M* published a lengthy 2025 Diversification Landscape report which includes numerous
three-year correlation matrixes along with several matrixes for longer time periods.
Correlations were calculated at the asset/sub-asset class level.
https://www.morningstar.com/lp/diversification-landscape

An interesting line of reasoning from @DrVenture with thoughtful suggestions which have merit.
"I'd like to hear ideas, thoughts, even helpful criticisms. Maybe we can form some more detailed plans/ideas?"
I'm left at this point with many more questions than answers. Some might be disposed to flee to an asset that's tripled in price over the past 3 or 4 years. Not convinced of that escape route either. One thing I'm fairly certain of: There will be more and higher inflation.
PS - Should go without saying that the current game plan is to stimulate the hell out of the economy up until the 2026 mid-terms, now less than a year away. The new Fed chief will quarterback. Look for some giveaways like "tariff rebate checks" to enter the discussion or even come to fruition.
Now back to 1929.

Right!

An interesting line of reasoning from @DrVenture with thoughtful suggestions which have merit.
"I'd like to hear ideas, thoughts, even helpful criticisms. Maybe we can form some more detailed plans/ideas?"
I'm left at this point with many more questions than answers. Some might be disposed to flee to an asset that's tripled in price over the past 3 or 4 years. Not convinced of that escape route either. One thing I'm fairly certain of: There will be more and higher inflation.
PS - Should go without saying that the current game plan is to stimulate the hell out of the economy up until the 2026 mid-terms, now less than a year away. The new Fed chief will quarterback. Look for some giveaways like "tariff rebate checks" to enter the discussion or even come to fruition.
Now back to 1929.

AAII Bull-Bear Spread
CNN Fear & Greed Index
NYSE %Above 50-dMA
SP500 %Above 50-dMA
The Death-cross, see (link).
Can PE, PE10(CAPE), the economy, recessions, M2, inverted yield, high valuation, interest rates, GDP, inflation, high demand, demographic, Bullish sentiments, EARNINGS, the "experts"...predict STOCKS PERFORMANCE in the next 1-4-8 weeks(many times longer than that)? See (link).
None of the above can predict markets accurately in the next 1-4-16 weeks. Some of these are too early or too late, and some can be off for years too.
There is nothing here about YBB, which is a valuable poster. These are just facts.

When any indicator, including sentiment, reaches never before or rarely before seen levels that is as good a buy signal as you could want. We had two of those last Thursday and Friday. Check this thread where I mentioned them. Also I know several traders who have been very successful using the CNN Fear and Greed index as a buy signal when it reaches single digits and synthesizing that with other indicators. Good traders are into synthesizing a variety of indicators into a coherent trading plan. Trading is not easy and anyone who tells you it is, is a crook, con man, and charlatan.

AAII Bull-Bear Spread
CNN Fear & Greed Index
NYSE %Above 50-dMA
SP500 %Above 50-dMA
The Death-cross, see (link).
Can PE, PE10(CAPE), the economy, recessions, M2, inverted yield, high valuation, interest rates, GDP, inflation, high demand, demographic, Bullish sentiments, EARNINGS, the "experts"...predict STOCKS PERFORMANCE in the next 1-4-8 weeks(many times longer than that)? See (link).
None of the above can predict markets accurately in the next 1-4-16 weeks. Some of these are too early or too late, and some can be off for years too.
There is nothing here about YBB, which is a valuable poster. These are just facts.

From @Sven's link:

Nonetheless, Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft are set to collectively sink around $400 billion on AI this year, mostly for funding data centers. Some of the companies are set to devote about 50% of their current cash flow to data center construction.
Or to put it another way: every iPhone user on earth would have to pay more than $250 to pay for that amount of spending. "That's not going to happen," Kedrosky said.

One reason it won't happen is because Apple is not investing in AI the way the other companies are. https://www.techbuzz.ai/articles/apple-s-12-7b-ai-bet-defies-big-tech-s-capex-arms-race.
OTOH, they do have a history of making big announcements to placate politicians. This article at Forbes is paywalled, but I got in for free, you might too.

When I asked Andy Thurai, VP and principal analyst at Constellation Research, what he thought about Apple’s latest announcement to invest all that money in the United States, he said “Apple is known to navigate the political scenes smartly but never follow through with it.” That’s not what you’d expect to hear, especially when you consider the sheer size of this multibillion dollar investment — but Thurai’s answer is steeped in history.
For example, he said, right after former U.S. President Joe Biden’s inauguration in 2021, Apple pledged to spend $430 billion and add 20,000 jobs over five years and that never materialized. “They also pledged during Trump’s first term that they would directly contribute to the U.S. economy in the order of $350 billion over the next five years and create 20,000 jobs, which they didn’t follow through either,” Thurai added.

From Markets A.M. newsletter by Spencer Jakab.
On this day in 1998, America Online acquired once-dominant internet browser Netscape Communications
for roughly $4.2 billion.

Everybody talks about how this isn't pets.com, but Jain hits the points I have been thinking about:

During the dot-com era, the big infrastructure builders were incumbent telecommunication businesses and global long-haul telcos and equipment names whose regulated local and long-distance franchises generated stable, utility-like cash flows that underwrote the internet and fiber infrastructure capex binge. Today’s infrastructure arms race is driven by the hyperscalers—Microsoft MSFT, Alphabet GOOG, Amazon AMZN, Meta Platforms META, Oracle ORCL—whose reported free cash is increasingly strained by data center and GPU capex, and whose overall earnings quality is propped up by extending server/chip “useful lives” to five to six years, versus the two to three we believe it will be. And they’re treating very large and increasing stock-based compensation as a non-cash item that is being added back to cash flow metrics.

Am I selling tech? No. It's mostly all in my taxable account, and I mostly bought at much lower prices. I'm not buying either.
But wait, there's more. I wasn't aware of the following:

Let’s take GPU pricing. You can call up distributors, which have publicly listed phone numbers, and some are authorized Nvidia distributors. My question: Why is the Nvidia H200, which was released late last year, selling at a 50%-60% discount if there’s such a shortage? On Nvidia’s website, they’re selling at $40,000-plus. NetworkOutlet.com quoted $25,900 just a couple of days ago. If there’s such a shortage, why are there tens of thousands available? Nvidia’s latest and most powerful AI chips, Blackwell, are also offered at a discount.
Next, GPU rentals. Why are they in freefall? We’ve gotten quotes at under $4 per hour for Nvidia’s Blackwell GPU rentals. Would you let a $50,000 car rent for $4 if the car only has a three-to-four year life? Meanwhile, [Amazon Web Services] charges around $12-$13 for Blackwell. The bulk of new cloud growth is coming from AI startups. If they’re paying $4 per hour versus $12, then AWS can’t compete. Margins for AWS are already coming under pressure. Revenue growth was OK. Why? Because large tech is also investing in Anthropic, OpenAI, and so on. They go back and buy compute [computational resources] from these guys. Nvidia has invested in over 50 startups, which then go back and buy Nvidia chips.

More at the link.

@FD100 - Have you ever mentioned “trend following” by name in any of your previous posts or recommended the best current trends to chase follow for the benefit of members who read you?
There are successful trend following funds. I have 5-6% so invested . Why anyone would put “all their eggs” in that one basket escapes me. Waiting for a Wiley Coyote moment? Trend following (managed futures) funds invest in a diverse mix of equities, bonds, currencies, commodities, metals, real estate and more. It’s doubtful that whatever you are doing is comparable to what they do.

I mentioned trends hundreds of times over the years.
Start reading at https://big-bang-investors.proboards.com/thread/3344/time-sell?page=10
stayCalm is correct about trends. I don't use most of what these funds do; it's too complicated and time-consuming.
Mine is pretty simple: only long, change funds according to trends, and sell to MM when risk is very high. Black boxes are unreliable. If I use them, it's usually shorter term, and I watch carefully.
Why would I put "all my eggs"?
This is based on my LT view that I can only have 2-5 great ideas at any moment. But I also switch quickly too when the time is right. In the last 2-3 years I traded less often and stayed in bond funds that I think can make 8+%. That also works with good timing. A fund with higher SD loses money quicker. A slower fund let me exit a bit later.
Example: I could have made more in 2024, but I stayed in HOSIX/CLOZ a lot more time.
In my world it was a perfect fund in 2024 (https://schrts.co/gnvFaMZA)
Why EGRIX and then switch to EIGMX? because after a decline, a more volatile fund would make more.

@FD100 - Have you ever mentioned “trend following” by name in any of your previous posts or recommended the best current trends to chase follow for the benefit of members who read you?
There are successful trend following funds. I have 5-6% so invested . Why anyone would put “all their eggs” in that one basket escapes me. Waiting for a Wiley Coyote moment? Trend following (managed futures) funds invest in a diverse mix of equities, bonds, currencies, commodities, metals, real estate and more. It’s doubtful that whatever you are doing is comparable to what they do.

I interpreted the trend following comment as switch in and out of mutual funds as a retail investor. Not replication of the investment strategies of the underlying funds. In most cases, that would either be prohibitively expensive or impossible (shorting Coffee futures, Iraqi Dinar anyone?)

@FD100 - Have you ever mentioned “trend following” by name in any of your previous posts or recommended the best current trends to chase follow for the benefit of members who read you?
There are successful trend following funds. I have 5-6% so invested . Why anyone would put “all their eggs” in that one basket escapes me. Waiting for a Wiley Coyote moment? Trend following (managed futures) funds invest in a diverse mix of equities, bonds, currencies, commodities, metals, real estate and more. It’s doubtful that whatever you are doing is comparable to what they do.

Carl Kaufman of Osterweis Strategic Income, OSTIX, is more cautious on BBB rated bonds. The fund holds over 10% in cash, a historical high. Excerpt from 4th quarter outlook:

For fixed income investors, the AI-themed names are a cohort that exists largely outside our investment purview (although we did have one very successful investment in an AI-related convertible, which we exited at the end of 2024). Most of the AI-themed names are private, VC-owned cash burners that are not prime candidates for borrowing in the credit markets. The few that have come to market to borrow have very dubious credit profiles and have asked lenders to invest largely based on their future prospects. This is a sensible arrangement for equity holders, who receive unlimited upside in exchange for the risk they take, but for bondholders it is far less appealing, as their upside is limited to the coupon they receive while the risk is the same. We are, however, carefully monitoring this because we believe it is an apt barometer for broad investor sentiment, which is unabashedly risk-on.
The hyperscalers are budgeting hundreds of billions of dollars of CapEx to build data centers, which they hope will power a massive expansion of AI adoption in the years ahead. The numbers are astonishing, and the hype and activity around AI reminds us of the excitement around all things dot-com and dark fiber in the 1990s. The birth of the internet was a society-changing phenomenon, and AI could prove to be the same. However, it is unlikely that AI adoption will pan out exactly as planned. Given the lofty valuations ascribed to these early-stage, unproven companies, any deviation from the expected adoption rate and the ensuing revenue forecasts (many of which are still years away) could trigger at least a tremor, and possibly a much larger quake as winners and losers are parsed by the market. Stay tuned.

https://osterweis.com/outlooks/Strategic_Income_Outlook_Q4
OSTIX has lower drawdowns than typical junk bond funds. He tends to stay in higher quality end of junk bonds that provides more consistent total return.
With respect to Global Wellington and Global Wellesley funds, they share the same bond manager, Loren Moran. Moran tends to hold higher % of long bond for higher yield. This hurt them when the FED hiked rate in 2022. Now the FED is reversing the rate cycle that benefit the long bonds. Something to bear in mind of Wellington funds. On the equity side, they share the same manager but the goals are slightly different that reflect in the selector selection. Global Wellington focuses more on the capital appreciation side while Global Wellesley focus on dividend and value oriented stocks. I own Global Wellington but will buy Wellesley.
@sma3, agree with point on the Active Shares. The passive asset allocation funds are often used as benchmark to other asset allocation funds. I still prefer active management.

@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.

Hi @larryB
For the search words: best fund with mix of tech and financial services
A quasi AI answer. Two sections. This first below doesn't include the word 'global', the second section does.
Regards,
Catch
--- Funds that provide exposure to both technology and financial services generally fall under the Fintech (Financial Technology) thematic category. These funds invest in companies leveraging technology to transform financial services like payments, banking, and investing.
Here are some of the best-known and top-performing Fintech ETFs:
Top Fintech Funds
Fund Name Ticker Description
ARK Fintech Innovation ETF ARKF An actively managed ETF that invests in companies at the forefront of innovation in the fintech space, with holdings like Block, PayPal, and Coinbase. It is known for its focus on disruptive innovation and has shown strong returns over a three-year period despite high volatility.
Global X FinTech ETF FINX This fund seeks to invest in companies using technology to help banks and other financial firms digitize their operations. It offers broad exposure to companies involved in payment processing, peer-to-peer lending, and digital banking globally.
Amplify Digital Payments ETF IPAY A "pure-play" on the digital and mobile payments industry, this ETF includes traditional credit card companies like Visa and Mastercard, as well as emerging consumer payment companies like PayPal and Block.
iShares FinTech Active ETF BPAY This actively managed fund invests in a range of innovative companies, including payment processors and traditional financial institutions adopting new technologies.
Capital Link Global Fintech Leaders ETF KOIN This fund invests in a mix of traditional tech companies (e.g., Microsoft, Oracle) that provide the underlying technology for financial firms, and companies that use fintech internally.
Key Considerations
Thematic Focus: These funds are thematic and thus more concentrated than broad market or even single-sector funds. They are designed to capture growth in the intersection of two dynamic sectors.
Risk Profile: Fintech funds can be volatile due to the nature of technology and the evolving regulatory landscape of the financial sector. The performance has been mixed across different funds and time periods.
Active vs. Passive: Some, like ARKF and BPAY, are actively managed, relying on management expertise to pick stocks. Others like FINX are index funds, aiming to track a specific index.
Before investing, consider your risk tolerance and investment objectives, and review the specific holdings and expense ratios of each fund
--- USING THE WORD 'GLOBAL'
Finding a single "best" fund is difficult as performance and suitability depend on market conditions and individual risk tolerance. However, several global funds invest significantly in both technology and financial services, offering exposure to both sectors.
Funds with a mix of Technology and Financial Services
Funds that explicitly target a blend of technology and financial services are often called "fintech" funds. These funds focus on the intersection of the two sectors.
ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF): This active ETF invests in companies that focus on disruptive innovation in the financial services sector, which inherently includes a large technology component. It has shown strong long-term performance (50.09% three-year total return) but comes with high volatility.
Global X FinTech ETF (FINX): This ETF offers exposure to companies providing financial technology products and services.
Capital Link Global Fintech Leaders ETF (KOIN): This fund divides its investments into two groups: traditional financial companies adopting new technology and technology firms providing the code/hardware for fintech systems. Its top holdings include a mix of large tech companies like Microsoft and financial service infrastructure providers.
General Global Technology Funds with Diversification
Many general global technology funds include financial technology companies as part of their diversified technology holdings. These often have strong long-term performance and high ratings.
Janus Henderson Global Technology And Innovation Fund (JNGTX, JGLTX): This highly-rated fund invests in domestic and foreign companies that benefit from technological advances. It has strong three-year annualized returns (32.4%) and is a good option for global technology exposure.
T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund (PRGTX): This fund seeks long-term capital growth by investing globally in technology companies. It has a reasonable expense ratio and good performance.
Putnam Global Technology Fund (PGTAX): Another global fund focused on capital appreciation through investments in large and mid-size companies in the technology sector.
Important Considerations
Global vs. US Focus: Most top-performing, large-asset tech funds are heavily US-focused (e.g., Vanguard Information Technology ETF, FTEC, XLK), often with over 60% of assets in the top few large-cap tech stocks like Apple, Nvidia, and Microsoft. Funds with a true "global" mandate will have more exposure to international markets.
Risk: Sector-specific funds, especially in high-growth areas like technology and fintech, can be more volatile than a broadly diversified global index fund.
Expense Ratios: ETFs generally have lower expense ratios than actively managed mutual funds, which can impact long-term returns.
It is recommended to evaluate the specific holdings, risk profiles, and expense ratios of these funds to determine which best fits your investment goals.

@Observant1. That is a very interesting read, and it is what I believe is likely. That the hype will be overblown in many investors minds, there will be corrections, maybe a few really big ones. But overall, this could be a sea change. Most of us watched precisely that happen, in 2000, and the following decades.
Imagine if here are big breakthroughs in quantum computing, along the way.
"In the late 1990s and early 2000s, dot-com-related stocks went through a correction and digestion phase. But in the next 20 years, the internet became embedded in everything we do, creating value over time. That is the road map I’m using to think about generative AI.
I am a believer in [futurist Roy] Amara’s Law: We tend to overestimate the impact of technologies in the short term but underestimate them in the long term. I use Netscape, the internet-browser company, as an example. It went public in 1995 and brought the internet to the masses—similar to ChatGPT. That was the starting line [of the internet cycle]."

Post FOMC Presser Notes
Rates: Fed fund rate cut -25 bps to 3.75-4.00%, bank reserves rate at 3.90% (generous), discount rate at 4.00%. On December 1, the Treasury QT of -$5 billion/mo will drop to $0, & MBS QT at -$35 billion/mo to $0 but futures reinvestments will be in Treasuries (not MBS). Fed balance sheet has declined by -$2.2 trillion so far.
DC shutdown effects should be temporary. Lack of government data is a concern but for now, there are estimates from state and private data & surveys.
Tariffs effects should be one-time. They are in goods inflation, but not in services.
Inflation is sticky. Unknowable neutral rate may be between 3-4%. Financial conditions are restrictive despite huge capex seen in AI. Fed is more concerned about financial stability, not market levels.
Labor market has been soft. Announced layoffs by companies aren't showing in unemployment claims. Economy is bifurcated (like K) & there is more spending by higher income earners that by lower income earners.
Banking losses from low-rated debt are being monitored, but that isn't a broader issue.
December FOMC looks very cloudy.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/2277/thread

Wow. Crazy. Can count about a half-dozen harrowing experiences in my long life that could / should have ended it. Escaped thus far. Was not aware of the shock hazard. Did a lot of foolish stuff with electricity as a kid but never tried replacing a tube. I do have a large bug zapper that even unplugged for several minutes retains quite a charge as I’ve learned the hard way. Suspect vacuum tubes may also be that way.
...

The shock you can get from a bug zapper is due to capacitors. The hold a charge, like a battery, but give it up all at once. And the charge is much higher in voltage. The risk with vacuum tubes is mainly while under power, as they are essentially amplifiers. With standard line voltages of 120VAC, they can generate hundreds or thousands of volts in output. And because of the high voltages, they can get quite hot. The risk in sticking one's hand into an old TV, was they also used capacitors to filter/store energy. Those needed to be discharged before handling.
In some of the old power plant equipment that I worked with, you would "charge" the capacitors on the equipment being fed by putting a plain old incandescent light bulb in series with the power feeder. Then you could insert the main fuse, remove the bulb and insert the pilot fuse in its place. Failure to do so would pop the main fuse on initial insertion, due to the surge of the capacitor charging suddenly. You could tell that the capacitor was charged when the light bulb went out. If the bulb did not extinguish, there was a short or power drain somewhere. Or the capacitor was blown (dead short).
Next lesson:diodes... LOL

https://wolfstreet.com/2025/10/21/the-23-bigger-cities-where-condo-prices-dropped-by-12-to-28-through-september/
Condo prices in the markets on this list have dropped by 12% to 28% from their respective peaks in 2021, 2022, 2023, or 2024. Each city has its own chart below, with some additional data. Prices through September, seasonally adjusted.
The 23 bigger cities where condo prices fell 12% to 28% from their peaks:
Oakland, CA: -28% (2022)
Cape Coral, FL: -28% (2024)
Austin, TX: -25% (2022)
St. Petersburg, FL: -25% (2022)
San Francisco, CA: -16% (2022)
Jacksonville, FL: -16% (2022)
Tampa, FL: -16% (2022)
Denver, CO: -15% (2022)
Detroit, MI: -15% (2021)
Arlington, TX: -15% (2024)