FREE NEWSLETTER

Indexing is for those wise enough to realize that they aren’t wiser than the collective wisdom of all investors.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Investment Versus Speculation

"I’m thinking of friends who have speculated in houses during their entire adult lives. To the best of my recollection they have owned 14 homes over the past 50 years, including the condo in town, and park unit in Florida that they currently own. Some houses were renovation projects and some were new builds. They lived in every single property long enough to escape capital gains taxes.  While not a bad plan, (if you don’t mind moving frequently), low house prices in Metro Toledo don’t provide for much profit margin. When calculating the profit made on each sale, they failed to include in the cost of property tax, mortgage interest, and utilities. They made a little money but have not become real estate tycons.  At the same time, they are the definition of ‘risk averse’. A couple attempts at market investments ended abruptly at the first signs of trouble, and at the most inopportune times. All 401(k) contributions have been in bond or stable value funds.  They would have accumulated much more money with proper investments versus house speculation.  I’m in total agreement with your final paragraph and sentence. "
- Dan Smith
Read more »

Giving Up on Owning a Home

"I can remember being in a similar situation in the early 1980s. I was on the 8-year plan to finish college, because I got started just when tuition was skyrocketing at 15% per year, and I was living in my own tiny apartment working as a research technician. Buying a house was, for all practical purposes, totally out of reach and mortgage rates were whole number multiples of what today's rates are. (It also didn't help being the tail end of the Baby Boomers - born 1961) I didn't buy my first house until I was almost 50 years old, but we paid cash on the barrel head, because I didn't like the mortgage rate that we were being offered on a loan. We were buying what would qualify as a starter house, because I was living & working overseas in the oil business and our eldest needed some place to lay his head when the dorms closed during university vacation periods. My point? Yeah, it's tough nowadays, but it was no walk in park for me, either. Unless your last name is Vanderbilt or Rockefeller (i.e., you come from moneyed parentage), success in life requires strong character to make the hard choices."
- John Doe
Read more »

Social Security Spousal Benefits

"This is a great description of the rules involved with figuring social security benefits when coordinating with a spouse. I know it has been mentioned before, but I think the Open Social Security calculator is worth mentioning here again in helping to strategize when to claim benefits."
- Doug C
Read more »

Quinn’s super frugal experiment. Are you up for a challenge?

"Ed, yes, thank you for asking. Everything went through fine, I updated in my guardianship post from December. Spouse will have to do a report to the court every 2 years. We were also very relieved that the bond we thought we would have to post, was waived by the judge. The “big” things like the house and car sale have closed. We are sleeping better. C"
- baldscreen
Read more »

A Big Little Move (by Dana/DrLefty)

"Thanks for the good thoughts! I already have my husband designated for survivor benefits for my pension, but we set up a trust and a successor trustee for her to provide some stability and guidance when she’s older."
- DrLefty
Read more »

The Cardinal Sin

THERE’S A LITANY of investment sins. But one may top them all. I’m guessing it’s one you haven’t given much thought to. Until recently, neither did I. The cardinal investment sin: selling your winners too soon. From 1926 to 2016, more than half of all U.S. stocks—57.4% to be exact—returned less than one-month Treasury bills. In other words, you were better off putting your money into risk-free T-bills than owning these stocks. In fact, more than half of common stocks delivered negative total returns. These stats come from an academic paper by finance professor Hendrik Bessembinder. Now here’s the real kicker: Bessembinder found that the best-performing shares, a mere 4% of all stocks, were responsible for the stock market’s entire gain over and above T-bills. The remaining 96% of companies collectively generated returns that simply matched one-month T-bills. These findings have profound implications for investors. If just 4% of stocks—we'll call them the winners—account for the lion’s share of stock market returns, you had better own them or you’re doomed to underperform the market. If you invest in total market index funds, you will own these winners by default. On the other hand, if you’re picking individual stocks, your odds aren’t great. But let’s say you’re really smart (or lucky) and happen to pick a fair share of the winners. You face another big hurdle. You must hold on to your winners and not sell them prematurely. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. Most investors display a strong tendency to sell their winners and ride their losers. This has been termed the disposition effect, first described by behavioral economists Hersh Shefrin and Meir Statman. The disposition effect can be explained by mental accounting and loss aversion. When an investor buys a stock, a mental account is subconsciously created. The initial investment or cost basis is recorded in this account. If the position is subsequently sold for less than its cost basis, the mental account is closed at a loss. Since losses are painful—particularly to our egos—investors do everything in their power to avoid this from happening, hence the tendency for investors to cling to their losers and even double down on them. Mental accounting also explains why investors are so quick to sell their winners. Selling a position for a gain closes the mental account in the black. This feels good and strokes the investor’s ego. It also serves as a salve for the pain caused by the losers in the portfolio. Prospect theory says that investors weigh losses more heavily than equal-sized gains. That means the mental anguish from a $1,000 loss must be counterbalanced by gains far in excess of $1,000, thus serving as further impetus for selling winners. From a tax standpoint, the disposition effect is an anomaly that shouldn’t exist. After all, our tax code rewards us for taking capital losses and penalizes our capital gains. Despite these incentives, the disposition effect is alive and well. It appears that investors are willing to pay a heavy tax to preserve their self-esteem. [xyz-ihs snippet="Mobile-Subscribe"] Taxes aside, consider the enormous damage done to a portfolio by selling winners too early. As demonstrated in Bessembinder’s paper, strip out the big winners from a portfolio and you are left with middling returns that are on par with T-bills. Why are the winners so vital to a portfolio? Because of the inherent asymmetry between losers and winners. A losing stock has limited downside. At worst, it can go to zero. In fact, in Bessembinder’s study, a 100% loss was the single most frequent outcome for individual stocks over their lifetime. On the other hand, winners had virtually unlimited upside. If you talk to seasoned investors, most will confess they struggle far more with the sell decision than the buy one. A recent study of institutional investors confirms this striking discrepancy. While the authors found clear evidence of skill in buying, selling decisions underperformed badly. In fact, they were worse than random selling strategies. Given the data from Bessembinder’s paper and the behavioral biases plaguing the sell decision, perhaps the best strategy is the one espoused by Warren Buffett: "When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever. We are just the opposite of those who hurry to sell and book profits when companies perform well but who tenaciously hang on to businesses that disappoint. [Celebrated fund manager] Peter Lynch aptly likens such behavior to cutting the flowers and watering the weeds." The greatest investing sin may also explain why active managers find it so hard to beat mindless index funds. Notwithstanding lower fees, cap-weighted index funds have fundamental advantages over their actively managed brethren. As alluded to earlier, a total market index fund by definition will own all the winners. More important, it lets them ride. The manager of an index fund won’t be tempted to sell the winners, nor does he have an ego to preserve. What’s my advice to active managers and stock pickers? As much as possible, ignore your cost basis and focus on the fundamentals. Remember that the market is right most of the time, so let your losers go and enjoy the tax loss harvest. Most important, fight the urge to cash in on your winners with every fiber of your being. John Lim is a physician and author of "How to Raise Your Child's Financial IQ," which is available as both a free PDF and a Kindle edition. Follow John on Twitter @JohnTLim and check out his earlier articles. [xyz-ihs snippet="Donate"]
Read more »

Very Fast, Not Very Smart

"Your comment give me a glorious mental image of greedy gerbils stuffing their cheek pouches with money while the bankrupt lemmings hurl themselves off a cliff in despair. I know, Norm — my mind needs a serious talking to."
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

Blood Money

"Glad we're aligned on index funds, though my defence sector pitch clearly needs work. I've been told I have the look of someone who'd try to lure you into a pump and dump, which is a reputation I'm apparently doing nothing to dispel. The article link in your reply was a welcome bonus; it made the Guinness 0.0 almost convincing…which, in a bar, is really the best you can hope for."
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

Treasury Tax Reporting

IF YOU HAVE a Money Market Fund (e.g. VUSXX, VMFXX), Treasury fund (e.g. SGOV), or any other Treasury ETF (e.g. VBIL), you need to know how to report it on your taxes correctly. If you don’t, you are overpaying on your state taxes unknowingly. 

How and why?

These funds hold U.S. Treasury Bills. Treasuries are exempt from state and local taxes. Of course, this only matters if you hold these funds in a taxable brokerage account, which most people do.

The broker sends you a 1099-DIV form, but it’s your responsibility to figure out how to report it on your taxes correctly. By the way, bad tax preparers can miss this sometimes, or if you self-prepare, this may be something you aren't aware of (I hope most of you reading HumbleDollar are familiar with this!)

This is one of those areas where the reporting rules are technically simple, but the execution is where people mess up. The IRS gets their share regardless (since interest is fully taxable at the federal level), but if you don’t adjust properly, your state will too, even when it shouldn’t.

The 1099-DIV doesn’t break out how much of the dividend was allocated to Treasuries. The software also wouldn’t know how much based on the 1099-DIV. This means that you generally have to figure out how to report it (or ensure your CPA does it correctly).

Now, the 1099-DIV will have a breakdown of every single stock/ETF you have, but you have to find out the percentage of a fund that holds Treasuries.

This percentage is not on your brokerage statement. It comes directly from the fund provider (Vanguard, iShares, Schwab, etc), usually buried in their “tax center” or “year-end tax supplement” pages.

Let me give you an actual example.

Say, in 2025, you received $5,000 of dividends from two funds.

Then, if you scroll down, you will see a “Detail Information” of your dividends:

Interest

We can see that $2,456.78 came from Vanguard Federal Money Market fund.

The entire $2,456.78 will be taxed at the federal level, but how do we figure out what’s taxed at the state level?

This is where the extra step comes is.

During the end of the year, the fund manager (e.g Vanguard for VMFXX) will post a “US government source income information” on their Tax page.

This report tells you what portion of the fund’s income is derived from U.S. government obligations (Treasuries), which is the key to the state tax exemption.

VMFXX

We can see that 66.61% of VMFXX holdings for the 2025 tax year were income derived from the U.S. government and, therefore, are not taxable at the state level.

So, we would take $2,456.78 * 0.6661 = $1,636. Of the total, $1,636 is derived from U.S. obligations, and you would only pay state taxes on the remaining ~$819.

That $2,456.78 is still fully taxable federally. This is strictly a state adjustment.

It’s also important to note that some states say "if less than 50% of the fund is from the U.S. government (like Treasury Bills), you can treat it as 0%.”

For example, California, Connecticut, and New York are some of these states. So, if the fund has only 35% coming from the Treasury, you shouldn’t even calculate the exempt amount for these states.

Now, if you buy Treasuries directly from TreasuryDirect, they will send you a 1099-INT, and you can just enter that information directly into the tax software. No extra calculations are needed. That’s because the income is already clearly identified as U.S. government interest, no allocation required.

So, how do you report that dividend interest calculation?

In most tax softwares, after entering the 1099-DIV, it will ask: "Did a portion of dividends came from a U.S. Government interest?'

So, you would just check it off/select and enter the amount from Treasuries ($1,636 in our example).

Behind the scenes, this flows into your state return as a subtraction or adjustment, depending on the state.

Some software might ask for the percentage of dividends that are state tax exempt. However, this is a bit tricky because you might receive other dividends in your brokerage account.

In that case, calculate the amount from the Treasury, say $1,636, and divide it by your total dividend amount (e.g. $5,000)

If you have someone do your taxes and you have some of these Money Market Funds or other Treasury ETFs, double-check your state tax return and see the amounts reported. This will save you some money. It's also not too late to amend your tax return if this was missed.

Specifically, look for a “U.S. government interest subtraction” or similarly labeled line item on your state return. If it’s zero and you held these funds, that’s a red flag.

If you live in a no tax state, this would not apply to you, but still good to know in case you move!

I hope you found this one valuable.

  Bogdan Sheremeta is a licensed CPA based in Illinois with experience at Deloitte and a Fortune 200 multinational.
Read more »

Simplify Everything

"That's a great idea especially with the prices. My wife notes the aisle location of the item the first time we get it and adds it to our shared Notes app shopping list, and it comes up again automatically when we add that item in the future. Then we sort the list by aisle making shopping speedy and efficient and helps us in only getting what we really need."
- Doug C
Read more »

Investment Versus Speculation

"I’m thinking of friends who have speculated in houses during their entire adult lives. To the best of my recollection they have owned 14 homes over the past 50 years, including the condo in town, and park unit in Florida that they currently own. Some houses were renovation projects and some were new builds. They lived in every single property long enough to escape capital gains taxes.  While not a bad plan, (if you don’t mind moving frequently), low house prices in Metro Toledo don’t provide for much profit margin. When calculating the profit made on each sale, they failed to include in the cost of property tax, mortgage interest, and utilities. They made a little money but have not become real estate tycons.  At the same time, they are the definition of ‘risk averse’. A couple attempts at market investments ended abruptly at the first signs of trouble, and at the most inopportune times. All 401(k) contributions have been in bond or stable value funds.  They would have accumulated much more money with proper investments versus house speculation.  I’m in total agreement with your final paragraph and sentence. "
- Dan Smith
Read more »

Giving Up on Owning a Home

"I can remember being in a similar situation in the early 1980s. I was on the 8-year plan to finish college, because I got started just when tuition was skyrocketing at 15% per year, and I was living in my own tiny apartment working as a research technician. Buying a house was, for all practical purposes, totally out of reach and mortgage rates were whole number multiples of what today's rates are. (It also didn't help being the tail end of the Baby Boomers - born 1961) I didn't buy my first house until I was almost 50 years old, but we paid cash on the barrel head, because I didn't like the mortgage rate that we were being offered on a loan. We were buying what would qualify as a starter house, because I was living & working overseas in the oil business and our eldest needed some place to lay his head when the dorms closed during university vacation periods. My point? Yeah, it's tough nowadays, but it was no walk in park for me, either. Unless your last name is Vanderbilt or Rockefeller (i.e., you come from moneyed parentage), success in life requires strong character to make the hard choices."
- John Doe
Read more »

Social Security Spousal Benefits

"This is a great description of the rules involved with figuring social security benefits when coordinating with a spouse. I know it has been mentioned before, but I think the Open Social Security calculator is worth mentioning here again in helping to strategize when to claim benefits."
- Doug C
Read more »

Quinn’s super frugal experiment. Are you up for a challenge?

"Ed, yes, thank you for asking. Everything went through fine, I updated in my guardianship post from December. Spouse will have to do a report to the court every 2 years. We were also very relieved that the bond we thought we would have to post, was waived by the judge. The “big” things like the house and car sale have closed. We are sleeping better. C"
- baldscreen
Read more »

A Big Little Move (by Dana/DrLefty)

"Thanks for the good thoughts! I already have my husband designated for survivor benefits for my pension, but we set up a trust and a successor trustee for her to provide some stability and guidance when she’s older."
- DrLefty
Read more »

The Cardinal Sin

THERE’S A LITANY of investment sins. But one may top them all. I’m guessing it’s one you haven’t given much thought to. Until recently, neither did I. The cardinal investment sin: selling your winners too soon. From 1926 to 2016, more than half of all U.S. stocks—57.4% to be exact—returned less than one-month Treasury bills. In other words, you were better off putting your money into risk-free T-bills than owning these stocks. In fact, more than half of common stocks delivered negative total returns. These stats come from an academic paper by finance professor Hendrik Bessembinder. Now here’s the real kicker: Bessembinder found that the best-performing shares, a mere 4% of all stocks, were responsible for the stock market’s entire gain over and above T-bills. The remaining 96% of companies collectively generated returns that simply matched one-month T-bills. These findings have profound implications for investors. If just 4% of stocks—we'll call them the winners—account for the lion’s share of stock market returns, you had better own them or you’re doomed to underperform the market. If you invest in total market index funds, you will own these winners by default. On the other hand, if you’re picking individual stocks, your odds aren’t great. But let’s say you’re really smart (or lucky) and happen to pick a fair share of the winners. You face another big hurdle. You must hold on to your winners and not sell them prematurely. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. Most investors display a strong tendency to sell their winners and ride their losers. This has been termed the disposition effect, first described by behavioral economists Hersh Shefrin and Meir Statman. The disposition effect can be explained by mental accounting and loss aversion. When an investor buys a stock, a mental account is subconsciously created. The initial investment or cost basis is recorded in this account. If the position is subsequently sold for less than its cost basis, the mental account is closed at a loss. Since losses are painful—particularly to our egos—investors do everything in their power to avoid this from happening, hence the tendency for investors to cling to their losers and even double down on them. Mental accounting also explains why investors are so quick to sell their winners. Selling a position for a gain closes the mental account in the black. This feels good and strokes the investor’s ego. It also serves as a salve for the pain caused by the losers in the portfolio. Prospect theory says that investors weigh losses more heavily than equal-sized gains. That means the mental anguish from a $1,000 loss must be counterbalanced by gains far in excess of $1,000, thus serving as further impetus for selling winners. From a tax standpoint, the disposition effect is an anomaly that shouldn’t exist. After all, our tax code rewards us for taking capital losses and penalizes our capital gains. Despite these incentives, the disposition effect is alive and well. It appears that investors are willing to pay a heavy tax to preserve their self-esteem. [xyz-ihs snippet="Mobile-Subscribe"] Taxes aside, consider the enormous damage done to a portfolio by selling winners too early. As demonstrated in Bessembinder’s paper, strip out the big winners from a portfolio and you are left with middling returns that are on par with T-bills. Why are the winners so vital to a portfolio? Because of the inherent asymmetry between losers and winners. A losing stock has limited downside. At worst, it can go to zero. In fact, in Bessembinder’s study, a 100% loss was the single most frequent outcome for individual stocks over their lifetime. On the other hand, winners had virtually unlimited upside. If you talk to seasoned investors, most will confess they struggle far more with the sell decision than the buy one. A recent study of institutional investors confirms this striking discrepancy. While the authors found clear evidence of skill in buying, selling decisions underperformed badly. In fact, they were worse than random selling strategies. Given the data from Bessembinder’s paper and the behavioral biases plaguing the sell decision, perhaps the best strategy is the one espoused by Warren Buffett: "When we own portions of outstanding businesses with outstanding managements, our favorite holding period is forever. We are just the opposite of those who hurry to sell and book profits when companies perform well but who tenaciously hang on to businesses that disappoint. [Celebrated fund manager] Peter Lynch aptly likens such behavior to cutting the flowers and watering the weeds." The greatest investing sin may also explain why active managers find it so hard to beat mindless index funds. Notwithstanding lower fees, cap-weighted index funds have fundamental advantages over their actively managed brethren. As alluded to earlier, a total market index fund by definition will own all the winners. More important, it lets them ride. The manager of an index fund won’t be tempted to sell the winners, nor does he have an ego to preserve. What’s my advice to active managers and stock pickers? As much as possible, ignore your cost basis and focus on the fundamentals. Remember that the market is right most of the time, so let your losers go and enjoy the tax loss harvest. Most important, fight the urge to cash in on your winners with every fiber of your being. John Lim is a physician and author of "How to Raise Your Child's Financial IQ," which is available as both a free PDF and a Kindle edition. Follow John on Twitter @JohnTLim and check out his earlier articles. [xyz-ihs snippet="Donate"]
Read more »

Very Fast, Not Very Smart

"Your comment give me a glorious mental image of greedy gerbils stuffing their cheek pouches with money while the bankrupt lemmings hurl themselves off a cliff in despair. I know, Norm — my mind needs a serious talking to."
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 47: IF WE NEED a financial advisor, we should hire one who’s legally required to act as a fiduciary—meaning he or she should only make recommendations that are in our best interest.

think

SOCIAL PROOF. We take our cues from others, assuming what’s popular is also good. That’s a smart strategy with movies, cars, restaurants and electronic gadgets. It’s often a terrible strategy with investments, because we find ourselves buying into stocks and market sectors that have already been bid up—and will likely have modest future returns.

act

CONSIDER A TARGET-date fund. Financial advisors push the notion that every investor needs a customized portfolio—and, indeed, we all like the idea that we have an investment mix specially designed for us. Yet most of us, whether we’re investing on our own or through an advisor, would likely fare just as well by buying a single target-date retirement fund.

Truths

NO. 103: YOU CAN estimate stock market returns by adding the starting dividend yield to the expected percentage increase in earnings per share. But such estimates could prove badly wrong—depending on investor sentiment. When investors grow bullish, they put a higher value on corporate earnings, driving up the market’s price-earnings ratio.

Plan your estate

Manifesto

NO. 47: IF WE NEED a financial advisor, we should hire one who’s legally required to act as a fiduciary—meaning he or she should only make recommendations that are in our best interest.

Spotlight: Behavior

Never Enough

MANY FINANCIAL IDEAS are tough to embrace. But perhaps the toughest can be summed up in one simple word: enough.
Will we ever feel like we have enough and that we’ve accomplished enough? Accepting that we have enough and done enough might seem like worthy goals, a serene acceptance that’s possible for those at peace with themselves and the world around them. Indeed, for many, “retirement” and “enough” seem to be pretty much synonymous,

Read more »

Regular HD writers, readers and commentators are just not normal- in a good way

Over the several years I have been writing and commenting on HD it has been made clear that the HD community includes many sophisticated investors and planners. People who use budgets, track expenses, do their best to investigate and then make financial decisions based on information they develop. They use various type of software programs and, of course, their own spreadsheets. They analyze risk and investment expenses. They like details. They think about the future. And,

Read more »

On My Own Time

WHO OWNS TIME? WE speak of “my time” and “your time” as if it were a possession we hold in our hands. But we can’t stash it away for future use, nor can we trade or transfer our allotment to another person. Is it truly ours? For the moment, let’s say that it is.
Appraising time. How much do we value our time? Some days, we treat it as a precious commodity. On those days,

Read more »

Help Wanted

If you could offer your fellow readers one piece of advice that you’re confident would improve their life, what would it be?
To get us rolling, here’s my suggestion: Be generous with others—but do it when they aren’t expecting it. For instance, folks expect to receive gifts on their birthday, so any gifts you give likely won’t seem all that special. What if, instead, you present them with a gift out of the blue? The element of surprise has the potential to make the gift especially meaningful.

Read more »

Why We Struggle

I’VE SPENT MUCH OF MY life trying to better understand the world, especially the financial world. But I wonder whether I should have spent more of that time trying to better understand myself.
Why do some financial situations scare us, while others leave us unperturbed? Why do we spend time and money in ways we later regret? Why do we find our bad habits so difficult to change? Why do we admire some folks,

Read more »

Kicking Myself

THERE ARE TWO TYPES of mistake I make: those that are unintentional and those where I should have known what would happen.
After an unintentional mistake, I’m perplexed by what went wrong. I might say to myself “I’ll never do that again” or perhaps “what the heck just happened?” These are genuine mistakes, and I try to learn from them.
By contrast, stupid mistakes are those that I should have known would occur. No matter how many college degrees we have or how many years on the job,

Read more »

Spotlight: Clements

Improving the Odds

WE HEAR ABOUT highflying stocks and hotshot money managers, and it’s easy to imagine the streets of lower Manhattan are paved with gold. But the truth is a tad more mundane. Want some reasonable assurance of investment success? We should shun the excitement of trying to pick winners and instead focus on more prosaic portfolio tweaks. The overriding goal: ensure the compounding of our investment dollars encounters as little friction as possible. Minimizing this friction will, I believe, be especially important in the years ahead, because stock and bond returns will likely be below their historical averages. What to do? Many HumbleDollar readers are heavily invested in low-cost index funds, so they’re already well-positioned to capture the market’s return with minimal loss to investment costs. But don’t stop there. Here are five other steps that should speed your portfolio’s progress: 1. Cashing in. As brokerage commissions shrink, trading spreads tighten and investors flock to index funds, it’s become harder for brokerage firms to make money. But there remains one favorite way to milk customers: Pay them little or nothing on their cash balances. Many brokerage firms offer money market mutual funds with reasonably high yields. Despite that, their designated cash sweep account—the place money goes if, say, we sell a stock—is often a bank account with a modest yield. To earn more, customers need to move cash out of this sweep account and into a higher-yielding money market fund. Sound like work? This is a reason to invest at Fidelity Investments or Vanguard Group. Both use government money market funds with decent yields as their sweep account. 2. Taking risk. I realize this might sound odd, but if we’re worried that the stock market will deliver subpar returns in the decade ahead, arguably we should allocate more to stocks. Why?…
Read more »

Repeat After Me

IF YOUR INVESTMENTS climb in value, hold the champagne—until you figure out whether it’s a onetime gain or a repeatable performance. Suppose your foreign stocks post gains because the dollar weakens. Or your bonds climb because interest rates fall. Or stocks rise because price-earnings ratios head higher. Or corporate earnings increase because profit margins expand. Or stocks jump because the corporate tax rate or the capital-gains tax rate is cut. Sound familiar? All of these things have either happened over the long haul or helped drive share prices higher this year. You won’t necessarily give back these gains—and, indeed, the dollar could weaken further, interest rates could drop even more, P/Es might rise yet higher, profit margins could widen further and tax rates might be cut again. But each of these is a road you can only travel once. For instance, since the early 1980s, the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note has fallen from roughly 16% to 2% and the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index has climbed from less than eight times earnings to 25 times earnings. Treasury yields can’t fall from 16% to 2% again and the S&P 500’s P/E can’t climb from eight to 25 again—unless we first saw a dramatic market reversal. In other words, these are truly onetime gains. Moreover, in some of these cases, there are limits to how far these developments can run. Theoretically, the dollar could continuously weaken and P/Es could continuously rise, though neither seems likely. But interest rates won't spend prolonged periods below 0%, profits margins can’t expand so that all of GDP goes to corporate profits and tax rates can’t be any lower than 0%. So what would count as a repeatable investment performance? It’s reasonable to expect that bonds will continue to pay interest at their stated yield until they…
Read more »

Stuck at Home

IT'S AN ARGUMENT I’ll never win. But perhaps I can sow a few seeds of doubt. The anti-foreign-stock drumbeat has grown louder with each additional year that international markets underperform U.S. shares. Indeed, even though foreign stocks beat U.S. shares in the 1970s, 1980s and 2000s, there are folks today who argue there’s no reason to own foreign shares. Really? Before you throw in the towel, ask yourself six questions: 1. If U.S. stocks had lousy returns for 15 years, would you abandon them? Since year-end 2009, foreign stocks have lagged behind U.S. shares almost every year. If U.S. stocks had served up that sort of mediocre performance, and I declared that it was time to give up on America’s publicly traded companies, readers would eviscerate me for my flip-flopping, failure to appreciate market history, and possible horrible market-timing—and the criticism would be richly deserved. 2. If U.S. multinationals are a good substitute for investing abroad, why don’t they perform like large-cap foreign stocks? Pained by international markets’ lackluster results, it seems many U.S. investors are looking for an excuse not to invest overseas. One of their favorite contentions: There’s no need to own foreign stocks, because U.S. corporations offer ample international exposure. But if that were truly the case, wouldn’t returns for large-cap stocks in the two markets be similar? Yet, over the 15 years through Oct. 31, MSCI’s Europe, Australasia and Far East index has notched just 5.7% a year, far behind the S&P 500’s 14.2%. 3. Yes, foreign companies offer fewer legal protections and greater business risk. But isn't this already reflected in share prices? Arguably, investors today are getting paid to take the greater risk associated with international markets. For instance, the stocks in Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (symbol: VTI) sport a price-earnings (P/E) ratio…
Read more »

Breaking Bad

WE ALL DO THINGS that make us feel good right now, but which aren’t so good for us over the long haul. Yes, even me. Yes, even you. Some of this behavior stems from hardwired instincts passed down to us from our hunter-gatherer ancestors, like our tendency to consume whenever we can and to focus too much on today, while giving short shrift to tomorrow. Other damaging behavior is the result of habits we’ve developed, often learned from our parents, that we’re now trying to unlearn. Fighting our instincts and breaking these bad habits is tough. We could try summoning the necessary willpower. But that can be mentally exhausting. It may even backfire, when we decide the effort just expended deserves a reward—and, the next thing we know, we’re in the drive-through at McDonald’s. Similarly, knowledge isn’t power. We all know we should exercise regularly, eat more fruits and vegetables, and save 10% to 15% of income. But knowing better doesn’t mean we’ll behave better. So how do we change our habits and keep our worst instincts at bay? Consider three steps. First, know yourself. What causes you to spend too much, eat too much or drink excessively? Do these things tend to happen at a particular time of day, or when you’re with certain people, or when you’re at certain places, or if you’ve had a taxing day? For instance, you might eat too much or eat unhealthily when you go to certain restaurants or if you’ve had a rough time at work. You might drink too much when you’re with certain friends or on Friday evenings. You might shop to feel better if you’re despondent. You might trade more when you have CNBC turned on. Psychologists have identified five key personality traits: agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism and openness. Those who…
Read more »

Good, Bad and Ugly

EVEN BAD FINANCIAL products and strategies turn out okay for some investors. If that wasn’t the case, they probably wouldn’t attract enough customers to survive, no matter how aggressively they're peddled. Still, some are so risky or so costly that the chances of a happy outcome are slim. Want to improve your odds of financial success? Here’s how I would categorize the products and strategies on offer today: Dangerous Buying stocks on margin Leveraged exchange-traded index funds Day trading Short selling Writing naked call options Dubious Cash value life insurance Variable annuities Equity-indexed annuities Hedge funds Market timing Options trading Technical analysis Structured products Load funds Unit investment trusts Closed-end funds bought at the initial public offering Non-traded REITs Brokers on commission Carrying a credit card balance Proceed with Caution Actively managed funds Individual stocks Bonds bought in the secondary market Closed-end funds at a discount Rental properties Vacation homes Interest-only mortgages Reverse mortgages Long-term-care insurance Claiming Social Security early Promising Index mutual funds Exchange-traded index funds High-yield savings accounts Certificates of deposit Treasury bonds 401(k) plans IRAs Health savings accounts Term life insurance Rewards credit cards Owning your primary residence Conventional mortgages Home-equity lines of credit Immediate fixed annuities Deferred income annuities Claiming Social Security late The bottom line: With so many products in the promising category, why risk owning anything else? [xyz-ihs snippet="Donate"]
Read more »

Learned Along the Way

IMAGINE YOU TOOK a group of folks—mostly male, mostly older, mostly upper-middle class, mostly well-educated—and had them describe their financial journey. They’d all be pretty similar, right? You might be surprised. I was. Next Tuesday marks the official publication of My Money Journey, which you can now order from Amazon and Barnes & Noble, as well as directly from Harriman House, the publisher. When I asked 29 writers for HumbleDollar to join me in contributing essays to the book, I wasn’t quite sure what I’d get. But as the last few essays trickled in and I looked over the submissions, what struck me most was the diversity of the stories. There are many paths to the top of the mountain. Most journeys start haphazardly, trying one route and then another. But eventually, successful investors settle down and do mostly the right thing for many years, and they end up with surprising wealth—and nobody’s more surprised than the investors themselves, who discover that a huge pile of dollars has resulted from decades of prosaic prudence. While each journey described in the book is unique, you’ll likely notice that certain themes crop up again and again. Here are the eight themes that struck me: 1. Our parents mold our financial beliefs. This comes shining through in almost every essay. Trust me: If you’re a parent, it’s scary to realize how much influence you have on your children. Really scary. What beliefs from our parents should we hang on to, and which should we discard? For some contributors to My Money Journey, it’s been a lifelong struggle. 2. The key to financial freedom is good savings habits. It’s banal to say it, and yet it can’t be said enough. The virtue of thrift is a theme that runs through almost all 30 essays. 3. Complexity is…
Read more »