FREE NEWSLETTER

We strive throughout the day to get everything done—and yet it would be terrible if there were nothing left to be done tomorrow.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Time to share our financial info with children?

"Being an only child, my parent's estate was very simple. I had helped my dad realize he needed a will and directed him to a good attorney to prepare it. I have helped my relatives get their wills and assets in order. It made things so much easier. As far as disclosure of dollars in accounts, I am ambivalent. I knew my parent's financials. I helped one relative set up his estate to pass to his son. His son chose not to know the details. He just did not emotionally want to deal with it. I was with the son after his dad's passing. I walked him through the steps to take in the days after the funeral. Step one...call the estate attorney. It worked out OK not to know the details."
- Harold Tynes
Read more »

Peter Cancro from age 14 to 69 covered in oil and vinegar

"The other factor in the healthcare realm is those that can’t afford healthcare still get sick and injured and the hospital writes the expense off but then raises rates to recoup the losses. This results in those that do have health insurance paying higher premiums. Also if there is bifurcated wealth in a country sure the wealthy can prop up the economy to some degree. The poor mostly limits their spending to fulfilling their needs necessary to survive, ie have little to no disposable income. In this type of economy there eventually are not enough wealthy citizens spending to grow the economy. You need a strong middle class with larger number of people doing well enough to buy more than the essentials. This can be accomplished by more of the poor being elevated to the middle class. If this occurs companies have more people to sell to which would result in greater profits which then makes the wealth wealthier. I summary then, helping the poor earn more increases the wealth of the rich. It doesn’t have to be an I win, you lose society, but everyone wins."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Bucket Strategy

A WHILE BACK, I was speaking with a fellow who had recently retired. He shared this observation, only half-jokingly: “Working was easy,” he said. What he meant was that financial management during our working years is more straightforward than it is in retirement. We earn and save and hope that our savings grow. But when we get to retirement, it becomes more complicated to know exactly how to manage those savings. In the 1950s, a Ph.D. student named Harry Markowitz developed a framework to help investors answer this question. His approach, which is now known as modern portfolio theory, provided new insights on how to effectively diversify a portfolio. He later won a Nobel Prize for this work. But useful as it was, modern portfolio theory involved a lot of math and didn’t offer investors any practical help in managing their savings. Other academic theories have emerged over the years, but all of them involved similar levels of complexity. It was for that reason that in 1985, financial planner Harold Evensky developed an idea that’s now known as the “bucket strategy.” The idea is that investors—especially those in retirement—should segment their portfolios. To understand this idea, we can look at a simple example. Suppose Tom is a recent retiree and planning to withdraw 5% of his portfolio each year for the next several years. To protect against a potential stock market downturn, it would be reasonable for him to hold five years worth of withdrawals in some combination of cash and short-term bonds, since that corresponds, more or less, to the length of the worst stock market downturns we’ve seen in modern times.  In Evensky’s model, cash and bonds would be the first bucket, and the math is straightforward: If Tom wants to withdraw 5% each year and wants to set aside enough for five years, then he’d hold 25% (that is, 5% x 5) in the first bucket. With that 25% allocated to bonds for stability, Tom could then feel free to allocate the remaining 75% to stocks. The benefit of this structure is that Tom would then have the flexibility to withdraw from either the stock or bond side of his portfolio depending on where the stock market stood in any given year. Most importantly, by putting a wall between his stocks and his bonds, Tom would be able to avoid selling stocks during market downturns. The bucket concept can be very useful, but it’s important to know that there isn’t just one bucket strategy. Since Evensky first introduced the idea 40 years ago, a handful of alternatives have evolved. Evensky’s original structure consisted of just two buckets. This makes it simple and easy to manage. A downside, though, is that bonds can still lose money, so neither of the two buckets could be considered truly safe. In 2022, in fact, total-bond market funds lost more than 10% of their value, and it took several years for investors to get back to even. Thus, one of the most popular ways to structure a bucket portfolio is to add a third bucket, for cash. To be sure, cash doesn’t offer much growth potential. But it would’ve been extremely helpful in a year like 2022, when both bonds and stocks lost money. While it provides more protection, the downside of a three-bucket approach is that it’s more complicated and somewhat harder to manage. Proponents, however, argue that it doesn’t require much more effort than traditional portfolio rebalancing and is well worth the effort. In his book, The Aspirational Investor, Ashvin Chhabra lays out another bucket alternative. Chhabra is less concerned with the distinction between bonds and cash. Instead, he advises investors to focus on the riskier side of their portfolios. He suggests that investors distinguish between standard, publicly-traded stock market investments and any alternative assets, such as private funds and real estate, that they might hold. Chhabra feels this segmentation is important because of the nature of alternative investments. They’re a little like lottery tickets: They can turn into home runs but can also go to zero. If you’re constructing a portfolio and like the idea of a bucket approach, which way should you go?  Since each of these approaches has merit, you could combine them all, creating a four-bucket setup, consisting of cash, bonds, stocks and alternatives. That wouldn’t be unreasonable, but it would also ratchet up the complexity level. Here’s the approach I recommend: First, like Chhabra, I would draw a distinction between traditional assets and alternatives. Traditional, publicly-traded investments, including standard stock and bond mutual funds and ETFs, would go in your core portfolio. These are the assets around which you’d build your plan.  Alternatives, if you own them, would go in their own separate bucket. In general, I don’t recommend these types of assets because their performance is more variable and more unpredictable, and because they tend to carry higher fees. But if you already own some alternatives, I’d separate them from your financial plan and view them only as a bonus if they deliver value. In other words, make sure that your financial plan will still work if you were to rely on only your core portfolio. Within the core, I’d have just two buckets: one for stocks and one for bonds. The result is that you would have just two buckets, plus alternatives, if you happen to own them. But what about cash, since, as we saw earlier, bonds aren’t guaranteed and can certainly lose money? In my view, a dedicated, separate cash bucket isn’t necessary. Instead, what I recommend is to be diligent in diversifying your bond holdings. I wouldn’t own a total-bond market fund. Instead, take a building block approach, holding some short-term and some intermediate-term bond funds. Short-term funds will shine when rates are rising because they’ll decline much less than total-market funds. Intermediate-term bonds, on the other hand, will shine when rates are dropping. You could also add some inflation-protected bonds to round out your holdings. At the end of the day, the best portfolio structure is the one that’s simple to manage while also protecting your savings from whatever surprises the market delivers.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

A $1,000 Conversation With My Daughter

"You are right Mark there is a bit of politics involved in the post but you walked the tightrope brilliantly and kept the post objectively about finance. Bravo!"
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

ChatGPT’s Portfolio Advice

"I used Boldin a few years ago with a trial, downloaded the information then cancelled the membership. Once we both claim Social Security I will start an actual membership and run the numbers with those inputs to see where we stand. I realized that with Boldin’s Monte Carlo I no longer need to pay for a financial advisor to do the work."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Reflections on a Quiet Failure

"“For example, I have several friends with income from annuities, none of them can tell me if they are variable or fixed.” In a similar vein I was a talking finance with my next door neighbor yesterday. He works for Fidelity and his wife is retiring from her position as a school principal. He told me his wife had a pension. I asked him if it included inflation adjustments and he had no idea. I explained the importance this way He decided he should check even though he would have no say in the matter."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Setting the Hook, Reeling In the Fish

"The soundness of Roth conversions varies from case to case. You and Bogdan (Mega Backdoor Roth) describe worthwhile strategies.  Your final sentence best describes the point I was making; …. I don’t do steak dinners, I cook my own….  Enjoy that new grill!"
- Dan Smith
Read more »

Money and Me

JONATHAN CLEMENTS’S final book was released this week. Titled Money and Me, it traces the arc of Jonathan’s nearly four-decade career as a personal finance columnist.

Money and Me starts with the story of a man named George Cope, who was a nineteenth century tobacco baron. At the time of his death in 1888, Cope was one of Britain’s richest men. But within just two generations, his fortune was gone. Why? Cope’s daughter was the sole heir to her father’s fortune, but she lived what Jonathan described as a Downton Abbey lifestyle, on an estate in the Cotswolds with five homes and eight children. Before long, the fortune was gone.

This story was of interest to Jonathan because George Cope was his great-great-grandfather. He called it the “big family story” and explains that this hard financial lesson was imprinted on everyone in his family from a young age.

In part because of this family story, Jonathan got interested in personal finance, and, among his peers, was early in focusing on the psychology of money. “I like to think I’m rational in the way I spend my dollars, and I suspect most readers do, too. We are, of course, deluding ourselves,” he wrote.

Early in his career, Jonathan covered mutual funds for Forbes, then The Wall Street Journal. Each week, he'd review a different fund and interview the fund’s manager. From that vantage point, he was early in recognizing a reality about Wall Street: that they’re great marketers but not such great investment managers. After reviewing scores of actively-managed funds, Jonathan came to the conclusion that index funds were a better way to go for most investors.

Since the investing question was “solved,” as he put it, by index funds, Jonathan turned his attention to other domains in personal finance. The relationship between money and happiness was of particular interest. Though he acknowledged that each of us has a happiness “set point” that is largely fixed, he pointed out that our happiness level isn’t entirely fixed. There’s plenty we can do to move the needle.

A chapter titled “15 Ways to Happy” includes a number of practical suggestions. Among them: Jonathan always recommended making plans—especially vacation plans—far in advance. Why? “Often, the best part of a purchase or experience is the anticipation, he explained.And since it doesn’t cost more to book early—indeed, it often costs less—that was his recommendation.

Jonathan leaned heavily on academic research and helped translate its findings for everyday investors. In Money and Me, he explains concepts from psychology including the hedonic treadmill, eudaimonic happiness and many others. Jonathan acknowledged that there’s no magic wand for achieving happiness. On the other hand, he explains why a million-dollar salary isn’t a necessary ingredient for financial contentment.

Jonathan also wrote a lot about spending. On the one hand, owing to his family’s experience, he developed frugal habits early in life, and he was grateful that those habits led to financial independence by age 50. On the other hand, he knew that frugality could be taken too far. In a chapter titled “Don’t Overdo It,” Jonathan offers a menu of ideas to help others who might similarly struggleto loosen the purse strings.

Jonathan had two children and thought a lot about how best to convey money values to them. He knew the risk in helping too much. Money doesn’t necessarily kill all ambition. But it seems to put a big dent in financial ambition, he wrote. For that reason, Jonathan mostly emphasized education rather than direct financial assistance. 

He describes, however, one important way in which his own parents helped him: They always made it clear that they were there for him as a backstop. Though he might have never needed it, simply knowing this support was in the background gave Jonathan the confidence to always invest heavily in the stock market. He describes maintaining an allocation to stocks that was regularly above 80% or even 90%. That kind of aggressive investing ran contrary to the textbook. But recognizing the benefit it had provided during strong markets over the years, Jonathan offered a similar backstop to his own children, thus allowing them to take risks that they might not have otherwise.

In choosing a heavy allocation to stocks, Jonathan explains some of the other factors that went into his thinking. For starters, he points to the role of financial forecasters. They’re often wrong, but that doesn’t stop them from waking up the next day with something new to say. As a result, during both stock market rallies and routs, prognosticators can be found on TV telling stories that often cause investors to overreact. In the chapter “Not Scared of Bears,” Jonathan walks through the math that should give investors the courage to ignore forecasters, to keep their feet on the ground and to stay fully invested regardless of what bad news happens to be in the headlines.

Jonathan was willing to pile on even more risk in his portfolio when markets declined. He acknowledged that this opened him up to the accusation of being a market timer—“pretty much the nastiest insult you can hurl”—but he explains a subtle difference between his approach and true market timing, then offers a helpful strategy for profiting from downturns.

Jonathan Clements was one of a kind. Like all of his readers, I miss his kindness, wit and good cheer. For decades, he helped readers navigate the potholed road known as Wall Street. With his final work, Jonathan leaves us with a timeless guide to thinking about money in uniquely sensible ways.

  Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Moving is Expensive!

"Of course moving is expensive, you must have known that. Yes, been there done that in 2016 and since moved into an Independent Living CCRC in 2022. Most people move here in their 70's to 80's, but some later. Average age here is 83, 2/3 women and 50 couples out of 234 apartments. Once you are moved in all the hassle is gone. And our CCRC has assisted living, memory care, and nursing when needed. After you enjoy your home, and then it becomes a burden, be ready to make one more move. My mantra during those times is ODAAT, one day at a time, because you can't do it all in a week."
- William Dorner
Read more »

The thief of joy

"Mike, so far, so good. Maybe they realise that I'm just not worth marketing to!"
- greg_j_tomamichel
Read more »

Mourning the World

"There were 4 deaths during past 3 months in our 55+ community. It is devastating to everyone, especially survivors. My learnings: Focus on relationships, spend time wisely, and be well prepared for end of life. Jonathan, Thanks for showing us what truly matters."
- smr1082
Read more »

The Quiet Failure of Good Advice

"Rick, Thank you for volunteering as a tax preparer. I do the same myself. There is a non-profit that provides free financial literacy. The program includes mentors who meet online with students to give feedback. You can volunteer to become a mentor, which requires no formal certification or experience. The program trains volunteers on what to know and what to expect. For each student, you meet with them three times over the course of a year. Each meeting is 90 - 120 minutes on date that is mutually chosen by both parties. For more information, the program is 3rd Decade. https://3rddecade.org/"
- Hall Plante
Read more »

Mega Backdoor Roth

I WAS RECENTLY asked about strategies that high earners can use to reduce their tax bill.

Most people know the usual options. They contribute to a 401(k), fund a health savings account or make a Roth IRA contribution through the backdoor method. Business owners may have additional opportunities through retirement plans and business structures.

But there's another strategy worth knowing about: the Mega Backdoor Roth (MBDR).

The MBDR allows some workers to put far more money into Roth accounts than the usual contribution limits permit.

Consider somebody who contributes the maximum $24,500 to a 401(k) in 2026 and receives a $5,000 employer match. If the employer's retirement plan allows after-tax contributions, that worker may be able to contribute an additional $42,500 to the retirement plan.

This is because the total 401(k) contribution limit for 2026 is $72,000. That limit includes employee contributions, employer contributions and after-tax contributions. Subtract the $24,500 employee contribution and the $5,000 employer match, and there's room for another $42,500. Workers age 50 and older might be able to contribute even more ($80,000 total 401(k) limit in 2026) because of catch-up provisions.

For savers who have already exhausted other retirement account options, this can be a powerful way to build additional tax-free savings.

The catch

Your employer's retirement plan must permit after-tax contributions.

Many plans don't. According to Fidelity, only about 11% of employer-sponsored 401(k) plans offer MBDR conversions.

If you log into your retirement plan and review your contribution options, you may see a category labeled "after-tax." That's the option you need:

Importantly, don't confuse it with a Roth 401(k). They're similar, but different. Small-business owners with a solo 401(k) may also be able to use this strategy if their plan allows.

The MBDR process generally involves two steps:

  1. Contribute money to the plan's after-tax account.
  2. Move those funds to a Roth account.

Depending on your plan, the money may be rolled into either a Roth IRA or a Roth 401(k).

The rules vary from plan to plan. Check your plan documents or summary plan description before enganging in this strategy.

Why use it?

Suppose you've already maxed out your traditional 401(k) contribution and completed a backdoor Roth IRA contribution. You now have additional money to invest.

One option is a taxable brokerage account. Another is the Mega Backdoor Roth.

The Roth strategy offers several potential advantages:

  • Future growth can be tax-free.
  • Dividends aren't taxed each year.
  • Rebalancing investments doesn't trigger taxable gains.
  • Retirement assets may receive creditor protection under federal law.

A taxable brokerage account also has advantages:

  • No contribution limits.
  • No age-based withdrawal rules.
  • Greater flexibility if you need access to the money before retirement.

That flexibility shouldn't be overlooked. Retirement accounts come with restrictions, and those restrictions may matter depending on your goals.

Importantly, some plans allow you to move after-tax contributions to either Roth IRA or Roth 401(k) accounts. A Roth 401(k) may be simpler because some plans offer automatic conversions. A Roth IRA typically offers a wider range of investment choices. It may also provide greater flexibility when it comes to withdrawals.

I generally prefer the Roth IRA option when it's available. Still, either choice can work well.

Mind the earnings

After-tax contributions are usually invested while they remain in the 401(k).

If the account earns money before the conversion takes place, those earnings are taxable when moved to the Roth account. For that reason, many investors try to complete the conversion quickly. Some plans even allow automatic conversions.

Suppose you contribute $10,000 to the after-tax portion of your 401(k). Before the conversion occurs, the account earns $100.

You then move the balance to a Roth IRA. The entire $10,100 can be transferred, but the $100 of earnings will generally be taxable if you put it all into Roth IRA. There are plans that allow you to split between Roth and Traditional, which could be helpful.

At year-end, you'll receive Form 1099-R reporting the transaction.

Using the example above, your tax return would show a $10,100 distribution, with $100 generally treated as taxable income.

If you work with a tax professional, make sure they understand exactly what happened. The reporting isn't especially complicated, but it should be handled correctly.

The Mega Backdoor Roth isn't available to everybody. But for those whose retirement plans allow it, the strategy offers a chance to put a substantial amount of additional money into a Roth account and enjoy tax-free growth for years to come.

Have you used this strategy to contribute to your retirement accounts? Let us know in the comments!

 

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

Read more »

Time to share our financial info with children?

"Being an only child, my parent's estate was very simple. I had helped my dad realize he needed a will and directed him to a good attorney to prepare it. I have helped my relatives get their wills and assets in order. It made things so much easier. As far as disclosure of dollars in accounts, I am ambivalent. I knew my parent's financials. I helped one relative set up his estate to pass to his son. His son chose not to know the details. He just did not emotionally want to deal with it. I was with the son after his dad's passing. I walked him through the steps to take in the days after the funeral. Step one...call the estate attorney. It worked out OK not to know the details."
- Harold Tynes
Read more »

Peter Cancro from age 14 to 69 covered in oil and vinegar

"The other factor in the healthcare realm is those that can’t afford healthcare still get sick and injured and the hospital writes the expense off but then raises rates to recoup the losses. This results in those that do have health insurance paying higher premiums. Also if there is bifurcated wealth in a country sure the wealthy can prop up the economy to some degree. The poor mostly limits their spending to fulfilling their needs necessary to survive, ie have little to no disposable income. In this type of economy there eventually are not enough wealthy citizens spending to grow the economy. You need a strong middle class with larger number of people doing well enough to buy more than the essentials. This can be accomplished by more of the poor being elevated to the middle class. If this occurs companies have more people to sell to which would result in greater profits which then makes the wealth wealthier. I summary then, helping the poor earn more increases the wealth of the rich. It doesn’t have to be an I win, you lose society, but everyone wins."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Bucket Strategy

A WHILE BACK, I was speaking with a fellow who had recently retired. He shared this observation, only half-jokingly: “Working was easy,” he said. What he meant was that financial management during our working years is more straightforward than it is in retirement. We earn and save and hope that our savings grow. But when we get to retirement, it becomes more complicated to know exactly how to manage those savings. In the 1950s, a Ph.D. student named Harry Markowitz developed a framework to help investors answer this question. His approach, which is now known as modern portfolio theory, provided new insights on how to effectively diversify a portfolio. He later won a Nobel Prize for this work. But useful as it was, modern portfolio theory involved a lot of math and didn’t offer investors any practical help in managing their savings. Other academic theories have emerged over the years, but all of them involved similar levels of complexity. It was for that reason that in 1985, financial planner Harold Evensky developed an idea that’s now known as the “bucket strategy.” The idea is that investors—especially those in retirement—should segment their portfolios. To understand this idea, we can look at a simple example. Suppose Tom is a recent retiree and planning to withdraw 5% of his portfolio each year for the next several years. To protect against a potential stock market downturn, it would be reasonable for him to hold five years worth of withdrawals in some combination of cash and short-term bonds, since that corresponds, more or less, to the length of the worst stock market downturns we’ve seen in modern times.  In Evensky’s model, cash and bonds would be the first bucket, and the math is straightforward: If Tom wants to withdraw 5% each year and wants to set aside enough for five years, then he’d hold 25% (that is, 5% x 5) in the first bucket. With that 25% allocated to bonds for stability, Tom could then feel free to allocate the remaining 75% to stocks. The benefit of this structure is that Tom would then have the flexibility to withdraw from either the stock or bond side of his portfolio depending on where the stock market stood in any given year. Most importantly, by putting a wall between his stocks and his bonds, Tom would be able to avoid selling stocks during market downturns. The bucket concept can be very useful, but it’s important to know that there isn’t just one bucket strategy. Since Evensky first introduced the idea 40 years ago, a handful of alternatives have evolved. Evensky’s original structure consisted of just two buckets. This makes it simple and easy to manage. A downside, though, is that bonds can still lose money, so neither of the two buckets could be considered truly safe. In 2022, in fact, total-bond market funds lost more than 10% of their value, and it took several years for investors to get back to even. Thus, one of the most popular ways to structure a bucket portfolio is to add a third bucket, for cash. To be sure, cash doesn’t offer much growth potential. But it would’ve been extremely helpful in a year like 2022, when both bonds and stocks lost money. While it provides more protection, the downside of a three-bucket approach is that it’s more complicated and somewhat harder to manage. Proponents, however, argue that it doesn’t require much more effort than traditional portfolio rebalancing and is well worth the effort. In his book, The Aspirational Investor, Ashvin Chhabra lays out another bucket alternative. Chhabra is less concerned with the distinction between bonds and cash. Instead, he advises investors to focus on the riskier side of their portfolios. He suggests that investors distinguish between standard, publicly-traded stock market investments and any alternative assets, such as private funds and real estate, that they might hold. Chhabra feels this segmentation is important because of the nature of alternative investments. They’re a little like lottery tickets: They can turn into home runs but can also go to zero. If you’re constructing a portfolio and like the idea of a bucket approach, which way should you go?  Since each of these approaches has merit, you could combine them all, creating a four-bucket setup, consisting of cash, bonds, stocks and alternatives. That wouldn’t be unreasonable, but it would also ratchet up the complexity level. Here’s the approach I recommend: First, like Chhabra, I would draw a distinction between traditional assets and alternatives. Traditional, publicly-traded investments, including standard stock and bond mutual funds and ETFs, would go in your core portfolio. These are the assets around which you’d build your plan.  Alternatives, if you own them, would go in their own separate bucket. In general, I don’t recommend these types of assets because their performance is more variable and more unpredictable, and because they tend to carry higher fees. But if you already own some alternatives, I’d separate them from your financial plan and view them only as a bonus if they deliver value. In other words, make sure that your financial plan will still work if you were to rely on only your core portfolio. Within the core, I’d have just two buckets: one for stocks and one for bonds. The result is that you would have just two buckets, plus alternatives, if you happen to own them. But what about cash, since, as we saw earlier, bonds aren’t guaranteed and can certainly lose money? In my view, a dedicated, separate cash bucket isn’t necessary. Instead, what I recommend is to be diligent in diversifying your bond holdings. I wouldn’t own a total-bond market fund. Instead, take a building block approach, holding some short-term and some intermediate-term bond funds. Short-term funds will shine when rates are rising because they’ll decline much less than total-market funds. Intermediate-term bonds, on the other hand, will shine when rates are dropping. You could also add some inflation-protected bonds to round out your holdings. At the end of the day, the best portfolio structure is the one that’s simple to manage while also protecting your savings from whatever surprises the market delivers.   Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

A $1,000 Conversation With My Daughter

"You are right Mark there is a bit of politics involved in the post but you walked the tightrope brilliantly and kept the post objectively about finance. Bravo!"
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

ChatGPT’s Portfolio Advice

"I used Boldin a few years ago with a trial, downloaded the information then cancelled the membership. Once we both claim Social Security I will start an actual membership and run the numbers with those inputs to see where we stand. I realized that with Boldin’s Monte Carlo I no longer need to pay for a financial advisor to do the work."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Reflections on a Quiet Failure

"“For example, I have several friends with income from annuities, none of them can tell me if they are variable or fixed.” In a similar vein I was a talking finance with my next door neighbor yesterday. He works for Fidelity and his wife is retiring from her position as a school principal. He told me his wife had a pension. I asked him if it included inflation adjustments and he had no idea. I explained the importance this way He decided he should check even though he would have no say in the matter."
- DavidHLancaster
Read more »

Setting the Hook, Reeling In the Fish

"The soundness of Roth conversions varies from case to case. You and Bogdan (Mega Backdoor Roth) describe worthwhile strategies.  Your final sentence best describes the point I was making; …. I don’t do steak dinners, I cook my own….  Enjoy that new grill!"
- Dan Smith
Read more »

Money and Me

JONATHAN CLEMENTS’S final book was released this week. Titled Money and Me, it traces the arc of Jonathan’s nearly four-decade career as a personal finance columnist.

Money and Me starts with the story of a man named George Cope, who was a nineteenth century tobacco baron. At the time of his death in 1888, Cope was one of Britain’s richest men. But within just two generations, his fortune was gone. Why? Cope’s daughter was the sole heir to her father’s fortune, but she lived what Jonathan described as a Downton Abbey lifestyle, on an estate in the Cotswolds with five homes and eight children. Before long, the fortune was gone.

This story was of interest to Jonathan because George Cope was his great-great-grandfather. He called it the “big family story” and explains that this hard financial lesson was imprinted on everyone in his family from a young age.

In part because of this family story, Jonathan got interested in personal finance, and, among his peers, was early in focusing on the psychology of money. “I like to think I’m rational in the way I spend my dollars, and I suspect most readers do, too. We are, of course, deluding ourselves,” he wrote.

Early in his career, Jonathan covered mutual funds for Forbes, then The Wall Street Journal. Each week, he'd review a different fund and interview the fund’s manager. From that vantage point, he was early in recognizing a reality about Wall Street: that they’re great marketers but not such great investment managers. After reviewing scores of actively-managed funds, Jonathan came to the conclusion that index funds were a better way to go for most investors.

Since the investing question was “solved,” as he put it, by index funds, Jonathan turned his attention to other domains in personal finance. The relationship between money and happiness was of particular interest. Though he acknowledged that each of us has a happiness “set point” that is largely fixed, he pointed out that our happiness level isn’t entirely fixed. There’s plenty we can do to move the needle.

A chapter titled “15 Ways to Happy” includes a number of practical suggestions. Among them: Jonathan always recommended making plans—especially vacation plans—far in advance. Why? “Often, the best part of a purchase or experience is the anticipation, he explained.And since it doesn’t cost more to book early—indeed, it often costs less—that was his recommendation.

Jonathan leaned heavily on academic research and helped translate its findings for everyday investors. In Money and Me, he explains concepts from psychology including the hedonic treadmill, eudaimonic happiness and many others. Jonathan acknowledged that there’s no magic wand for achieving happiness. On the other hand, he explains why a million-dollar salary isn’t a necessary ingredient for financial contentment.

Jonathan also wrote a lot about spending. On the one hand, owing to his family’s experience, he developed frugal habits early in life, and he was grateful that those habits led to financial independence by age 50. On the other hand, he knew that frugality could be taken too far. In a chapter titled “Don’t Overdo It,” Jonathan offers a menu of ideas to help others who might similarly struggleto loosen the purse strings.

Jonathan had two children and thought a lot about how best to convey money values to them. He knew the risk in helping too much. Money doesn’t necessarily kill all ambition. But it seems to put a big dent in financial ambition, he wrote. For that reason, Jonathan mostly emphasized education rather than direct financial assistance. 

He describes, however, one important way in which his own parents helped him: They always made it clear that they were there for him as a backstop. Though he might have never needed it, simply knowing this support was in the background gave Jonathan the confidence to always invest heavily in the stock market. He describes maintaining an allocation to stocks that was regularly above 80% or even 90%. That kind of aggressive investing ran contrary to the textbook. But recognizing the benefit it had provided during strong markets over the years, Jonathan offered a similar backstop to his own children, thus allowing them to take risks that they might not have otherwise.

In choosing a heavy allocation to stocks, Jonathan explains some of the other factors that went into his thinking. For starters, he points to the role of financial forecasters. They’re often wrong, but that doesn’t stop them from waking up the next day with something new to say. As a result, during both stock market rallies and routs, prognosticators can be found on TV telling stories that often cause investors to overreact. In the chapter “Not Scared of Bears,” Jonathan walks through the math that should give investors the courage to ignore forecasters, to keep their feet on the ground and to stay fully invested regardless of what bad news happens to be in the headlines.

Jonathan was willing to pile on even more risk in his portfolio when markets declined. He acknowledged that this opened him up to the accusation of being a market timer—“pretty much the nastiest insult you can hurl”—but he explains a subtle difference between his approach and true market timing, then offers a helpful strategy for profiting from downturns.

Jonathan Clements was one of a kind. Like all of his readers, I miss his kindness, wit and good cheer. For decades, he helped readers navigate the potholed road known as Wall Street. With his final work, Jonathan leaves us with a timeless guide to thinking about money in uniquely sensible ways.

  Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Read more »

Moving is Expensive!

"Of course moving is expensive, you must have known that. Yes, been there done that in 2016 and since moved into an Independent Living CCRC in 2022. Most people move here in their 70's to 80's, but some later. Average age here is 83, 2/3 women and 50 couples out of 234 apartments. Once you are moved in all the hassle is gone. And our CCRC has assisted living, memory care, and nursing when needed. After you enjoy your home, and then it becomes a burden, be ready to make one more move. My mantra during those times is ODAAT, one day at a time, because you can't do it all in a week."
- William Dorner
Read more »

Mega Backdoor Roth

I WAS RECENTLY asked about strategies that high earners can use to reduce their tax bill.

Most people know the usual options. They contribute to a 401(k), fund a health savings account or make a Roth IRA contribution through the backdoor method. Business owners may have additional opportunities through retirement plans and business structures.

But there's another strategy worth knowing about: the Mega Backdoor Roth (MBDR).

The MBDR allows some workers to put far more money into Roth accounts than the usual contribution limits permit.

Consider somebody who contributes the maximum $24,500 to a 401(k) in 2026 and receives a $5,000 employer match. If the employer's retirement plan allows after-tax contributions, that worker may be able to contribute an additional $42,500 to the retirement plan.

This is because the total 401(k) contribution limit for 2026 is $72,000. That limit includes employee contributions, employer contributions and after-tax contributions. Subtract the $24,500 employee contribution and the $5,000 employer match, and there's room for another $42,500. Workers age 50 and older might be able to contribute even more ($80,000 total 401(k) limit in 2026) because of catch-up provisions.

For savers who have already exhausted other retirement account options, this can be a powerful way to build additional tax-free savings.

The catch

Your employer's retirement plan must permit after-tax contributions.

Many plans don't. According to Fidelity, only about 11% of employer-sponsored 401(k) plans offer MBDR conversions.

If you log into your retirement plan and review your contribution options, you may see a category labeled "after-tax." That's the option you need:

Importantly, don't confuse it with a Roth 401(k). They're similar, but different. Small-business owners with a solo 401(k) may also be able to use this strategy if their plan allows.

The MBDR process generally involves two steps:

  1. Contribute money to the plan's after-tax account.
  2. Move those funds to a Roth account.

Depending on your plan, the money may be rolled into either a Roth IRA or a Roth 401(k).

The rules vary from plan to plan. Check your plan documents or summary plan description before enganging in this strategy.

Why use it?

Suppose you've already maxed out your traditional 401(k) contribution and completed a backdoor Roth IRA contribution. You now have additional money to invest.

One option is a taxable brokerage account. Another is the Mega Backdoor Roth.

The Roth strategy offers several potential advantages:

  • Future growth can be tax-free.
  • Dividends aren't taxed each year.
  • Rebalancing investments doesn't trigger taxable gains.
  • Retirement assets may receive creditor protection under federal law.

A taxable brokerage account also has advantages:

  • No contribution limits.
  • No age-based withdrawal rules.
  • Greater flexibility if you need access to the money before retirement.

That flexibility shouldn't be overlooked. Retirement accounts come with restrictions, and those restrictions may matter depending on your goals.

Importantly, some plans allow you to move after-tax contributions to either Roth IRA or Roth 401(k) accounts. A Roth 401(k) may be simpler because some plans offer automatic conversions. A Roth IRA typically offers a wider range of investment choices. It may also provide greater flexibility when it comes to withdrawals.

I generally prefer the Roth IRA option when it's available. Still, either choice can work well.

Mind the earnings

After-tax contributions are usually invested while they remain in the 401(k).

If the account earns money before the conversion takes place, those earnings are taxable when moved to the Roth account. For that reason, many investors try to complete the conversion quickly. Some plans even allow automatic conversions.

Suppose you contribute $10,000 to the after-tax portion of your 401(k). Before the conversion occurs, the account earns $100.

You then move the balance to a Roth IRA. The entire $10,100 can be transferred, but the $100 of earnings will generally be taxable if you put it all into Roth IRA. There are plans that allow you to split between Roth and Traditional, which could be helpful.

At year-end, you'll receive Form 1099-R reporting the transaction.

Using the example above, your tax return would show a $10,100 distribution, with $100 generally treated as taxable income.

If you work with a tax professional, make sure they understand exactly what happened. The reporting isn't especially complicated, but it should be handled correctly.

The Mega Backdoor Roth isn't available to everybody. But for those whose retirement plans allow it, the strategy offers a chance to put a substantial amount of additional money into a Roth account and enjoy tax-free growth for years to come.

Have you used this strategy to contribute to your retirement accounts? Let us know in the comments!

 

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

Read more »

Free Newsletter

Get Educated

Manifesto

NO. 60: WE SHOULDN’T necessarily be investment contrarians, but we should be leery of crowds. When “everybody” is buying, that’s a warning sign—and we should resist joining the stampede.

think

REBALANCING. For major market segments—emerging markets, high-quality bonds, small-cap stocks and so on—we should have target portfolio percentages. Every so often, we should bring our portfolio back into line with these targets, preferably making any sales in a tax-deferred account. Rebalancing controls risk—but it can also boost returns.

humans

NO. 25: WE LIKE the idea of choice—but we’re often happier when we have less of it. Welcome to the so-called paradox of choice: If we’re presented with too many options, we can become paralyzed and fail to make a decision, plus all the choice leads to added anxiety. Exhibit A: 401(k) plans, where more options often cause employees to make poorer investment decisions.

Truths

NO. 55: UPSIDE GAINS are a sign of downside risk. Investors will say they don’t care how quickly an investment rises, only about how fast it might fall. But if an investment’s price skyrockets, there's a risk it’ll plunge just as rapidly. The lesson: Pay attention to measures of volatility such as beta and standard deviation—and be leery of soaring stocks and funds.

Our favorite investment: index funds

Manifesto

NO. 60: WE SHOULDN’T necessarily be investment contrarians, but we should be leery of crowds. When “everybody” is buying, that’s a warning sign—and we should resist joining the stampede.

Spotlight: Abuse

Is It Safe to use ChatGPT on your iPhone?

My first home computer was a Comodore 64.  Let us not dwell on when that was in terms of the year.  Suffice it to say that it was long ago.  My first PC when I was employed  was an IBM PC with 2 5 1/4’ floppy drives, and no hard drive.  It cost the company maybe $5500.  I have owned many PCs since then.  So, even though I clearly remember using old tech like wired phones,

Read more »

Forget the Check

THE HOLIDAY SEASON used to be a time when we’d write and mail more checks than usual. Some were gifts to family, while others were year-end charitable donations. But with the rise in mail theft and check washing, we’ve been on a campaign to limit the number of checks we write, plus we’ve almost eliminated the mailing of checks. Here are eight things we’ve done to reduce our exposure to check fraud:

We opened a secondary no-fee checking account and opted out of the overdraft protection.

Read more »

Ten Important Security Tips

I was making a payment on Zelle recently which our landlord requires us to use to pay our rent. I had completed the process when I suddenly got an alert that I needed to make the payment again as they were having technical problems. This was a red flag to me so I did not make another payment.
I then looked at our checking account online and saw that my payment had been deducted. I also got a text confirmation from the bank.

Read more »

Lost Property

OUR COMMUNITY HAS a Facebook-like online forum called Nextdoor. I tend to ignore the posts, which usually involve things like items for sale and new restaurant openings. But a recent post caught my eye—because it was from the Montgomery County Recorder of Deeds.
The article said Pennsylvania’s Attorney General had initiated a lawsuit against a realty company for deceptive practices targeting elderly, low-income and minority homeowners. The realty company was offering a “Homeowner Benefit Program” that gives homeowners anywhere from $400 to $1,000 upfront to lock into a contract.

Read more »

Fool’s Gold

I RECENTLY LEARNED that crooks like to use tungsten to defraud gold investors. Here’s how it works: Gold bars are typically validated by weight. If a standard size bar clocks in at the expected weight, it’s assumed to be pure. But tungsten, it turns out, has a very similar density to gold. Crooks will drill out a bar’s core, fill it with tungsten and then cover their tracks by applying a thin veneer of gold.

Read more »

Taking the Keys

DO YOU REMEMBER the headline, “Brooke Astor’s Son Guilty in Scheme to Defraud Her”? He swindled his famous mother out of millions, once by pocketing a $2 million commission on the sale of an Impressionist painting he purloined from her New York City apartment. She lived to age 105 but suffered from dementia.
F. Scott Fitzgerald purportedly said, “The rich are different than you and me.” But maybe not when it comes to elder fraud.

Read more »

Spotlight: Ehart

Own Worst Enemy

IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, you’re always tempted to do something with your portfolio. How should I invest if inflation stays high? What if interest rates come down? Am I well-positioned for that? Do bonds offer a better risk-reward than stocks right now and, if so, should I adjust my long-held stock-bond mix? There’s been recent research and commentary, including two pieces from HumbleDollar’s Adam Grossman that you can find here and here, about how doing less is usually better and how to recognize when making a change makes sense. But why is standing pat usually better than acting on our latest ideas? Among other things, we can get thrown off track by fear, greed and the news. Sometimes, that fear is the fear of losing money. Sometimes, it’s fear of missing out on a big market rally. I’m feeling that these days, with all the rage over tech stocks because of AI, or artificial intelligence. Here’s an obvious example of fear at work: selling when the stock market is down big. At such times, the headlines will be scary and the prophets of doom will seem prescient. You have no way of knowing whether the market will keep falling. In the short term, it’s a coin toss. The stock market certainly can and likely will fall 30%-plus multiple times during your investment career. But it’s a bad decision to sell. How do I know? Because the odds are overwhelming that you’re reacting to fear and that you’ll miss the rebound. If that happens, you’ve lost an opportunity to make money that can’t be recovered. That happens to many investors over and over. Similarly, in many other situations, the urge to act should also be resisted. The fact is, the information environment is stacked against you. Truly insightful journalism—especially that which…
Read more »

No A for Effort

LESS IS MORE when it comes to investing. Less effort. Fewer transactions. Lower costs. Less worry. Lower taxes. Less ego. Less clickbait. We’re wired to try hard. To do well. Especially if you’ve had some success in your life, and built up some money to invest, you probably got there by working harder than others. Problem is, the same rule doesn’t apply to investing. There is no A for effort. But there is an F for frenetic. The good news is, there’s a simple way. You can grow wealth by matching the market—with index funds—instead of vainly trying to beat it. Broadly diversified low-cost balanced, asset allocation and target-date funds also can be good choices. It’s the pursuit of market-beating funds that can do us in, since past outperformance does not predict future outperformance. What will you do when yesterday’s top fund manager lags the market for the ensuing two or three years? Will you agonize, switch to the next hot fund, rinse and repeat? Just matching the market can be plenty lucrative. While we’re working, most of us will have the opportunity to invest regularly and let our money compound over several decades. Let’s assume you had done just that over the past 30 years. You made an initial $3,000 investment in a tax-deferred account on June 1, 1989, in the Vanguard 500 Index Fund. Then you added $400 a month through May 31, 2019. (In truth, you should try to invest more. This is just an eminently doable example, especially if you have a 401(k) with a company match.) According to PortfolioVisualizer.com, your money would have compounded at about 9% a year, in line with the historical average for U.S. stocks. Boring you say? What would you say to $717,000? I thought so. There’s no guarantee that your…
Read more »

Reflation Nation

RAMPANT SPECULATION in parts of the market has been obvious for months. Less obvious is whether investors collectively will pay a substantial price for it. Can a reflation trade end up piercing a market bubble? Stocks posted solid gains in February—with the S&P 500 touching a record high on Feb. 12—but the final week felt a bit precarious, even if the benchmark ended the month down just 3.5% from that high. (Insert your favorite adjective to describe the correction so far: normal, frequent, healthy, necessary.) But some investors appear concerned that a sharp spike in Treasury yields may be changing the market calculus. The 10-year yield hit its highest level in a year at 1.51% on Feb. 25. That’s just a touch below the S&P 500’s 1.53% dividend yield. The S&P’s earnings yield—the inverse of the price-earnings ratio—is now at its lowest level in three years versus the 10-year Treasury yield. Those two points matter because higher bond yields now offer greater competition for investor dollars. While the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (symbol: IVV) gained 2.8% in February, energy, leisure and financial shares surged double-digits. The Vanguard Energy ETF (VDE) jumped more than 22%. Indeed, commodity prices are red hot. Copper is up 20% year to date and has nearly doubled since its March 2020 low. Gold, however, has been left out. The SPDR Gold Shares ETF (GLD) fell more than 6% last month. Small- and mid-cap value gained strongly in February, followed by microcaps, despite a sharp pullback for the latter in the final week. The iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC), up 65% over 12 months, gained more than 6% in February, even after factoring in a nearly 5% drop in the last week. The Vanguard Small-Cap Growth ETF (VBK) also fell 5%. Large-cap growth lagged value again, with…
Read more »

Resolve to Rebalance

I CAN TELL I’M a little squishy on my investment plan, because the thought of making a public New Year’s resolution fills me with all the dread of a reluctant groom. As I linger outside my metaphorical church, I imagine my bride wants to shackle me to allocation targets and rebalancing rules that I announce to the whole congregation. My aversion to such commitments competes with my realization that—without them—I’ll be back to my free-wandering self. But freedom’s just another word for… never getting to kiss the bride. It can mean wondering every darn day whether it’s time to take profits, buy the dip or indulge my latest get-rich-quicker scheme. Freedom allows us to respond to our emotions, which rarely leads to sound decisions. I have asset allocation targets, such as 20% developed foreign stocks, 7% emerging markets, 5% real estate investment trusts, 3% inflation-indexed Treasury bonds—and 5% for a satellite position that allows me to make a small bet on any asset I think might outperform, which is currently foreign small-cap value stocks. But I haven’t set hard and fast triggers for rebalancing. Do I bring the portfolio back to all targets every year-end? Every two years? Or adjust each asset class when it strays too much from my target percentage? What if it’s a long-suffering asset class? Wouldn’t I want to let it run above target for a bit before rebalancing? How about my satellite position—when do I take profits there, assuming I realize any? How long do I stick with the original bet before making a new one? Meanwhile, what about my overall stock allocation target, which—at age 58—is currently 72% of my overall portfolio? Do I reduce that by a percentage point every year as I age, as I tentatively plan to do? Or do I…
Read more »

Right From Wrong

I’VE BEEN WRONG many times, as I’ve noted in earlier articles. But the past few months have made me—and maybe you—look like an investment genius. I’ve had some nice “wins” since March 13, when I started buying the stock market dip. Does that make me brilliant? Of course not. Was I “right”? That depends on how I made my decisions. A quick profit doesn’t necessarily mean I made the right call. Too often, when we analyze our investment moves, we judge them by whether we made money—and usually our focus is short term. We wanna know if we were “right” right away. But that’s the wrong way to look at it. As Wall Street Journal investment columnist Jason Zweig reminded readers recently, he touched on this topic in 1999. He was writing then about assessing whether certain investment strategies “worked.” “More than ever, people think the test of an investment’s validity is whether it ‘worked'.… But investing successfully over the course of a lifetime has nothing to do with being right in the short term.… Imagine that two places are 130 miles apart. If I observe the 65-mph speed limit, I’ll drive this distance in two hours. But if I go 130 mph, I can get there in just one hour. If I try this and survive, am I ‘right’?” Exactly right. That is to say, no, he would be wrong. Evaluating an investment over a long period gets closer to answering the right vs. wrong question. But even then, the result doesn’t wholly validate or invalidate the decision. Eight years ago, was I “wrong” to buy Pepsi and Coca-Cola instead of Apple for my son and daughter, respectively, when I wanted to teach them about investing? It’s hard to say I was “right.” Since the purchases, Apple has returned 375%, versus…
Read more »

Reader Beware

I ONCE DREAMED OF writing for one of the high-profile personal finance magazines—but that was before I had a rude awakening about the “journalism” they sometimes committed. As a mid-career business journalist at a respectable daily newspaper, teaching myself about investing, I had looked up to these magazines, then in their heyday, and viewed them as a career possibility. My worlds came together one day when a top magazine ran a story touting the stock of the electric utility that served my area. The reporter quoted a sell-side Wall Street analyst as saying the stock was one of his top picks. I called the analyst so I could write my own story. No, he explained, he wasn’t that high on electric utilities in general, though my local utility was a decent one within the sector. It seems the reporter had been assigned to write a story about how attractive utility stocks were, and that’s what the reporter did. His editor deserves most of the blame. Or perhaps the blame lies with the personal finance magazine business model, which requires hyping new investments every issue. I was stunned. I told the analyst that my own newspaper would have fired me for an act of such dishonesty. Suddenly, the “big time” magazines in the Big Apple weren’t so appealing. Today, the personal finance magazines are leaner and some have folded. Still, advertisements and headlines proliferate on the internet under every stock or exchange-traded fund quote you call up. “Open a gold IRA.” “Former CIA economist sees depression ahead.” “Three most-popular stocks on Robinhood you should buy now.” “Rare all-in buy alert.” “Tech stocks to buy for crypto exposure.” “The #1 Stock to Buy Right Now.” At least those are just advertisements. Almost as bad are some of the online personal finance news…
Read more »