FREE NEWSLETTER

Want to feel short? Hang out with people who are tall. Want to feel poor? Hang out with folks who are rich.

Latest PostsAll Discussions »

Would You Be Miserable?

"Not really. Our four children are 51 to 56"
- R Quinn
Read more »

Reflections on a Quiet Failure

"Yes, that's exactly what you said; my bad."
- Dan Smith
Read more »

How to Use AI With Your Portfolio

"Since I believe strongly in both the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid) and the value of benign neglect, and also have no interest in providing personal data to big companies, I will not pursue this. Aside from one current account, all my finances are consolidated at Vanguard, and it provides my asset allocation on the home page, with additional detail available if required. It also reports my total fees as a percentage."
- mytimetotravel
Read more »

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

"I like their turkey club. I’m going to try the cheesesteak though."
- R Quinn
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 »

Time to share our financial info with children?

"I urge you to share, RDQ, with all four of your children. I suspect it will remove a huge, perhaps subconscious, load from your shoulders. My father began sharing his financial information with me, an only child, when I was in my 20s. Then, I hated it, as he reviewed his accounts and investment deliberations in great detail; I barely had the patience to listen. I also never counted on inheriting (the step family situation was fluid), and these talks did not alter my savings path. Over time, I grew to respect my father for sharing. I learned much, too. As his eventual executor, my understanding of his finances made my work that much easier. I already had a checklist. And the best part was that my father asked what I would do were I to inherit. We spoke of philanthropy and it pleased him to know that his money would be put to good use. He passed two decades ago, but I feel him with me to this day as I realize my giving plans."
- Jo Bo
Read more »

A $1,000 Conversation With My Daughter

"Dan, my youngest daughter has never been great at listening to her old dad — so I figured I'd meet her where she lives. Sent it to her on WhatsApp. Funny how a phone screen carries more authority than I do. 😉"
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

The Quiet Failure of Good Advice

"Do you spend exclusively out of your equities until a downtrend? And if so, how do you define a downtrend/tizzy to make the switch from spending from equity allocation to begin spending from cash allocation?"
- Andy Morrison
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 »

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 »

Terms of the Trade

CONSUMER ECONOMICS and media literacy have evolved to become important fields of study, analyzing the way consumers make decisions—and how those decisions can be nudged. Here are 20 of the tricks and techniques used by marketers and others: Aspirational buying. When consumers are encouraged to live like those they admire, even if they can’t afford it. Bandwagon appeal. The psychological nudge to do—or consume—something because others are doing it. Also known as FOMO, or fear of missing out. Bundling. The practice of offering multiple, usually related, goods and services at a lower price than if each item were purchased separately. This is great if you’ll use the entire bundle, but a waste of resources and money if you don’t. Dog whistle. An indirect or implied message meant to communicate with a particular group, often placed within a broader, more general message, thus allowing the messenger to deny meaning it. It can also reinforce a “you’re an insider” sense of affiliation. Saying something is only for “the right people” can make us want to be one of those “right people." Eye candy. Visual images that are superficially attractive and entertaining but are unnecessary or unrelated to the subject at hand, such as flashing lights and attractive spokespeople. False statistics. Using graphs, charts or statistics that sound precise—yet even the four out of five dentists who preferred Trident gum can find these numbers suspect. Feedback loop. A phenomenon whereby the media, reporting a purported “hot” trend, inspires consumers to follow the trend. This seemingly confirms the initial report. Flattery. A technique where the potential consumer is complimented as part of the sales pitch. "Because you're worth it."  "Don't you deserve the best?" Such phrases induce consumers to feel good about the product, making them more likely to buy. Freemium. Giving away a base-level product for free, but then offering paid upgrades and enhancements once the buyer is hooked. A common practice in gaming. Hasty generalization. A conclusion drawn from insufficient evidence, such as ascribing the characteristic of a few members of a group to all of the group’s members. It also includes proof by anecdotal evidence. “I once knew a guy from Florida who lost weight by eating only alligator meat, so it must work.” Hedging. Subtly limiting or equivocating a claim, so as to reduce the guarantee or assertion made in the claim. “Studies indicate there may absolutely be a connection between hedging and people slipping on soap.” Hyperbole. Exaggerated claims or statements used as a tool of promotion, but not as a statement of fact. It’s only false advertising if a “reasonable person” would believe facts are being stated. Juxtaposition. Placing items, whether physical objects, pictures or statements, side by side to invite comparison. “I’m not saying it works. I’m just putting these pictures of before and after in front of you, and I’ll let you decide.” Nostalgia. Invoking simpler, better times can make us want a particular product, even if we don’t remember what those times were really like. Panache. Having a style or manner, usually indicating superior socio-economic status. Can be done by an affectation, such as giving American ice cream an exotic Dutch name, or spelling colour or theatre in the English way. Also called posing. Poisoning the well. One side introduces negative facts or perceptions about the other side, putting the other side at an immediate disadvantage. “Only an idiot would buy….”  It can include the ad hominem fallacy, where a messenger doesn’t address the substantive differences, but attacks a competitor’s or opponent’s motives or credentials. Plain folks. Having people just like you speak on behalf of a product, except—unlike you—they’re getting paid.   Stacking. Skewing experiments, data or the presentation of data in a way that helps market a good or service. One allergy pill claimed it was the only one clinically proven effective. The fine print noted it was the only pill tested in the clinical trial. Testimonial. Having a false expert—like a famous person or a guy who isn’t a doctor but plays one on TV—advocate for a product. A popular NFL quarterback was everywhere on Dallas TV as the “official spokesperson” for a brick company. Truthiness. A term coined by Stephen Colbert, it’s when the appeal is made to our “gut,” no matter what the actual data says. “Everyone knows….” It’s based on confirmation bias, our tendency to accept or reject data based on whether it supports or refutes beliefs we already hold. Jim Wasserman is a former business litigation attorney who taught economics and humanities for 20 years. Check out his follow-up article, Choice Words. Jim’s series of books on teaching behavioral economics and media literacy,  Media, Marketing, and Me, is being published in 2019. Jim lives in Granada, Spain, with his wife and fellow HumbleDollar contributor, Jiab. Together, they write a blog on retirement, finance and living abroad at YourThirdLife.com. [xyz-ihs snippet="Donate"]
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 »

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 »

Would You Be Miserable?

"Not really. Our four children are 51 to 56"
- R Quinn
Read more »

Reflections on a Quiet Failure

"Yes, that's exactly what you said; my bad."
- Dan Smith
Read more »

How to Use AI With Your Portfolio

"Since I believe strongly in both the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid) and the value of benign neglect, and also have no interest in providing personal data to big companies, I will not pursue this. Aside from one current account, all my finances are consolidated at Vanguard, and it provides my asset allocation on the home page, with additional detail available if required. It also reports my total fees as a percentage."
- mytimetotravel
Read more »

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

"I like their turkey club. I’m going to try the cheesesteak though."
- R Quinn
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 »

Time to share our financial info with children?

"I urge you to share, RDQ, with all four of your children. I suspect it will remove a huge, perhaps subconscious, load from your shoulders. My father began sharing his financial information with me, an only child, when I was in my 20s. Then, I hated it, as he reviewed his accounts and investment deliberations in great detail; I barely had the patience to listen. I also never counted on inheriting (the step family situation was fluid), and these talks did not alter my savings path. Over time, I grew to respect my father for sharing. I learned much, too. As his eventual executor, my understanding of his finances made my work that much easier. I already had a checklist. And the best part was that my father asked what I would do were I to inherit. We spoke of philanthropy and it pleased him to know that his money would be put to good use. He passed two decades ago, but I feel him with me to this day as I realize my giving plans."
- Jo Bo
Read more »

A $1,000 Conversation With My Daughter

"Dan, my youngest daughter has never been great at listening to her old dad — so I figured I'd meet her where she lives. Sent it to her on WhatsApp. Funny how a phone screen carries more authority than I do. 😉"
- Mark Crothers
Read more »

The Quiet Failure of Good Advice

"Do you spend exclusively out of your equities until a downtrend? And if so, how do you define a downtrend/tizzy to make the switch from spending from equity allocation to begin spending from cash allocation?"
- Andy Morrison
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 »

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.

Truths

NO. 72: EXPECTED return and risk change over time. Historically, commodity futures have delivered great returns and been great diversifiers for stocks—but both qualities have waned, as investors rushed to take advantage. The same may be true for the high excess return from owning value stocks, smaller companies and stocks in general.

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.

Pay down debt

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: Life Events

After Loss, Love Again

I belong to a club I never wanted to join: women who have outlived their husbands. Like me, millions of baby boomer women, and now Gen Xers too, will face life without their long-term partner.
Thankfully, today’s widows have more choices than our great-grandmothers did. Some of us embrace living solo. Others are surprised to find companionship again, sometimes even love. That next chapter can be sweet, but it’s also financially complex.
I know this firsthand.

Read more »

Turned Upside Down

FOUR MONTHS AGO, I was told I might have just a year to live. It’s been a whirlwind ever since.
I’ve been inundated with messages from acquaintances and readers, gone to countless medical appointments, my diagnosis has received a surprising amount of media attention, I’ve been hustling to organize my financial affairs, and Elaine and I have taken two trips.
Where do things stand today? Here’s what’s been going on.
Medical update. After three radiation treatments to zap the 10 cancerous lesions on my brain and an intense opening round of infusion sessions,

Read more »

The Unsettling Relief of Saying Goodbye

It would have been my mum’s 91st birthday this week. She passed two years ago this June after the long goodbye from the thousand small cuts of dementia. Although I experienced grief and sadness, it truly was a relief to bid my mum the final farewell after the long marathon of loss over many years. I gave a final kiss to the echo of the woman before me as the heat of life left mum’s body.

Read more »

Eyeing the End

Five months ago, I was loath to take any sort of medication. Today, I have a pillbox.
In fact, the way things are going, I fear I’ll soon be declared a superfund site by the Environmental Protection Agency. A seemingly endless stream of chemicals pours into my body, most notably during my every-three-week chemo and immunotherapy sessions. What about the rest of the time? Depending on the day, I might down three or four pills in the morning and one or two in the afternoon.

Read more »

Boglehead Conference

There is a Boglehead Conference in October.  Has anybody attended previous conferences? I’m considering attending and I’d appreciate your hearing about your experience. Did you find it valuable?
Thanks,
Jackie

Read more »

What Would You Take?

In 2020, the Silverado fire broke out near our city. At the time, I couldn’t imagine that fire would threaten our home because it would have to burn a large part of our town to get to us. Surely, the firefighters would have it under control before there was mass destruction. Then, the Palisades and Eaton fires this year destroyed thousands of structures fueled by low humidity and strong winds. I now realize we might not have been as safe as I thought we were.

Read more »

Spotlight: Kondrack

A Living Tribute

I have always thought that words matter.  To this end, I have followed a few financial writers whom I have admired, and whose advice I trust.  Each one has a singular quality:  one was a brilliant market  analyst, one had an uncommon knowledge of investing, and another a well known market strategist.  All were trusted providers of market analysis to the world’s  most well known institutional investors. I found one person who is the whole package.  He is Jonathan Clements. Among his writing talents, Jonathan can untangle unnecessary words, pompous frills and unnecessary jargon.  He has the ability to strip every sentence to its cleanest components.  Not a word is wasted. Jonathan has the uncanny ability to distill complex thoughts and ideas and break them down in a clear, simple way. Clear thinking becomes clear writing.  And In his creativity, he continues to find new ways to convey endless information. So many writers have a style I call herky-jerky. Their thoughts may be interesting and worthy of our attention—but there is a disconnect in their delivery.  A hallmark of Jonathan’s writing is a quality I long to possess—his ability to smoothly connect his thoughts. In addition to his financial writing, Jonathan is capable of writing about human nature, with all of its foibles, and flaws, often connecting folks financial idiosyncrasies with their quirky characteristics.  He manages to make sense of it all with his contemplative reflections. Some of the best gifts of words are ones we can share with the person we honor while they’re still alive.  Thanks, Jonathan,—Clarity, simplicity and humanity are the hallmarks of your writing.  Of Equal importance, your compassionate and humble nature. I hope you have many more years to share your talents with us, enjoy your family, and eat heaps of French fries.
Read more »

Fox in the Henhouse

ALBERT EINSTEIN reportedly once said, “The hardest thing in the world to understand is income taxes.” Which makes me wonder: How did I end up wandering into this mind-boggling field?  I like knowing how my money gets taxed because it helps me better control our finances. By managing taxes, we can significantly boost how much money we have for retirement. Why is the tax system so complicated? The system is trying to do more than just collect taxes. Congress uses the tax code to try to achieve economic and social goals, and then relies on an overburdened IRS to deliver on those plans. It would be far better for the IRS to concentrate its efforts on collecting revenue—its primary purpose—and let other federal agencies monitor social policies. The U.S. tax code is a master class in complexity. If you prepare your own return, you need a lot of patience and usually find yourself reading the instructions more than once. Today’s tax laws unnecessarily burden America's taxpayers and make voluntary tax compliance far too difficult. The two top dogs in tax-preparation software are TurboTax and H&R Block. I’ve also had good results with FreeTaxUSA. It supports most tax situations and forms, without incessant handholding. It charges if you want live help, and also for state tax returns. Now, the IRS wants to get in on the action. Its new Direct File pilot program, a free tax-filing program, is currently available in 12 states. The program doesn’t prepare state returns, nor can you use it if you itemize deductions, have more than $1,500 in interest income or claim certain tax credits. In other words, as currently designed, it’s only meant for people with simple tax situations. The thinking is that, if the pilot plan is successful, it’ll be expanded to handle more complicated returns. Some…
Read more »

Stay Informed

How many of us can proudly say we can cut through misinformation and disinformation, personal bias or prejudice? As we enter the last month of a new election year, I’m wondering how many voters are truly informed. How many voters actually delve into the politics and issues put forth by the candidates. At first glance, some may sound good, but what are the calamitous consequences of their proposed policies, if enacted.  Have you studied history and educated yourself about the problems some of the policies that they have put forth have wrought? Some folks feel that it’s become a popularity contest.  They may not like a certain candidates personality, and therefore disregard his/her Policies. While this may seem foolish, Too many surveys have proven This likely. To illustrate,  while President Joe Biden was still in the running, I heard someone remark that they would vote for him. “even if he was in a casket”, rather than vote for the opposition, no matter how good their policies were. Have the candidates put forth their policies with clarity— and can we trust them to be sincere? The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.  We have a clear view there— Kamala Harris has been vice president of our country for nigh on four years and Donald Trump was a former president four years ago.  What were their individual accomplishments?. We have a good perspective from which to form our opinion based on the records of each.  Neither one is new. Have you checked out their records and the policies they espoused? Don’t listen to what the candidate say.  Look at what they do and have done.  Try to ignore the propaganda and surface level baloney that prevents us from forming educated opinions.  Are they just selling a lot of sizzle?  Where’s…
Read more »

The Burgeoning Boomers

Youth is not making the scene the way it used to.  It has been said that baby boomers will redefine the concept and process of aging.  America is growing older. “ Gerontology, the science of aging, is a booming field because so many of us are outlasting the biblical span of “three score and ten”. So writes James Chappel, author of “Golden Years: How Americans Invented and Reinvented Old Age.” Our population is aging. This not only brings challenges to the elderly, but to their spouses, siblings and children.  In the not too distant past, older people were viewed as frail, feeble, financially strained and not contributing to society—straining the country’s impoverished safety net. But key findings show that many Americans now see aging as a time of growth and reinvention.  What was once a distinct stage of life has evolved over time.  So it’s no wonder that aging has become a major issue in what was once one of the youngest countries in the world. To illustrate:  past generations of millions of Americans watched as early TV, In the 1950s, portrayed older people as looking and acting like Fred and Ethel Mertz of the “I Love Lucy” show.  Then there was the lovable oldster, Uncle  David, of the original “The Goldbergs”show who was portrayed as mild and sweet tempered, but doddering and hard of hearing. Over time, these portrayals evolved, and in the 70s and 80s we had shows like “All in the Family”with the irascible—usually wrong, but never in doubt—Archie Bunker character. It broke ground by bringing challenging and complex issues to the mainstream.   Later, the randy older women of the “Golden Girls”set the stage for highly spirited and more vigorous seniors.  We also had the capable and keen mind of the Jessica Fletcher character in “Murder She…
Read more »

Prosperity

I never thought about becoming ultra rich. I just wanted enough money to feel financially secure and not have to think about stretching every dollar. I reached my goal, but found that the most important thing money can provide is personal freedom. However, earning or having a lot of money is not liberating to everyone. it’s all too easy for us to fall into the trap of spending too little money. Once we have worked hard or smart for many years to create income, it follows that we should enjoy it. Misers have put together a fortune and have not experienced one bit of pleasure from it. Talk about financial dysfunction. Preposterous as it may seem, countless people in elite income brackets have proven that financial independence doesn’t necessarily mean prosperity. . While money can’t buy happiness, it can add to your enjoyment of life— which is the reason for having financial independence in the first place. Living ridiculously below your means is just as financially dysfunctional as living way above your means. Since having money requires that you save it  prudently, but spend it joyfully, you may not want to sacrifice present happiness, joy, and satisfaction for a few extra dollars. Happily parting with some portion of your money can add to a feeling of prosperity. I found that viewing spending, in that context, eased away my stress and my life was enriched. Would you say you feel proud and satisfied with your spending choices? Or, is parting (with your money) such sweet sorrow.
Read more »

You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby

When I sought a good plan for investing during the 1960s,  women were discouraged from having too much interest in the male-dominated Investment world.  Then I discovered dividend investing,  and found that income is not only a path to steady returns, but also a source of comfort when the market hits maximum turbulence, as it has recently. I discovered this strategy has also become popular with people who are planning to retire early and need income—but also growth. Income from  the S&P 500 stock dividends over the last 25 years( 2004-2024)has grown an average percentage of 7.33%. While this includes both capital appreciation and dividend income,  it’s notable that dividends contributed significantly to the total return. Coincidentally, the strategy has seen the same level of annual dividend growth. When you’re getting that kind of income and it’s growing, it’s possible to outpace inflation. The comfort and consistency of a dividend income stream gave me the confidence I needed to be a successful investor. When a company that’s actually made it through the pandemic, and the great financial crisis earlier in the century, and continues to pay its dividend, there is a pretty good chance that the company is committed to it. The more challenging part of the analysis is to figure out what a company’s management and board philosophy is, beyond the dividend. Do they say they are committed to the dividend—that’s what you’re looking for.  There’s something comforting about a strategy where income—even $1,000. a month extra is consistently delivered into my account. It started with a book I read by the late Geraldine Weiss, known as “the Grand Dame of Dividends, —“Dividends Don’t Lie—”which changed the course of my investing strategy. She was also the first woman to launch a successful investment newsletter, now managed by Kelley Wright—Investment…
Read more »