I KEEP PHYSICALLY active and exercise on a semi-regular basis. Maybe not as much as my wife suggests, but enough that I feel the burn during a workout, and experience those pesky muscle group aches the next day. However, there is one muscle that I should probably exercise more, and with greater fervor, especially now that I am retired.That muscle is the brain. In my humble opinion, the brain should be considered a critical retirement asset.I am keenly aware of my diminished mental acuity as I enter my third trimester of life. My ability to sort, store, and retrieve information has weakened. Furthermore, at two years into retirement, I find that I no longer push my brain muscles for hours at a time as I did during my working years. When I do push, my focus is shorter; my thoughts are not quite as deep. Where I used to swim deep with the fishes, I now wade shallow with the minnows.I joke with friends and colleagues that, as a former scientist-researcher-educator, my brain was my most critical piece of “capital equipment”. In reality, regardless of occupation or social status, the brain serves everyone as his or her most important asset for career placement, advancement, and success.There is irony in carefully protecting a financial retirement portfolio while paying considerably less attention to the biological asset responsible for managing it. Many of us pour over our spreadsheets to ensure existing monetary assets will support our retirement years. I suggest that just like any other valuable asset, the brain requires continued monitoring. I am certainly guilty of giving my fiscal portfolio more attention than I do preserving the cognitive asset required to maintain it. During my working years, brain “maintenance” was automatic; daily doses of research investigations, teaching and writing, kept this capital equipment asset exquisitely tuned. Now that I am retired, I find that much of the built-in capital expenditure for maintaining the brain is gone. I have this extraordinarily valuable piece of equipment lying around the house (upstairs) with no scheduled maintenance program. Recognition that I require increased brain maintenance may be the first step. Perhaps all I need is simply a continued re-investment; a minor amount of intellectual capital deposited every day might do the trick to keep my most important muscle asset from depreciating.I thought to start by fortifying existing neurons. My twins bought me a subscription to Spotify, a music service that has eerily learned my likes and dislikes all too well. Figuring to rekindle teenage memories of the ‘70s, I created playlists that included the earliest albums I owned. Curiously, I am able to recall all the words from favorite songs written by The Beatles, Elton John, and The Kinks. Unfortunately these exercises can backfire. Let’s just say that once Bee Gees tunes, or associated images of John Travolta dancing in tight bell bottoms, get into your head, no amount of cognitive therapy can force them out. On the flip side, some neurons simply left no forwarding address. Try as I may, I am unable to remember anything I learned in physics or calculus from that same decade. Those capital assets left no receipts; the intellectual ledger entries have been simply wiped clean from the grey matter processing center. The creation of new neural pathways remains a challenge. I try to stay mentally engaged. While my time spent reading is probably similar to when working, the breadth of subjects has expanded. Less pure science, and more science fiction. What I really need is a way to consistently exercise and strengthen my brain’s problem-solving circuitry.I’ve tried jigsaw puzzles, however, my color deficiency leads to more frustration than completed projects. Apps are fun, but become less engaging once the logical paths to successful completion have been mastered. I tried to learn a new language, but the slow progress made me depressed.There is an oft-cited figure that it takes 10,000 deliberate and focused hours to achieve mastery in any particular field. At a realistic pace of 2 hours a day, for 6 days a week, mastery in any new field chosen would take roughly 16 years. That’s a significant time-related investment, and that investment comes with an opportunity cost. Time spent mastering one pursuit is time unavailable for another. At my current stage of life, time may actually be the capital asset in the shortest supply.I began new hobbies, such as woodworking and hydroponic gardening. Each brings the challenge of new cognitive skills. Yet I don’t engage in those activities every day. Furthermore, it seems unrealistic that these activities will hold my interest intently for the time required to master these subjects. Indeed, the only constant activity I’ve kept since retiring is that of napping. So, I guess I am on track to be a nap master in another decade or two. I could speed the process by taking longer naps, but on the surface that seems to defeat the overall goal of strengthening mental muscle growth and cognitive conditioning. For now, I am beginning to realize that the overall goal may not truly be mastery of new skills at all. Rather I should focus on continued cognitive maintenance and investment. A little intellectual capital deposited every day may not make me an expert in anything new, but perhaps it will keep my most important capital biological asset from depreciating too quickly.Jeffrey K. Actor, PhD, was a professor at a major medical school in Houston for more than 25 years, serving as an academic researcher with interests in how immune responses function to fight pathogenic diseases. Jeff’s retirement goals are to write short science fiction stories, volunteer in the community and spend time in his garden. Check out his earlier articles.
"Based on the advice I have read here over the years, I am right now making the move from Medicare Advantage to Original Medicare, a Medigap G and a Part D plan I just signed up for this morning.I had been thoroughly happy with my AARP United Healthcare MA plan, but last month I received notifications -- first from the Fred Hutch Cancer Center and then from UHC, which was odd -- that the plan was being discontinued.I called an independent health insurance agent I've worked with for several years on my wife's and my mother-in-law's Obamacare health plans. She enthusiastically recommended I take the opportunity that UHC had kindly granted to make the choice overwhelmingly preferred by the denizens of HD. So I have. My Medicap will come from Premera, a company operating only in WA and AK, and I let UHC keep my Part D business, since I really like their mail pharmacy Optum. And on we go."
"I recall Jonathan was a big believer in worldwide diversification. It was one area where I disagreed with him, not because of the diversification theory, but because of political and financial realities. A few things you mention fit that view. My view is based on three things. First, I do believe the US is still unique and will remain so for my lifetime at least. Second, I also believe that most countries lack the discipline and legal structures that encourage free enterprise, and the politicians there either slow progress by private companies or extort some of their value. Third, the rest of the world is not one market. It is hundreds of individual country markets that are often governed by facts that we in the US can't always understand, or can't address in a timely way to protect investors. It is hard enough to try to do that for the US market. I'm not saying Jonathan was wrong. International performance went strongly his way in the last few years of his life. I just don't feel comfortable with my money there."
"Two quick comments about public company calls (and reporting). First, the companies' reports and the calls about them are the 'best' that they can legally say. The reports are required by law, and ethical companies don't want to overstate or misstate anything important. At the same time, they don't want to understate their performance. That could hurt their share price. By definition, there are rarely upside surprises that can be promised or expected in advance, but the structure leaves lots of room for downside future surprises. Second, companies make lots of room for key words, i.e., words that are in vogue. Now it is AI, and affordability. It used to be equity, climate neutrality and inclusiveness. Next year, there will be new such words. One should usually read them as window dressing."
IT'S THAT TIME of year again, when college endowments report their results for the recently completed fiscal year. This year’s numbers were unusual and carry lessons for individual investors.For fiscal year 2026, which ended June 30th, some schools reported extraordinary returns. The University of North Carolina’s endowment reported a gain of nearly 38%. Washington University notched a return of more than 37%. And Stanford University’s endowment gained almost 32%.Those are strong numbers, but it was a year of haves and have-nots. The median return was a much more modest 16.1%, according to consulting firm Cambridge Associates. And some schools trailed badly. MIT’s endowment, which has historically been near the top of the leaderboard, returned just 10.3%.Why the disparity? The explanation, in short: SpaceX. Some schools—but not all—had invested in the company years before its public offering. Some had purchased shares directly, while others had exposure through venture capital funds. So when SpaceX held its IPO earlier this year at a valuation of nearly $2 trillion, these schools experienced windfalls. That explains the outstanding results at UNC, WashU and Stanford, and it explains why the median school, which had little or no exposure to SpaceX, put up much less dramatic results.What should we conclude from this? On the one hand, this seems to validate stock pickers’ argument that the right picks can make all the difference. It also seems to support those lobbying for a rule change to allow private funds into workplace 401(k)s. Advocates of this move talk about democratizing access to investments, and the impact of SpaceX certainly aligns with that argument.Despite some endowments’ success with this strategy, though, my recommendation is unchanged: For virtually all investors, I would still opt for the simplicity of index funds and would steer clear of private funds, including hedge funds, private equity and venture capital.When it comes to private funds, there are four fundamental challenges which are well understood. For starters, they’re expensive. The traditional private fund structure involves a management fee which is typically between 1% and 2%. On top of that, the manager collects a performance fee—usually 20% of the profits each year. Funds like the Robinhood Ventures Fund (ticker: RVI) offer access to a basket of private companies through a publicly-traded vehicle, and they’re similarly expensive. This fund charges more than 3%. In contrast, funds tracking the S&P 500 charge as little as 0.03%. So cost is one key factor.Private funds can also be tax-inefficient. Because they’re actively managed, the level of trading inside these funds can be significant. That leaves investors’ tax bills exposed to the whims of fund managers. A recent roundup by research firm Morningstar illustrates how investors in actively-managed mutual funds can face unpleasant tax surprises. Though the mechanism is different, the same risk applies to investors in private funds.Private funds also carry fundamentally more risk, because they aren’t required to undergo the same level of scrutiny as publicly-traded funds. That provides more room for malfeasance.And finally, private funds are generally illiquid, limiting withdrawals to periodic windows throughout the year. These restrictions have been problematic even for large university endowments, forcing them to sell investments at below-market prices. For individual investors, this sort of illiquidity could be an even larger problem. In my view, an asset that can’t be sold on demand has limited practical value, however attractive it may appear on paper.Those are some of the more commonly cited challenges with private funds. But this year’s endowment returns highlight another issue: The performance of private funds is highly variable, and that’s because the landscape of investments outside of public markets is so idiosyncratic. At the University of North Carolina, for example, half of the endowment’s returns last year came solely from its SpaceX stake. That was fortunate. But unfortunately, there’s no reliable formula to repeat that kind of success.It’s for that reason, I think, that endowment returns, on average, have been middling. According to data from the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO), the average college endowment has gained 10.0% per year over the past three fiscal years. In contrast, an investor in a simple publicly-traded stock-bond fund like the Vanguard Balanced Index Fund, would have earned 12.5% per year over that same time period.To be sure, endowments have delivered better returns than publicly-traded alternatives in other time periods. Over the past five years, for example, endowments in the NACUBO database have beaten that Vanguard fund by about one percentage point per year. The issue, though, is that there’s no pattern to these returns. If private funds start the year encumbered by high fees, tax-inefficiency and illiquidity, then they need to deliver returns that are that much better just to stay even. And there’s no guarantee that this will be the case.It’s for these reasons that I continue to recommend the simplest of investments for portfolios of all sizes.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 @AdamMGrossmanand check out his earlier articles.
"My public facing role in investments before I retired was as a CPA in local and regional firms so I hesitate to offer a legal conclusion on an adviser's recommendation responsibility. I do know that in preparing returns that I as preparer had legal obligations to not take a position that was contrary to law, rules and regulations, along with the taxpayer. The purpose of the boilerplate that no one typically reads often is to disclaim responsibility from the one selling the service."
FINANCIAL EMERGENCIES have a way of compounding when least expected. This is often coined as a correlated risk. I call it running out of clean underwear. My father used to profess, in emergencies, that turning pairs inside out was a legitimate way to extend undergarment use under duress. Financially, this is merely extending the life of a depreciating asset. I am sure my mother would have refuted this concept. Nevertheless, before you judge me too harshly, allow me to share the situational details.Three weeks ago our 7 year old washing machine, an example of aging capital equipment, began exhibiting signs of being possessed. Wash cycles were accompanied with grinding noises and violent walks across the floor. Spin cycles initiated poltergeist-like behavior, with heavy banging and metallic thuds made by nether-world demons.An internet search revealed the probable cause of the machine’s paranormal behavior, which was likely broken suspension rods or damaged shock absorbers holding the inner tub in place. After watching 8 or 9 YouTube videos, I decided that I had the inner fortitude to de-demonize our beloved washing machine. And being thrifty, I wished to avoid the major capital expenditure of replacing the washer.I consider myself handy and even pride myself on the 65% success rate for fixing household appliances. Yes, I freely admit that past performance is no guarantee of success. However, since I was attempting to maintain my existing emergency fund, I ordered new drum springs; at 7 years old it seemed financially responsible to repair rather than replace the machine. Upon arrival of the rods, I subsequently installed them in a mere 3 hours (I like to think of myself as methodical, rather than speedy). With a screwdriver in hand, one bruised elbow, and my pride on the line, I separated the whites from the darks and ran a load. Success!Unfortunately, the clean clothes ran up against another obstacle. Our 10 year old dryer must have been jealous of the attention its utility counterpart received. What are the odds that both a washer and a dryer would malfunction in the same week? Call it correlated asset failure. In my house, in hindsight, the odds were pretty darn high. One appliance repair was manageable. Two was beginning to feel like collusion between utilities.To make matters worse, the washing machine was only functional for two loads. Just because you can purchase parts on the internet does not guarantee long term utility after installment, in essence rendering my original repair invalid. Sunken costs for a depreciating asset. In this case, I probably broke a plastic piece holding the inner tub while replacing the springs.Unfortunately, I was lulled into a false sense of security, and was outside the house when those diabolical mechanical fiends struck again. When I returned, the washer was in full demonic dance, this time mischievously thumping our 17 year old water heater. The water tank wanted no part of the dance, and promptly sprung a supply line leak. Great.In hindsight, advocating for a larger emergency fund balance would have been prudent for someone like me with a known 35% failure rate.I ran to the big box store to purchase a new pipe and some sealing tape, but silly me, I forgot to take measurements of the tank and valves. I called my wife in the parking lot to assist. My mistake was to ask her to check if the tank’s intake valve was functional. It was not, evident by her high pitched scream and the clear sound of water gushing. Note to self: remember to shut off the main water supply before asking the wife to help with water tank issues. Did I mention that our daughter’s future in-laws were coming to dinner the next day? In the end, we purchased a new water heater and were only without water for two days. We also purchased a washing machine, but it took roughly three weeks for delivery, as we required a difficult footprint size to fill the space occupied by the previous device. Our emergency fund survived, albeit at a lower level than anticipated. As a side note, I was able to fix the dryer, for the most part, so that a full replacement was not necessary. The experience taught me a few lessons. First, household financial risks may appear independent, yet often this is not the case. It was easy to fathom we had our unexpected events covered with our existing emergency fund. Yet compounding systemic appliance failures pushed the unexpected expenses towards our theoretical limits. Second, my father was only partially correct. Underwear is not a renewable asset.I should also think about establishing a separate Fruit of the Loom reserve account to accompany our current emergency fund. A decision my mother would have approved.Jeffrey K. Actor, PhD, was a professor at a major medical school in Houston for more than 25 years, serving as an academic researcher with interests in how immune responses function to fight pathogenic diseases. Jeff’s retirement goals are to write short science fiction stories, volunteer in the community and spend time in his garden. Check out his earlier articles.
I KEEP PHYSICALLY active and exercise on a semi-regular basis. Maybe not as much as my wife suggests, but enough that I feel the burn during a workout, and experience those pesky muscle group aches the next day. However, there is one muscle that I should probably exercise more, and with greater fervor, especially now that I am retired.That muscle is the brain. In my humble opinion, the brain should be considered a critical retirement asset.I am keenly aware of my diminished mental acuity as I enter my third trimester of life. My ability to sort, store, and retrieve information has weakened. Furthermore, at two years into retirement, I find that I no longer push my brain muscles for hours at a time as I did during my working years. When I do push, my focus is shorter; my thoughts are not quite as deep. Where I used to swim deep with the fishes, I now wade shallow with the minnows.I joke with friends and colleagues that, as a former scientist-researcher-educator, my brain was my most critical piece of “capital equipment”. In reality, regardless of occupation or social status, the brain serves everyone as his or her most important asset for career placement, advancement, and success.There is irony in carefully protecting a financial retirement portfolio while paying considerably less attention to the biological asset responsible for managing it. Many of us pour over our spreadsheets to ensure existing monetary assets will support our retirement years. I suggest that just like any other valuable asset, the brain requires continued monitoring. I am certainly guilty of giving my fiscal portfolio more attention than I do preserving the cognitive asset required to maintain it. During my working years, brain “maintenance” was automatic; daily doses of research investigations, teaching and writing, kept this capital equipment asset exquisitely tuned. Now that I am retired, I find that much of the built-in capital expenditure for maintaining the brain is gone. I have this extraordinarily valuable piece of equipment lying around the house (upstairs) with no scheduled maintenance program. Recognition that I require increased brain maintenance may be the first step. Perhaps all I need is simply a continued re-investment; a minor amount of intellectual capital deposited every day might do the trick to keep my most important muscle asset from depreciating.I thought to start by fortifying existing neurons. My twins bought me a subscription to Spotify, a music service that has eerily learned my likes and dislikes all too well. Figuring to rekindle teenage memories of the ‘70s, I created playlists that included the earliest albums I owned. Curiously, I am able to recall all the words from favorite songs written by The Beatles, Elton John, and The Kinks. Unfortunately these exercises can backfire. Let’s just say that once Bee Gees tunes, or associated images
Retirement
Why can’t Americans put more effort into understanding Social Security?
R Quinn | Oct 29, 2026
Health
Brain Power
ArticleJeffrey K. Actor | Oct 31, 2026
Health
Dropping My Subsidized Retiree Health Plan for a Medigap Plan G—Am I Crazy to Pay $2K+ More?
John Katz | Oct 31, 2026
Investing
One in six Nasdaq companies says it may not last another year
Daniel Oliveira | Nov 1, 2026
From HumbleDollar Founder Jonathan Clements
Careers
Late Shift
Investing
Do I really need International funds in my portfolio? I say no.
Bruce Roberts | Oct 26, 2026
Markets
Executives have stopped talking about recession. They talk about affordability instead.
Daniel Oliveira | Oct 30, 2026
Family
The Advantage We Bring
Andrew Clements | Oct 28, 2026
Investing
Private Funds
ArticleAdam M. Grossman | Oct 31, 2026
Retirement
IRS Blows Up Tax-Free Exchange of Appreciated Stocks for ETF
Paul Ward | Oct 31, 2026
Life Events
Laundered
ArticleJeffrey K. Actor | Oct 3, 2026
Investing
What happened to 145 companies that got a stock exchange warning letter
Daniel Oliveira | Nov 1, 2026