When I worked in wealth management, trying to get a client to pull together any sort of budget was frustrating at best. It was beyond not knowing how to do one, and much more a case of they simply didn't want to know how much and where their money was being spent. On more than one occasion, I had a client declare firmly that they did not have a spending problem, but that we had an investment problem!
Having at least some non-US holdings in your portfolio has been a perennial recommendation, although its been hard to love this idea until recently. However, staring a year ago, I began to add non-US holdings and have been rewarded for this effort. As always, however, when and how much are constant questions. I can't say I'll hang onto my non-US holdings forever, but unless or until the Dollar begins to show some strength, they seem like a good idea.
Congratulations! Most active managers would not make the concessions that you were apparently able to negotiate. And, while 0.58% is a whole lot better than 2.0%, 0.19% would be even better. I help several family members with their investments (I am not a registered advisor, but worked in the Invest biz) and am always astonished by how little people know about the fees, direct and indirect, that they are being charged. They also (falsely) believe that using a fee manager will generate superior returns, when research suggests just the opposite. And, they have no real comprehension of the compound effect that paying fees will have on the long term performance of their investments. This problem is largely due (in my opinion) to professional asset managers making the investment process look way more complicated and opaque than it needs to be, presumably in order to justify their fees. With a little help and a small universe of low fee funds, it is entirely possible for a non-professional to achieve good long term performance at a moderate cost.
First, let me say how sorry I am that your wife lost her job this late in her working career. Second, this was my biggest fear as I approached the last 5+ years of my working career before I retired. I saved for retirement from my first day at work and upped my retirement contributions with every increase in salary. However, the last 5 years of retirement savings are critical, not only in the increasing amount you can save, but because of the compound effect of growth in these final years. While it may be possible to find another job for these last few years, the lost momentum in retirement savings from having to shift jobs is significant. In today's working world, I don't have a good strategy to counter a late term lost job, other than to suggest to younger workers that you may need to save more than you think in the early years in order to have a safer cushion if you are forced to "retire" earlier than expected.
As you note, Part D is a bit of a crapshoot each year. Not only do you not know what your required medications will be or cost from year to year, but Part D premiums are subject to wide variations YOY, which has caused us to change our Part D provider 3 times over the 10 years we have been retired.
My first decade of work in the financial biz was during the 70's, which was considered a lost decade due to very low market returns 1970-80. Market returns are but one factor. What about the rate of inflation and 10 year bond yields? During the 70's, the rate of inflation was around 12%, and 10 year Treasuries ranged from 7%-11%. However, gold experienced a price runup for the entire decade. Housing prices also experienced a similar boom. Maybe the answer is hard assets, but buying and selling can be hard and the timing to get this right is likely even harder. What I mostly remember about the 70's was being glad when it was over, but then came even higher inflation in the 80's combined with painful fed rates to bring rates back down. Diversification may be about the best answer to this dilemma, including more foreign representation and a higher cash balance.
I read the article, but is there an error in the author's chart? ABX on the NYSE is the symbol for Abacus Global Mngmt. ABX.TO is the symbol for Barrick Gold, which has a very different performance chart. I also think what maybe missing is that Barrick is not necessarily a speculator in gold, but a producer that would readily adjust its mining and refining operations based on the price of gold. It would constantly adjust what it pays for raw material and what it sell its finished product for it order to maximize its net return - independent of the spot price of gold. I doubt very much that Mr. Buffet has changed his mind on gold, but more likely sees a market play in Barrick as gold prices help drive its stock price, while still earning a current dividend return. The greater question may be: will Berkshire continue to hold on to Barrack when the inevitable turn in gold prices arrives?
I am retired 10+ years and have never missed being at work. We are fortunate to be financially secure and have been able to travel freely. However, I do have a few thoughts that may be worth sharing for those still working: 1) You need to figure out how to spend your time when retired. Hobbies, volunteerism, travel, etc. It doesn't matter - you need things to keep yourself busy and give purpose in retirement. 2) As the pandemic taught us, events may not always work out the way you planned, so you need to be flexible. And, 3) Aging is not a linear process, but accelerates as we get older. You may be able to walk 10 miles a day at age 65, but by the time you are approaching 80, you likely won't. If you want to travel in retirement, don't wait. Most of us are tied to a retirement timetable that depends on Social Security, Medicare and retirement savings, but if we had been able to swing it at an earlier age, I would not have hesitated to retire early.
I am confused by this question. If they invested the entire $10M in a 60/40 diversified portfolio, they could easily earn $250-$300K/yr. in dividends alone. In addition, their portfolio should be growing at about a 4-5% rate each year. And, to make this really simple, they could achieve this using a single Vanguard balanced fund which would cost little in fees.
Comments
When I worked in wealth management, trying to get a client to pull together any sort of budget was frustrating at best. It was beyond not knowing how to do one, and much more a case of they simply didn't want to know how much and where their money was being spent. On more than one occasion, I had a client declare firmly that they did not have a spending problem, but that we had an investment problem!
Post: The Monthly Mystery of the Vanishing Paycheck
Link to comment from February 14, 2026
Having at least some non-US holdings in your portfolio has been a perennial recommendation, although its been hard to love this idea until recently. However, staring a year ago, I began to add non-US holdings and have been rewarded for this effort. As always, however, when and how much are constant questions. I can't say I'll hang onto my non-US holdings forever, but unless or until the Dollar begins to show some strength, they seem like a good idea.
Post: Sell America
Link to comment from February 14, 2026
Congratulations! Most active managers would not make the concessions that you were apparently able to negotiate. And, while 0.58% is a whole lot better than 2.0%, 0.19% would be even better. I help several family members with their investments (I am not a registered advisor, but worked in the Invest biz) and am always astonished by how little people know about the fees, direct and indirect, that they are being charged. They also (falsely) believe that using a fee manager will generate superior returns, when research suggests just the opposite. And, they have no real comprehension of the compound effect that paying fees will have on the long term performance of their investments. This problem is largely due (in my opinion) to professional asset managers making the investment process look way more complicated and opaque than it needs to be, presumably in order to justify their fees. With a little help and a small universe of low fee funds, it is entirely possible for a non-professional to achieve good long term performance at a moderate cost.
Post: The High Cost of Financial Advice: A Tale of Two Portfolios Revisited
Link to comment from February 7, 2026
First, let me say how sorry I am that your wife lost her job this late in her working career. Second, this was my biggest fear as I approached the last 5+ years of my working career before I retired. I saved for retirement from my first day at work and upped my retirement contributions with every increase in salary. However, the last 5 years of retirement savings are critical, not only in the increasing amount you can save, but because of the compound effect of growth in these final years. While it may be possible to find another job for these last few years, the lost momentum in retirement savings from having to shift jobs is significant. In today's working world, I don't have a good strategy to counter a late term lost job, other than to suggest to younger workers that you may need to save more than you think in the early years in order to have a safer cushion if you are forced to "retire" earlier than expected.
Post: Laid Off
Link to comment from February 7, 2026
As you note, Part D is a bit of a crapshoot each year. Not only do you not know what your required medications will be or cost from year to year, but Part D premiums are subject to wide variations YOY, which has caused us to change our Part D provider 3 times over the 10 years we have been retired.
Post: When $2100 is not what it appears. The Medicare Part D trap
Link to comment from February 7, 2026
Great story. If your grandson had asked this question 12 months ago, it would have made an even better story!
Post: The Playground Indicator
Link to comment from January 31, 2026
My first decade of work in the financial biz was during the 70's, which was considered a lost decade due to very low market returns 1970-80. Market returns are but one factor. What about the rate of inflation and 10 year bond yields? During the 70's, the rate of inflation was around 12%, and 10 year Treasuries ranged from 7%-11%. However, gold experienced a price runup for the entire decade. Housing prices also experienced a similar boom. Maybe the answer is hard assets, but buying and selling can be hard and the timing to get this right is likely even harder. What I mostly remember about the 70's was being glad when it was over, but then came even higher inflation in the 80's combined with painful fed rates to bring rates back down. Diversification may be about the best answer to this dilemma, including more foreign representation and a higher cash balance.
Post: Considering a Lost Decade When Retirement Planning
Link to comment from January 17, 2026
I read the article, but is there an error in the author's chart? ABX on the NYSE is the symbol for Abacus Global Mngmt. ABX.TO is the symbol for Barrick Gold, which has a very different performance chart. I also think what maybe missing is that Barrick is not necessarily a speculator in gold, but a producer that would readily adjust its mining and refining operations based on the price of gold. It would constantly adjust what it pays for raw material and what it sell its finished product for it order to maximize its net return - independent of the spot price of gold. I doubt very much that Mr. Buffet has changed his mind on gold, but more likely sees a market play in Barrick as gold prices help drive its stock price, while still earning a current dividend return. The greater question may be: will Berkshire continue to hold on to Barrack when the inevitable turn in gold prices arrives?
Post: Gold Isn’t Special
Link to comment from January 10, 2026
I am retired 10+ years and have never missed being at work. We are fortunate to be financially secure and have been able to travel freely. However, I do have a few thoughts that may be worth sharing for those still working: 1) You need to figure out how to spend your time when retired. Hobbies, volunteerism, travel, etc. It doesn't matter - you need things to keep yourself busy and give purpose in retirement. 2) As the pandemic taught us, events may not always work out the way you planned, so you need to be flexible. And, 3) Aging is not a linear process, but accelerates as we get older. You may be able to walk 10 miles a day at age 65, but by the time you are approaching 80, you likely won't. If you want to travel in retirement, don't wait. Most of us are tied to a retirement timetable that depends on Social Security, Medicare and retirement savings, but if we had been able to swing it at an earlier age, I would not have hesitated to retire early.
Post: The Life That Was Waiting
Link to comment from December 27, 2025
I am confused by this question. If they invested the entire $10M in a 60/40 diversified portfolio, they could easily earn $250-$300K/yr. in dividends alone. In addition, their portfolio should be growing at about a 4-5% rate each year. And, to make this really simple, they could achieve this using a single Vanguard balanced fund which would cost little in fees.
Post: What is the standard advice for someone who wants guaranteed income in retirement?
Link to comment from December 27, 2025