MICHAEL BURRY IS a hedge fund manager who gained fame betting against the housing market in 2008. When that market collapsed, Burry made a fortune, and that cemented his reputation as a market seer. Burry was later portrayed as the central character in Michael Lewis’s The Big Short.
But in the years since, Burry’s predictions haven’t turned out as well. Five years ago, he spooked index-fund investors when he argued that they might have trouble accessing their funds.

AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR, I watch the hilarious short YouTube clip by personal-finance author JL Collins. If you aren’t around small children and can handle liberal use of America’s favorite four-letter word, check it out. Some may recognize it as a parody of actor John Goodman’s soliloquy from the film The Gambler starring Mark Wahlberg.
The clip, however, is more than just entertaining. Its content is what keeps me and, judging from the half-million views,

WHEN I STARTED learning about investing, I stumbled upon a book at my library that immediately grabbed my attention: The Lazy Person’s Guide to Investing by Paul B. Farrell. A portfolio championed by the book consisted of just two mutual funds—one stock index fund and one bond index fund, with 50% of your portfolio invested in each.
With only two choices to make, decision-making becomes far more straightforward. Farrell’s suggested 50-50 split simplifies the process even further.

LOOKING TO CONDUCT a review of your investments? Below is a five-point end-of-year housekeeping checklist.
Suitability. When it comes to the world of investments, the most common types of assets are stocks and bonds—but they aren’t the only ones. There are alternatives like real estate and commodities and, of course, there’s bitcoin, which has more than doubled this year. Which of these is right for you? Since everyone is different, the first litmus test is to assess the suitability of the types of assets you own.

THE STOCK MARKET HAS been one of my life’s enduring interests. No, it’s not because I try to pick market-beating investments. I gave up on that nonsense more than three decades ago.
Rather, I’m fascinated by the way we humans engage with this maddening market that promises both riches and peril, and which seems both ruthlessly efficient and utterly nuts. What have I learned from a lifetime of following the stock market? The sad truth is,

MORGAN HOUSEL, author of The Psychology of Money, once made this observation: “Before the 1700s, the richest members of society had among the shortest lives—meaningfully below that of the overall population.”
It was counterintuitive, but Housel cited a hypothesis, developed by historian T.H. Hollingsworth, to make sense of it: “The best explanation is that the rich were the only ones who could afford all the quack medicines and sham doctors who peddled hope but increased your odds of being poisoned.”
Housel then added this thought: “I would bet good money the same happens today with investing advice.” Wealthy folks,

BENJAMIN GRAHAM, the father of investment analysis, made this observation: “The investor’s chief problem—even his worst enemy—is likely to be himself.”
Why? One reason is our intuition can sometimes lead us astray. Things that seem like they make sense, and seem like they ought to be true, often turn out not to be supported by the data.
Perhaps the best-known example is the divergence between growth and value stocks. Intuition suggests that growth stocks—companies like Apple and Amazon—would deliver better performance than their more pedestrian peers on the value side of the market.

IT’S AN ARGUMENT I’ll never win. But perhaps I can sow a few seeds of doubt.
The anti-foreign-stock drumbeat has grown louder with each additional year that international markets underperform U.S. shares. Indeed, even though foreign stocks beat U.S. shares in the 1970s, 1980s and 2000s, there are folks today who argue there’s no reason to own foreign shares.
Really? Before you throw in the towel, ask yourself six questions:
1. If U.S.

NOW THAT I’M RETIRED and have all the time in the world, I often use that time to worry about money. That brings me to a recent offer from Wells Fargo to get a $525 bonus for depositing $25,000 in a savings account for 90 days.
My immediate concern was whether the $525 would more than compensate for the paltry interest rate that Wells Fargo pays. A quick calculation determined that investing $25,000 in a Wells Fargo savings account and getting the $525 bonus—rather than the 4.25% I could then earn with Capital One 360 Performance Savings—would still leave me almost $260 ahead.

AN ANCIENT FINANCIAL concept is gaining newfound popularity.
In his book Politics, Aristotle related a story about a fellow philosopher named Thales, who lived about 2,600 years ago. One winter, Thales made a prediction about the coming olive harvest. He felt that it was going to be a strong year. But because recent harvests had been weak, most people disagreed with him. To Thales, this meant opportunity. He approached the owners of olive presses in his town with a proposition.

THE NEIGHBORING TOWNS of Nogales, Arizona, and Nogales, Mexico, figure prominently in the work of Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson, who—together with a colleague—won this year’s Nobel Prize in economics.
In their book Why Nations Fail, Acemoglu and Robinson explain that these two border towns are identical in almost every way—from demographics to geography to climate. But they differ in one key respect: Nogales on the American side of the border is prosperous, while its southern neighbor is not.

FOR YEARS, THERE’S been growing concern about the top-heavy nature of the U.S. market. Today, just 10 stocks account for 35% of the S&P 500’s total value. And while the largest technology stocks—dubbed the Magnificent Seven—have done exceedingly well in recent years, their extreme outperformance is making people nervous.
Observers are comparing today’s market to past periods when certain groups of stocks appeared similarly flawless. Consider the late 1990s, when companies such as General Electric dominated the market.

BENJAMIN GRAHAM was Warren Buffett’s teacher and mentor. He also ran an investment fund that specialized in uncovering demonstrably undervalued stocks.
One day in 1926, Graham was at his desk, reading through a government report on railroads, when he noticed a potentially important footnote. It referenced assets held by a number of oil pipeline companies. But there wasn’t a lot of detail, so Graham boarded a train to Washington and found his way to the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC),

IS IT WORTH OWNING international stocks? There’s far from universal agreement. The traditional argument for investing outside the U.S. is straightforward: diversification—since domestic and international stocks don’t move in lockstep, and sometimes diverge significantly.
At the same time, however, international stocks have lagged behind their U.S. counterparts for so many years that it’s been trying the patience of even the most tenacious investors. Domestic stocks have outpaced international stocks in eight of the past 10 years.

WHY IS IT THAT GREAT companies don’t always make great investments? This is a conundrum that’s long puzzled investors because it so clearly flies in the face of intuition.
Indeed, today’s market leaders—companies like Apple, Amazon and Microsoft—are impressive businesses, and their stocks have delivered equally impressive performance, so much so that they and their peers have been dubbed the “Magnificent Seven.” The others in this group are Google parent Alphabet, Facebook parent Meta,