A LOT OF INVESTORS have spent a lot of time, hope and energy trying to emulate guru portfolios. I’m no different.
When I read Unconventional Success by Yale University’s chief investment officer, David Swensen, I felt like The Truth was being revealed. Here was the wisdom of the country’s top endowment manager with, at the time of publication, a benchmark-crushing 20-year record of 16.1% a year. This wasn’t an attention-seeking fund manager or TV host,

“JOURNALISM IS printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.” It’s a quote that should be framed on the wall of every newsroom.
Of course, every journalist knows this. We call PR—public relations—the dark side. But most of us journalists stray into it far more often than we like to admit.
As a reporter, I cut my teeth at a group of regional newspapers in a prosperous part of England in 1989.

INDEX DESIGNERS FTSE Russell and MSCI are jumping on China’s A train this year—and index-fund investors should watch out. There’s a $6 trillion wild-and-woolly domestic Chinese stock market slowly chugging your way, whether you like it or not. Yes, it may bring riches—and it’ll definitely bring huge risks.
In fact, your emerging markets index fund may already have 34% in Chinese stocks, and it could exceed 50% in years to come. Sound unnerving? For those with a position in an emerging markets index fund—or are considering one—good alternatives are hard to come by.

A LITTLE WHILE BACK, I found myself in an Uber. The driver began to share his political views. Before long, it became clear that his point of view was well outside the norm. He explained that the Federal Reserve is not a government entity, as most people believe. Rather, it is privately owned by the Rothschild family. In addition, he said, the Rothschilds also control the president—not just this president, but the presidency in general.

IT WOULD BE difficult to overemphasize how important Vanguard Group is to everyday investors. Many of us have money at the Malvern, Pa., behemoth, which easily ranks as the largest mutual-fund company. But even if investors don’t, they’ve likely still benefited, as other companies have moved to slash their fees and expand their lineup of index funds to compete with Vanguard.
Well aware of this, I follow Vanguard closely—and even more so since Vanguard’s founder,

STOCK MARKET INDEXES are at all-time highs, share prices are expensive relative to earnings and global economic growth is slowing. Is it time to consider rebalancing our portfolios and perhaps adopting a more defensive approach?
If you believe in rebalancing—maintaining a relatively consistent allocation to stocks and bonds—then, at some point in this bull market, you must sell stocks. I am hugely hesitant to do so, for three reasons. First, I am fundamentally a buy-and-hold forever investor,

THE SUDDEN BULL MOVE of 1991 enraged me. Mr. Market waved the red flag and I charged. Forget balanced, S&P 500 and large-cap value funds. I was gonna get me one of them aggressive funds that goes up 99% in a year.
I greedily and resentfully scanned the list of 1991’s 10 top-performing mutual funds. Why didn’t I own any of them? Oppenheimer Global Biotech was up 121%. Vanguard Windsor II, which I owned around that time,

A NEW FIRM CALLED Life + Liberty Indexes has created what it calls the Freedom 100 index of emerging markets stocks. Unlike other indexes, which typically weight stocks by their market value, the Freedom 100 weights countries by measures of freedom. These include freedom of religion, freedom of the press and freedom of assembly, among others. In short, the Freedom 100 looks like it could have been created by the authors of our Declaration of Independence.

EMPLOYEES WHO accumulate significant company stock can end up with a problem, though not necessarily a bad one: concentrated stock holdings. When these employees retire, their challenge is to sell those shares in a way that maximizes their value—taking into account the share price, dividends and taxes. One strategy: Utilize covered calls.
Selling a concentrated stock position can take many years because of tax considerations or restrictions on selling. For example, if appreciated shares are held in a regular taxable account,

LESS IS MORE when it comes to investing. Less effort. Fewer transactions. Lower costs. Less worry. Lower taxes. Less ego. Less clickbait.
We’re wired to try hard. To do well. Especially if you’ve had some success in your life, and built up some money to invest, you probably got there by working harder than others. Problem is, the same rule doesn’t apply to investing. There is no A for effort. But there is an F for frenetic.

A FEW WEEKS BACK, a reader—let’s call him Karl—challenged me with a question. Why, he asked, don’t I recommend momentum investment strategies?
If you aren’t familiar with the term, momentum strategies seek to buy stocks that have done well in the past, with the hope that they will continue rising, while also selling stocks that have done poorly, with the expectation that they will keep falling.
Karl asked why, in a recent article, I had dismissed momentum investing as the sort of thing that would turn your portfolio into an “unpredictable stew,” even though research has found that it can be profitable.

IT’S INTUITIVE THAT, the cheaper a stock is when you buy it, the greater the expected risk-adjusted return. Indeed, academic research has shown this to be true. Eugene Fama and Kenneth French demonstrated in a 1992 academic paper how, over the long term, so-called value stocks have delivered significantly higher returns than growth stocks.
Fama and French defined value stocks as those companies with a book value—the accounting difference between corporate assets and liabilities—that was high relative to their stock market value.

YOU’VE NO DOUBT heard this before: Asset allocation is the single most important investment decision. If you have the right mix of stocks, bonds, cash and maybe real estate, you sharply increase your chances of success. 
But how do you pick the right mix? There are rules of thumb based on age, there’s a statistical approach called Modern Portfolio Theory, there are risk tolerance questionnaires and there are cash flow-based approaches. Each delivers a different answer—because each emphasizes different factors.

I’M A FAN OF EMERGING stock markets—for two key reasons. But I also have qualms—for two key reasons.
Readers frequently write to me about emerging markets, and those messages usually coincide with periods of stomach-churning volatility, which is what we’ve witnessed recently: MSCI’s emerging markets index tumbled 15% in 2018 and was up just 4% in 2019’s first five months—after being up as much as 14% earlier this year. But as I tell my nervous correspondents,

DAD GAVE ME $1,000 in the mid-1980s on condition I start an IRA and make my own annual contributions, which I did at least some of the time. He recommended doing business with Vanguard Group, which was headquartered near my hometown of Wayne, Pennsylvania.
I can remember reading about the STAR fund, Windsor II, Wellington, Wellesley, the gold and precious metals fund, and the very highly regarded health care and energy funds.