A YOUNG GRADUATE student named Harry Markowitz wrote a paper in 1952 that sought to prove, mathematically, the old maxim “don’t put all your eggs in one basket.” Through his work, Markowitz taught investors how to diversify their investments effectively, something that was not well understood at the time.
For instance, he explained that the number of stocks you hold is far less important than the number of types of stocks you own.

A FEW YEARS BACK, a fellow named Wylie Tollette faced uncomfortable questions as he sat before the public oversight committee of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). Tollette, the pension fund’s Chief Operating Investment Officer, was responsible for updating the committee on the status of its massive $350 billion portfolio.
But when a committee member asked about the fees CalPERS was paying to a particular group of investment managers, Tollette did not have a ready answer.

I LOVE THE PRICE war among index-fund providers, because it puts pressure on all money managers to lower fees. But I don’t think investors should pay much heed to differences in annual expenses that amount to just 0.01% or 0.02% a year, equal to 1 or 2 cents for every $100 invested—and they certainly shouldn’t switch funds for those potential cost savings.
To check I wasn’t missing something, I set out to do apples-to-apples comparisons among index funds in four highly competitively segments of the indexing market: large-cap U.S.

IF YOU’RE WORRIED that indexing threatens the smooth functioning of the stock market, it’s helpful to spend an hour chatting over coffee with Charles Ellis—which is what I did last week when I was in New Haven, Connecticut. Ellis is one of indexing’s most eloquent advocates, including in his bestselling book Winning the Loser’s Game and in his latest tome, The Index Revolution.
Charley dismisses the idea that index funds are distorting the market—and scoffs at the idea that active management is headed for extinction.

WHAT’S A GOOD REASON to dial down your stock market exposure? A year after Donald Trump was elected president, many folks are still smarting from their decision to bail out of stocks. Clearly, we shouldn’t lighten up on shares just because we don’t like the guy in the White House.
We also shouldn’t bail out just because stocks sport high price-earnings ratios and skimpy dividend yields. No doubt about it, stocks today are expensive.

STOCK BUYBACKS ARE here to stay. The Securities and Exchange Commission opened the door in 1982, when it ruled that companies could repurchase their own stock without triggering accusations of share price manipulation. Ever since, more and more companies have taken advantage. Indeed, in recent years, U.S. corporations have spent more money buying back their own shares than paying out dividends.
Good news? I see both plusses and minuses. Here are the plusses:

Once you figure in buybacks,

THE BOGLEHEADS HAD their annual conference this week in the Philadelphia area, where Vanguard Group’s headquarters is located. Devotees of Vanguard’s 88-year-old founder John C. Bogle, the Bogleheads usually meet online at what’s probably the world’s best investment forum.
The star of their annual meeting was, of course, Jack himself. His latest book, an extensive revision of The Little Book of Common Sense Investing, just came out. What was on Jack’s mind?

I’M A BIG BELIEVER in transparency, so I’d like to tell you a little about my personal investments. As you might guess, the overwhelming majority of my money is allocated to simple, low-cost index funds—the same things I recommend in my writing and for my clients. That is true almost without exception. But today, I would like to describe one of those exceptions.
Many years ago, before I entered the investment industry, I purchased shares in a small mutual fund called the Mairs &

REVIEWING YOUR investment strategy? To get you started, here are 10 questions to wrestle with:

How much cash you will need from your portfolio over the next five years? That money should be out of stocks and riskier bonds—and invested in nothing more adventurous than short-term bonds.
What’s the total sum you expect to save between now and retirement? If you look at that future savings as a cash holding and count it as part of your portfolio’s conservative investments,

IT’S A COMMON PLOY among columnists: You start with the provocative statement—and then spend the rest of the article dancing like crazy, trying to defend it. Today’s provocative statement: Except in a few rare instances, I’m not sure why anybody would ever own municipal bonds.
At first blush, this sounds not just provocative, but downright stupid. If you’re in a high income-tax bracket and investing money through a regular taxable account, it would be foolish to buy taxable bonds and then pay income taxes on the interest you earn.

VANGUARD GROUP is my favorite fund company—and the place where I now keep all my investment dollars. There’s no mystery why: Among mutual fund companies, Vanguard has long been not only the biggest champion of index funds, but also the firm with the lowest annual fund expenses.
Except that’s no longer the case.
Fidelity Investments, BlackRock’s iShares and Charles Schwab have all muscled onto Vanguard’s turf, offering index funds with lower annual expenses. This is obviously a marketing ploy: By offering cut-rate deals on select index funds,

THIS BULL MARKET is more than eight years old, U.S. stocks are undoubtedly expensive and there’s even talk of war. Tempted to sell? Problem is, there was also ample reason to be worried three years ago and yet here we are, with shares both higher and more richly valued.
What to do? I fall back on my standard advice: Forget trying to forecast the market’s short-term direction and instead focus on taking the right amount of risk.

WHEN I LOOK AT TODAY’S world, I often think of Charles Dickens’s famous line, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” Technology, including the web and smartphones, has made life so much more convenient.
Still, one thing I really miss from the “old days” is the experience of the traditional bookstore. Shopping online is great, but sometimes it’s easier to choose from a curated set of 10 books on a shelf than to sift through an unwieldy list of a thousand choices online.

AS I THINK BACK over the past three decades, I have one overriding investment regret.
No, it has nothing to do with the investments I bought. For much of the past 30 years, I’ve owned a globally diversified portfolio, with 100% in stocks when I was younger and closer to 70% now that I’m in my mid-50s. Initially, I owned actively managed funds and a few individual stocks, but I substituted index funds as they became available,

IT’S ANECDOTAL evidence, so take it with a grain of salt. Still, I’m once again hearing a dangerous argument—that you should always carry the largest mortgage possible, so you have extra money to stash in stocks.
During the roaring bull market of the late 1990s, and during the booming market for stocks and real estate in 2005 and 2006, readers regularly wrote to me, making the same argument. The strategy isn’t without logic—and it isn’t necessarily a sign that stocks are about to crash.