Investing

I saw this on the back page of today’s Wall St Journal.
“On this day in 1971, Wells Fargo launched the world’s first stock-index fund. One mutual-fund manager’s reaction: “If people start believing this random-walk garbage and switch to index funds, a lot of $80,000-ayear portfolio managers and analysts will be replaced by $16,000-a-year computer clerks. It just can’t happen.”

We all remember the 2022 bond collapse, triggered by rising interest rates. Most of us were caught out, a supposedly safe asset class posting double-digit losses. Some of those bond funds are still slightly underwater four years later. Which brings me to a question worth thinking about.
Right now, Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) are offering guaranteed real returns of roughly 2-3% above inflation. That’s a compelling, ultra-safe option for liability matching in retirement, and I think most people would do well to look into it.

TIPS are US Government securities that currently pay two to three percent real return depending on the maturity selected. You can buy them from your broker, Treasury Direct account, Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and mutual funds. So, if inflation for a time period is three percent, your bonds earn five to six percent depending on the time period. These real returns are guaranteed by the US Treasury. I will not give all the details here and am not giving advice.

WHEN IT COMES to financial decisions, many investors subscribe to an approach known as evidence-based investing. The idea, as the name suggests, is to base decisions, whenever possible, on data rather than on intuition or other informal methods.
This sounds logical. It isn’t perfect, though. Economic and financial indicators have weaknesses which are important to be aware of. 
Consider, for example, the Cyclically-Adjusted Price-to-Earnings, or CAPE, ratio, developed by Robert Shiller, a Yale professor and Nobel laureate,

THE OTHER DAY, WHILE walking to my mailbox, I noticed a summer class schedule for a private gifted youth academy lying on the ground. I assumed it belonged to one of my neighbors, who has elementary-aged children.
Their interest in extra academics didn’t surprise me. Many families move to this area because of its excellent schools. Parents here clearly value education. On any given day, it’s common to hear children practicing the piano or violin as you walk through the neighborhood.

INNOVATION IN THE world of retirement plans is decidedly slow moving. But as of July 4th, investors now have a new savings option known as a Trump account. In short, these are retirement accounts designed specifically for children.
Trump accounts share some similarities with traditional individual retirement accounts (IRAs), but there are also key differences. If you have children, grandchildren, nieces or nephews, this new option may be worth exploring.
Who is eligible for a Trump account?

Nice! On top of other recent gains, the only individual stock I owned was up two days in a row and had reached the sell price I had in mind for months. Shortly before the market closed on Friday, I logged in to E*TRADE and stepped off the rollercoaster ride once and for all.
The sale came almost 17 years to the day that I first purchased that company stock via an employee stock purchase program (ESPP).

In a previous post I recounted how luck and stupidity kickstarted my retirement savings journey, but I glossed over one important detail: the cost.
In the mid-eighties, high-fee front-loading was standard practice, and these products were typically sold by people whose entire compensation depended on shifting them. The pressure to sell was enormous, and the salespeople were good at their jobs.
My twenty-year-old self walked straight into one of them. He was slick, he was persuasive,

THE INVESTMENT WORLD is full of storytellers. And while these folks might be entertaining, they generally aren’t very helpful. There’s one category of stories, however, that I do think is useful: They’re what I might call investment fables. They’re apocryphal stories that likely aren’t real. But they’re helpful nonetheless because each carries a useful lesson. Here are some of the more popular ones.
Consumer choice. In 1999, Richard Mille and a partner launched a company to make wristwatches.

I recently received an email from Vanguard informing me they’re updating the prospectus on a developed world fund I hold with them. The change relates to concentration limits. Under existing European regulation, no single company can normally represent more than 10% of a fund. However, there is a pre-existing exemption available to index-tracking funds that allows this ceiling to be raised to 20%. Vanguard are now choosing to apply that exemption.
Here’s what caught my attention: no company has actually hit that 10% threshold yet.

I used AI as an editorial assistant to help organize and refine my thoughts; the underlying ideas and personal experiences remain my own.
Rebalancing sounds simple. Pick your target allocation and, whenever a holding drifts too far, trade back to target.
That’s how I thought about it as I started managing my risk portfolio. The problem was that I never stopped to ask what “too far” meant. I found myself reacting to routine market movements that had little effect on my long-term plan.

My great aunt survived the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 with nothing. We know this because she wrote a letter to my grandmother in Kansas asking her to sell the property they had inherited together. She and Billy had nothing left. Nothing at all. A Union soldier — that is how she described him in the letter — handed her a pair of long johns. That was what she had to wear.
She and her husband William F.

Here’s something I’m debating and hoping the collective brain trust of the HD community can push me in the right direction.
As a retired Fed, I have access to the Thrift Saving Plan G Fund.  For those not familiar, it’s basically a high yield savings account on steroids.  It pays rates comparable to medium/long-term Treasuries but has no default risk, duration risk, or interest rate risk.  It only pays interest and can never fall in value. 

THE WAY INVESTORS think about the stock market may be entirely wrong.
Intuition tells us, and academic research confirms, that a company’s stock price should respond to important news and information. When a company announces a new product, for example, its stock should go up. And when results fall short of expectations, it should decline. 
But a new paper titled “The Inefficient Pricing of News” calls this idea into question. The authors found that investors respond much more slowly and inconsistently to market news than previously thought.

EARLIER THIS SPRING, Emil Verner, an economist at MIT, made an observation: The stock market, he said, seemed to be exhibiting “excess tranquility.” Despite an ongoing war, inflation and other negative headlines, investors seemed surprisingly unfazed. The market was on track for its fourth year in a row of positive returns. Through May, it had gained 11%.
But no sooner did Verner make this observation that the market did begin to wobble. Last Friday,