Yay PP!

General Discussion on the Permanent Portfolio Strategy

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14228
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Yay PP!

Post by dualstow » Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:56 pm

dockinGA wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 2:20 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 8:41 am

In fact , I am done here ….i don’t think you really care about discussing the pros and cons of the pp at all in this forum or alternative ideas for supporting up some of the pp weaknesses.
If mathjak is in fact done, let the record show he quit on a day when his oft-hated LTTs are the only thing carrying water for the portfolio (or likely any portfolio).
{mathjak quote edited down by me. It’s intact in dockinGA’s post, FYI}
Well, I missed the “I am done here.” The post says it was edited 7 times. I guess I only caught an earlier edit.
I have lost track of how many times he quit. In fact, once I was worried he’d passed on and I googled him — his forum name — and I found another forum where people were asking, Where did mathjak go? City-data maybe? I forget the exact name.

Well, we really need to find a space for mathjak to do his thing. But, i think Lord’s post above validates my bitching to some degree. I feel like I’m helping to edit a forum for vegetarians and there’s a meat guy who’s talking about how wonderful bacon is in every thread. It’s…weird.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
dockinGA
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 9:29 am

Re: Yay PP!

Post by dockinGA » Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:06 pm

Don wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:40 pm
I, for one, enjoy reading mathjak's posts even if I don't always agree with them. I've learned from him and I hope that we have a big enough tent here not to drive him away.
The first thousand times, it was an interesting alternative perspective.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Yay PP!

Post by vnatale » Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:39 pm

Don wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:40 pm

I, for one, enjoy reading mathjak's posts even if I don't always agree with them. I've learned from him and I hope that we have a big enough tent here not to drive him away.


I agree with what you concisely stated above.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
drumminj
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 9:16 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by drumminj » Fri Jan 21, 2022 7:10 pm

dualstow wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:46 pm
Not at all harsh. In fact, I appreciate your post, because I can’t tell what the lurkers out there are thinking.
As a semi-lurker, I feel like this issue has been covered many times over the past several years, both with Budd and with Mathjak. Somehow they both end up coming back and dominating every thread no matter how many times they leave, or someone tries to corral them.

I hardly read any threads anymore, as most of the comments are from posters on my ignore list, and the signal to noise ratio is far too low.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14228
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Yay PP!

Post by dualstow » Fri Jan 21, 2022 7:47 pm

yeah, it’s sad. I think I might start copying the old threads in case something goes bust.
(oh dear lord, now all the New posts list my name as the last poster. Made it worse O0 )
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
Pet Hog
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by Pet Hog » Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:13 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 6:39 pm
Don wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 5:40 pm
I, for one, enjoy reading mathjak's posts even if I don't always agree with them. I've learned from him and I hope that we have a big enough tent here not to drive him away.
I agree with what you concisely stated above.
I, too, like reading dissenting views on this forum. None of us knows the future and nothing is set in stone.
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by ppnewbie » Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:48 am

dockinGA wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 1:11 pm
flyingpylon wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 12:31 pm
If people are concerned about maintaining a clean, well-lit place to educate others about the PP, perhaps there should be a separate Permanent Portfolio Skepticism forum.

with lots of 'expertise' being shared with an admittance that the person has no intention of tracking the performance of their 'expertise', it seems to damage the usefulness of the entire forum to me.
This is a key point to me.
It feels groundless and noisy. Up one percent - IM UP I’M UP I’M UP!!! Down one percent - I’m beating the crappy PP inflation hedge by 100 PERCENT.

I think that if we boast we should do it in context. IM UP ONE PERCENT! Or - I sprinkled a little magic crypto fairy dust on my funky GB variant and it took off like a rocket - here are the details of the ride.

About the forum in general:
One great thing about the forum is it covers the entire economy. So I think it’s OK if a section (LTT’s currently) becoming a big group therapy session. Most investing forums or investors don’t even realize there is a potential issue till much later. But folks in this forum have much more skin in the game because we get a 30x smack in the face of rates move higher. Nobody I know even knows about LTT’s until I start talking about deflation hedges.
dockinGA
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 9:29 am

Re: Yay PP!

Post by dockinGA » Sat Jan 22, 2022 5:44 am

ppnewbie wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:48 am
dockinGA wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 1:11 pm
flyingpylon wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 12:31 pm
If people are concerned about maintaining a clean, well-lit place to educate others about the PP, perhaps there should be a separate Permanent Portfolio Skepticism forum.

with lots of 'expertise' being shared with an admittance that the person has no intention of tracking the performance of their 'expertise', it seems to damage the usefulness of the entire forum to me.
This is a key point to me.
It feels groundless and noisy. Up one percent - IM UP I’M UP I’M UP!!! Down one percent - I’m beating the crappy PP inflation hedge by 100 PERCENT.

I think that if we boast we should do it in context. IM UP ONE PERCENT! Or - I sprinkled a little magic crypto fairy dust on my funky GB variant and it took off like a rocket - here are the details of the ride.

About the forum in general:
One great thing about the forum is it covers the entire economy. So I think it’s OK if a section (LTT’s currently) becoming a big group therapy session. Most investing forums or investors don’t even realize there is a potential issue till much later. But folks in this forum have much more skin in the game because we get a 30x smack in the face of rates move higher. Nobody I know even knows about LTT’s until I start talking about deflation hedges.
Very well said. The issue with mathjak is that he hammers on about LTT's when literally NOBODY on the forum is debating what the impact of higher rates will be, at least in the sense that it could possibly harm LTT returns significantly in the short term. He's just incapable of realizing that a) he can't predict the future, b) he's been wrong in the past, c) the economy is so complicated that a short term rate rise may or may not impact long term rates, etc. etc. If some of the members need to be reminded of that 15x a day, then I apologize that we may have driven him off.
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Yay PP!

Post by flyingpylon » Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:43 am

My observation of problematic posters over the years is that they’re never able to understand or embrace the “permanent” part of the Permanent Portfolio (or variants) or why people would even desire such a thing. So while on the surface we might debate this asset or that, the differences in the underlying psychological or emotional issues and what people need from their investments make it difficult to find lasting common ground.
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:09 am

flyingpylon wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:43 am
My observation of problematic posters over the years is that they’re never able to understand or embrace the “permanent” part of the Permanent Portfolio (or variants) or why people would even desire such a thing.
I agree. In the case of mathjak, I tried a few weeks back to get him to suggest any mix of assets that one could set and forget and he just didn't seem to be interested in the question. I too am in the group of folks who has learned from him over the years. The Clyatt withdrawal strategy and him highlighting Michael Kitces' work were both enlightening. I just think that on forums like this one, there has to be an occasional "At least this is what works for me" or "This is just my opinion", etc. And once something has been said, it doesn't need to be repeated every day.

In the case of Budd, it's just weird that someone with a lot of assets just melts down every time gold gets hit but can't rid himself of the holding because the taxes on the gains would be too great. I mean which is it? Does the asset absolutely suck or has it made him money?

But both posters had (have) interesting things to share at times. mathjak's wonderful photography, his personal Covid journey and his musical interests come to mind. I think we do have a big tent here but posters need to make an effort to see things from other perspectives.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Yay PP!

Post by glennds » Sat Jan 22, 2022 10:12 am

Lorddoskias123 wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:11 am
but there seem to be few PP purists active at this point. Perhaps simply because its all been said over the years. Perhaps because we are deep into a long Bull Market.
I think you nailed it. The longer into a bull market, the less attractive the PP looks.
After the next correction or crash, the popular focus will change from making money to not losing money, and at that point the PP will become into fashion and this forum's traffic will reflect it.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: Yay PP!

Post by Cortopassi » Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:37 pm

Well that was an interesting last few pages to read through!

If you've seen my other post on writing calls, I have grown a bit tired of being passive about my investments. I figure I am 2-10 years away from retirement, and now is the time to see if I can wrangle some consistent added income out of especially my gold and silver holdings, and also TLT.

It's more to get to a comfort level of actually being able to produce consistent income (whether that is less or more in any given year than a PP or buy and hold strategy remains to be seen).

The one huge positive I am mentally experiencing from this so far (3 weeks) is the premiums I have made are real. With the pp any gains are on paper, except dividends, until you sell something at a profit in a rebalance. And we all know how many times we've watch gold and bonds go up...and then down, over time. Time to capture a little of that volatility.

Of course...this means they all will either straight line up or down from this point on....!
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14228
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Yay PP!

Post by dualstow » Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:25 pm

Re: bull market. The guy who ran PRPFX used to talk about how people would flock to the fund during lean years and stampede out during prosperous years, ie stocks going up. Seems pretty normal and human, although not a wise way to invest.
barrett wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:09 am
But both posters had (have) interesting things to share at times. mathjak's wonderful photography, his personal Covid journey and his musical interests come to mind. I think we do have a big tent here but posters need to make an effort to see things from other perspectives.
Mathjak is smart, talented and funny. I wish he would just come out with a newsletter already so his diehard fans could subscribe. Normally, when someone has nothing to sell that’s a positive thing. In this case, it’s a bad thing because this situation may carry on in perpetuity.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by ppnewbie » Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:20 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:37 pm
Well that was an interesting last few pages to read through!

If you've seen my other post on writing calls, I have grown a bit tired of being passive about my investments. I figure I am 2-10 years away from retirement, and now is the time to see if I can wrangle some consistent added income out of especially my gold and silver holdings, and also TLT.

It's more to get to a comfort level of actually being able to produce consistent income (whether that is less or more in any given year than a PP or buy and hold strategy remains to be seen).

The one huge positive I am mentally experiencing from this so far (3 weeks) is the premiums I have made are real. With the pp any gains are on paper, except dividends, until you sell something at a profit in a rebalance. And we all know how many times we've watch gold and bonds go up...and then down, over time. Time to capture a little of that volatility.

Of course...this means they all will either straight line up or down from this point on....!
Please keep reporting as you work through it. It’s very valuable for me because I think we would all feel much more comfortable with a method to generate cash flow.
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by ppnewbie » Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:48 pm

My GB (ish) portfolio is down 1.7 percent vs ~11 percent for VTI in the last month. So thank you Harry Browne and Tyler.
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:37 am

ppnewbie wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:48 pm
My GB (ish) portfolio is down 1.7 percent vs ~11 percent for VTI in the last month. So thank you Harry Browne and Tyler.
Would you be willing to share your approximate asset allocation? Also curious if your "tweaks" to the GB were deliberate or just you making the best of trying to rework existing assets without upsetting the whole apple cart.

For example, I find the basic ideas of the GB compelling but couldn't implement it currently in my taxable account as that holds almost all S&P 500, gold bullion and Savings Bonds. Some T-Bills in there for living expenses. The EE and I-Bonds are mostly older and it only makes sense to redeem them more or less when they mature. The gains on the S&P position are quite large. Ditto for gold. I'm in that zone where I am retired but still 20 months to Medicare so need to keep my income down this year and next for health insurance reasons. Selling a bunch of the above pushes my income too high.

Anyway, maybe way too much information. I guess the point is that for many of us it's expensive to significantly change the AA in our taxable accounts. It would be super easy to do so in tIRA & Roth which is really why I am asking about your version of the GB.

Thanks in advance!
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by ppnewbie » Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:01 am

Sure. I need to recalculate everything. The reason I say GB ish is that I converted a retirement into a GB. Like apart of the stock allocation is a portion of the Account that is a Roth. It has tech mutual fund in it. I did not sell that but count it as a stock.

Anyway I’ll throw it out in a bit.

Also totally agree on the taxable. There is no way I could make such wholesale modifications in my taxable and not get wrecked with taxes. And then face the same thing in every rebalance.
Last edited by ppnewbie on Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kevin K.
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by Kevin K. » Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am

barrett wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:37 am
ppnewbie wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 9:48 pm
My GB (ish) portfolio is down 1.7 percent vs ~11 percent for VTI in the last month. So thank you Harry Browne and Tyler.
Would you be willing to share your approximate asset allocation? Also curious if your "tweaks" to the GB were deliberate or just you making the best of trying to rework existing assets without upsetting the whole apple cart.

For example, I find the basic ideas of the GB compelling but couldn't implement it currently in my taxable account as that holds almost all S&P 500, gold bullion and Savings Bonds. Some T-Bills in there for living expenses. The EE and I-Bonds are mostly older and it only makes sense to redeem them more or less when they mature. The gains on the S&P position are quite large. Ditto for gold. I'm in that zone where I am retired but still 20 months to Medicare so need to keep my income down this year and next for health insurance reasons. Selling a bunch of the above pushes my income too high.

Anyway, maybe way too much information. I guess the point is that for many of us it's expensive to significantly change the AA in our taxable accounts. It would be super easy to do so in tIRA & Roth which is really why I am asking about your version of the GB.

Thanks in advance!
Not exactly an answer to your question barrett but I'm in a similar situation to yours. Just turned 65 myself and had to transition from ACA to Medicare but my wife is 58 so we have to manage our taxable income carefully to keep her well within subsidy range.

The only modification I've made to the GB is to use intermediate Treasuries instead of the barbell - VGIT specifically because it's not only low-cost but keeps average maturity to 5 years (which used to be the default definition of "intermediate" but many funds, from pure Treasuries to total market ones like BND and actively-managed bond-heavy funds like Wellesley have been pushing maturities [and thus interest rate risk] out to ~8-9 years in search of yield. I have a couple of years of supplemental (I'm taking SS and that covers most of our essential expenses) expenses in iBonds and NCUA-insured MM paying .35%.

Where it sounds like we differ is that we have about equal amounts in IRA's and taxable, so I keep the gold ETFs and most of the bonds in tax-deferred and the stock ETFs and additional bonds/cash in taxable.

I'm down 3.3% YTD. No complaints - just a lot of gratitude to Harry Browne for his defensive thinking and to Tyler for taking Browne's work to the next level.
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:00 am

ppnewbie wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:01 am
Sure. I need to recalculate everything. The reason I say GB ish is that I converted a retirement into a GB. Like apart of the stock allocation is a portion of the Account that is a Roth. It has tech mutual fund in it. I did not sell that but count it as a stock.

Anyway I’ll throw it out in a bit.

Also totally agree on the taxable. There is no way I could make such wholesale modifications in my taxable and not get wrecked with taxes. And then face the same thing in every rebalance.
No need to recalculate anything for my benefit. What you posted is already helpful. I think the part that I bolded is tough for a lot of folks to figure out. A switch in AA is easy to do in tax-advantaged accounts but much tougher in taxable, especially later in life when assets are substantial and maybe one has no disposable earned income to throw into a lagging asset.
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:16 am

Kevin K. wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am
Not exactly an answer to your question barrett but I'm in a similar situation to yours. Just turned 65 myself and had to transition from ACA to Medicare but my wife is 58 so we have to manage our taxable income carefully to keep her well within subsidy range.

The only modification I've made to the GB is to use intermediate Treasuries instead of the barbell - VGIT specifically because it's not only low-cost but keeps average maturity to 5 years (which used to be the default definition of "intermediate" but many funds, from pure Treasuries to total market ones like BND and actively-managed bond-heavy funds like Wellesley have been pushing maturities [and thus interest rate risk] out to ~8-9 years in search of yield. I have a couple of years of supplemental (I'm taking SS and that covers most of our essential expenses) expenses in iBonds and NCUA-insured MM paying .35%.

Where it sounds like we differ is that we have about equal amounts in IRA's and taxable, so I keep the gold ETFs and most of the bonds in tax-deferred and the stock ETFs and additional bonds/cash in taxable.

I'm down 3.3% YTD. No complaints - just a lot of gratitude to Harry Browne for his defensive thinking and to Tyler for taking Browne's work to the next level.
I am 63 and will start on Medicare in September of 2023. My wife will turn 55 next month. As self-employed people we have been playing the game of managing our taxable income for years. It can get exhausting but has been totally worth the effort. No work-related health insurance for us free lancers.

I have also been looking at intermediate Treasuries, but in my case it would be FUAMX as most of my stuff is with Fidelity. Duration on that fund is 6.7 years, so somewhat higher than what you are using.

For us, our taxable vs. tax-deferred numbers are actually quite comparable. I just can't make any major changes out of Savings Bonds, gold & stocks without losing health subsidies. I did finally turn dividend reinvestment off on the S&P fund. Just didn't think this all through correctly before implementing everything. Sigh. At least I have some time between now and RMDs at 72 to plug away at my "problems".
Kevin K.
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by Kevin K. » Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:34 am

barrett wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:16 am
Kevin K. wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am
Not exactly an answer to your question barrett but I'm in a similar situation to yours. Just turned 65 myself and had to transition from ACA to Medicare but my wife is 58 so we have to manage our taxable income carefully to keep her well within subsidy range.

The only modification I've made to the GB is to use intermediate Treasuries instead of the barbell - VGIT specifically because it's not only low-cost but keeps average maturity to 5 years (which used to be the default definition of "intermediate" but many funds, from pure Treasuries to total market ones like BND and actively-managed bond-heavy funds like Wellesley have been pushing maturities [and thus interest rate risk] out to ~8-9 years in search of yield. I have a couple of years of supplemental (I'm taking SS and that covers most of our essential expenses) expenses in iBonds and NCUA-insured MM paying .35%.

Where it sounds like we differ is that we have about equal amounts in IRA's and taxable, so I keep the gold ETFs and most of the bonds in tax-deferred and the stock ETFs and additional bonds/cash in taxable.

I'm down 3.3% YTD. No complaints - just a lot of gratitude to Harry Browne for his defensive thinking and to Tyler for taking Browne's work to the next level.
I am 63 and will start on Medicare in September of 2023. My wife will turn 55 next month. As self-employed people we have been playing the game of managing our taxable income for years. It can get exhausting but has been totally worth the effort. No work-related health insurance for us free lancers.

I have also been looking at intermediate Treasuries, but in my case it would be FUAMX as most of my stuff is with Fidelity. Duration on that fund is 6.7 years, so somewhat higher than what you are using.

For us, our taxable vs. tax-deferred numbers are actually quite comparable. I just can't make any major changes out of Savings Bonds, gold & stocks without losing health subsidies. I did finally turn dividend reinvestment off on the S&P fund. Just didn't think this all through correctly before implementing everything. Sigh. At least I have some time between now and RMDs at 72 to plug away at my "problems".
We're very much in the same boat. FUAMX is certainly a good choice. I haven't been a FIDO customer but hear nothing but good things about them.

Yeah not only do you have nearly a decade to plug away at those "problems" you also have a couple of years for yourself and a decade for your wife to sock away extra money in order to afford the big jump in premiums from high-subsidy ACA plans to Medicare and whatever supplements you choose. After a ton of research I decided to go with traditional Medicare plus a high-deductible Part G and cheap Part D drug plan but even with my wife still on a Silver plan with close to the max subsidy (we keep our MAGI to ~28-35K) our monthly premiums have more than doubled since I went on Medicare. The only silver lining - and it's considerable - is that at least one of us (me) now has coverage when traveling out of state and can see any doctor or specialist - without a referral. But the way things are going with Medicare premium costs and health care generally we may spend our dotage (if we're lucky enough to live that long) in Mexico where we can (and have in the past) self-insure and go see a doc for $25 anytime we want.
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by ppnewbie » Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:04 pm

The last time I did a survey was end of 2021:

Approximate then:

38.38% Stocks (This is a bout 40 percent a tech mutual fund - FSELX and then the rest S&P 500)
21.60% - Cash - Moved it into SCHO recently to reduce fees and hopefully have some clarity as to what it was comprised of - treasury notes
16.97% - LTT - FNBGX - and some actual LTT's - Maybe a little more based on a small recent purchase...
23.05% - Gold - IAU

Like I said I kind of backed into this by deciding to keep some things that were already there. And some of my performance is definitely related to FSELX shooting up. I wish I caught VBR before the run up so I could mold my little Frankenstein portfolio closer to the actual GB.
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:36 am

Thanks for posting that, ppnewbie. So sort of a GB with a slice of tech as opposed to SCV, right?
barrett
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:54 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by barrett » Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:43 am

Kevin K. wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am
The only modification I've made to the GB is to use intermediate Treasuries instead of the barbell - VGIT specifically because it's not only low-cost but keeps average maturity to 5 years (which used to be the default definition of "intermediate" but many funds, from pure Treasuries to total market ones like BND and actively-managed bond-heavy funds like Wellesley have been pushing maturities [and thus interest rate risk] out to ~8-9 years in search of yield. I have a couple of years of supplemental (I'm taking SS and that covers most of our essential expenses) expenses in iBonds and NCUA-insured MM paying .35%.
Kevin, Do you then hold more like 30% in ITTs and less cash? That is how I have been leaning toward setting up my retirement accounts. Those are currently probably too high in STTs, but with the Fed planning to raise rates I keep thinking that maybe I should hold off on committing to ITTs. Market timing, I know.
Kevin K.
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Yay PP!

Post by Kevin K. » Mon Jan 24, 2022 9:23 am

barrett wrote:
Mon Jan 24, 2022 6:43 am
Kevin K. wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:09 am
The only modification I've made to the GB is to use intermediate Treasuries instead of the barbell - VGIT specifically because it's not only low-cost but keeps average maturity to 5 years (which used to be the default definition of "intermediate" but many funds, from pure Treasuries to total market ones like BND and actively-managed bond-heavy funds like Wellesley have been pushing maturities [and thus interest rate risk] out to ~8-9 years in search of yield. I have a couple of years of supplemental (I'm taking SS and that covers most of our essential expenses) expenses in iBonds and NCUA-insured MM paying .35%.
Kevin, Do you then hold more like 30% in ITTs and less cash? That is how I have been leaning toward setting up my retirement accounts. Those are currently probably too high in STTs, but with the Fed planning to raise rates I keep thinking that maybe I should hold off on committing to ITTs. Market timing, I know.
Yeah I of course have had the same thoughts, while reminding myself that forecasting interest rates (even in a case like this where the Fed has explicitly announced their intentions) is if anything even more of a fool's errand than timing the stock market. Tyler would doubtless remind us of his article on bond convexity and perhaps point out that the weighted average maturity of the specified STT/LTT barbell is only about 11 years, so still "intermediate." But yeah, what I've done is to keep at least 30% in ITT's, with the 10% in cash being a mixture of iBonds and MM funds. Based on the backtesting I did on both Portfolio Charts and Portfolio Visualizer using all ITT's has historically been just as good as the barbell for both returns and protection during market meltdowns but obviously we are in uncharted waters with interest rates being so low and equity valuations so frothy. At the end of the day I guess my current thinking is to still have lots of ITTs for ballast even though they're likely to have negative returns for a few years while hoping that the substantial allocation to SCV and gold provide some protection during the next major market meltdown.

Actually when it comes to tweaks I think there's a decent argument to be made that replacing TSM (whose returns are pretty much entirely driven by the FAANG stocks and which includes a fair amount of mid and small cap) with an S&P 500 and using a super-value-y SCV fund like AVUV (run by ex-DFA folks and the topic of much discussion and glowing recommendations on Bogleheads and by Larry Swedroe, Merriman and other SCV advocates) might be more fruitful than messing with the bonds. But like you I have to pay very close attention to capital gains so I keep things pretty plain vanilla except for the ITT's.
Post Reply