Interest Rates Probably Will Not Rise Any Time Soon

Events over the past few days...primarily the fear over global implications concerning this Contravirus....show just how "shaky" investing can be. The markets are in another nose dive today. Couple this virus fear with Brexit, and the near future looks very volatile. It seems to me that about all a person can do is compile a diversified and fairly conservative portfolio, and mentally ride out the wild swings.
 

mathjak107 said:
bonds and bond funds have done bettter than cash instruments over just about all time frames .

the only thing you need to know is what the bond fund holds so you know how it reacts and to what , and the duration value of the fund so you can ladder them like a cd so you don't sell before its time .

it really is easy .
Click to expand...
I remain a stock investor because for me it is more interesting to investigate and follow companies of all sizes and business areas. If you don't love your work then it is work!
 

personally i have much more interesting things to do than monitor stocks .... i use a diversified portfolio that works well and it generates a nice income for us with reduced volatility
 
fmdog44 said:
Never invest in something you do not understand. I don't understand bonds. I have never invested in bonds.
Click to expand...
Good thinking. Same with stocks, if I do not understand what a stock does I would not buy it.

Talking about bonds, I do not like they. I do not like mutual funds either as I like to pick my stocks. But to each their own.

Over the long term, stocks do better. Since 1926, large stocks have returned an average of 10 % per year; long-term government bonds have returned between 5% and 6%, according to investment researcher Morningstar.
 
mathjak107 said:
personally i have much more interesting things to do than monitor stocks .... i use a diversified portfolio that works well and it generates a nice income for us with reduced volatility
Click to expand...
So you are saying you monitor your portfolio which is what I am saying I do.
 
oldmontana said:
Good thinking. Same with stocks, if I do not understand what a stock does I would not buy it.

Talking about bonds, I do not like they. I do not like mutual funds either as I like to pick my stocks. But to each their own.

Over the long term, stocks do better. Since 1926, large stocks have returned an average of 10 % per year; long-term government bonds have returned between 5% and 6%, according to investment researcher Morningstar.
Click to expand...
i am not sure why you would even attempt a comparison .. bonds are not a growth vehicle . they are no different than laddering cd''s .. would you compare cd's to stocks ?

you ladder bond funds by duration value with the time frame you want the money just like you would the maturity dates on a bond or cd .. bonds have just provided better returns than cd's and money markets over the equivalent periods of time .

stocks are never a proxy for fixed income and fixed income is never a proxy for stocks with one exception .

high yield is kind of hybrid bond or bond fund since they act more like stocks and are effected by what effects stocks only they provide income from interest .
 
For cash I would recommend Vanguard Money Market...it is yielding 1.65% but you are not locked in for any period of time and the yield changes as short term rates change. It was yielding in the mid 2% range last year but came down as rates came down. I use Vanguard for most of my mutual funds also.
 
mathjak107 said:
i am not sure why you would even attempt a comparison .. bonds are not a growth vehicle . they are no different than laddering cd''s .. would you compare cd's to stocks ?

you ladder bond funds by duration value with the time frame you want the money just like you would the maturity dates on a bond or cd .. bonds have just provided better returns than cd's and money markets over the equivalent periods of time .

stocks are never a proxy for fixed income and fixed income is never a proxy for stocks with one exception .

high yield is kind of hybrid bond or bond fund since they act more like stocks and are effected by what effects stocks only they provide income from interest .
Click to expand...
mathjak107 said:
i am not sure why you would even attempt a comparison .. bonds are not a growth vehicle . they are no different than laddering cd''s .. would you compare cd's to stocks ?

you ladder bond funds by duration value with the time frame you want the money just like you would the maturity dates on a bond or cd .. bonds have just provided better returns than cd's and money markets over the equivalent periods of time .

stocks are never a proxy for fixed income and fixed income is never a proxy for stocks with one exception .

high yield is kind of hybrid bond or bond fund since they act more like stocks and are effected by what effects stocks only they provide income from interest .
Click to expand...
I was showing what stocks return vs bonds of a period of time.....its called information.

"would you compare cd's to stocks ? " Yes I would...why not if you are looking for the best return over a, say a 5 year period?

Your posts indicate you think bonds are a better why to invest than stocks. I do not...so be it.
 
oldmontana said:
I was showing what stocks return vs bonds of a period of time.....its called information.

"would you compare cd's to stocks ? " Yes I would...why not if you are looking for the best return over a, say a 5 year period?

Your posts indicate you think bonds are a better why to invest than stocks. I do not...so be it.
Click to expand...
Your whole premise here is flawed .

You are so wrong with your interpretation here. No where was it ever said bonds outperform stocks in any consistent manner ....ever .

But stocks are stocks and they should be long term investments ,short term they can plunge so this five year outlook is ridiculous

But that is still not the point ..those here interested in fixed income are doing so because they don’t want this money in stocks , or we wouldn’t be having this discussion about rates on fixed income .they either want fixed income only or are discussing the fixed income side of a balanced portfolio..

So are you trying to tell us retirees should be 100% equities because they have better returns ? I hope not ...

Stocks are NEVER A PROXY for any fixed income component. It has zero to do with which has better returns
 
Last edited:
fmdog44 said:
Love my Vanguard!!
Click to expand...

we all like something until they give us reason not to . vanguard has given me quite a few reasons to dislike their company policies , they way they go to market and their customer service which for me was an awful experience.

i had to call them and it ended up being my first and last call to them . i stopped doing business . absolutely the worst customer experience i had with any financial company
 
mathjak107 said:
i am not sure why you would even attempt a comparison .. bonds are not a growth vehicle . they are no different than laddering cd''s .. would you compare cd's to stocks ?

you ladder bond funds by duration value with the time frame you want the money just like you would the maturity dates on a bond or cd .. bonds have just provided better returns than cd's and money markets over the equivalent periods of time .

stocks are never a proxy for fixed income and fixed income is never a proxy for stocks with one exception .

high yield is kind of hybrid bond or bond fund since they act more like stocks and are effected by what effects stocks only they provide income from interest .
Click to expand...
mathjak107 said:
Your whole premise here is flawed .

You are so wrong with your interpretation here. No where was it ever said bonds outperform stocks in any consistent manner ....ever .

But stocks are stocks and they should be long term investments ,short term they can plunge so this five year outlook is ridiculous

But that is still not the point ..those here interested in fixed income are doing so because they don’t want this money in stocks , or we wouldn’t be having this discussion about rates on fixed income .they either want fixed income only or are discussing the fixed income side of a balanced portfolio..

So are you trying to tell us retirees should be 100% equities because they have better returns ? I hope not ...

Stocks are NEVER A PROXY for any fixed income component. It has zero to do with which has better returns
Click to expand...
 

Sorry, I had problems posting.

I was going to say that you seem do not understand the difference between fixed income and return on a investment.

Again FYI..

I was showing what stocks return vs bonds of a period of time.....its called information.

"would you compare cd's to stocks ? " Yes I would...why not if you are looking for the best return over a, say a 5 year period?

Your posts indicate you think bonds are a better why to invest than stocks. I do not...so be it.
 
yeah , thats it , i don't understand the difference ....this conversation is going no where.

the only thing not understood is no where in this conversation is it about which has the biggest gains . nor should anyone ever be using a dividend paying stock as a substitute for fixed income . stocks regardless of type belong on the equity side of a portfolio , not the fixed income side of things . if a retiree is using a balanced portfolio it is exactly that .
 

Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top