Bogleheads Home Bogleheads
Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle
 
  WikiWiki    FAQFAQ    SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

please pimp my portfolio

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bogleheads Forum Index -> Investing - Help with Personal Investments
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:42 pm    Post subject: please pimp my portfolio Reply with quote

I've been lurking here awhile, but only now is my spirit strong
enough to put the full horror of my existing portfolio on display
for public ridicule Smile

I am 55yo, single, and semi-retired (some earnings, sporadic
and unreliable). My portfolio is roughly $1million. I believe
I can live comfortably off an initial WR of 4% (CPI adjusted
going forward) plus these sporadic earnings near-term and
Social Security long-term. Probably a little less than 4% would
be ok.

I have no emergency fund; I imagine the cash portion of my AA
can serve that purpose.

I have no debt.

My filing status is single. My federal rate tends to be 25%, but
may be down close to 15% for years aI have no income other
than investments. State rate (NC) is about 7%

Age: 55

I believe an appropriate AA for me is: stock 40%, bonds 40%,
cash 10%, other (real estate, commodities) 10%. With a 2/3
to 1/3 domestic/int'l split on equities. I am open to other
suggestions, however.

My current portfolio is as follows (percentages are of total egg, summing to 100%).
It's a mess. Please be gentle. And thanks in advance ... (I'm sorry the formatting
is so lame; the forum interface doesn't seem to care about my tabs).



6.25% APY CDs due 2-4 years 8.7% bond or cash ???


VANGUARD MUTUAL FUNDS
Wellesley Income Fund VWINX 6.0% balance conservative allocation
Prime Money Market Fund VMMXX 5.1% cash
High-Yield Corporate Fund VWEHX 1.1% bond intermediate
High-Yield Tax-Exempt Fund VWAHX 0.9% bond muni national intm

TAXABLE BROKERAGE ACCOUNT
American Fd Income Fund AMECX 1.8% balance moderate allocation
American Fd New Perspective ANWPX 3.7% stock foreign misc
T Rowe Price Health Sciences Fd PRHSX 0.4% stock mid growth
Energy Conversion ENER 0.3% stock small growth
Vanguard All-World ex-US ETF VEU 1.5% stock foreign large blend
Johnson&Johnson JNJ 0.4% stock large core
Pepsico PEP 0.7% stock large growth
Rambus RMBS 1.2% stock small growth
Loomis Sayles Global Bond LSGLX 1.0% bond world bond
Vanguard Total Bond Mkt ETF BND 3.7% bond intermediate
Vanguard Mid Cap ETF VO 0.7% stock mid blend
Vanguard Small Cap Growth ETF VBK 0.9% stock small growth
Vanguard Small Cap Value ETF VBR 1.4% stock small value
cash (liquid) 11.0%

TIAA-CREF After-Tax
Inst'l Growth & Income Fund TIIRX 2.8% stock large blend
Inst'l International Equity Fd TIERX 2.6% stock foreign large blend

401K
Fidelity Puritan Fund FPURX 3.5% balance moderate allocation

BROKERAGE TRADITIONAL IRA
Navios Maritime Holdings NM 0.5% stock small core
Intel INTC 0.2% stock large growth
Advanced Micro Devices AMD 0.1% stock mid growth
JP Morgan JPM 0.4% stock large value
Procter & Gamble PG 0.8% stock large growth
CVS Caremark CVS 0.4% stock large growth
American Century Int'l Bond BEGBX 0.9% bond world bond
iShares Lehman Aggregate Bond AGG 2.1% bond intermediate
KBW Regional Banking ETF KRE 0.4% stock small value
iPath DowJones AIG Commodity DJP 3.1% commodity
SLM Corp (expires 3/2017) OSM 2.3% bond inflation-linked
Vanguard REIT Index ETF VNQ 1.5% r'estate
SPDR DJ Int'l Real Estate ETF RWX 1.0% r'estate
ING Clarion Global Real Estate IGR 0.8% r'estate
streetTRACKS Gold Shares GLD 1.6% commodity
5-year TIPS due 4/2011 3.3% bond inflation-linked
10-year TIPS due 7/2017 3.3% bond inflation-linked
cash (liquid) 0.9%

BROKERAGE ROTH IRA
Vanguard Total Stock Mkt Index VTI 1.3% stock large blend
Vanguard All-World ex-US ETF VEU 1.2% stock foreign large blend
Vanguard Total Bond Mkt ETF BND 0.5% bond intermediate
cash 0.5%

TIAA-CREF 403(a)
TIAA Traditional 5.0% bond
S&P 500 Index TRSPX 2.3% stock large blend
Small-Cap Equity Retire Class TRSEX 1.0% stock small blend
CREF Inflation-Linked Bond 1.1% bond inflation-linked
CREF Bond Market 1.2% bond
TIAA Real Estate 2.9% real estate

I have not listed basis of stuff in taxable accounts. I think the only ones
large enough to give me pause in liquidating them would be the New Perspective
and the T'CREF Int'l fund.

Other comments ... I must keep the TIAA-CREF retirement account, in order
to receive retiree health insurance; but I'm open to trimming it down (remove
the TRSEX ?)

I'll probably roll the 401K to the T-IRA soon, when current contracting arrangement
(done as a W-2 employee of an agency) ends.

I like having Vanguard mutual fund account (to be able to get stuff like Wellesley,
bond funds) but also a brokerage accounts, to be able to add stuff like global
bond funds, buy individual TIPS, commodity stuff like DJP and GLD, that kind of thing.
I'd love to get rid of the TIAA-CREF Mutual funds, but the gain in the int'l one is
pretty big.

Thanks !!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alec



Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1135

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow. Looks like this is the breakdown of holdings:

Taxable: 56%
401(k): 4%
Trad IRA: 24%
Roth IRA: 3%
403: 14%

Is that about right?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlohaJoe



Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 190

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:06 pm    Post subject: Re: please pimp my portfolio Reply with quote

Is your AA a "goal"? I ask because you say 10% cash (which still seems high to me) but you've actually got almost 20% in cash if I've summed it up right.

You appear to have a number of quasi-duplicated funds and a number of bonds in taxable accounts, as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alec wrote:
Wow. Looks like this is the breakdown of holdings:

Taxable: 56%
401(k): 4%
Trad IRA: 24%
Roth IRA: 3%
403: 14%

Is that about right?


Yes, it is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:16 pm    Post subject: Re: please pimp my portfolio Reply with quote

AlohaJoe wrote:
Is your AA a "goal"? I ask because you say 10% cash (which still seems high to me) but you've actually got almost 20% in cash if I've summed it up right.


Yes, a goal - not where I'm at now. Also, as far as the cash alloc,
I'm not quite sure how to count those 6.25% CDs.

Quote:

You appear to have a number of quasi-duplicated funds and a number of bonds in taxable accounts, as well.


Indeed - it's a mess. One reason I started this whole thing asking
if I oughta roll the AMECX into VWINX. Complicated by the fact that
a lot of folks here don't seem to believe in balanced funds at all, at
least not in taxable accounts.

I guess since I'm pretty much in the draw-down phase, I figure
I have to pay taxes on that bond income one way or the other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PiperWarrior



Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 4068
Location: right on course

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about something like this?

Taxable
3.7% American Fd New Perspective ANWPX stock foreign misc
2.6% Inst'l International Equity Fd TIERX stock foreign large blend
27% VTI Total Stock Market
6.7% VEU FTSE All-World ex-US
10.0% cash
5.9% BND Total Bond Market or a tax-exempt bond fund if it makes sense

Traditional IRA + planned 401(k) rollover
14.1% BND Total Bond Market
6.4% TIP Inflation Protected Securities
3.3% 5-year TIPS due 4/2011
3.3% 10-year TIPS due 7/2017

Roth IRA
3.5% VNQ REIT Index

TIAA-CREF 403(a)
6.5% TIAA Real Estate
7.0% CREF Inflation-Linked Bond

This adds up to:

27% domestic stocks
10% REIT
13% international stocks
20% nominal bonds
20% inflation protected securities
10% cash

ANWPX and TIERX appear to be a bit expensive. You might want to turn off reinvestment of dividends and capital gains and take them in cash, especially if you are in the withdrawal phase.

I wanted to hide cash in a tax-advantaged account to reduce non-qualified dividends, but I couldn't do so due to lack of space. Since cash has a lower yield than a bond fund, I put the entire cash in your taxable account.

If you want to put commodify, international real estate, etc, you can do so in your Roth IRA or Traditional IRA.

RustyShackleford wrote:
I guess since I'm pretty much in the draw-down phase, I figure I have to pay taxes on that bond income one way or the other.

You are correct, but if you withdraw from your taxable account, you pay tax on (mostly) qualified dividends and long-term capital gains, both of which are taxed favorably, so you can defer tax as much as possible that way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks. So you are not a believer in having something like
Wellesley as a core holding for a retiree ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bolt



Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 871
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
Thanks. So you are not a believer in having something like
Wellesley as a core holding for a retiree ?
I'm no one to say, but I have it as part of mine,.... so it your call. What % would be my concern. Good Luck!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Midpack



Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 274
Location: Chicagoland

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You could do a lot worse. What struck me first is just that it's way more complicated (far too many holdings) than necessary. I used to have more holdings but I've simplified and my 'egg' is about 2X the one you mention with a taxable account, a 401k and 4 IRA's --- and I have grand total of 10 holdings. I have all the major asset classes and relatively low correlation without the complexity.

I was going to work up something, but PW is a far better resource than I am and he's already done it. IMO you've just got a lot of timely, planned pruning and consolidating to do for the most part.
_________________
You only live once...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PiperWarrior



Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 4068
Location: right on course

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
Thanks. So you are not a believer in having something like
Wellesley as a core holding for a retiree ?

It would be a nice fund in a tax-advantaged account if it is the only fund you hold. If you have a taxable account, I would enjoy favorable taxation on qualified dividends and long-term capital gains. Also, a balanced fund makes it harder to implement an asset allocation. If your asset allocation calls for 40% domestic stocks, for example, you cannot just purchase 40% Total Stock Market because a balanced fund holds some of them. That is, I want to be able to directly translate an asset allocation to an asset placement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alec



Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1135

PostPosted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PiperWarrior wrote:
RustyShackleford wrote:
Thanks. So you are not a believer in having something like
Wellesley as a core holding for a retiree ?

It would be a nice fund in a tax-advantaged account if it is the only fund you hold. If you have a taxable account, I would enjoy favorable taxation on qualified dividends and long-term capital gains. Also, a balanced fund makes it harder to implement an asset allocation. If your asset allocation calls for 40% domestic stocks, for example, you cannot just purchase 40% Total Stock Market because a balanced fund holds some of them. That is, I want to be able to directly translate an asset allocation to an asset placement.


In addition to what PW has said, and as I alluded to in your prior conversation, you can just create Wellesley more tax efficiently by using a cheap high dividend fund/etf, like Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) in conjunction with an int term inv grade bond fund. So, if you wanted a lot of Wellesley initially, just replace a large % of the stock funds with VYM.

Since you're going to be using a brokerage acct for the IRAs, you could look into buying individual TIPS directly at auction, or as cheaply as possible to save the expenses on the TIPS ETFs. Also, you could look into gradually replacing the taxable bonds with I bonds - tax deferral, no state taxes, inflation protected, plus the fixed rate on the I bond is currently pretty competitive with 5-10 yr TIPS.

btw - I'd treat the CD's as short term fixed income, like ST bonds.

- Alec
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Me again ...

Part of simplifying my portfolio, getting to something like
piperwarrior's most excellent proposal, would be to liquidate
some of the individual blue-chips I have in there (PEP, PG, JNJ,
JPM). One reads periodically that it's good to have some of these
rock-solid high-yielding individual stocks, but I kinda gather the
main point of this is to have some "value" stuff in there. So I wonder
if it makes sense to go ahead and sell them, but put a little "value"
tilt in my domestic equity with something like VTV or VYM. Not to mention a "small" tilt with something like VBR or VB.

Thanks again !

P.S. Some of the other individual issues like NM, ENER, RMBS are
"play" holdings, relics from previous employers, that kinda thing ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rorussell



Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pardon me for barging into this conversation, but I don't know how to move about this site very well.

I'm terribly interested in Midpacks statement that, "I have 10 holdings in all the major asset classes and relatively low correlation without the complexity."

What does "relatively low correlation" mean? What are the 10 asset classes that give you simplicity? Sounds like my dream allocation.

Bob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Midpack



Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 274
Location: Chicagoland

PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 5:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Pardon me for barging into this conversation, but I don't know how to move about this site very well.

I'm terribly interested in Midpacks statement that, "I have 10 holdings in all the major asset classes and relatively low correlation without the complexity."

What does "relatively low correlation" mean? What are the 10 asset classes that give you simplicity? Sounds like my dream allocation.

Bob

Welcome aboard, barging is fine here. But there's nothing 'terribly interesting' about my AA, it's like many, many others here and elsewhere. My AA is based on The Four Pillars of Investing --- but any of these http://www.diehards.org/readbooks.htm are along the same lines - there is no better recommended reading list IMHO. They all deal with low correlation (some explain more thoroughly than others and I PM'd more info on that topic) and I doubt any of them recommend you have dozens of holdings. Fortunately, it's not 'rocket science' after all...
_________________
You only live once...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alec



Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1135

PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
Me again ...

Part of simplifying my portfolio, getting to something like
piperwarrior's most excellent proposal, would be to liquidate
some of the individual blue-chips I have in there (PEP, PG, JNJ,
JPM). One reads periodically that it's good to have some of these
rock-solid high-yielding individual stocks, but I kinda gather the
main point of this is to have some "value" stuff in there. So I wonder
if it makes sense to go ahead and sell them, but put a little "value"
tilt in my domestic equity with something like VTV or VYM. Not to mention a "small" tilt with something like VBR or VB.

Thanks again !

P.S. Some of the other individual issues like NM, ENER, RMBS are
"play" holdings, relics from previous employers, that kinda thing ...


I really hate monitoring stocks, and if they go from growth to value, or low div to high div, so if you want to tilt your portfolio towards higher div stocks [since you already own all the stocks thru the TSM fund/etf], I'd just use the High Div etf.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Folks, I posted my portfolio awhile back and had many excellent
suggestions. I didn't implement them all, because I don't like to
do anything suddenly with my money. Since then, many interesting
things have happened, most notably the collapse of stock values and
the fire-sale on TIPS a few months back. I'd like to post my
current portfolio, considerably streamlined from the originally-
posted one, but still in need of remediation, and solicit your
comments and suggestions.

My desired AA is equity 40%, bond 40%, real estate 10%, 5%
commodities, 5% cash; but I certainly welcome comments on the
appropriateness of this for a 56yo early/semi-retiree wanting to
spend 4% (inflation-adjusted going forward) of CURRENT (i.e.
second great depression) portfolio value ! With perhaps 60/40
domestic/foreign equity, and modest value and small tilts.

Right now I'm at 31% stock (VPGDX is 70% stock),
47% bond (VPGDX is 25% bond, and also calling the CDs
and TIAA Traditional to be bonds). My real estate is way below
target, but that's because I bailed on TIAA-RE for the well-predicted
dip; I'll re-enter whenever it looks right. Commodities (DJP+GLD)
are close to target, and of course cash is WAY heavy.

It's silly to have two each of international bond and int'l real-estate
funds, and I realize many may say it's silly to have 'em at all (at the
levels of allocation I have). I hate to sell 'em at current values, but
I guess I'd be moving the money to similarly-devalued assets.

Some of the minor holdings of individual stocks (RMBS, ENER, NM)
are sentimental and/or speculative "play" stocks. I should liquidate
'em ...

The money in TIAA-CREF needs to stay there (although it COULD be
legally rolled to the IRA), but of course the allocations can change.

Thanks much !

TAXABLE
Vanguard Total Stock Mkt VTI 6.33%
Vanguard All-World ex-US VEU 8.29%
Vanguard Small Cap Value VBR 1.46%
Vanguard High Dividend Yld VYM 3.74%
Vanguard Mgd Payout Growth&Dividend VPGDX 8.29%
Vanguard High-Yield Corporate Bond Fund VWEHX 1.07%
Vanguard High-Yield Tax-Ex Bond Fund VWAHX 1.30%
T Rowe Price Health Sciences Fund PRHSX 0.34%
Rambus RMBS 0.84%
Loomis Sayles Global Bond LSGLX 1.03%
6.25% APY CDs due Jan '10 thru Jan '12 12.32%
cash (money market) 8.87%

IRA
American Century Int'l Bond BEGBX 0.99%
SLM Corp (matures 2017) inflation-bond OSM 1.47%
TIPS (individual) 17.44%
Energy Conversion Devices ENER 0.33%
iPath DowJones AIG Commodity DJP 2.07%
streetTRACKS Gold Shares GLD 1.87%
Vanguard REIT Index ETF VNQ 0.81%
SPDR DJ Int'l Real Estate ETF RWX 0.57%
ING Clarion Global Real Estate IGR 0.25%
Navios Maritime Holdings NM 0.47%
CVS Caremark CVS 0.35%
KBW Regional Banking ETF KRE 0.25%

ROTH
Vanguard Total Stock Mkt Index VTI 1.34%
Vanguard All-World ex-US VEU 1.39%

TIAA-CREF (retirement annuities)
TIAA Traditional 6.67%
CREF Money Market 7.10%
CREF Inflation-Linked Bond 1.30%
CREF Bond Market 1.45%
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alec



Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1135

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi again Rusty,

Since no one has graced you with a response, I'll wade in.

1) It appears that you can still move some bonds/cash into the tax deferred/free accounts and some equities into the taxable account. For example, move into the IRA or Roth VWEHX and LSGLX and move VTI, VEU, NM, CVS, KBW into taxable. Even though Larry and Rick "disagree" over whether to use HY bonds, I'm pretty sure they'd both agree that it is better to hold them in non-taxable account.

2)
Quote:
It's silly to have two each of international bond and int'l real-estate funds, and I realize many may say it's silly to have 'em at all (at the levels of allocation I have). I hate to sell 'em at current values, but
I guess I'd be moving the money to similarly-devalued assets.


I agree. Don't let the endowment effect affect your portfolio. A better way to think about whether to sell things is to imagine that instead of those funds, you just hold a similar amount in cash. If you would still buy those funds, then keep them. If not, sell them.

3)
Quote:
Some of the minor holdings of individual stocks (RMBS, ENER, NM)
are sentimental and/or speculative "play" stocks. I should liquidate
'em ...


Agreed. Also, since you're retired, you've got some time to read up on behavioral traps to avoid. A very good [and somewhat short] book is Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes And How To Correct Them: Lessons From The New Science Of Behavioral Economics.

4) Why hold the CREF Inflation linked bond account and individual TIPS? You can totally avoid the 0.56% expense ratio buy just buying more ind TIPS in your IRA.

5) A better idea for any extra cash you've got in taxable account is I bonds, especially if you're retired and at inflation risk.

6) Why hold VPGDX at all? It's supposed to be someone's only fund in retirement, and since you've already got stocks, bonds, and real estate covered, no need to use it.

7) Unless you're keeping the money with TIAA-CREF for access to a RA or GRA TIAA acccount [that pays higher interest], I don't see many reasons not to roll it over into an IRA. You can still access the TIAA RE account, if you want, through an IRA w/ TIAA. And the CREF accounts are more or less higher expense versions of similar funds you can get at Vanguard.

Here's a possible portfolio for your consideration:

Taxable:

VTI 15.00%
VEU 16.56%
VBR 5.00%
VYM 5.00%
CDs 12.32%

IRA:

SLM Corp (matures 2017) inflation-bond OSM 1.47%
TIPS (individual) 17.44%
More ind TIPS 2.96%
Some Vanguard MM 5%

Roth:

VIPSX 2.73%

TIAA-CREF:

TIAA Traditional 6.67%
TIAA RE 9.85%

- Alec
_________________
"You will never correct by logic a man's error, if that error did not get into his mind by logic" - Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Alec. Many of you suggestions I shall take to heart. A couple
I don't think make sense for me, so let me say why, and tell me if I'm
wrong. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just thinking out loud !

1. As far as using my Roth for tax-inefficient funds, I figure that since
Roth is so advantageous tax-wise (with tax-free growth and withdrawals)
that it makes sense to FILL it with investments that have the highest
long-term appreciation; hence just a simple blend of VTI and VEU (the
only reason I don't just go VT there is it makes it a little more complicated
to calculate the domestic/foreign split in my master spreadsheet). But
even so, I can certainly re-arrange my positions better for tax purposes.

Also, a minor book-keeping problem is the VGD bond funds are VERY
expensive ($50 transactions) to hold in my IRA (at a brokerage). So
I'd need to open yet another acc't a VGD IRA. But I wonder if I should
have either position - and you seem to say "no" in your proposal.
VWAHX because my income is low-bracket (at least 'til I get another
big contracting gig, which may never happen, and certainly won't
keep happening long-term), and VWEHX because so many smart
people don't believe in it.

2. Right you are. If I DO decide to keep the int'l RE and bond positions,
I'll consolidate to one or the other, but I've never been able to get a
clear consensus (for one of my positions in each category).

3. I'll read that article, thanks. Part of my reason for having these,
frankly, is that it's fun to "play" the market, trying to market time in and
out of positions. I know this is a horrific admission here; but I figure as
long as it's such small amounts (maybe 2% of my egg, total), it's
harmless enough and prevents me from engaging in such frivolity with
the bulk of my assets !

4. Good point. But how to re-arrange things ? Maybe, as you are
suggesting, make TIAA-RE my sole RE position, selling VNQ (and
maybe IGR and RWX, depending on the crack I come out on #2),
thus providing cash in IRA to buy more individual TIPS to replace
the TIAA Inflation-Linked Bond Fund. Hmmm. I wonder if it should
scare me to have TIAA-RE as my sole RE position ?!? Maybe that's a
good thing, given the near consensus (yes, I've read that massive
thread) that it's possible to market-time TIAA-RE.

6. I agonized long and hard over entering VPGDX. I did it to get access
to the market-neutral fund, and for the way it manages cash outflow for
a retiree. Probably stupid. Certainly stupid with 20/20 hindsight, given
I liquidated Wellesley to get into it Sad

7. There are two compelling reasons for me to keep TIAA-CREF. One is
that any withdrawals are state-tax free; a lump-sum may be, but I can't
get a definitive answer on that one. The second is I get free state
employees' health insurance as long as I have a monthly payment from
TIAA-CREF; theoretically that could be $1/month, but I HATE to mess
with ANY possiblity of queering this remarkable benefit. And yes, I
think TIAA Trad is a pretty good fixed-income holding these days; in fact,
the last payment from my "TIAA payout annuity" I simply rolled back
into TIAA Trad !

Did I say "thanks" ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alec



Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 1135

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
Thanks Alec. Many of you suggestions I shall take to heart. A couple
I don't think make sense for me, so let me say why, and tell me if I'm
wrong. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just thinking out loud !

1. As far as using my Roth for tax-inefficient funds, I figure that since
Roth is so advantageous tax-wise (with tax-free growth and withdrawals)
that it makes sense to FILL it with investments that have the highest
long-term appreciation; hence just a simple blend of VTI and VEU (the
only reason I don't just go VT there is it makes it a little more complicated
to calculate the domestic/foreign split in my master spreadsheet). But
even so, I can certainly re-arrange my positions better for tax purposes.


As people mentioned in the other thread, I'd keep as many tax efficient equities in the taxable account as possible.

Quote:
Also, a minor book-keeping problem is the VGD bond funds are VERY expensive ($50 transactions) to hold in my IRA (at a brokerage). So I'd need to open yet another acc't a VGD IRA. But I wonder if I should have either position - and you seem to say "no" in your proposal.
VWAHX because my income is low-bracket (at least 'til I get another
big contracting gig, which may never happen, and certainly won't
keep happening long-term), and VWEHX because so many smart
people don't believe in it.


If it's be that much of a hassle to include the 2 high yield funds in the tax deferred accounts, get rid of them. Especially since given the low % of the two high yield funds in the portfolio [only 2.37%], not including them in not going to make much of a difference.

Quote:
2. Right you are. If I DO decide to keep the int'l RE and bond positions,
I'll consolidate to one or the other, but I've never been able to get a
clear consensus (for one of my positions in each category).


Again, the int'l RE and bonds are such a small % of the portfolio, not including them in not going to make much of a difference. Plus, if I was going to own an int'l bond fund, I'd own one of Pimco's institutional foreign bond funds b/c they're cheaper than BEGBX.

Quote:
3. I'll read that article, thanks. Part of my reason for having these,
frankly, is that it's fun to "play" the market, trying to market time in and
out of positions. I know this is a horrific admission here; but I figure as
long as it's such small amounts (maybe 2% of my egg, total), it's
harmless enough and prevents me from engaging in such frivolity with
the bulk of my assets !


Hey, it's your money. If you are going to play around with ind stocks, use the taxable account so the gov't can share in any losses.

Quote:
4. Good point. But how to re-arrange things ? Maybe, as you are
suggesting, make TIAA-RE my sole RE position, selling VNQ (and
maybe IGR and RWX, depending on the crack I come out on #2),
thus providing cash in IRA to buy more individual TIPS to replace
the TIAA Inflation-Linked Bond Fund. Hmmm. I wonder if it should
scare me to have TIAA-RE as my sole RE position ?!? Maybe that's a
good thing, given the near consensus (yes, I've read that massive
thread) that it's possible to market-time TIAA-RE.


We're not talking rocket science here. You can always use a REIT index fund in the Roth, and put the TIPS back into the TC account.

Quote:
6. I agonized long and hard over entering VPGDX. I did it to get access
to the market-neutral fund, and for the way it manages cash outflow for
a retiree. Probably stupid. Certainly stupid with 20/20 hindsight, given
I liquidated Wellesley to get into it Sad


As I said previously, the managed payout funds are supposed to be a sole fund for a retirement portfolio. Also, the goal of the managed payout funds is basically the goal fo your entire portfolio. IMO, the market neutral fund would make up such a low % of your overall portfolio, it wouldn't make much of a difference if you 86'd VPGDX.

Quote:
7. There are two compelling reasons for me to keep TIAA-CREF. One is that any withdrawals are state-tax free; a lump-sum may be, but I can't get a definitive answer on that one. The second is I get free state
employees' health insurance as long as I have a monthly payment from
TIAA-CREF; theoretically that could be $1/month, but I HATE to mess
with ANY possiblity of queering this remarkable benefit. And yes, I
think TIAA Trad is a pretty good fixed-income holding these days; in fact,
the last payment from my "TIAA payout annuity" I simply rolled back
into TIAA Trad !


If the health and tax bennies are worth it, then keep the money w/ TC. It appears that TIAA [RA/GRA] provides interest comparable to CD's, so when your CD's do eventually mature, you can consider replacing future CD purchases with TIAA. This would also free up taxable space to replace the MM in the tax deferred with I bonds in taxable.

- Alec
_________________
"You will never correct by logic a man's error, if that error did not get into his mind by logic" - Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, it's me again. I have implemented many of the suggestions
made in my "round two" last April. Here is where I am at now
(sorry about the formatting):

TAXABLE
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index 20.0%
Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Index 10.0%
Vanguard Value Index 2.5%
Vanguard Small Cap Value Index 2.3%
play stocks 2.5%
6.25% APY CDs due Jan '10 thru Jan '12 10.8%
Vanguard Total Bond Market 2.3%
cash 5.0%

IRA
SLM Corp inflation-linked bonds (ticker: OSM) 2.0%
individual Treasury TIPS 15.9%
PowerShares DBC Commodity Index 5.0%
Vanguard REIT Index 2.9%

ROTH
Vanguard Balanced Index Fund (60% stock/40% bond) 4.5%

TIAA-CREF RA
TIAA Traditional 5.8%
CREF Bond Market 1.4%
TIAA Real Estate 7.1%

To re-cap, I am a 56yp single early-retiree. My target AA is:
equities 40%, bonds 40%, RE 10%, commodity 5%, cash 5%.
For equities, I want something like 25-40% int'l, and a small
and value tilt. For bonds, I want roughly 50% inflation-linked.
I welcome comments on the appropriateness of these targets.

One continuing suggestion, that I continue to resist, is filling Roth
with tax-inefficient stuff; I feel that Roth is uniquely valuable and
that I want to go with a good growth/risk mix, hence the moderate
allocation fund VBINX.

This still leaves a fair amount of tax-inefficient stuff in TAXABLE,
but there's only room (the stock portion of VBINX) to move a small
amount of it into tax-sheltered anyhow. Plus, those CDs are earning
6.25% APY (Penfed !!), so it seems silly to disturb them !

Thanks !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
celia



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alec wrote:
Quote:
3. I'll read that article, thanks. Part of my reason for having these,
frankly, is that it's fun to "play" the market, trying to market time in and
out of positions. I know this is a horrific admission here; but I figure as
long as it's such small amounts (maybe 2% of my egg, total), it's
harmless enough and prevents me from engaging in such frivolity with
the bulk of my assets !


Hey, it's your money. If you are going to play around with ind stocks, use the taxable account so the gov't can share in any losses.

Rusty, I didn't read this thread until today, but I would have disagreed with Alec. Instead of thinking that the government can share in your losses, I would think that by keeping them in the IRA, I wouldn't have to pay taxes on any gains until I withdraw from the IRA. However, they are fine in your taxable account since you can get the capital gains taxed at a lower rate.

Have you considered converting part of your IRA to a Roth? If you're living off investments now, by age 70 1/2, you'll probably be living off investments and social security and your tax rate won't be any lower than it is today. In addition, you'll have to take Minimum Required Distributions and pay taxes on them based on your tax rate then. (The government needs to get their share eventually.) Knowing this, I would start by converting REIT or part of it (depending on how much you can afford in taxes and where the tax money will come from). Be sure you convert into a new Roth account, in case you need to re-characterize.

I totally agree that you want the asset that has the potential to grow the most in the Roth.

You specifically asked for comments on your proposed asset allocation. I think your goal is completely suitable for your situation.

celia
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Default User BR



Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 362

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
One continuing suggestion, that I continue to resist, is filling Roth with tax-inefficient stuff; I feel that Roth is uniquely valuable and that I want to go with a good growth/risk mix, hence the moderate allocation fund VBINX.

That's fine and all, but I wouldn't do like you are. I'd suggest getting rid of the balanced and move the Total Bond and SCV from taxable into there. Then you have your mix, and the same time getting less efficient stuff out of taxable.



Brian
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alex Frakt
Site Admin


Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 3637
Location: Chicago

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Default User BR wrote:
RustyShackleford wrote:
One continuing suggestion, that I continue to resist, is filling Roth with tax-inefficient stuff; I feel that Roth is uniquely valuable and that I want to go with a good growth/risk mix, hence the moderate allocation fund VBINX.

That's fine and all, but I wouldn't do like you are. I'd suggest getting rid of the balanced and move the Total Bond and SCV from taxable into there. Then you have your mix, and the same time getting less efficient stuff out of taxable.

I agree completely. Exchange Total Bond and SCV for TSM in taxable and Balanced for a 50/50 mix of Total Bond and SCV in the Roth.

Beyond that, I'm not sure what holding 1.4% of anything gets you, so I would simplify a bit by moving the CREF Bond into TIAA Traditional if you can easily do this. And I have no idea how your individual stocks and Sallie Mae bonds are doing, but again I'd be asking myself if it's worth the headache to actively manage 4.5% of my portfolio. Maybe liquidate the individual stocks over time to meet any income needs that remain after your RMDs?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MWCA



Joined: 30 Nov 2007
Posts: 782

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just want to comment. The title made me chuckle a bit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Celia, Brian, and Alex. Some good ideas, some I'd
love more discussion on, some I appreciate but don't like ...
(I should have pointed out that my recent post isn't where I'm
literally at now, but where I plan to be in the short-term, after
running things by you all).

Quote:

Regarding my "play stocks" - Instead of thinking that the government can share in your losses, I would think that by keeping them in the IRA, I wouldn't have to pay taxes on any gains until I withdraw from the IRA.


Thanks to tax-loss harvesting, it'll be a long time before I have to
worry about capital-gains again ! Meanwhile, since I'm short on space
in tax-sheltered accounts anyhow, these stocks should clearly be in
taxable. Many think "play stocks" are silly, and they're probably right,
but they serve a useful function diverting me from messing with the
rest of my portolio Smile I'll probably do as Alex suggested - sell
'em for annual withdrawal when they seem over-valued.

Quote:

Have you considered converting part of your IRA to a Roth? If you're living off investments now, by age 70 1/2, you'll probably be living off investments and social security and your tax rate won't be any lower than it is today. In addition, you'll have to take Minimum Required Distributions and pay taxes on them based on your tax rate then. (The government needs to get their share eventually.) Knowing this, I would start by converting REIT or part of it (depending on how much you can afford in taxes and where the tax money will come from). Be sure you convert into a new Roth account, in case you need to re-characterize.


My plan is to DCA (as it were) into Roth by filling my 10/15% tax
brackets with conversions each year. I'm reluctant to convert all at
once, liking the idea of "tax diversification", since I don't trust the
gov't not to find some way to effectively tax Roth withdrawals (VAT,
use tax, etc). This year, I have enough cash in the IRA to convert,
but I like your suggestion about what to convert in future years (REIT).
I'm be tempted to convert some of the TIPS too, since it's pretty easy
to define a good time, when they're undervalued based on high YTM.

Please remind me why I might need to recharacterize, assuming I
convert near the end of the year when I know my income ?

Quote:

You specifically asked for comments on your proposed asset allocation. I think your goal is completely suitable for your situation.


Good. You are the first (I think) to comment on this, which is, as
any good Boglehead knows, THE most important thing in your portfolio.


Quote:

I agree completely. Exchange Total Bond and SCV for TSM in taxable and Balanced for a 50/50 mix of Total Bond and SCV in the Roth.


Sounds good. Although I'm exchanging the total bonds in taxable for
the bond portion of Balanced, so the main improvement is putting the
SCV into Roth. I still have to keep some bonds in taxable to maintain
my 40% allocation, no ?

Quote:

... I would simplify a bit by moving the CREF Bond into TIAA Traditional if you can easily do this.


Wow, people ARE down on bond funds these days ! I already have a
TPA out of Trad (this RA, not SRA), but I guess that doesn't mean I
can't u-turn the money back.

Quote:

... Sallie Mae bonds are doing, but again I'd be asking myself if it's worth the headache to actively manage 4.5% of my portfolio.


They're paying inflation + 2% (on par) and are discounted about
50% now, with maturity in 7 years; that's a pretty astronomical yield.
They could default, but I lock in a 50% loss if I sell 'em now.
Not much headache other than double-checking Sallie's yield
computations, and a lot of excitement wondering if you'll actually
get paid each month Smile !

Thanks for reminding me why this is the best source of investment
advice in the universe !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
celia



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RustyShackleford wrote:
Please remind me why I might need to recharacterize, assuming I convert near the end of the year when I know my income ?

If the value of the converted asset goes down significantly between now and Oct. 15 of the following year, you probably wouldn't want to pay taxes on the higher converted dollar amount. (If you pay taxes on any 2009 converted amount by April 15, 2010, you can still re-characterize and file an amended return up to Oct. 15. You do not need to request a tax filling extension.)

If you convert, also do it to a new Roth. If you co-mingle it in an existing Roth, the re-characterization will un-do part of everything in the co-mingled Roth instead of just the new asset/shares you converted. It gets to be a mess. After Oct. 15, you can move the converted assets to your other Roth.

If your IRA and Roth are at Vanguard, be aware that once you do any re-characterization in a calendar year, Vanguard's computers "lock" your accounts so you can't do any more conversions in that year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RustyShackleford



Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

celia wrote:
RustyShackleford wrote:
Please remind me why I might need to recharacterize, assuming I convert near the end of the year when I know my income ?

If the value of the converted asset goes down significantly between now and Oct. 15 of the following year, you probably wouldn't want to pay taxes on the higher converted dollar amount. (If you pay taxes on any 2009 converted amount by April 15, 2010, you can still re-characterize and file an amended return up to Oct. 15. You do not need to request a tax filling extension.)


Oh, I see - an insurance policy, as it were, against the dreaded
W-shaped recovery. Actually a good reason to convert assets
instead of cash, I reckon.

Quote:

If you convert, also do it to a new Roth.


I wonder if Schwab would allow me to have two Roth's ??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bogleheads Forum Index -> Investing - Help with Personal Investments All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group