Bogleheads.org

The system automatically did that match. I am not emotional when it comes to bear market so I am ok with not drops like 2008 and 2020. Why do I need Bonds or international stocks? See the video linked in the first post of the thread below for some reasons why you should consider adding international stocks to your portfolio. Link: https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=400140 Regards, Isn’t the US market the most stable? International would be more towards speculative? not during the lost decade. International outperformed US over that time period. also it's hard to say international is "speculative" when 40% of the entire planet's equity allocation is outside US borders. returns over the long long term (like talking ba...

that's fine. you can check for comparison under Approximating Total Stock Market some might say S&P500 (by itself) would be fine since the returns of the two are very similar (back to 1992 when total stock market launched): https://i.postimg.cc/fy2zc0cb/s-p.jpg source: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&timePeriod=4&startYear=1985&firstMonth=1&endYear=2023&lastMonth=12&calendarAligned=true&includeYTD=false&initialAmount=10000&annualOperation=0&annualAdjustment=0&inflationAdjusted=true&annualPercentage=0.0&frequency=4&rebalanceType=1&absoluteDeviation=5.0&relativeDeviation=25.0&leverageType=0&leverageRatio=0.0&debtAmount=0&debtInteres...

It's only when the tide goes out that you learn who has been swimming naked

not that one?

No matter how great the talent or efforts, some things just take time. You can’t produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant.

not that one either?

how about this mantra of W.B...

Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.

is that the one?

that's fine. you can check for comparison under Approximating Total Stock Market some might say S&P500 (by itself) would be fine since the returns of the two are very similar (back to 1992 when total stock market launched): https://i.postimg.cc/fy2zc0cb/s-p.jpg source: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&timePeriod=4&startYear=1985&firstMonth=1&endYear=2023&lastMonth=12&calendarAligned=true&includeYTD=false&initialAmount=10000&annualOperation=0&annualAdjustment=0&inflationAdjusted=true&annualPercentage=0.0&frequency=4&rebalanceType=1&absoluteDeviation=5.0&relativeDeviation=25.0&leverageType=0&leverageRatio=0.0&debtAmount=0&debtInterest...

Svensk Anga wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 8:22 pm If you claim early based on a high nominal interest rate, inflation may bite your retirement standard of living.

this.
(SS is a longevity benefit. It might matter in your 80s and 90s whether you get 24% higher benefit than at FRA or not).

Not to mention, if you have a lower earning spouse, s/he might regret your taking SS prior to 70 because s/he will get a reduced SS benefit if you predecease him/her. (this doesn't mean that while you're delaying to 70, the lower earning spouse should wait. In many cases the lower earner should claim at 62 while the higher earner delays to 70). See more on Mike Piper's talk at bogleheads 2022 conference.

Mike Piper is the creator of www.opensocialsecurity.com

Clarky wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 7:07 pm For our managed accounts in total, pas has us at 59/41 domestic/international stocks, 65/35 bonds. They slice and dice it in interesting ways, though… for instance, 92% international stock allocation to a Roth, with 100% domestic stock in TIRA.

do you know what the rationale was for putting international in Roth and domestic in TIRA?

Also, if you have to withdraw from TIRA but not Roth, won't the allocation of domestic/international get off kilter at some point as you draw down TIRA but not Roth?

thanks for sharing. didn't know about this one. yeah it's pretty new isn't it. sec yield is usually the past 30 days and since the funds inception was 3/7/23 it hasn't had a 30 day track record. i'd assume it will do what you want it to do if you: 1. want less risk (short term bonds are less risky than intermediate) 2. are ok with the potential of lower returns than an intermediate bond 3. need tax exempt income or are in a high tax bracket where munis make more sense actually it says maturities of 0-7 years and it's for investors with time horizons of 4-10 years. That doesn't sound short term to me. Sounds more intermediate. But I guess intermediate bonds can have short, intermediate and long term bonds which this fund wouldn't have (nothi...

welcome to the group. one way to think about it is you want the growth in your Roth IRA (tax free) and more of the fixed income in tax deferred accounts (401k). You have some bonds because of the target date fund there and it will be more heavy in bonds as you age. but the way to think about it is all of your assets and different accounts are different pieces of an entire pie. Your portfolio is the total of all your accounts combined. in that sense, whatever you want your asset allocation to be, you have to make sure the individual pieces add up to the whole that gets you to your asset allocation OVERALL. So first you need to figure what you want your asset allocation to be, then design the different accounts you have with an eye on stocks ...

Sorry I didn’t answer this when you earlier asked. Each account will automatically have its associated settlement fund. That happens as soon as you create the account. Vanguard created each of your accounts for you as part of the platform migration. The settlement fund is there for each of your accounts. So tell me if this is correct: Once the mutual fund account is converted to a brokerage, Vanguard automatically assigns a settlement fund to it (whether you know it not), and that fund happens to be the Federal Money Market fund. If you have an Sep Ira and Roth, it will create two separate settlement funds (one for each), and those settlement funds are the Federal Money Market. yes, you automatically get a money market fund in settlement f...

you shouldn't have converted funds, you were converting the ACCOUNT (from MF platform to brokerage platform). A conversion of FUNDS would be if you had mutual funds and converted them to ETFs. the settlement fund is just where the money sits while it's waiting to be invested (or possibly transferred as you're trying to do to fidelity). But it can't just sit in a settlement fund by itself. So it sits in a money market fund IN the settlement fund. At least you're earning interest on your money in the settlemetn fund BECAUSE it's in a money market fund IN THE settlement fund. See the difference now? when i transitioned from mutual fund in old platform to brokerage platform last year i did not need to sell anything, go to settlement and rebuy b...

grumpy30000 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 2:28 pm

arcticpineapplecorp. wrote: ↑Thu Mar 23, 2023 2:15 pm whatever brokerage you're using contact them and see if they can pull all the accounts with your current advisor and transfer all assets trustee to trustee and investments in kind to your new broker (if that's etrade?)

see with your new broker if there are any limitations regarding transfers (like with annuities).

The advisor works under New Edge Securities. Is that who I contact? Is there a way to initiate a transfer to keep the advisor out of the loop to avoid the sales pitch of why its a bad idea, etc etc

sorry, meant contact the new broker where you want to move your money and they'll initiate the trustee to trustee transfer for you without having you contact your current advisor. let us know how it goes!

whatever brokerage you're using contact them and see if they can pull all the accounts with your current advisor and transfer all assets trustee to trustee and investments in kind to your new broker (if that's etrade?)

see with your new broker if there are any limitations regarding transfers (like with annuities).

Questions for you: Be honest: Is there ever a point when you would stop investing in equities? Are you committed pretty much no matter what? Some people can’t stomach the market, that’s why they aren’t in it, and that’s a pretty reasonable and understandable position. Some don’t need to take the risk. But unless you are a business owner, or have other means of income, the alternatives to equities don’t look that great either (cash, bonds, PMs). Diversification becomes key, but what do you diversify to? What would you invest in if you could not invest in VTSAX or the like? For me probably real estate and some gold (95/5?) if I couldn’t invest in equities, or starting a business, but those options aren’t really passive. Here’s to many more y...

If you work for 40 years, the idea of having 25% of your lifetime's wealth taken away (equivalent to 10 YEARS of labor) by someone doing a few hours of work per year, is nothing short of horrifying. It would be if it were true. what's untrue here? The fact that someone might not work 40 years? What's untrue is that you'd lose 20% of your wealth by someone doing a few hours of work per year. but most advisors' (who are worth their salt) work is upfront at the beginning in simplifying what can often be described as client's hodgepodge portfolios, and in establishing a plan that involves explaining withdrawal strategies, etc. once the plan is established, there's not much to do except periodic rebalancing. you yourself might have an IPS. I'd ...

I'm sure many of us have elderly parent(s) and I'm wondering if there are any legal concerns with setting up online financial accounts for an elderly parent (with their knowledge and their funds). Like opening online bank or CD accounts and then providing access to the parent. I currently assist my dad with his technology needs and this just seems like a natural next step. Thanks, there are two ways of thinking about it. Though one may be right and one wrong, I'm not a lawyer. one says if you are his financial POA (are you? If not, get that done first) then you have the legal authority to act on his behalf at any time (not just when he's disabled or incompentent). however, another school of thought is you should not be accessing another pe...

We're a couple right at 80 years old. Financially were good to go, but if one of us goes into "the home", it would put a significant drain on the $1.5M assets that we'd like our kids and grandkids to inherit. So far we have made no moves to "protect our assets" by transferring title, etc., have no plans for doing so, but are we suckers for not doing so? not at all. And as a taxpayer, I for one thank you for not putting more of a burden on me to pay for your care. I'll do the same, so as to not be a burden on your children to have to pay for my care either. One good turn deserves another. That being said, you didn't say how much of that $1.5 mil is tied up in your home. In other words, going into a home may or may not pu...

“Buy when others are fearful”. Does it make sense to back up the truck to sector funds such as financials? Seems like a good time to get a huge discount. You might have to sit on it until it rebounds but you would do that with any holding. What would having 10-15% of portfolio in this matter as far as the downside. Could go down more. If it does just DCA into it. Is this any worse or riskier than holding something such as a REIT fund at these percentages? you should have an Investment Policy Statement . If you want to hold REITS then hold them. But don't bounce around from one thing to another just because it's out of favor. If you have no plan how will you know when and how much of your winnings to trim once they "rebound"? Deci...

Nate79 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 6:21 pm Are people fearful right now?

seems to me people are always fearful, and fearful about everything.

doomscrolling is a real thing.

there are 43 pages (to date) on the Bank failure discussion mega-thread you know. 43 pages, much of it fear.

A few years after 2008, Buffett hated giving up his preferred shares in Goldman Sachs that were paying him a juicy dividend plus a lot of upside as the stock recovered. That kind of deal wouldn't have been available to you. In 2008 Buffett gave an offer to Dick Fuld to invest in Lehman Bros to save the company. Dick Fuld rejected Buffett's offer. We know what happened to Lehman. Afterwords, Buffett considered himself lucky for Fuld having turned down his offer because his money wouldn't have turned the company around. are you holding cash to wait for the big one? If so, you could be giving up more than you'd stand to make from buying on the dips. Swedroe shows you why it's Better to Face the Correction Peter Lynch put it this way: “Far more...

So my question is simple: Should I follow my husband’s example and lock in the current loss I’m showing for VBILX and VBTLX . . . or should I relax and leave things alone there, hoping that I will still be around when the situation begins to reverse itself (Vanguard’s older bond purchases mature and their higher-interest-rate bond purchases begin to pick up the slack)? Or am I missing something elemental here, something that might make it even more appropriate for me to unload those two funds? if you are thinking of selling losses in bonds, why would you not be doing the same with stocks? They've lost even more than bonds over the past year: https://i.postimg.cc/PfRHsKwV/total.jpg source: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfo...

what dilemma exactly? Can she tell her company she shopped around and see if she can get a contract that matches one of the other two suppliers or else she will have to go with one of them because she's on a fixed income and can't afford their higher charges? if they balk, then get a contract with the cheapest company but inquire (if necessary) about whether or not they provide emergency repair service. Have you verified whether these cheaper companies will come out for an emergency or not? Also, just because a company is supplying oil doesn't mean that's who has to service the boiler, right? Can't you just call a repairman if/when you need that type of service? Can you separate out the need for oil from the need for repair? If so, then you...

these lawyers should not charge a fee upfront because they take their 1/3rd out of the lump sum that's received when you're approved and paid back for all the months you were waiting. as a result if the lawyer doesn't think you have a chance of winning s/he's not going to take your case because s/he needs to make money. much of the time individuals are not equipped at the process (they've only done it once) so they don't know what to do to get approved (medical records, second opinions, filing an appeal when denied, on and on). The attorney will take care of all that for you. I've known lots of people who applied, got denied and then reapplied, when they should have appealed the denial. When they reapplied they started the clock all over. I...

So my question is simple: Should I follow my husband’s example and lock in the current loss I’m showing for VBILX and VBTLX . . . or should I relax and leave things alone there, hoping that I will still be around when the situation begins to reverse itself (Vanguard’s older bond purchases mature and their higher-interest-rate bond purchases begin to pick up the slack)? Or am I missing something elemental here, something that might make it even more appropriate for me to unload those two funds? if you are thinking of selling losses in bonds, why would you not be doing the same with stocks? They've lost even more than bonds over the past year: https://i.postimg.cc/PfRHsKwV/total.jpg source: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfo...

I know the the Total Stock market is a wider assortment of companies - but can there a case be made for the SP having more stable, reliable companies? What things do you consider when evaluating both these indexes? the S&P500 is only about 80% of the total market. People call it "the market" but it's really not. Even Jack Bogle stated total stock market index fund was more "representative of the market" than the S&P500. over the short term holding fewer securities could have an impact on returns relative to "the market". An example of this was in 2020 when Tesla wasn't added to the S&P500 until Dec. (but it was in the total stock market the entire time). Since it's value rose in 2020 total market d...

burritoLover wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 11:48 am

sharadr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 11:43 am What is the fee for digital advisory ? I am currently enrolled in PAS, thinking to switch to digital.

0.2% per year AUM

actually vanguard says:

You'll pay no advisory fees for the first 90 days. After that, you'll pay no more than 0.20% in advisory fees for all-index investment options or 0.25% for an active/index mix, depending on your elections.

source: https://investor.vanguard.com/advice/robo-advisor

Received this promotional email from Vanguard: Looking for new ways to save on your tax bill? Tax-loss harvesting—coming soon to Vanguard Digital Advisor®—may help give you the break you need. And there's no additional advisory charge. Managing tax-loss harvesting on your own can take time. But with Digital Advisor, it's done automatically. • After you opt in, Digital Advisor will look for opportunities to sell stock index investments that are losing value so the loss becomes realized—this can be especially helpful during periods of market volatility. • Then it uses the proceeds from the sale of investments to purchase a replacement investment, so you'll remain fully invested.* At tax time, you may be able to claim those realized losses to...

I started investing in 2006, but I have yet to be able to reach the 300K. Despite my efforts, I've seen minimal progress in my investments, and I recognize that I must be making some mistakes. I hope that by maximizing my returns over the next five years, I might have better luck than the laissez-faire approach I held for the past 19 years. we don't know if you're making mistakes or not. A few mistakes you could be making is: a. paying too much for investments (not sure, haven't reviewed all your funds and don't know how much your 401k administrator charges) b. investing/saving too little (expecting too much from your investments to do the heavy lifing instead of your contributions) c. behavioral mistakes (changing allocation during times ...

OP has >$1.7M with a $70-80k salary. WOW. That is impressive. The SWR of 3.2% does work out to $54k/year, and so OP can lean FIRE or BARISTA fire with $20k income supplemental income elsewhere, but if I were OP, I'd DEFINITELY look for another job. OP has the freedom to do so. I make a lot more than OP but have a lot less saved. I love my job function & compensation but have to work with a handful of type A aggressive & selfish bullying individuals that I cannot stand the way they treat me, so am trying to live well below my means and save & invest 50% of income to be FI just to have options if it deteriorates. So OP did excellent in saving & investing. yeah, i thought that too but then I think the OP might have individual ...

* Due to advantage of lower standard deduction and claim medical deductions, they will file MFS (Married Filing Separately) what do you mean by this? obviously you're itemizing if it's more advantageous than taking the standard deduction but if you itemize for one and file MFS you have to itemize for the other. That could wind up with a much lower deduction for the one who isn't claiming the medical expenses. You sure MFS is the right way to go? I did not know TaxSlayer could override the Standard Deduction when it is higher than the Itemized total? i'm not saying taxslayer picks the better of the two. In fact I'm pretty sure you have to tell taxslayer which of the two you want it to look at. I'm saying you have to itemize for both if you ...

Can't say for sure. Merriman used to keep 10% in it i believe in his ulimate buy and hold which was 10% or so in like 10 funds. Depends on if you want to slice and dice or not. Doesn't avantis have an all world etf with value tilt which is probably simpler.

I don't think less than 10% in anything is going to move the needle.

might not have been more risky but because of the underperformance of emerging market that did drag down the performance of total international over eafe. full disclosure: i own total international. emerging markets were definitely more riskier over this time frame and investors weren't rewarded for having taken that extra risk over that time frame. but small cap value is also riskier too and it has long periods of underperformance as well. 10 or so years is also not very long term when it comes to investing. certainly not long enough to draw a meaningful conclusion.

just saw for the first time at the end of this article The numbers that are too big to imagine:

The author used ChatGPT to research trusted sources and calculate parts of this story.

Anyone care to double check whether ChatGPT got the numbers in that bbc article right?

bhwabeck3533 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 10:03 am * Due to advantage of lower standard deduction and claim medical deductions, they will file MFS (Married Filing Separately)

what do you mean by this?

obviously you're itemizing if it's more advantageous than taking the standard deduction but if you itemize for one and file MFS you have to itemize for the other. That could wind up with a much lower deduction for the one who isn't claiming the medical expenses. You sure MFS is the right way to go? Only asking because you thought you can claim head of household, which you can't if they're married.

By the way, i thought this was another Cathy Woods post. You might want to change the title to Arkansas, rather than Ark (yes I know it's ARKK, but still).

captmorgan50 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 8:23 pm What funds/etf do you use for your Natural Resource Equity portion of a portfolio? Not commodity futures, but the commodity companies.

read this thread here:
viewtopic.php?t=400500

kangtheconquerer wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 7:57 pm I have a reasonable tolerance for risk because of my long horizon. If the risk of US SCV benefits from a longer horizon, then I will overweight.

you sure you can withstand underperformance for like 14, 17, 19 years before the small cap premium shows up:



Merriman who's a big advocate for small cap value shared that chart in one of his presentations a year ago as a warning to those who think they can hold on for the long term without really understanding what that might actually mean. Do you have the stomach to wait that long? Investor know thyself.

kchico wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 7:27 pm

rob wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 7:16 pm I don't see any way this works to be honest....

So Bogleheads don't use the 4% SWR?

do you see anywhere on this chart (trinity study) (which only covers 30 years at most) where you had 100% success with a 4% withdrawal over 30 years? I don't:

https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/File:TrinityTable3.jpg

3% worked for 30 years with 25% or more in stocks.

unless you're planning on not living past 68, you could only afford to take dividends, but not yet start tapping principal.

the latest:

Janet Yellen says the U.S. is ready to protect depositors at small banks if required

i'm confused. do you need to get to $500k in 5 years or 10? if 5, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest: $35,000 a year for the next 5 years. in excel: =FV(.06,5,-35000,-240000) If 10, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest: $7000 a year for the next 10 years =FV(.06,10,-7000,-240000) are these doable to hit your number? I think your mistaken my numbers I gave OP I gave my numbers to OP just to let him know you need a realistic goal. The OP can't expect a miracle weird. i was just reading from the OP's response to what I thought was your question: Crdemts [/color]post_id=7180084 time=1679426845 user_id=188888] I sincerely appreciate all the valuable advice I've rece...

i'm confused. do you need to get to $500k in 5 years or 10? if 5, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest: $35,000 a year for the next 5 years. in excel: =FV(.06,5,-35000,-240000) If 10, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest: $7000 a year for the next 10 years =FV(.06,10,-7000,-240000) are these doable to hit your number? I think your mistaken my numbers I gave OP I gave my numbers to OP just to let him know you need a realistic goal. The OP can't expect a miracle weird. i was just reading from the OP's response to what I thought was your question: I sincerely appreciate all the valuable advice I've received so far. Why a five-year horizon? I started investing in 200...

i'm confused. do you need to get to $500k in 5 years or 10?

if 5, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest:

$35,000 a year for the next 5 years.

in excel:

=FV(.06,5,-35000,-240000)

If 10, and you have $240k currently and plan to earn 6% CAGR you'll need to invest:

$7000 a year for the next 10 years

=FV(.06,10,-7000,-240000)

are these doable to hit your number?

here's some ideas:
https://clark.com/scams-rip-offs/synthe ... ity-theft/
https://www.cleveland.com/business/2017 ... e_cou.html

Clark Howard (link above) says it could be synthetic identity theft:

“The way it works is that somebody uses a mix of different people’s Social Security numbers and other people’s names and a mix of addresses,” Clark says. “The credit bureau systems fail to detect the synthetic identity theft that involves one person’s name, another person’s Social Security Number [and] another person’s address. And so they’re doing this three-way mix to the point that they’ve created another identity.”

You have some competing goals like starting a business or buying a home. Money you might need in the short term you can't take risk with. So you have to think carefully about what portion of this money you won't touch for the long term. That part can be invested. Have you considered writing up an investment policy statement?

Backroads4Me wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 1:46 pm

David Jay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 1:27 pm I would think that the easiest to explain would be a Treasury fund (like FDLXX): “Dad, 100% of the money is in US Treasuries, held by a separate custodian so even if (brokerage name) were to go bust the Treasury notes/bills are still there.”

I agree with this. While he hasn't said it, I can't help but think some of the impetus for taking action now is hearing about bank failures and FDIC insurance on the news.

But if he and spouse have a joint account (cd) they have $250K FDIC coverage each! That means their $300K is 100% protected by fdic if their bank fails.

Why be afraid of something that's not fearful at all?

I'd be inclined to keep enough in bonds to last an average downturn say 5 years, so 10% in bonds at a minimum (since you're withdrawing 2% per year). Replenish yearly from stocks in up years or wait it out in down years.

Not sure there's one right answer though some might say invest according to your overall AA. Just because you have new money doesn't mean you invest differently. You'd just have the same AA with a larger portfolio than before. Though it's also possible if you're closer to your number as a result of this new money that might lead you to dial down risk. But the point is look at all your money as one portfolio rather than different portfolios just because you have different accounts. Though some accounts may have greater/lesser value after accounting for taxes.

What will you do with the money as you distribute?

Are you already maxing all retirement accounts?

Would these funds go into taxable?

I started investing in 2006, but I have yet to be able to reach the 300K. Despite my efforts, I've seen minimal progress in my investments, and I recognize that I must be making some mistakes. I hope that by maximizing my returns over the next five years, I might have better luck than the laissez-faire approach I held for the past 19 years. we don't know if you're making mistakes or not. A few mistakes you could be making is: a. paying too much for investments (not sure, haven't reviewed all your funds and don't know how much your 401k administrator charges) b. investing/saving too little (expecting too much from your investments to do the heavy lifing instead of your contributions) c. behavioral mistakes (changing allocation during times ...

couple additional thoughts: 1. maybe picking at nits, but vanguard says vasix is 19.2% stocks with the rest bonds (source: https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-funds/profile/vasix#price). Won't make a hill of beans, really but this should be thought of as an 20/80 (stock/bond) fund because that's usually what it is/has been. 2. What they really should do is design their portfolio to match their need, ability and willingness to take risk. Perhaps they don't have a need to take risk (you said they can meet their obligations with their pension and SS), some say why take risk if you don't need to? They might have the ability (because they don't need the money to live), and might want to grow the pie to leave more to you, bu...

we can't tell you how to maximize them because that would require a crystal ball. some might say 100% stock "might" maximize over say, your desired 80/20 because bonds "usually' are a drag on performance (around 0.5% for every 10% in bonds you hold, i.e. a 80/20 portfolio may earn 1% less than 100% stocks over a long time period). thing is, there are three variables that come to mind: 1. there are time periods when 100% stock (or 80/20 for that matter) are suboptimal compared to some other portfolio (say like 70/30 or 60/40) if for no other reason bonds could outperform stocks over that 5 year (or whatever) period of time. It happened even over a 10 year period of time. see for yourself total stock vs total bond from 2000-201...

have you read the other posts on this subject already (one of them was started by me!):

viewtopic.php?p=6455014
viewtopic.php?t=97062
viewtopic.php?t=187017
viewtopic.php?t=138240
viewtopic.php?t=185508

don't forget to look it up by it's other unpopular name (Bank on Yourself!):
viewtopic.php?t=175822

Katietsu wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:05 pm Do you just have more than $250k or do you actually haves funds not covered by FDIC insurance? My spouse and I have more than $250k at Ally. I am not worried because it is still all covered by FDIC insurance. I am worried that Ally will go down and I will lose my 4.75% rate on the No Penalty CD.

guess if that happens you'd go find another bank that has a competitive CD rate or buy treasuries instead.

In the meantime, if it doesn't happen, then there's nothing to do and you collect 4.75%.

If you worry about something that may never happen, won't that have been time/energy spent for no real purpose?