European Tribune

Display:
Is to be 100 % share and 0 % bond 10 years before you retire, and then move 10 % of the capital from shares to bonds per year, so that one year before you retire you will be 90 % bond and 10 % share.

This is the minimum route: you migh well start moving from shares to bonds earlier, but not later than 10 years before you retire.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 09:58:01 AM EST
Would you say that rule still hold these days?

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 11:22:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The idea is that if there's a market meltdown 3 years before you're set to retire, you only lose 30% of your portfolio. But it also means that if you're 10 years from retirement you could lose it all.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 11:26:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru: The idea is that if there's a market meltdown 3 years before you're set to retire, you only lose 30% of your portfolio. But it also means that if you're 10 years from retirement you could lose it all.

But say all my savings were in bonds and I just retired.  Then according to my very naïve reading of the following article, they would still be going down in value, wouldn't they?

Bond prices fall as investors scramble for cash

U.S. Treasuries mostly fell on Friday as the ever-worsening credit crisis had investors selling out of even lower-risk government debt in a mad scramble to turn any investment into cash.

U.S. stocks plunged on Friday, following an equities rout on Thursday and then a global stocks tailspin overnight.

Normally, stocks weakness would spur buying into safer-haven government debt, but analysts said the outlook has become so dire that investors were selling anything they can, including Treasuries, to get their hands on cash.

Only short-term Treasury bills, which are considered pretty much a cash equivalent, were able to catch a bit of a bid.

"We are not used to seeing stocks implode and Treasuries sell off (at the same time)," said Josh Stiles, senior bond strategist at IDEAglobal in New York, adding "but people are saying they don't even want to be in Treasuries now, they need the cash."



Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 11:52:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Falling" does not mean the same thing for treasuries (at least medium maturities, coupon-paying ones), even when yields go up "sharply" (like +10% in yields from 4.4% to 4.84%, it means only that the market price of the coupon bond is down a few percent for a maturity a decade away)

Pierre
by Pierre on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 12:14:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bond prices go down but bonds pay to income as a fraction of the principal value.

That's why bonds are called fixed income securities as opposed to variable income securities (shares or cash equities, which pay dividends).

If you hold a bond to maturity you know exactly how much money you're getting and on which dates (normally every 6 months) unless the bond issuer defaults.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 12:44:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Google the PIMCO Total Return fund, one of the largest US bond funds, and check out what they've been up to. They aren't as conservative as one would think. Of course one of the more skeptical articles was an old one from AIG. Heh.
by northsylvania on Mon Oct 13th, 2008 at 03:03:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Lehman Brothers has historically been at the centre of the US bond market, and you saw what happened to them.

One of the "innovative" features of finance in recent years is the use of equity-style investment techniques with high turnovers and more focus on bond price than on the income. That may have been a very bad idea precisely because of the default risk.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 08:47:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
marco:
"We are not used to seeing stocks implode and Treasuries sell off (at the same time)," said Josh Stiles, senior bond strategist at IDEAglobal in New York, adding "but people are saying they don't even want to be in Treasuries now, they need the cash."

a lot of financial advisers are parroting 'cash is king', which i can only take to mean that any investment vehicle is inherently not suspicion-free.

everyone know that's paranoid, because cash dwindles in value unless it's growing faster than inflation, but these are times in economic history like no other, so it appears under the mattress is safer than any of these oh-so ex-respectable banks and brokerage houses.

personally i think buying tools and seeds while one still freely can is the one sure way to invest. that kind of bank is harder to crumble or flood.

brokerage...the name says it all.

go-for-brokerage, more like.

as a boomer, i watched the survivors of the war, the emerging middle class, my parents' generation, the last age of petro-innocence, and they were the 'sunset effect' of the cheap energy boom that led to so many people feeling entitled to a comfortable retirement, cushioned with nice dividends from the 'endless growth' economy, which has revealed itself during our boomer adulthood to be built on sand, (middle eastern variety), more myth than sustainable reality.

this financial independence in the golden years has boosted worker productivity, as families used to support the old, now there's service industry to do it.

this also led to the atomisation of families, people going to retire far away, because they didn't need to huddle so much.

all this is about to shift back, i think, and i beleve it will do wonders for our mental health, as often disconnected from their roots, young working parents attempt the demanding job of raising children without much family day-to-day support, and so often lack energy and quality time to really bring them up well, leading to much adolescent unhappiness and acting out...

silver lining...

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it. Chinese Proverb.

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Oct 11th, 2008 at 06:58:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
a lot of financial advisers are parroting 'cash is king', which i can only take to mean that any investment vehicle is inherently not suspicion-free.

No. The liquidity premium has gone through the roof. Cash is the most liquid asset.

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Oct 11th, 2008 at 02:37:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think that is too aggressive. And in protection of a systemic meltdown, starting with 40 or so you should have a couple % of your portfolio in gold or other industrial metals (gold has the advantage you can store it easily at home).
Bonds would have been great over the last 10-15 years, so I think 10 years is clearly a too short horizon to start shifting out of stocks. As well it doesn't take into account that you may e.g. become a disabled person before you retire, or you may want to become self-employed and need start capital, or you want to build a house and have to pay down 20% to get a cheap credit. So even as a young person I would keep 15-30% of my savings in credit and coupon markets.
And depending on your financial situation, I would not go out of stocks so much as an older person, but that of course is connected with the idea to pass on some of your assets to your children, which is not to the taste of everybody.

Lich King/Caribou Barbie 08
Pain brings Katharsis
by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 at 01:24:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Early Friday Photography Blog No. 62
by LEP - Nov 20
18 comments

The Puritan Edge
by rg - Nov 20
72 comments

Help oppose Sarko's three strike nonsense
by nicta - Nov 20
2 comments

So I met Bill McKibben
by SacredCowTipper - Nov 20
1 comment

LQD: Geoengineering Ranked
by nanne - Nov 19
16 comments

The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
1 comment

Trains in Moravia
by DoDo - Nov 16
72 comments

LQD: The real orgasmic Puritans
by Ted Welch - Nov 20
2 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series