Author Topic: where are stashing your "safe" money?  (Read 4502 times)

mistymoney

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3226
where are stashing your "safe" money?
« on: April 11, 2025, 04:23:14 PM »
hearing grumbles about bonds. where to put the money you want safe?

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
  • Age: 31
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2025, 07:30:19 PM »
HYSA (including one where we get 7% as long as we promise to use it to buy a house) and money market (for the emergency fund we don't want to promise to spend on a house). This is also money I want quick-ish access to, though, which may not be exactly what you are asking.

Kapyarn

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 91
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2025, 10:00:54 PM »
I bought some TIPS, good yield.  Not worried about default because I will stop paying my taxes if my TIPS default.

waltworks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5873
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2025, 07:14:00 AM »
VMFXX.

StapleSauce

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2025, 08:30:36 AM »
I have most in a HYSA. I also put some recently in a short term international bond ETF to hedge against a hypothetical dollar devaluation. But the vast majority is in a HYSA.

aasdfadsf

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 249
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2025, 10:21:40 AM »
VMFXX.

Same. I switched about 50-75% of my stocks to this, depending on the portfolio, back in Feb. for defensive reasons, and I'm glad I did. (With hindsight 100% would have been better.)

I'm currently seeking an even more defensive move if it turns out that a debt default, or simply talk of a debt default, is in our future. I think it is unlikely, but then again betting that no one could be that stupid keeps turning out to be a bad bet. 

VanillaGorilla

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Location: CA

reeshau

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3875
  • Location: Houston, TX Former locations: Detroit, Indianapolis, Dublin
  • FIRE'd Jan 2020
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2025, 10:38:42 AM »
For those truly feeling paranoia, a reminder that money market funds are not insured against loss of value. (They are insured against broker shenanigans by the SIPC)  In times of financial crisis, they can break the buck. Money market accounts are insured by the FDIC, up to $250k.

This differential was essentially meaningless, until 2008.  The government then did step in to provide a temporary backstop.

AuspiciousEight

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2025, 10:55:44 AM »
Personally - High yield savings account and real property.

For the truly paranoid if you don't believe the government will pay their debts, and/or see hyper inflation in the future, I would honestly consider things like real property, farmland, consumables, tools, and buying things for the future today also.

Of course, I don't believe it's healthy to have that level of paranoia. One has to have a certain amount of faith in society and government and the economy to even bother trying to retire early, imo.

firemane

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2025, 02:20:47 PM »
Personally - High yield savings account and real property.

For the truly paranoid if you don't believe the government will pay their debts, and/or see hyper inflation in the future, I would honestly consider things like real property, farmland, consumables, tools, and buying things for the future today also.

Of course, I don't believe it's healthy to have that level of paranoia. One has to have a certain amount of faith in society and government and the economy to even bother trying to retire early, imo.

I feel Real property is necessary to be safe due to cybersecurity attacks. However, I don’t have the ambition to start a rental or farmland empire.

ATtiny85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
  • Location: Midwest
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2025, 07:27:00 PM »
A couple million dollars in BND as part of our appropriately chosen asset allocation. I don’t have to worry, there are plenty of others doing enough hand wringing.

We have maybe low six figures in a TIPS index fund also.

It’s been part of our plan to buy a few individual treasury bonds before long. Probably in the next month I will at least buy a couple in my tIRA. A TIPS and a nominal just to get experience with the process at Vanguard.

I bought some TIPS, good yield.  Not worried about default because I will stop paying my taxes if my TIPS default.

LOL, love this point of view! Well said.

moustachebar

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2025, 08:41:35 PM »
I bought some TIPS, good yield.  Not worried about default because I will stop paying my taxes if my TIPS default.

LOL, love this point of view! Well said.

So do I. Fantastic. Thanks for the smile.

Wonder what form to file when that happens?

aasdfadsf

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 249
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2025, 11:45:08 PM »
Personally - High yield savings account and real property.

For the truly paranoid if you don't believe the government will pay their debts, and/or see hyper inflation in the future, I would honestly consider things like real property, farmland, consumables, tools, and buying things for the future today also.

Of course, I don't believe it's healthy to have that level of paranoia. One has to have a certain amount of faith in society and government and the economy to even bother trying to retire early, imo.
I feel Real property is necessary to be safe due to cybersecurity attacks. However, I don’t have the ambition to start a rental or farmland empire.

I'd guess that over half of our net worth is already in real estate. And like a lot of people on this forum, I am becoming increasingly exasperated at having to be a landlord. It's a job unto itself (I spent 2.5 hours on Friday fixing a door that a handyman couldn't get right). My goal is to totally divest it when fully retired so I no longer have to think about it.

If the real estate market crashes like it did in '08/'09, I'll probably try to swoop in and pick up some deals. Right now I think it's overvalued, at least where I live (and no, I'm not buying something in a far away town I'll never visit hoping that someone else can manage it for me without ripping me off). That will of course need to happen after the shit hits the fan. 

Something similar can be said of gold. If you bought gold several months ago, you've made out like a bandit. Is there any more upside? Who knows. But if you bought gold in, say, 2011, when people had been flocking to it because of a safe haven, you would have waited a full decade just to break even. And gold of course generates no income.

So that's where I stand with safe havens. If there's a fund that is basically "pays a modest dividend and is totally safe if President Stable Genius destroys the world economy", then someone let me in on this. It may not be theoretically possible.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8283
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2025, 09:38:58 AM »
I just buy SGOV or BIL in my brokerage account. You get the "risk-free" rate minus a few hundredths of a percent and are essentially immune to the interest rate risk of longer-duration bonds. Plus have a couple hundred dollars in cash stashed in your piggy bank at home.

Kapyarn

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 91
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #14 on: April 13, 2025, 09:40:43 AM »
I actually did buy some gold around 2011...actually I think it was 2013 or so.  Expensive then at about $1500 an ounce and it went nowhere as you said until now, it is $3250 an ounce suddenly.  Still a decent return, buying near the high in 2013, then 12 years later it has more than doubled.  A EE bond would not have done that.

BicycleB

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5629
  • Location: US Midwest - Where Jokes Are Tricky These Days
  • Older than the internet, but not wiser... yet
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2025, 04:46:21 PM »
I had gone to about 25% cash early in the year, and kick myself for not buying gold - I'd been thinking since Dec '24 about it for exactly the reasons it turned out valuable. Just the same, bought a smidge of gold (3-4% of investable assets) a few weeks ago.

Very little free cash left - spent some on expenses, invested the rest gradually in stock, with the last third of the cash going into stock on the Friday and Monday after "Liberation Day".

It feels like either the stock market will survive and stock is fine, or the dollar will go down with the US market and gold will be strong against that, so part of me feels like an 80/20 stock/gold (or 70/30) is reasonable even at today's high prices. But I haven't acted on that beyond the smidge.*

*To be fair, I estimate that 40% of my long term income is from Social Security and two tiny fixed pensions, so that's my "safe" money - except if Social Security and my pension employers, a state and local govt, have trouble. Arguably gold is a hedge against govt failure in ways that stock isn't, increasing the hedge value for me, so - we'll see (gulps nervously).
« Last Edit: April 13, 2025, 04:51:27 PM by BicycleB »

JAYSLOL

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2360
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #16 on: April 13, 2025, 10:37:40 PM »
My safe money I keep in my safe.  But seriously I usually keep a couple grand at home tucked away for emergencies, around 45k in an online hysa, and everything else is invested in not-so-safe assets. 

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #17 on: April 15, 2025, 05:25:11 AM »
Some in a high-yielding bank account and most in a money market fund. The latter is accessible with 2 days notice as settlement time is t+2 as with most stuff.

trc4897

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2025, 09:31:21 AM »
HYSA (including one where we get 7% as long as we promise to use it to buy a house) and money market (for the emergency fund we don't want to promise to spend on a house). This is also money I want quick-ish access to, though, which may not be exactly what you are asking.

Where are you getting the 7%? I am planning to buy a house next year, and the 7% would be awesome to help my savings compound faster!

Tasse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4086
  • Age: 31
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2025, 10:44:52 AM »
HYSA (including one where we get 7% as long as we promise to use it to buy a house) and money market (for the emergency fund we don't want to promise to spend on a house). This is also money I want quick-ish access to, though, which may not be exactly what you are asking.

Where are you getting the 7%? I am planning to buy a house next year, and the 7% would be awesome to help my savings compound faster!

Unfortunately it's a state program, so if you don't live in Ohio (and plan to continue living in Ohio) I can't help you. Although I suppose it's always worth looking into whether anything similar is available where you live.

41_swish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Colorado
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2025, 10:52:14 AM »
Just my Ally HYSA. Could I chase the highest rate? Sure, but I don't think it is worth transferring funds around all the time.

San Diego Girl

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 40
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2025, 05:03:38 PM »
In short term Treasury Bill's, 6 month and one year.

bigfoot

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2025, 07:22:26 PM »
VMFXX.
Same


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

41_swish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Colorado
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2025, 07:52:29 PM »
You can always buy three month t bills if that is your sort of thing. I have always found hunting the highest HYSA/CD rate to be tiresome for the marginal improvement. My cash reserves are there to bail me out of a sticky situation, not make me rich

markpst

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 95
  • Location: Cincinnati, OH
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2025, 08:29:27 AM »
I am mostly in treasury bills of 13 or 26 weeks, broken up over several dates. I also have some VMFXX (Roth IRA and taxable brokerage), and some in Ally Savings. Will continue to add to safe assets when possible, w/o selling stocks as I am within two years of FIRE. Vanguard dividends are set to not reinvest.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2025, 08:31:38 AM by markpst »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7648
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2025, 10:23:27 PM »
I still like USFR, which holds floating rate U.S. Treasuries.

The bond market fund $BND has a duration of 6 years.  If all bond yields increase 1%, the fund takes a -6% hit.  And the reverse if yields drop.

$USFR, by contrast, has a duration of zero.  When yields change, the floating-rate yield changes within days.  It earns slightly better than money market funds, but has no impact when rates change.  I prefer that characteristic during a time of uncertain and volatile rates.

41_swish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Colorado
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2025, 07:29:47 PM »
Can someone explain $BND to me? I have always seen people say the standard three fund portfolio is VTI, VXUS, and BND. I clearly understand the point of VTI and VXUS, but how does BND work? When securities like stocks go up BND goes down and vice versa?

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2025, 05:42:17 AM »
Can someone explain $BND to me? I have always seen people say the standard three fund portfolio is VTI, VXUS, and BND. I clearly understand the point of VTI and VXUS, but how does BND work? When securities like stocks go up BND goes down and vice versa?

BND is Vanguard's total market bond fund, it covers the US governemnt bond market (68.5% of the fund) and US investment-grade corporate bonds (the remaining 31.5%). There is no law of nature that states that BND has to go up when stocks go down and vice versa - its entirely possible they move in the same direction.

You have essentially three kinds of risk in BNP
- duration, or interest rates risk. If (medium/long-term) interest rates go up, you loose money. If they go down, you make money
- credit spread risk. If credit spreads widen, you loose money on the 31.5% that's non-govvies, you make money on the same percentage when credit spreads tighten
- reinvestment risk, i.e. at what yields you can reinvest dividends

If you, in times like these, view US treasuries as risk-free investments, is another question.

ATtiny85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
  • Location: Midwest
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #28 on: May 14, 2025, 07:56:02 AM »
Can someone explain $BND to me? I have always seen people say the standard three fund portfolio is VTI, VXUS, and BND. I clearly understand the point of VTI and VXUS, but how does BND work? When securities like stocks go up BND goes down and vice versa?

Sometimes they move in opposite directions, but really it’s mostly just uncorrelated. One thing BND does tend to do is not move as fast and as far, so it really tempers volatility. I have really noticed that this year as I now have about 35% in BND type investments.

Duration is a key metric to know and understand for bond funds. I don’t agree with habanero's first bullet. It just takes time for BND to recover after interest rate increases.

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2025, 02:19:04 AM »
It just takes time for BND to recover after interest rate increases.

Thats like saying you don't loose money when equities go down, they just need some time to recover and you're golden.

Since its peak (read: bottom in long-term interest rate) in June 2020, TLT, the 20y US Treasuries ETF has lost 50% of its market value, or -13.5% Annual total return. If you reinvested the dividends in the same fund your annualized total return is a bit better at -11.1%. You would be vastly better off by buying a short-term US t-bill fund or similar - same credit risk (assumed zero), virtually no duration risk and significantly better returns. This is also a fine example that bonds and equities can move in opposite directions for a long time. The S&P total return during the same period is almost 100% while said "riskless" fund is down 50%.

Another significant risk with fixed-income-investments is inflation risk. Yes, if you buy treasuries you are guaranteed a coupon of x% and return of principal at maturity, but those or only nominal dollars, your purchasing power for those dollars can be significantly eroded.

The absyssmal performance of long-dated treasury funds the last few years is a prime example of the concept of duration risk. The investments are "risk free", but only in the sense that there is assumed no default risk. The duration risk is massive, and bigger the longer the maturities of the underlying securities and when you have v.v. low interst rates the downside is massive and the upside is virtually zero. For a safe place to stash money, shorter duration is far less risky.

Quote
is not move as fast and as far, so it really tempers volatility. I have really noticed that this year as I now have about 35% in BND type investments.

Yeah, bonds - at least IG and/or govvies can significantly reduce the overall volatility of a portfolio and historically also for not that much reduction in returns. During the ZIRP era when bonds pretty much offered risk and no returns it was a bit different. I now have around 35% of my stash in other stuff than equities myself (not counting home equity in the mix).


« Last Edit: May 15, 2025, 03:21:44 AM by habanero »

ATtiny85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
  • Location: Midwest
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2025, 05:41:14 AM »
Talking 20 year bond performance over five years is not a discussion I am interested in. Though for sure lots of other bonds took quite a licking over the last five years. However, across the modern history of bonds, the last few years has been quite the outlier. We may see it repeat many times going forward of course, but it’s as likely that the last three years will be the best time ever to be buying something like BND.

But, still, most of your points are quite valid (and the one I disagree with is not invalid, I just view my fixed income differently.) There are a lot of risks with bond funds, some of which can be mitigated, some of which can’t.

If rates drop over the coming few years people in accumulation mode may be quite disappointed to have to buy new bonds at a significantly lower rate. We have seen the duration risk show up, but reinvestment risk may be the next hard lesson. I am not smart enough on the credit rate risk yet.


ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8283
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #31 on: May 15, 2025, 07:47:54 AM »
Talking 20 year bond performance over five years is not a discussion I am interested in. Though for sure lots of other bonds took quite a licking over the last five years. However, across the modern history of bonds, the last few years has been quite the outlier.
To specify this point, people 5 years ago were buying 10-year treasuries at a yield of 0.6%. They were accepting negative real yields in both the US and Europe.

At yields this low, bond convexity is a massive factor. As Investopedia notes, the convexity factor is a curved line, and "Typically, the higher the coupon rate or yield, the lower the convexity or market risk of a bond." At 0.6%, the convexity on long-duration bonds was outrageously high - at the steepest part of the convexity slope. There was nowhere to go but down, and yet the bonds were still selling. It was a disaster waiting to happen, fueled by yield-chasing, the TINA mentality, a dangerously rationalized concept of "safety", and a lack of any generational memory of inflation.

Today's treasury yields are closer to historical norms seen in the early 1960s and through the 2000's. So we're not in the convexity red zone anymore. Accepting today's 10-year yield of 4.48% is not nearly as risky as 0.6% was.

VanillaGorilla

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Location: CA
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #32 on: May 15, 2025, 09:02:02 AM »
Can someone explain $BND to me? I have always seen people say the standard three fund portfolio is VTI, VXUS, and BND. I clearly understand the point of VTI and VXUS, but how does BND work? When securities like stocks go up BND goes down and vice versa?

Sometimes they move in opposite directions, but really it’s mostly just uncorrelated. One thing BND does tend to do is not move as fast and as far, so it really tempers volatility. I have really noticed that this year as I now have about 35% in BND type investments.

Duration is a key metric to know and understand for bond funds. I don’t agree with habanero's first bullet. It just takes time for BND to recover after interest rate increases.
Bond supercycles are a very pronounced effect. BND has provided zero real return in the last 15 years. And that's hardly anomalous, from 1898 to 1981 bonds also gave a zero real return.

So yes, you can argue that "It just takes time to recover" but it's worth noting that occasionally the amount of time is eighty years.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2025, 09:03:39 AM by VanillaGorilla »

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #33 on: May 15, 2025, 10:02:46 AM »
Talking 20 year bond performance over five years is not a discussion I am interested in.

Well, when you buy it at a yield of 0.5% or whateter they were at the lowest it doesnt really matter what happens the next 10 years after the first five. You know you, over the lifetime of the bond will recieve 0.5% nominal return annually on the investment. That might turn out to be better than say t-bills during the period, but just what has happened the previous five years make that rather unlikely.

My main point is that when rates were at their lowest, to me it was weird that bonds were still a topic of discussion as if the actual extremely low effective yield one bought them at wasn't really relevant. I get why asset managers with a set mandate buy - they had to, and also why banks hold them (they serve several purposes for a bank) but why anyone who can do whatever they want with their money wanted to buy any such thing baffled me. The potential for monumental losses on something supposed to be safe/boring/stable/whatever should be rather obvious once one goes long in duration and the pickup over rolling short term pretty slim as well.

And as ChpBstrd points out, low-coupon bonds with long maturities have massive convexity as the weighted time to maturity is very long when coupons are close to zero and hence the potential for violent price moves if/when rates go up quickly.

I don't dislike bonds, I own a fair bit of the specimen myself and make my paycheck in the fixed income universe, but I didnt buy anything for myself when they didn't yield anything. Return-free risk was a pretty common phrase about bonds back then, especially in the eurozone where yields were deeply negative. 10y german government bonds yielded around -0.5% at the lowest.

These days yields of 4-5-6-7% (depending on currency, maturity and credit risk) feels high. That does not mean they cannot go significantly higher, and corprate bond credit spreads (yield pickup over treasuries) are also somewhere around historical lows. They can go even lower if/when investors diversify away from treasuries and into high-quality corporate bonds.

This is a slight digression from BNP, which has an weighted average maturity of around 8y and a duration of ca 6y. The latter number was closer to the former when yields were lower. But the very long-term bonds seve as the cleanest example of key bond metrics such as yield, coupon, convexity and duration. If shtf one will probably also learn the importance of credit spreads as they can blow out. This is normally the scenario when treasuries outperform their corporate cousins.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2025, 10:22:31 AM by habanero »

41_swish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Colorado
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #34 on: May 15, 2025, 10:05:44 AM »
So, is holding BND a good way to simplify trying to pick and choose which bonds to actually buy? That sounds like a nightmare to me

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #35 on: May 15, 2025, 10:07:44 AM »
So, is holding BND a good way to simplify trying to pick and choose which bonds to actually buy? That sounds like a nightmare to me
No its a very good way of getting exposure to the total US bond market, treasuries and investment grade corporate bonds. The fund owns over 11.000 bonds (from a much lower number of issuers) and is an amount of diversification thats completely impossible to obtain on your own.

The obvious alterntive for similar duration profile would be an IG corporate bond fund (higher yield, but comes with credit risk) or a pure US treasuries fund (lower yield, lower credit risk).

41_swish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Colorado
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #36 on: May 15, 2025, 10:09:05 AM »
So, it is like diversify my bond holding, just like how I would want to diversify my securities holding.

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #37 on: May 15, 2025, 10:26:41 AM »
So, it is like diversify my bond holding, just like how I would want to diversify my securities holding.
Well, you can argue that you need less diversification in bonds than in equities, but the minimum investment in a bond can be prohibetively high making it hard to get diversification. The US goverment has a gazillion bonds outstandig and from a risk/return prospective there are a lot of subsitutes for each other as its the same issuer so owning both say a 10y and 9y 10 months isnt neccessary. Even if you target some duration, say 7y just for the sake of argument you could buy a small portfolio of high-quality bonds from corps and Uncle Sam. But as time goes by they get shorter you get coupon payments you need to reinvest and the coupons might be to small to actually buy anything given minimum denominations. So for retail investors bond funds are an awsome option, provided one understands what the actual fund is. There are big differences between bond funds.

But if you want the whole market, BND is probably the best there is given the low fees.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8283
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #38 on: May 15, 2025, 11:39:42 AM »
My main point is that when rates were at their lowest, to me it was weird that bonds were still a topic of discussion as if the actual extremely low effective yield one bought them at wasn't really relevant. I get why asset managers with a set mandate buy - they had to, and also why banks hold them (they serve several purposes for a bank) but why anyone who can do whatever they want with their money wanted to buy any such thing baffled me.
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra. More diversification was better than less diversification, even if it was crazy stuff you were getting into. Plus, our SWR calculators were spitting out answers that 80/20 portfolios fared much better than 100/0 portfolios - at least historically. Meanwhile, people were getting rich on paper with cryptocurrency assets.

There were great debates between the Diversification Traditionalists and the TINA Crowd here on this board, where the Diversifiers looked at history and the TINA Crowd was more concerned with near-zero cash flow and minimal appreciation possibilities.

We've seen the same debate play out around crypto or negative-cash-flowing real estate. Both delivered excellent returns in the past, and there is no rational reason to purchase them today. Diversifiers see these assets as providing diversification benefits despite their lack of a rationale for returns. They argue on the basis of historical returns with Cynics, who see no rationale for value creation from these investments. They also argue with Cryptobros and RE Obsessives, who think we should all be all-in based on past performance.

The mere presence of Diversification Traditionalists may be a catalyst for the creation of new investment products that don't pencil out based on cash flow or yield, such as crowdfunding platforms, Crypto ETFs, NFTs, SPACs, or various closed end funds playing the return of capital trick to boost the dividend yield.

I'm obviously in the opposite camp. Diversification is good to the extent the assets offer the probability of a real return or protection from volatility. That's why I went from anti-bond in 2021 to agnostic today about whether bonds or stocks will do better in the next year or two. I am simply not in the market for reward-free risk, no matter how many such products are introduced or how high their prices go. I am a believer in diversification, but only among those assets and at those prices which make sense as a way to boost returns and flatten volatility.

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #39 on: May 15, 2025, 01:40:38 PM »
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra. More diversification was better than less diversification, even if it was crazy stuff you were getting into. Plus, our SWR calculators were spitting out answers that 80/20 portfolios fared much better than 100/0 portfolios - at least historically.

One crucial aspect I think was misunderstood is that when rates go very low, there is hardly any juice left in a bond so a stellar run will come to a halt eventually and you are left with very little, if any upside, but an increasingly big downside. When yields drop massively, the future value of the now high coupons is reflected in the bond price so holding on to the bond until maturity isnt gonna give you meaningfully more money than just selling it. Such times are when one should consider rolling into shorter maturities to reduce interest rate sensitivity. Or take your money and run, if you like. Admittingly, at the time its hard/impossible to know when you have reached some bottom - the concept of negative yields was regarded as impossible until it was mainstream. Back in the days 4,3,2 and 1% seemed like low yields compared to what they had been, but they still had a lot further to run. The idea that yields were gonna stay low forever was also widespread, not that surprinsing when the decades-long trend was downwards with a few exceptions that proved rather short-lived. This might even be such a time - nobody knows where yields are in a couple of years.

As opposed to equities, the future cashflows of a bond is known. And when calculating the value of a bond, you are basically assuming a best case - no default or restructuring over the lifetime of the bond so you actually get your coupons and return of principal at the end. There is for a "good" bond nothing magical that can happen in the future that gives you a claim on a significantly higher cashflow as is the case with equities. The only way your investment can become more valuable in nominal terms is if the discount rate goes down, either via overall lower yield levels or a lower credit spread of the bond. Your cashflows are gonna stay the same but the discounted value will increase and the price of the bond will go up.

And yes, yield chasing was most definately a thing. US banks were bigly in on it - partly to juice returns and partly due to accounting reasons. They don't need to mark their hold-to-maturity portfolio to market and as long as they aren't forced to sell (like Silicon Valley bank when the funding disappeared as depositors withdrew money) its "only" a big drag on returns. At one point half of Bank of America's equity would have been widped out if they had reported their portfolio of hold-to-maturity at actual value. Losses were over 130bn dollar or whatever. The always better run and bigger JP Morgan had less than 1/3 the unrealized losses in their HTM portfolio compared to BofA.

The bank I work for has a big portfolio of fixed-income securities, but we swap out all the rates risk in the derivatives market so we basically earn whatever the floating rate is at any given time plus/minus a credit spread. Then we are left with only credit risk, if any. Seen from us what us banks do in this field is competely nuts. But different countries, different regulations, different cultures.

« Last Edit: May 15, 2025, 01:44:59 PM by habanero »

tooqk4u22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3056
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #40 on: May 15, 2025, 02:52:38 PM »
My main point is that when rates were at their lowest, to me it was weird that bonds were still a topic of discussion as if the actual extremely low effective yield one bought them at wasn't really relevant. I get why asset managers with a set mandate buy - they had to, and also why banks hold them (they serve several purposes for a bank) but why anyone who can do whatever they want with their money wanted to buy any such thing baffled me.
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra. More diversification was better than less diversification, even if it was crazy stuff you were getting into. Plus, our SWR calculators were spitting out answers that 80/20 portfolios fared much better than 100/0 portfolios - at least historically. Meanwhile, people were getting rich on paper with cryptocurrency assets.

There were great debates between the Diversification Traditionalists and the TINA Crowd here on this board, where the Diversifiers looked at history and the TINA Crowd was more concerned with near-zero cash flow and minimal appreciation possibilities.

We've seen the same debate play out around crypto or negative-cash-flowing real estate. Both delivered excellent returns in the past, and there is no rational reason to purchase them today. Diversifiers see these assets as providing diversification benefits despite their lack of a rationale for returns. They argue on the basis of historical returns with Cynics, who see no rationale for value creation from these investments. They also argue with Cryptobros and RE Obsessives, who think we should all be all-in based on past performance.

The mere presence of Diversification Traditionalists may be a catalyst for the creation of new investment products that don't pencil out based on cash flow or yield, such as crowdfunding platforms, Crypto ETFs, NFTs, SPACs, or various closed end funds playing the return of capital trick to boost the dividend yield.

I'm obviously in the opposite camp. Diversification is good to the extent the assets offer the probability of a real return or protection from volatility. That's why I went from anti-bond in 2021 to agnostic today about whether bonds or stocks will do better in the next year or two. I am simply not in the market for reward-free risk, no matter how many such products are introduced or how high their prices go. I am a believer in diversification, but only among those assets and at those prices which make sense as a way to boost returns and flatten volatility.

It wasn't retail investors, or just retail for that matter, and it wasn't necessarily about diversification.   Banks were forced to buy treasuries, that is what happens when $7trillion of new money shows up and it caused the mini-regional banking crisis two years ago - a lot of banks were overall good institutions but suddenly became under capitalized due to mark-to-market on their bond holdings when rates spiked upward - if it occurred more methodically over a longer timerframe there wouldn't have been an issue. 

That duration/convexity is a real bitch at artificially super low rates.




Anyway, back on topic......BDN is an intermediate term fund and might not have made sense in 2020 but makes a lot more sense now.   It doesn't mean it still can't go down or up from here but at least it feels and looks more in line with historical ranges.   

Money markets are great, but if the FED cuts rates so to will your interest go down, but your principal will stay intact.  BND may or may not go up in value due the factors others mentioned like inflation but also demand (which is an issue as foreign governments are not buying as much and is why gold is going up so much because that is what they are buying instead), and supply (ever increasing deficits) so hard to see longer term rates going down too much and maybe higher given that backdrop.  Unless something breaks again.

All that said, duration is effectively a way to lock in a current interest rate return for that period of time - but principal can fluctuate.  If you think short rates are going way down and longer rate are staying flat or going down then BND is good.  If you think longer rates are going up then BDN is bad.  If you think short rates stay the same and long rates stay the same, then money market is probably best as you get same return with non of the other risks.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2025, 03:01:36 PM by tooqk4u22 »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7648
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #41 on: May 16, 2025, 04:49:21 AM »
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra.
...

It wasn't retail investors, or just retail for that matter, and it wasn't necessarily about diversification.   Banks were forced to buy treasuries, that is what happens when $7trillion of new money shows up and it caused the mini-regional banking crisis two years ago ...

You criticize "5 years ago" by pointing to a "banking crisis two years ago".  You two might not be talking about the same thing.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8283
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #42 on: May 16, 2025, 08:22:42 AM »
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra.
...
It wasn't retail investors, or just retail for that matter, and it wasn't necessarily about diversification.   Banks were forced to buy treasuries, that is what happens when $7trillion of new money shows up and it caused the mini-regional banking crisis two years ago ...
You criticize "5 years ago" by pointing to a "banking crisis two years ago".  You two might not be talking about the same thing.
I think what @tooqk4u22 is saying is that when banks purchased long-duration treasuries at sub-1% yields around 5 (plus or minus several) years ago, it set the stage for the minor banking crisis two years ago. I would agree this is what happened.

Where we are not talking about the same thing is I was talking about retail investors such as people on this board, whereas @tooqk4u22 was talking about banks. Perhaps banks were forced by regulations to buy these treasuries, but retail investors have only themselves to blame.

tooqk4u22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3056
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #43 on: May 16, 2025, 09:53:21 AM »
My explanation for the retail interest in low-yielding bonds 5 years ago is that people were following a mantra.
...
It wasn't retail investors, or just retail for that matter, and it wasn't necessarily about diversification.   Banks were forced to buy treasuries, that is what happens when $7trillion of new money shows up and it caused the mini-regional banking crisis two years ago ...
You criticize "5 years ago" by pointing to a "banking crisis two years ago".  You two might not be talking about the same thing.
I think what @tooqk4u22 is saying is that when banks purchased long-duration treasuries at sub-1% yields around 5 (plus or minus several) years ago, it set the stage for the minor banking crisis two years ago. I would agree this is what happened.

Where we are not talking about the same thing is I was talking about retail investors such as people on this board, whereas @tooqk4u22 was talking about banks. Perhaps banks were forced by regulations to buy these treasuries, but retail investors have only themselves to blame.

That is correct @ChpBstrd.  Retail investors have only themselves to blame but in reality the vast majority probably lack the education/knowledge to understand duration/interest rate risk as it's been so ingrained to the population that bonds are stable and safe, which simply isn't always true.

The banks had no choice to put $ into treasuries but they did have a choice on duration, which is far more negligent my mind as those running the banks should be knowledgeable.....money is the only thing they do after all.   

If you look back 20 years or 60 years you could argue the US 10-year has been stable and provided interest along the way - of course there was a shit ton of variation from 20 and 60 years ago to today ;)



MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7648
  • Location: U.S. expat
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #44 on: May 17, 2025, 04:41:11 AM »
Then I disagree with both of you, if you're claiming bank exposure to low yields was mostly the two years after the Covid-19 crisis.  The Fed funds rate was also zero from December 2008 to December 2015.  Those 7 years of buying treasuries had more of an impact than the more recent two.

When treasury yields rose sharply, old treasury bonds dropped in value sharply.  Banks counted on these assets against their liabilities, and were technically insolvent.  Their debts exceeded their liabilities, if sold off immediately.  If they wait, the treasuries will recover to their full value.  Silicon Valley Bank had too many withdrawals, and couldn't cover those by selling recently lower value treasuries.  The timing was the problem.  Where the bank couldn't wait, the government can, so it bought the treasuries and waited for them to mature.

As to what to learn from the 2022 bond selloff, it was so rare, Bloomberg reported it was the worst bond selloff in 235 years.

"Worst US Bond Selloff Since 1787 Marks End of Free-Money Era"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-08/bond-market-pain-is-a-sign-of-interest-rates-returning-to-normal?embedded-checkout=true

Rubyvroom

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #45 on: May 17, 2025, 10:38:47 AM »
Long Term - 10% of Portfolio in VBTLX
Short Term - Discover Savings Account @ 3.5% (funds used within 12 months)
HSA - Deductible for two people in a Money Market fund

I have made minor changes to this over time (dabbled w/ CDs, bought I-Bonds when rates were up, etc), but I keep coming back to this approach because I don't like overcomplicating our portfolio.

Radagast

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2783
  • One Does Not Simply Work Into Mordor
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #46 on: May 17, 2025, 07:58:25 PM »
So, it is like diversify my bond holding, just like how I would want to diversify my securities holding.
Lots of people don’t like the corporate bonds and mortgages in Total Bond, and prefer to own pure government bonds. I am one. The reason is that times when companies don’t make enough money to pay their owners are also times there is doubt about those same companies repaying their debts. Thus corporate bonds are closely correlated to stocks but don’t offer nearly as much opportunity for returns. Your asset allocation can only add up to 100% so corporate bonds and mortgages are generally just dead wood. You can buy an intermediate term government bond fund or even a total government bond fund and be better protected from stock crashes which feature a flight to the safety of government bonds , whereas BND’s corporates largely offset it’s governments and it is basically flat when you want it to be up.

habanero

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #47 on: May 18, 2025, 12:08:14 PM »
Lots of people don’t like the corporate bonds and mortgages in Total Bond, and prefer to own pure government bonds. I am one. The reason is that times when companies don’t make enough money to pay their owners are also times there is doubt about those same companies repaying their debts. Thus corporate bonds are closely correlated to stocks but don’t offer nearly as much opportunity for returns. Your asset allocation can only add up to 100% so corporate bonds and mortgages are generally just dead wood. You can buy an intermediate term government bond fund or even a total government bond fund and be better protected from stock crashes which feature a flight to the safety of government bonds , whereas BND’s corporates largely offset it’s governments and it is basically flat when you want it to be up.

This is a very valid point. Corporate bonds offers somewhat higher running returns than govvies, this excess return has however been at historical lows lately so one gets badly compensated for the extra risk. And then when shit hit the fans, these corp bonds might not perform as one would like compared to treasuries as corporate credit spreads tend to blow out when stuff gets nasty. High-yield bonds even more so than investment-grade bonds.

As I don't live in the US I dont hold any US goverment bonds. There is no practical way for me to buy those on an FX hedged basis home to my home currency and for bonds I dont want the FX risk that comes along with buying foreign-currency denominated bonds. Its fine for equities, but not for bonds imo.

If I was based in the US in times like these I would question the risk-freeness of longer-term US government bonds. I think its entirely debatable which is lesser risk - a 10y USD bond issued by Apple or Microsoft or a 10y US treasury bond. The two former are swimming in cash, the latter is running massive budget deficit with no feasible way to reduce it in the foreseeable future. MSFT now has a higher credit rating than Uncle Sam from Moody's. In the EU where most countries, as opposed to the US, dont have their own currency, only Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg are AAA-rated. Norway is as well and would probably have an extra A at the end if any such thing existed as the country has its own currency, no foreign-currency denominated goverment bonds and own financial assets more than 20 times the size of its own government debt.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2025, 12:14:57 PM by habanero »

Radagast

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2783
  • One Does Not Simply Work Into Mordor
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #48 on: May 19, 2025, 03:37:29 PM »
Lots of people don’t like the corporate bonds and mortgages in Total Bond, and prefer to own pure government bonds. I am one. The reason is that times when companies don’t make enough money to pay their owners are also times there is doubt about those same companies repaying their debts. Thus corporate bonds are closely correlated to stocks but don’t offer nearly as much opportunity for returns. Your asset allocation can only add up to 100% so corporate bonds and mortgages are generally just dead wood. You can buy an intermediate term government bond fund or even a total government bond fund and be better protected from stock crashes which feature a flight to the safety of government bonds , whereas BND’s corporates largely offset it’s governments and it is basically flat when you want it to be up.

This is a very valid point. Corporate bonds offers somewhat higher running returns than govvies, this excess return has however been at historical lows lately so one gets badly compensated for the extra risk. And then when shit hit the fans, these corp bonds might not perform as one would like compared to treasuries as corporate credit spreads tend to blow out when stuff gets nasty. High-yield bonds even more so than investment-grade bonds.

As I don't live in the US I dont hold any US goverment bonds. There is no practical way for me to buy those on an FX hedged basis home to my home currency and for bonds I dont want the FX risk that comes along with buying foreign-currency denominated bonds. Its fine for equities, but not for bonds imo.

If I was based in the US in times like these I would question the risk-freeness of longer-term US government bonds. I think its entirely debatable which is lesser risk - a 10y USD bond issued by Apple or Microsoft or a 10y US treasury bond. The two former are swimming in cash, the latter is running massive budget deficit with no feasible way to reduce it in the foreseeable future. MSFT now has a higher credit rating than Uncle Sam from Moody's. In the EU where most countries, as opposed to the US, dont have their own currency, only Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Luxembourg are AAA-rated. Norway is as well and would probably have an extra A at the end if any such thing existed as the country has its own currency, no foreign-currency denominated goverment bonds and own financial assets more than 20 times the size of its own government debt.
If the US defaults on its debt it will look like bad inflation, because the US is prohibited from defaulting by the Constitution. So printing money to make good on debts is what a default would look like. If Microsoft owed money in dollars they will suffer the same inflation. So really the US government sets the floor risk for all dollar denominated bonds. All other entities issuing dollars denominated bonds have the credit risk of the US government plus the credit risk of the entity.

ChpBstrd

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8283
  • Location: A poor and backward Southern state known as minimum wage country
Re: where are stashing your "safe" money?
« Reply #49 on: May 19, 2025, 04:34:52 PM »
If the US defaults on its debt it will look like bad inflation, because the US is prohibited from defaulting by the Constitution.
There are lots of laws being ignored in the U.S. right now.