Is The Carnage Mostly Over For Bond Funds?

[COcheesehead]

Set it and forget it isn’t a strategy. Its what people who hold your money want, but may not be in your best interest.

 

[f35phixer]

well I am a set and forget and tell me why I'm wrong please.
Pensions/month 13.6k after tax and medical ins. Fed/State employees. Lifetime COLA
Just inputting in my Fidelity Boggle head AA stocks 50.7/INT12.6/bond 36.6 for three fund numbers for FAGIX and FTBFX.

2022 FAGIX gave me 2743 shares extra FTBFX gave me 438
So far in 2023 FAGIX has 343 and FTBFX has 138

So we don't need the money every month and extrapolate my bond's number out 10 years when I have to take RMD's. That's a lot of extra money I'll have ready to give to DD and whom ever else right?

Thanks for looking....

 

[pb4uski]

Aren't we supposed to set out asset allocations and ignore the noise?

Arguably yes for an asset allocation, but FIRECalc proves that all else being equal that there are acceptable success rates under a wide range of AA with WR substantially less than 4%, which is common for many forum members so there is latitude for people to change their AA during retirement if they wish to.

But the focus of this thread is looking at substituting individual bonds for bond funds for the fixed income portion of ones AA so it really doesn't have anything to do with asset allocation.

 

[pb4uski]

well I am a set and forget and tell me why I'm wrong please.
Pensions/month 13.6k after tax and medical ins. Fed/State employees. Lifetime COLA
Just inputting in my Fidelity Boggle head AA stocks 50.7/INT12.6/bond 36.6 for three fund numbers for FAGIX and FTBFX.

2022 FAGIX gave me 2743 shares extra FTBFX gave me 438
So far in 2023 FAGIX has 343 and FTBFX has 138

So we don't need the money every month and extrapolate my bond's number out 10 years when I have to take RMD's. That's a lot of extra money I'll have ready to give to DD and whom ever else right?

Thanks for looking....

If I read this right, what you are saying is that your $13.6k per month COLAed pension provides for all your needs. If that's the case, then it really doesn't much matter whether your retirement investments are 100% equities or 100% cryptocurrency or 100% cash under your mattress, right?

 

[f35phixer]

If I read this right, what you are saying is that your $13.6k per month COLAed pension provides for all your needs. If that's the case, then it really doesn't much matter whether your retirement investments are 100% equities or 100% cryptocurrency or 100% cash under your mattress, right?

Correct, sometimes we put 5K or more into savings... But i don't want to be stupid and throw money away IF we have lots of down turn.

 

[pb4uski]

well I am a set and forget and tell me why I'm wrong please.
Pensions/month 13.6k after tax and medical ins. Fed/State employees. Lifetime COLA
Just inputting in my Fidelity Boggle head AA stocks 50.7/INT12.6/bond 36.6 for three fund numbers for FAGIX and FTBFX.

2022 FAGIX gave me 2743 shares extra FTBFX gave me 438
So far in 2023 FAGIX has 343 and FTBFX has 138

So we don't need the money every month and extrapolate my bond's number out 10 years when I have to take RMD's. That's a lot of extra money I'll have ready to give to DD and whom ever else right?

Thanks for looking....

Correct, sometimes we put 5K or more into savings... But i don't want to be stupid and throw money away IF we have lots of down turn.

It's all a risk/reward tradeoff and what you can stomach for losses. As you may know, that 50.7/12.6/36.6 combination actually declined in value by 10-15% in 2022 so even though you own more shares they are worth less than they were worth at the end of 2021.

I'm not very optimistic about stocks right now and think they are overvalued and due for additional declines in value and like you we don't need to invest in stocks for our retirement to be successful so I'm on the sidelines for now. The P/E ratio for the S&P 500 is currently about 22 vs a historical average of 15 or so, suggesting to me that stocks at 15-25% overvalued. It's very possible that stocks might have another "lost decade" in the 2020s with very modest returns lik in the 2000s.

 

[Phroig]

I too will have a pension that exceeds my current expenses. I was also in the “don’t need the risk” camp until recently. I’m coming around to the idea that I’m investing for my son, and consequently, have been shifting to mostly equities in taxable and Roth.

Stocks certainly seem overvalued, but hopefully the return over the next 40 years should be fine.

Coming back to the original question, the carnage in bond funds seems over, but I don’t believe there’s much upside left in the near term. If bonds and bond funds go sideways for a bit, the higher yields in MM funds are more attractive, at least for the next three months.

 

[Rianne]

I'm not very optimistic about stocks right now and think they are overvalued and due for additional declines in value and like you we don't need to invest in stocks for our retirement to be successful so I'm on the sidelines for now. The P/E ratio for the S&P 500 is currently about 22 vs a historical average of 15 or so, suggesting to me that stocks at 15-25% overvalued. It's very possible that stocks might have another "lost decade" in the 2020s with very modest returns lik in the 2000s.

When did you sell? Isn't the value of stock index funds irrelevant until you sell? Today our index fund performance (IRR), not changed since 2013.
10 yr +7.6%
5 yr +7.4%
3 yr +14.7%
1 yr -9.5%
YTD +4%

We're staying in but our fixed income is CD, treasury ladders. Based on the basis to today we're up and comfortable with that return.

 

[pb4uski]

I sold in 2020. I was getting uncomfortable with valuations even in late 2019 when P/Es were approaching 25 vs a historical mean of 15. When our portfolio declined to where it was when we retired in 2012 (albeit after large withdrawals in 2014-2015 to purchasse a winter condo, build a 2-car garage and 2 new cars... all for cash) and the uncertainties of the covid pandemic and the trajectory was down I decided that a return of capital was more inportant than return on capital.

I think the fair value of your portfolio is always relevant. Under your thinking if you started retirement with a 60/40 portfolio with $1m and took no withdrawals and in the first 5 years it declined to $0.5m then it is no big deal because you haven't sold?... that doesn't make sense to me at all.

While in retrospect the decision has not been a good move financially, but I'm still comfortable with the decision. I still think the market is 15-25% overvalued even after 2022. The reality is that our retirement is overfunded and we don't need stocks to have a successful retirement and the sale was more to preserve capital... my prime objective is that we never become a financial burden to our two children. Stocks were and still are overvalued IMO so I don't care to play the game and took my ball and bat and went home.

I haven't given up on stocks, just for now. If valuations ever get sensible again, I'll reconsider stocks.

 

[COcheesehead]

I never agreed with the it’s not a loss until you sell philosophy. What you have in your account today is what you have to live on from this point.
If the day you retired your plan was based on a million and now you have $800,000 - that is the number you have to live on, not a million.

 

[Montecfo]

I sold in 2020. I was getting uncomfortable with valuations even in late 2019 when P/Es were approaching 25 vs a historical mean of 15. When our portfolio declined to where it was when we retired in 2012 (albeit after large withdrawals in 2014-2015 to purchasse a winter condo, build a 2-car garage and 2 new cars... all for cash) and the uncertainties of the covid pandemic and the trajectory was down I decided that a return of capital was more inportant than return on capital.

I think the fair value of your portfolio is always relevant. Under your thinking if you started retirement with a 60/40 portfolio with $1m and took no withdrawals and in the first 5 years it declined to $0.5m then it is no big deal because you haven't sold?... that doesn't make sense to me at all.

While in retrospect the decision has not been a good move financially, but I'm still comfortable with the decision. I still think the market is 15-25% overvalued even after 2022. The reality is that our retirement is overfunded and we don't need stocks to have a successful retirement and the sale was more to preserve capital... my prime objective is that we never become a financial burden to our two children. Stocks were and still are overvalued IMO so I don't care to play the game and took my ball and bat and went home.

I haven't given up on stocks, just for now. If valuations ever get sensible again, I'll reconsider stocks.

Pb4uski,

I think if we get the hard recession the Fed appears to some to have set up, you will have a good shot at those lower PEs.

 

[Montecfo]

I never agreed with the it’s not a loss until you sell philosophy. What you have in your account today is what you have to live on from this point.
If the day you retired your plan was based on a million and now you have $800,000 - that is the number you have to live on, not a million.

Exactly right. When your portfolio declined you have lost purchasing power and your portfolio has lost earning power. Those are real losses. Gains are required to offset them.

 

[Rianne]

I never agreed with the it’s not a loss until you sell philosophy. What you have in your account today is what you have to live on from this point.
If the day you retired your plan was based on a million and now you have $800,000 - that is the number you have to live on, not a million.

That's my point. As of today, our account is up +4% since 2013, with no loss. From here it's just as it's always been, there's a risk in owning stock index funds. It's all about your risk tolerance. The loss in our "hedged" bond funds scared me and we got out. Those aren't supposed to be risky. But that loss will be made up with the recent interest rate hikes and our new strategy of CDs and treasuries. Overall, we are in the positive and according to Firecalc and other calculators are safe with a positive end until we're 95.

 

[COcheesehead]

That's my point. As of today, our account is up +4% since 2013, with no loss. From here it's just as it's always been, there's a risk in owning stock index funds. It's all about your risk tolerance. The loss in our "hedged" bond funds scared me and we got out. Those aren't supposed to be risky. But that loss will be made up with the recent interest rate hikes and our new strategy of CDs and treasuries. Overall, we are in the positive and according to Firecalc and other calculators are safe with a positive end until we're 95.

Are up 4% annualized or 4% total from 2013?

 

[f35phixer]

Dang PB4, all this doom and gloom makes me think I should have continued to work... Max my TSP, get match and 50 catch up, then lots of share not worth a dang and then in 20 years later I'd be golden......

NNNNAAAAHHHHHH, I'm good.

Thank you for the thoughts.

 

[f35phixer]

I need to do some new firecal's with our new numbers now that we both have full year of SS under our belts at 62....

 

[pb4uski]

Dang PB4, all this doom and gloom makes me think I should have continued to work... Max my TSP, get match and 50 catch up, then lots of share not worth a dang and then in 20 years later I'd be golden......



NNNNAAAAHHHHHH, I'm good.



Thank you for the thoughts.

While it might be bad, it isn't anywhere near dire enough to consider a return to work!!

 

[Sirka]

Just because a fund sells a bond doesn't mean that sale is a loss.

+1 Totally, as it was said, fund is buying and selling all the time. Maybe shifting their position to longer term bonds when they see rates are going lower?
I am done with bond funds for a while, it is easier buying T-bills with auto roll at Fidelity. It is new to me, we shall see

 

[Rianne]

Are up 4% annualized or 4% total from 2013?

According to our performance page, our CAGR is up 16.79% since 2013 (stock index funds)

According to IRR for those years, up 7.6%, stated as a 10-year performance. This is for stock index only, reinvest dividends, and withdrawal for working Roth contributions in the taxable, so those went to our Roths.

My previous post included all accounts, retirement, and nonretirement.


"Personal performance uses a dollar-weighted return formula called internal rate of return (IRR) to calculate your personal rate of return. IRR compares the initial purchase prices of the investment against the current price while also factoring in new money coming into your investment and how long that investment has been held. Because IRR takes new money and time into account, your personal rate of return will likely differ from the posted rates of return for a specific asset in your portfolio.

Personal performance does not include assets from trust services accounts, holdings purchased through companies other than Vanguard (outside investments), or assets from defined benefit plans."

 

[f35phixer]

I need to do some new firecal's with our new numbers now that we both have full year of SS under our belts at 62....

Very good could be either $538,519 to $15,140,925 for 30year cycle 100%. Dad is 90 and healthy

 

[bltkmt]

Never is a very long time.

Seems is a qualifier.