Buy I-bonds now or wait until Nov?

[soupcxan]

Given that the fed has rased the fed funds rate a few times, would I be better off buying I-bonds now, before the new rates are set in November or should I wait until the new rates are posted? That is to say, is it likely that the treasury will have to offer a higher fixed component on i-bonds now that rates are rising (ING savings up to 2.2%) to attract capital or will they probably keep rates the same (or lower)? I am going to buy I-bonds either way, it's just a question of timing. Would appreciate your input.

 

[wabmester]

You can come pretty close to predicting the real yield on the new i-bonds by looking at the 5-year TIPS yield, which is currently around 1%.   So, the real component probably won't change, and the inflation component will go up a bit to reflect higher inflation over the last 6 months.

In other words, it probably won't matter if you buy now or wait.

 

[ESRBob]

I haven't looked at the yield curve a lot lately (boy this indexing stuff is making me lazy!) but the movement in short term rates is fairly independent of the long term rates, which, though the feds would like to be able to move them, too, are usually set by Mr. Market based on long term assumptions about inflation, deficits, relative currency strength economic growth rates etc.  

So, to Wab's point,  the interest (real) part of the new I-Bonds probably won't bump up as much as the headlines on Fed tightening might make you think.  In fact, looking at 10 year Treasury rates at the time of the last rate-setting (May?) and comparing them to now shows us that rates have actually fallen by .4% or so since May. Wonder if that means the I-Bond rates might actually be lower next time up? (I'd take Wab's TIPS-derived indicators for more value as he knows more about this than I, though. Maybe 10-years are too long? Five year index hasn't dropped - is pretty much flat with today's rate, which would explain keeping the fixed I-Bond rate at the 1% going forward)

Five Year Treasury Index Graph:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=^FVX&t=6m

Ten Year Treasury Graph: last 6 months
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=^TNX&t=6m

(feels like getting an MBA all over again)

ESRBob

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Some pretty good articles I read suggest not bothering with ibonds at interest rates below 2%.

So far I'm not.

The only reason why I might consider them is if they reached 2%, as a college "fund" for my as yet unborn kid.

I'll probably just continue with my current plan and peel that money out of the portfolio when it happens. Heck, that wont be until I'm 60, and we're going to have so much money coming out of our ears then that a college education probably wont mean much.

 

[Roger_R]

long term rates, which, though the feds would like to be able to move them, too, are usually set by Mr. Market based on long term assumptions about inflation, deficits, relative currency strength economic growth rates etc.

This has been a curious aspect of our interest rate raises. At some point as short term interest rates rise and show a trend for the longer run, would it not be almost inevitable for longer term rates to start bumping up as the spread between short and long term money narrows. Wouldn't the fed want to influence longer term rates by increasing the coupon rate of longer term treasuries? Not arguing at all, but trying to inderstand.

 

[unclemick]

I think the longer rate(as noted) is set buy what sells(bids at auction). On occasion the Treasury has withdrawn/changed maturities when they didn't like the bids.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong - I'm not a bond person.

 

[soupcxan]

Hmm...given the dismal 1% fixed rate on I-bonds, would it make more sense to go with series EE?

 

[retire@40]

Hmm...given the dismal 1% fixed rate on I-bonds, would it make more sense to go with series EE?

Would it make more sense to go with a 5 year CD? EE bonds pay 2.84% while 5 year CDs pay 4.5%

 

[soupcxan]

True, but CDs don't offer any protection against rising rates. And they're not tax-deferred. And there may be larger penalties for breaking them.

Would it make more sense to go with a 5 year CD?  EE bonds pay 2.84% while 5 year CDs pay 4.5%

 

[retire@40]

True, but CDs don't offer any protection against rising rates. And they're not tax-deferred. And there may be larger penalties for breaking them.

Some CDs do offer protection against rising rates with a bump-up feature. True, they are not tax deferred, but chances are the taxes we are talking about are insignificant and sometimes if you lump thousands of dollars in interest income in one year you may jump up a tax bracket and pay a higher marginal tax rate. Penalties could be higher with a bank CD, but a non-issue if you hold to maturity. Don't forget that with a bank CD paying over 1.6% more than a Series EE bond, it would add up to $500 more a year in interest per $30,000 invested.

 

[wabmester]

Hmm...given the dismal 1% fixed rate on I-bonds, would it make more sense to go with series EE?

Well, that's 1% real yield. So, on top of inflation of 3% or so, you're looking at 4% which will beat EE's for a while.

 

[retire@40]

Well, that's 1% real yield.  So, on top of inflation of 3% or so, you're looking at 4% which will beat EE's for a while.

I just checked the I bond interest rates for May through Oct 2004. The total composite rate is 3.39%. Lousy rate, but still better than the EE Bonds at 2.64%.

 

[wabmester]

I just checked the I bond interest rates for May through Oct 2004.  The total composite rate is 3.39%.  Lousy rate, but still better than the EE Bonds at 2.64%.

CPI growth for the last 6 months has been around 1.4%, which annualizes to 2.8%, with the 1% real yield will give you 3.8%.   That's probably pretty close to what the composite rate will look like in November.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

The rule of thumb is to buy ibonds if you think inflation will rise and rates wont climb much. Buy EE bonds if rates will rise but inflation wont climb much.

Since the govt is already understating inflation, and correctly stating it makes them look bad and costs them money, my bet is they'll do whatever it takes to make inflation look as tame as possible.

On the other hand, rates almost have to go up at least a little more.

Given a shot at locking money up a while in ibonds at 1%+fake inflation, in tips at 2.5%+fake inflation for 20 years, i'm currently keeping that money in 3% 11 month cd's and waiting a while to see what happens.

If ibonds went to 2% or tips went over 3.25%, I'd think about it.
Otherwise I'll stay a little more liquid and move it into stocks after a correction.

 

[ESRBob]

If ibonds went to 2% or tips went over 3.25%, I'd think about it.
.

TH, are you referring to the real rate or the total rate (inflation plus the real rate)?  Want to be sure we compare apples as best as possible, even though the I or TIPS bonds are not directly comparable to other bonds.

Regarding a previous question about whether the Fed can influence long term rates, (This is not done by adjusting the spread or price at auction of long bonds, either, as the relevant long rates are the ones companies and decsionmakers face on their own corporate paper, not treasury bond prices.)  

It may be time to crack out the old economics text books on Fed Open Market Policy etc., but what I remember in short is that the Fed can influence short term rates through Open Market Operations and setting the Fed Funds and Discount Rates, (forcing banks to give them cash or lend more, for example), but the long term rates are in such vast, liquid markets and quantities that the Fed cannot really move them.  There is no direct mechanism, and you'd need to buy up trillions before you could have a sustained impact on interest rates, which would of course need to come from somewhere besides issuing new debt to pay for it!  

The long rates are set mostly by expectations of lots of smart decision-making people (investors, credit granters (lenders), borrowers, traders) on things like inflation, relative currency strength, trade deficits, economic growth, as well as supply and demand for credit. (with a premium applied to this base rate for credit risk)  That would appear to be why the Fed spends so much time trying to signal reassurance and 'jawbone' the market into keeping optimistic expectations about inflation and the like so that credit can stay cheap and the economy can keep rolling. If the Fed wants to increase long rates, they need to convince us that the economy really is going to heat up and create a future shortage of credit, or possibly on the flipside, future negatives like dollar weakness or inflation. Arencha glad you're not a central banker?

ESRBob

 

[ak4195]

i think its misguided to exclude CD's in the mix,since noone really knows with CERTAINTY where rates are going.So we must hedge our bets.To exclude TIPS/Ibonds for there rediculously low rates is also a mistake,since they should (imo) be viewed as a hedge and also should be looked at in terms of total return.the TIPS 1/15/14 series which auctioned 1/8/04 @99.829 are now priced at 105.53.

the recent auction ,series 7/15/14 was originally priced at 99.82 as well on7/08,this last go around(rehash) priced at 101.018,currently priced at 102.69.

There are also inflation indexed corps as well.To exclude bonds/CD's based on popular expectations for rates is a serious mistake.Its really quite amazing how much stability bonds can lend a portfolio.It seems to me that perhaps a way to hedge total return for bonds is to buy out of favor corps selling less than par,ive tried to keep my focus on anything AA and abuv.With that high of a rating the yields wont be too spectacular,but then im more worried about getting my investment back than yield,which is my focus on bonds at less than par--ak

 

[wabmester]

CPI growth for the last 6 months has been around 1.4%, which annualizes to 2.8%, with the 1% real yield will give you 3.8%.   That's probably pretty close to what the composite rate will look like in November.

As of today, the new composite rate is 3.67%, and the real yield is unchanged at 1%.