Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I have often wondered if having a cash buffer (perhaps 3-5 years) in the event of a huge bear market was worth earnings one gives up.
This article in today's WSJ indicates that it may be better to set one's AA and then rebalance while staring into the teeth of the Bear market.
Sorry this is behind a pay wall.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/retiri...rns-1537522201?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=3
Here is the relevant paragraph:
Here is the link to the study:
https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Page...rical Evidence on Buffer Zone Strategies.aspx
This article in today's WSJ indicates that it may be better to set one's AA and then rebalance while staring into the teeth of the Bear market.
Sorry this is behind a pay wall.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/retiri...rns-1537522201?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=3
Here is the relevant paragraph:
[-]If I can find the study online I will post a link.[/-]According to recent research, which looked at 140 combinations of investment strategies, withdrawal rates, and buffer-zone sizes over successive 30-year periods from 1926 to 2009, investors came out ahead with cash-buffer strategies in only three instances. In contrast, with rebalanced portfolios, they came out ahead in 70 simulations, said co-author David Nanigian, associate professor of finance in the Mihaylo College of Business and Economics at California State University, Fullerton. In the remaining 67 combinations, the strategies performed the same, he said.
Here is the link to the study:
https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Page...rical Evidence on Buffer Zone Strategies.aspx
Last edited: