<p>
</p>
<p>BCE, we did lose money at the end of 2008 and into 2009, but because I am invested in a “moderate” portfolio overall, and because I kept up with the quarterly rebalancing, we didn’t do nearly as badly as some others. Since then, however, we’ve more than made it up.</p>
<p>One needs to take the long view. Slow and steady wins the race, and all that.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I’ve always felt that that was a sales pitch from the mutual fund industry - along with the mantra that we’re never saving enough. Mutual funds do best when people hand over their money, as much of it as they can, and then leave it with the mutual fund companies. They make their fees on assets under management and sometimes sales (front and back). Moving to cash before a crash makes their life harder because they have to sell shares which can further the crash.</p>
<p>I think that it does make sense to keep an eye on moving average crossovers.</p>
<p>[The</a> dk Report - David Kneupper - Public ChartList - StockCharts.com](<a href=“http://stockcharts.com/public/3828047/tenpp]The”>Public ChartLists | StockCharts.com)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, the hard part is knowing when a crash is about to occur so that you make the appropriate moves.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Just look at moving average crossovers.</p>
<p>Fee’s vary by account. One thing to keep in mind is that your fees are reduced by the amount of money you have with that brokerage. If you have large accounts it’s in your best interest to keep those funds with the same brokerage. Your investment accounts are not insured like your bank account that has no bearing on where to keep them. Most brokerages have a bank as well and some count those funds as funds under management, some do not, but the kids is getting the most funds under management to get the best rates. Our brokerage firm you pay NO fees if your accounts under management are 1,000,000 or more (I think that’s the number).</p>
<p>I hope this is ok to post a link. It’s a very good visual about the stock market and the changes over the years:</p>
<p><a href=“http://americanfundsretirement.retire.americanfunds.com/basics/volatile-market/recessions.htm[/url]”>http://americanfundsretirement.retire.americanfunds.com/basics/volatile-market/recessions.htm</a></p>
<p>It’s a good illustration that yes, there are plenty of ups and downs but even the downs now are STILL higher then the highest ever reported…</p>
<p>Investment accounts are insured by SIPC.</p>
<p>[Your</a> Rights Under SIPC Protection - FINRA](<a href=“http://www.finra.org/Investors/ProtectYourself/AfterYouInvest/YourRightsUnderSIPCProtection/]Your”>http://www.finra.org/Investors/ProtectYourself/AfterYouInvest/YourRightsUnderSIPCProtection/)</p>
<p>You are better off buying an index fund with low fees than paying up to buy a managed mutual fund. Most funds do not beat the indexes they are tracking. Which funds charge less than Vanguard?</p>
<p>There may be no load funds, which are great, but is there a fund anywhere that does not charge any fees (expenses)? Since it costs
money to run a fund, I would like to see a no fee fund. </p>
<p>SteveMA, Which brokerage firm has no expenses if you have a million bucks or more being managed?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Timing is everything. Interesting that they didn’t note that the S&P is still down from the higgs in 2000 and 2007.</p>
<p>On fees: my fee to buy spy is $7 or $8. Same to sell.</p>
<p>Spys have other (expenses). They are very, very low though.</p>
<p>[SPY</a> Profile | SPDR S&P 500 Stock - Yahoo! Finance](<a href=“SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) Company Profile & Facts - Yahoo Finance”>SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) Company Profile & Facts - Yahoo Finance)</p>
<p>Those American Funds have expenses even if the sales charges are waived.</p>
<p>.09%. Can any mutual funds beat that?</p>
<p>The other advantage of ETFs is that you can get in or out whenever you want and write covered calls on them to make some income on your holdings. You could probably cover that 0.09% easily writing OOM CCs.</p>
<p>I said the expenses are very, very low.</p>
<p>I like spy.</p>
<p>I am trading the damn thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IVV, ITOT, VOO, VTI, a few that I know on top of my head. In fact, I heard somewhere for this type of ETF, SPY is considered to have high fees.</p>
<p>Vanguard 500 Index Fund has an expense ratio of 0.17 percent.</p>
<p>[Vanguard</a> 500 Index Fund (VFINX) | US News Best Mutual Funds](<a href=“http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-blend/vanguard-500-index-fund/vfinx]Vanguard”>http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-blend/vanguard-500-index-fund/vfinx)</p>
<p>I didn’t check the others.</p>
<p>Actually, the fee is 0.05% if the balance is over $10,000 in Admiral class (VFIAX). ETFs like spy have lower fees in general than mutual funds. The etf’s I quote above have fees 0.05%-0.07%. For mutual funds, Fidelity has low fee funds with fees equal or lower than 0.09%. I am sure Schwab also.</p>
<p>Schwab has made a strategic decision to try to be the low cost provider of ETFs. A couple of their ETFs (SCHX for one) charge expenses of .04% and they don’t charge commission to trade them. I use SCHX both as a core holding and occasionally as a speculative vehicle. </p>
<p>I think I mentioned this before, but after the tech bubble 2000/2001 where I got in late and sold out at the lows I decided that with a portion of my portfolio I would just stay in the market (still buying, selling and adjusting total exposure, but always net long some stocks) and ride out the ups and downs. This strategy (if you can call it a strategy) along with some high cash balances let me ride out the 2009 decline in stocks without panic and was able to add a little on the margin at lower levels. I could probably do better by simply indexing everything or turning it over to a manager, but I don’t want to.</p>
<p>dstark–that is not the same as FDIC insured though. That protects you from dishonest brokers. FDIC protects your money in the event a bank goes under. Your funds are NOT insured in investment accounts unless there was some wrong-doing with the investments. It’s not the same.</p>
<p>I didn’t know that some of the MFs had sharply lowered their fees. Last time I checked, fees were much higher.</p>
<p>At any rate, I like to be able to get in and out when I want to, go long or short, write options and use margin when I feel like it. The mutual fund world feels restrictive in comparison. One advantage MFs do have is the ability to buy shares in private companies.</p>
<p>All this talk about stocks. Is anyone else beginning to consider a shift to laddered muni’s and perhaps some charitable annuities to ensure a cash flow during retirement? Not sure if any of these vehicles are offering sufficient interest rates to make them attractive, it’s the sort of question I’d like to pose to a knowledgeable fee-only advisor. I figure we can always adjust our lifestyle to live within our means, but it would be nice to have a guaranteed cash flow for long term planning.</p>
<p>I think that I’m about 20 years from retirement so I haven’t given a lot of thought to bonds but it would be something that I’d think about, perhaps in ten years. Ideally, there would be those great bank CDs paying 5-6%.</p>
<p>At the moment, I have large positions in two dividend stocks. One has a yield of about 6% and the other has a yield of about 12%. I think that those could provide some pretty strong cash flow for retirement. My mother has two pensions, and several dividend stocks. I am not sure whether or not she has any bonds right now. She’s completely self-sufficient in her 90s.</p>
<p>momsquad-we have a couple annuities–one is intended to cover our basic living expenses in retirement-utilities, food, medical premiums, etc. The other is a placeholder to dump funds into if we should need them for long term care expenses. There isn’t much in there now but you have to have had the account open for 5+ years to get the tax benefit of the roll over for LTC.</p>