Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is this a time to increase the proportion of stocks I buy with my 401K contributions (vs bonds)? had reduced that proportion because I hope to retire in 4 years.
What % of bonds are you holding now? It is definitely a good buying opportunity as far as stocks are concerned, but you need to be in a position to withstand the volatility. I personally think it's a good way to mitigate the damage that your portfolio has suffered.
I have all mutual funds. About half of those are in equities. The rest of the mix is annuity, some bonds, a little real estate. But half equities.
Sound like you are actually doing pretty good. It doesn't sound like your portfolio is overly conservative. Maybe a little? If the percentage of stocks to bonds is around 75% stocks and 25% bonds, then that is a really good place to be for most people. When you have bonds that lean towards 50% of your portfolio, you really get hammered by inflation in the long run. Look up the Trinity study chart and you will see what I mean. For people who have a screwed up asset allocation prior to this debacle, this could be a good time to buy stocks while prices are low. I would also recommend checking out bogleheads forum before doing anything crazy. My father uses a well known and highly successful investment advisor, and I swear that bogleheads gives much better advice.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is this a time to increase the proportion of stocks I buy with my 401K contributions (vs bonds)? had reduced that proportion because I hope to retire in 4 years.
What % of bonds are you holding now? It is definitely a good buying opportunity as far as stocks are concerned, but you need to be in a position to withstand the volatility. I personally think it's a good way to mitigate the damage that your portfolio has suffered.
I have all mutual funds. About half of those are in equities. The rest of the mix is annuity, some bonds, a little real estate. But half equities.
Anonymous wrote:I cannot look at my 401k. Why are you pulling your money out????????
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is this a time to increase the proportion of stocks I buy with my 401K contributions (vs bonds)? had reduced that proportion because I hope to retire in 4 years.
What % of bonds are you holding now? It is definitely a good buying opportunity as far as stocks are concerned, but you need to be in a position to withstand the volatility. I personally think it's a good way to mitigate the damage that your portfolio has suffered.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is this a time to increase the proportion of stocks I buy with my 401K contributions (vs bonds)? had reduced that proportion because I hope to retire in 4 years.
What % of bonds are you holding now? It is definitely a good buying opportunity as far as stocks are concerned, but you need to be in a position to withstand the volatility. I personally think it's a good way to mitigate the damage that your portfolio has suffered.
Anonymous wrote:Is this a time to increase the proportion of stocks I buy with my 401K contributions (vs bonds)? had reduced that proportion because I hope to retire in 4 years.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, only idiots are pulling their money out. There is a boatload of evidence that shows that market timing is a losers strategy.
Now if you have a bunch of cash sitting around and you are willing to take a moderate amount of risk, it's hard to argue with buying stocks at a 40% discount (russell 2000).
There are a lot of idiots then with the market down as much as it is.
I wish I had more cash to invest in the next few months, but unfortunately we don't.
You ain't seen nothing yet. People who think they have the conviction to hold will sell. And sell. And sell.. until there are no sellers left. That's when I'm going in. Sitting on a ton of cash.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For those saying "this is like everything else, just wait this out a few months and the market will bounce back."
This is the most recent literature about the virus. This is what governors are basing their shut downs on. Read this and then get back to us with your casual attitude about it:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/...9-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
The global impact of COVID-19 has been profound, and the public health threat it represents is the most serious seen in a respiratory virus since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Here we present the results of epidemiological modelling which has informed policymaking in the UK and other countries in recent weeks. In the absence of a COVID-19 vaccine, we assess the potential role of a number of public health measures – so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) – aimed at reducing contact rates in the population and thereby reducing transmission of the virus. In the results presented here, we apply a previously published microsimulation model to two countries: the UK (Great Britain specifically) and the US. We conclude that the effectiveness of any one intervention in isolation is likely to be limited, requiring multiple interventions to be combined to have a substantial impact on transmission.
675,000 Americans were killed by the Spanish Flu in 1918, when the population was MUCH HIGHER. Be very scared of this.
This is not 1918 and most of the figures tossed around are factoring in NO intervention.
Also, 1918 was followed by 10 years of expansion and innovation. And there will be incredible innovation as a result of this pandemic. Everything we are seeing right now - all of these drastic changes to our society - will fuel innovation.
I am not saying this won’t be bad; it will be quite bad. But remember that no governor wants to be the headline for the state that didn’t act. With proper social distancing and self quarantines we can combat this. I know we are really focused on Italy right now, but China’s number are encouraging:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/china/