Kevin Kroskey's Money & Mind

After the recent downturn in the U.S. and global stock markets, you can be pardoned if you wished that the markets were a bit tamer. Wouldn’t it be nice to get, say, a steady 4% return every year rather than all these ups and downs? Be careful what you wish for. There are at least three reasons why you should hope the markets continue scaring investors half out of their wits. 1) The very fact that stock downturns scare people is one reason why stocks deliver a higher return than bonds. Economists call it the “risk premium;” which can be roughly translated as: people are not willing to pay as much for an investment that will periodically frighten them to death as they would pay for an investment that delivers a less exciting investment ride. Over their history, stocks have been a fairly consistent bargain relative to less volatile alternatives, which is another way of saying that they’ve delivered higher long-term returns than bonds and cash.  2) If you’re accumulating for reti...

After a turbulent 2015, stocks tumbled in the first few weeks of 2016, causing concerns that the bull market U.S. equities have enjoyed since 2009 may be over. Plagued by worries about global economic growth, the S&P 500 dropped 7.75% in the first two weeks of 2016.1 While the pullback surprised many investors, corrections in the 5-10% range are not unusual. Since 1928, the S&P 500 has experienced corrections of more than 5% about three or four times each year.2 We see declines of 10% or more every 1-1/2 years, and bear market corrections of 20% or more about every three or four years.3 Obviously, these are all averages and the performance of any single year can deviate significantly from historical norms.  Though market corrections are rarely welcome, they are a natural part of the overall business cycle, and it is important to take them in stride. The most important thing is not to give in to emotion. While it can be tempting to eject when downside volatility...

If you watched the Republican presidential debates, you might have noticed that a number of  candidates yearn for a return to the gold standard—that is, that every dollar issued by the government would be backed by a comparable value in gold bars that were stashed away in a government vault. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas argued that the dollar should have a fixed value in gold, and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky added that printing money without backing in the precious metal destroys the value of our currency. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, thinks that if not gold, then the dollar could be pegged to a basket of commodities. All are mostly concerned that printing money will cause runaway inflation.   But there may be several problems with this return to the fiscal system of the late 1800s and early 1900s. One is that inflation has barely budged even as the Federal Reserve Board was piling one QE stimulus on top of another, and the government was adding records amoun...

While many market participants wait for the "inevitable" rise in short-term interest rates expected when the Federal Reserve tightens its monetary policy, some investors may have missed the increase in short-term rates already underway as a result of market forces.    Looking at the zero- to two-year segment of the yield curve—the segment that many believe will be most affected whenever the Fed "normalizes interest rates"—it may be surprising to see how much rates have increased since 2013.   In fact, the yield on the 2-Year US Treasury note has nearly doubled since the beginning of 2015, rising from 0.45% in January to almost 0.90% today.* The yield on the 1-Year US Treasury note has more than tripled, from 0.15% to more than 0.50% over the same period. The 6-Month US Treasury bill’s yield rose from a low of 0.03% in May to over 0.30% today. Yet, despite the higher rates, we have not experienced the conjectured financial storm in the fixed income market....

Few words characterize today’s financial markets like uncertainty. When overseas economic issues can rob investors of months of gains and speeches by Federal Reserve officials cause markets to flip-flop unpredictably, investors are left wondering what they should do. In an attempt to make major market movements work for their portfolios rather than against, some investors attempt to time the market. Market timing is the strategy of trying to predict future market movements to time buying and selling decisions. When markets are rallying or pulling back, it can be very tempting to try to seek out the top to sell or the bottom to buy. The problem is that investors usually guess wrong, missing out on the best market days or months. The last few months has been volatile. The S&P 500 goes down -6.0% in August, another -2.5% in September, but bounces back +8.4%in October. If you hit the eject button at the end of September, you lost out! Missing out on the market’s top-performi...

A new map released by the Tax Foundation shows exactly how far $100 would go in all 50 states. Using recently released data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Tax Foundation was able to show how the varying prices of goods, housing and income taxes in each state can impact consumers’ purchasing power. Southerners and Midwesterners have a serious edge over those along the East and West Coasts. A hundred bucks goes the furthest in Mississippi, where $100 will buy you what would cost $115.74 in another state that's closer to the national average. The next low-price states are Arkansas, Missouri, and Alabama. Ohio comes in at an encouraging $112.11 Meanwhile, $100 would only be worth $84.60 in the District of Columbia, the priciest state, $85.32 in Hawaii and $86.66 in New York. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much--100-is-worth-in-your-state-152310027.html Click the Map Read More

If you don't already read Jason Zweig's regular column in the Wall Street Journal, you should. He is one of the few financial journalists worth reading. His recent article on the psychology of the recent market drop is rational and instructive. ==== Click here to read the article in it's entirety: http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/08/24/the-cruel-psychology-of-the-1000-point-drop/ See below for a snippet: Experiments have shown , for instance, that people believe cancer is riskier when they are told that it kills “1,286 out of 10,000 people” than when they hear that it kills “24.14 out of 100 people.” Hearing “1,286” immediately brings a large number of victims to mind, while “24.14” is simply a much smaller number. To notice that the first number is less than 13%, while the second is more than 24%, you have to focus on the denominators of the fractions and do some quick division. But your emotions will likely hijack your brain long before you get to that poi...