UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 59856  
Subject: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Last night I spent a bunch of time just figuring out what percentage I have in what kind of asset.

I have narrowed my investments down to 5 asset classes (which seems reasonable and easy to keep track of).

Those Asset Classes (for those who are interested in such things) are:

1: Money Market (Cash and Near Cash)
2: US Equities (Large Cap and Small Cap)
3: International Equities (Growth Stocks and Emerging Markets)
4: Commodities (What I call a commodity play in two different Vanguard specialized funds)
5: Future Pensions and Social Security


That last class doesn't require any attention since there is no re-balancing involved.

But as I was looking at the breakdown in percentages last night I was surprised to find that, since my really big re-allocation last May, my funds have performed rather evenly such that they are only under or over my target percentage for them by two or three percent. Well... one long-held fund is a little top-heavy, but I can take care of that easily enough later.

I've decided to take a "re-balancing" look at my holdings every May and again every September -- and do any minor re-balancings at that time. This should minimize any major tax bills and keep my portfolio healthy.

There is an article in this month's Money Magazine that stresses the importance of re-balancing your portfolio to minimize downturns and keep your portfolio healthy. Seems like a really good thing to do to me.

How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?

AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2215 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?



i don't yet have a strong feeling what the allocations *should* be ...

so parts of it, i look annually; parts quarterly; parts weekly.


=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NMTech74 Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2216 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I've decided to take a "re-balancing" look at my holdings every May and again every September -- and do any minor re-balancings at that time. This should minimize any major tax bills and keep my portfolio healthy.

There is an article in this month's Money Magazine that stresses the importance of re-balancing your portfolio to minimize downturns and keep your portfolio healthy. Seems like a really good thing to do to me.

How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?


Here's a study suggesting that frequent rebalancing is not a good idea.

<http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/100/rebal100.htm>

In some of the "lazy portfolios" there's no rebalancing at all:

<http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7BDB2FE1FE-444D-4D59-AF7B-3BF006881A2E%7D>

Not all rebalancing is based on a fixed amount of time:

<http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/07/pf/expert/ask_expert/index.htm>

Part of the answer depends on the costs of rebalancing, and your time horizon.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2217 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1


i don't yet have a strong feeling what the allocations *should* be ...

so parts of it, i look annually; parts quarterly; parts weekly.





I think the allocations really depend on you and how much risk you are willing to take and how comfortable you are with it.

I've broken mine down like so:

Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

This seems to be working pretty well for me.
It's the most conservative portfolio I've ever had.
I figure the 50% in cash is not too much for me since when I do put money into equity funds, I usually choose fairly aggressive ones.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2218 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Here's a study suggesting that frequent rebalancing is not a good idea.



I'm not suggesting that anyone re-balance frequently -- just that they make a point of at least evaluating their portfolio periodically so that it doesn't get skewed in one direction or the other. I think that is sound advice.


In some of the "lazy portfolios" there's no rebalancing at all:



True. But I don't own any lazy portfolios.



AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ResNullius Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2219 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?

I'm probably a bit odd in that I don't really re-balance. I currently have about 92% of my portfolio in large and mid-cap equities, spread between a number of Vanguard funds. My fixed assets are mostly in the money market, with a little bit in the bond part of the Wellington fund. Over the past several years, I've put all the savings from my part-time consulting in the Wellington fund in order to generate cash flow when I totally cease to have any earned income. I also have a signficant amount in Windsor II, which also pays out dividends. Two-thirds of my portfolio is in a taxable account, with one-third in an IRA. I don't count SS, and I don't have any type of pension. Back to rebalancing, I don't worry too much about keeping any specific balance between my equity funds, since I'm happy with them all. I just let them do their thing on a buy and hold basis. The last true re-balancing I did was several years ago when I sold off about 80% of the Vanguard Health fund in favor of moving that money over into Windsor II and Wellington. I did this because I felt that the health care sector, drugs in particular, probably would not outperform the general market over the next 20 years to the same extent it had over the past 15 years. I'm not sure financial experts would have agreed with this, but it's what I think. I think goverment or quasi-government price controls are inevitable in the health care sector, so I didn't want to be so heavily weighted in that sector. I made a load of money off of health care over the years, but I felt the need to reduce my exposure in that area. Even if I turn out to be wrong, I still wanted to rebalance into higher concentration in Wellington and Windsor II in order to generate unearned income after I quit my part-time consulting. As for the rest of my portfolio, I don't worry about keeping any particular balance, because I'm just not as concerned about that as many of the financial writers. I have a mostly auto-pilot portfolio, and I like it that way. It's worked out well for enough for me. My goal is to do well. I don't need to do the best, and I don't want to do the worst.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ResNullius Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2220 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 2:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I figure the 50% in cash is not too much for me since when I do put money into equity funds, I usually choose fairly aggressive ones.

I think folks should invest in a manner that lets them sleep well at night. That said, unless you're in your mid to upper 70s, you might not want to have so much in cash or near cash. Fixed assets in general don't enjoy the kind of steady growth that usually comes from a well-diversified equity portfolio. Steady growth is what's important to growing a portfolio to a level sufficient to sustain retirement, at least that's my opinion. In any event, if your plan works for you, then go for it.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2223 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 3:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I figure the 50% in cash is not too much for me since when I do put money into equity funds, I usually choose fairly aggressive ones.

I think folks should invest in a manner that lets them sleep well at night. That said, unless you're in your mid to upper 70s, you might not want to have so much in cash or near cash. Fixed assets in general don't enjoy the kind of steady growth that usually comes from a well-diversified equity portfolio. Steady growth is what's important to growing a portfolio to a level sufficient to sustain retirement, at least that's my opinion. In any event, if your plan works for you, then go for it.




Actually, I sleep a LOT better at night knowing that if the market decided to take a dump like it did back in 2000, I won't be losing the zillions (a slight exaggeration) of dollars I lost back then. I still have not recovered all my losses -- they were THAT terrible. It's a lesson well-learned.

That said, I kind of look at it like the 50% that's in the market is ALL the money I have. When THAT is the case, I'm well-diversified and doing quite well, thankyouverymuch.

I'm not fond of bonds, actually, and I look at my money market as being not much different from them. At least the NAV doesn't change and, at least right now, the MM is paying better than bonds. Or at least as good as.

And, like you, I have a tiny amount in Bonds by way of the Wellington Fund (my most conservative fund - not counting the money market).

I guess I just think re-balancing periodically is a good and prudent thing to do. I don't think anyone should just let their investments run without a leash. But that's just me. YMMV.

AM

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2224 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 3:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?"

Not too often...I check it every few months to see how things are doing. Since most of it is 'taxable', balancing for the sake of balancing is an expensive proposition.

Since I am retired, I need to have income each year.

So I do the following:

1) Do ont re-invest dividends and Cap Gains payments. I take them each year and spend them as part of annual income.

2) Slowly sell some individual stocks. Maybe 1% of stock allocation per year.

3) Take the interest from my CDs/bond funds that are tax-free or taxable, and spend it...as part of annual income.

4) Whatever is left over and not spend invested in other asset categories.

Currently have:

IRA - about 20% of assets
30% Vanguard Total Stock Market
40% TIPS
30% REIT fund

VAnguard other taxable funds about 15% of assets
REIT fund
Insternational fund (5%)

Individual stocks about 40% of asset (many with world exposure)

Cash, CDs, I-bonds, tax free mutual funds are the rest of the portfolio

Of course, I read the intercst study on rebalancing vs not rebalancing.

Where it is easy, I recommend it. Where you would incur tremendous penalties just to rebalance, then you might read the study and comtemplate at what point you do take action.

A few percent one way or the other simply moves you along the 'optimum' curve that Bernstein has described in modern portfolio management.

60% vs 55% vs 70% isn't that much different stock/bond allocation.

I don't count my house (would be about 8% of total assets added on) as part of my portfolio, or other things in my house or cars as part of portfolio..they are expenses, not income generators.


t.





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2225 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 3:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
AM: "I guess I just think re-balancing periodically is a good and prudent thing to do. I don't think anyone should just let their investments run without a leash. "

We had a poster on the FIRE board who panicked in 1996, sold all his stocks, and bought 100% CDs and TIPS and other things. 11 years later, he is still saying the 'market is too high priced'....

He missed out on 1996 to 2000, and 2002-2007 market rises.

Had he diversified 50/50, he would have been so far ahead of the game.

Cash drops in value by the rate of inflation each year. If true inflation is 3% a year, and you get 5%, you are making 2% in real terms.

Maybe you might only get 20-3% real rate of return on stock, but traditionally they have been doing better.


The advantage to individual bonds or CDs is that you lock in the rate. I sure enjoyed th 7% CDs I had until they expired a year ago (darn).....

with a ladder, you aren't going to be getting the best, but won't be getting he lowest interest rate either..it averages out....

For some reason, if interest rates dropped to 1% next year (recession?) then your money market fund would pay you about 1%.......even if inlation was still 3% or more.

Many people with cash and bonds got clobbered by the high inflation of the 1975 to 1983 period with interest rates climbing to 15%....then they fell like a rock..... If you had some 30 year treasuries with 13% coupon, you could sell them for twice face value, or collect 13% interest on them for the next 29 years!....

You pays your money and takes your chances, but betting all on short term interest rates is not what most portfolios are built upon......

See the efficient frontier....


t.





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: DorothyM Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2231 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 4:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Many people with cash and bonds got clobbered by the high inflation of the 1975 to 1983 period with interest rates climbing to 15%....then they fell like a rock..... If you had some 30 year treasuries with 13% coupon, you could sell them for twice face value, or collect 13% interest on them for the next 29 years!....

My very first IRA was 1982 -- $2000 in a 10 year CD at 15%, and the bank gave me a $20 bill for opening the account.





Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jim2B Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2234 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 6:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AM,

I keep pretty close tabs on my assets so I don't need to go perform a special look in order to know what % of my NAV each asset is.

So instead of looking every 6 months, I just wait until one asset class is more than 3% different from the desired %. This has happened in as little as 2 months but has also taken more than a year. It depends upon the relative performance of my assets.

It's currently been >4 months since my last reallocation and the major assets are still within 1% of their target. It looks like it'll several more months until I need to perform this function again.

Jim

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2235 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 7:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AM: "How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it"

I rebalance my IRA every year. The rest? Not so much.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: montecfo Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2242 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/17/2007 11:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I've decided to take a "re-balancing" look at my holdings every May and again every September -- and do any minor re-balancings at that time. This should minimize any major tax bills and keep my portfolio healthy.

Twice a year is probably too often.

And if you are trying to take a modern portfolio theory type of approach, you are not diversified enough, in my opinion. I would see that as far more important than rebalancing.

How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?

I look at my portfolio constantly, but I never rebalance per se.

I have 40% of my portfolio in 8 mutual funds, mostly value oriented with a small amount of aggressive growth, and a balanced fund. For my supersafe type money, I pay down my mortgage which gives me a bondlike guaranteed return.

The rest of my portfolio is in 20-25 individual stocks and bonds, which provide what I feel is adequate diversification, though in recent years I have been overweighted in oil and gas and rails, and always underweight in tech.

When I am buying new stocks, I consider diversification at that time. However, a value-type approach will necessarily result in overweighting of particular industries. Same when I am selling.

If you hope to beat the market, you have to overweight. If you want to track the market, you have to be more diversified.

Above all, you must watch costs, they will kill you.

Best,

Montecfo



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: montecfo Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2244 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 12:03 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Actually, I sleep a LOT better at night knowing that if the market decided to take a dump like it did back in 2000, I won't be losing the zillions (a slight exaggeration) of dollars I lost back then. I still have not recovered all my losses -- they were THAT terrible. It's a lesson well-learned.

OK. But I would say that your losses were due to being invested in the wrong things. Why would you want to invest even 50% in the wrong things, investments which are highly speculative?

Also, the other big big issue for investors is this :you MUST stay fully invested. Most investors try to time the market, which is not possible. Most investors seriously underperform for that reason.

You must have a plan and a discipline, and take emotion out of it.

Montecfo


Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2250 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 1:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
How often do the rest of you take a critical look at your portfolio and re-balance it?

AM


Just visited the financial advisor. He agreed that I would do well to move more into cash/money market/CD's.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2252 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 1:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2253 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 1:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff




Well, right now I sleep much better at night with 50% in cash.
And there is still plenty left over which is exposed to the fluctuations of the market. More than many people even have at all.
I'm content with it.

But thanks for the "young sprout" -- I feels good now! ;o)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2254 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 1:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff

Also, you didn't mention REITs.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2258 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 3:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff

Also, you didn't mention REITs.


Heh.


-b
...... wasn't there a 'rule' .... age = % allocated to cash & bonds ?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cliff666 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2259 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 3:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
-b
...... wasn't there a 'rule' .... age = % allocated to cash & bonds ?


AM is way too smart to simply follow roolz.

cliff

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2260 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 3:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2

...... wasn't there a 'rule' .... age = % allocated to cash & bonds ?

AM is way too smart to simply follow roolz.




yeah ....i was thinking the rule for you and i.


but how to allocate 723% to Cash ?


=

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Anibaldo Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2262 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 4:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff


I'm 80% in cash right now (age 44), as we sold a house we owned in my country of origin late last year. I'd like to lower this percentage, but stock markets just look so lofty these days...

I guess I will just buy some DJ Select Dividend ETF's every quarter for the next year to get an average price. I will report when I'm fully invested. You can go and sell your stocks then.

Abe

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2283 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 11:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cash/near cash: 50%
My commodity play: 10%
US Equities: 20%
International Equities: 20%

50% cash way too much for a young sprout such as yourself.

cliff

Also, you didn't mention REITs.

cliff



That's because I didn't choose REITS as one of my asset classes.
If you are going to own everything, you might as well buy an index fund. The important thing is to examine your own lifestyle/needs/portfolio and decide which asset classes will combine to give you the kind of return that you need to make in order to maintain a decent lifstyle in retirement. You don't need to own all asset classes. That would, in fact, be a mistake. There is a point of diminishing returns when you get too spread out.

I carefully chose the ones I have so that I would get the kind of returns I need.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 2284 of 59856
Subject: Re: More On Re-Balancing Date: 2/18/2007 11:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
-b
...... wasn't there a 'rule' .... age = % allocated to cash & bonds ?



Old rule.
And it won't get you the best of returns.
Maybe not even the SAFEST returns.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement