Up, Up and Away

By Jim Wiandt

2009 is shaping up to be a boffo year in equities, real estate and commodities markets.

Yeah, and my aunt would be my uncle if she had, uh, some of the sorts of things uncles have.

Really, it's hard to know what to make of the tea leaves of consumer confidence and macroeconomic numbers. I do get the feeling, though, that the world will survive, and that businesses will come out better—more sensible, more efficient, more competitive—on the other side. So, big picture, I actually like all of this, assuming unemployment doesn't soar to 15% or something. It's sort of like we're going to economic boot camp, getting in shape and cutting out the Doritos.

On the fixed-income thing brought up by Matt Hougan—well, I'm 40, so I should have 40% in bonds now, right? I just cannot see that happening any time soon. The types of bonds? Uh, well, you've got to love those zero-yielding Treasuries (in a dollar currency that the professional investing world is extremely bearish on), but then, since when did consensus drive anything, particularly relating to currency direction?

Can we buy Chinese government Treasuries? Oh, yeah, that's right, they're buying all of our Treasuries.

Mainly, I have to admit, I am excited about the new year, the more rational environment we seem to be headed into, the opportunities ahead. And I'm very excited about our Inside ETFs conference next week in Boca (Jan. 11-13). It feels like the whole ETF industry and the biggest group of ETF investors at an event are excited too, ready to start the new year, recharged after some brutal markets and a holiday respite.

Looking forward to seeing you all down there...

Comments

[investor88:]

Time to come out of shell and do some trading at least.

Jan 06 07:27 AM

[whisperonth...:]

I'm 59, and I just can't even consider bonds as more than a small piece of the pie right now. I'm having too much fun with stocks! But then, Risk is my middle name... and I'm not dead yet.

Jan 06 10:00 AM

[Geoffrey Lordi:]

Agreed - the closest I get to fixed income payouts is with preferred debt: oftentimes great yields with less volatility (normally). Of course, the fact that there *is* volatility makes holding preferreds impossible according to some models.

On another note, isn't it more common practice nowadays to use the "Rule of 120 or 130" when running the age calcs for "standard" treasury/equity planning? I haven't heard of many folks in the field who still use the 100-age rule...

Jan 06 01:51 PM