I'm in Goldman Sachs financial square. Government class A. At the broker's suggestion.
Cash is there waiting on the right land deal for me to find, not equities after a correction. I played that game in the 90s before getting into land. Lesson learned.

I wonder what people who pay to have these firms manage their money think when they give our guidance like this

Does it even line up with how they are managing their money? Are they wondering why they are paying if the company is giving the information out for free?

Also doesn't it hurt them in the long run when they are constantly wrong? I.e. I would never invest with chase since they have been bearish for most of the last decade.

Tom Lee calling that we are at the beginning phase of a bull cycle. He's been spot on for years.

Yeah everyone is a genius in a bull market. His big call was in 2023 when they laughed him off CNBC because everyone thought we would retest 2022 lows.

Mike Wilson of Morgan Stanley also thinks we're at thr beginning of a new bull market

Interesting.

Goldman is predicting like 5-6% per year going forward.

We might hit 12-13% this year.

Hard for a bull to be wrong since 2020. Despite the 2022 and 2025 dips, this market has been on a tear.

chris1515 said:

---

Lately I've been curious how so many people buying into the S&P 500 is skewing the current market, especially through 401Ks.

Twice a month this flood of people show up to the market to buy the S&P500 stocks, and they mostly don't care at all about the price. They just buy. Every two weeks, they show up and effectively take billions of dollars of stocks out of the market thanks to their buy and hold strategies. And who is showing up to sell them those stocks?
I'm curious if that effect is big enough to make a difference.

---

There was some impact when the law changed to make it a default that employers opted you into the 401(k) instead of employees having to affirmatively elect. We also heard "the sky is falling" recently when everyone said we're headed for a recession because the number of hardship withdrawals on IRAs and 401(k)s went through the roof. The real problem was that Congress passed a law that loosened the rules so that almost anything counted as a hardship that avoided a 6% penalty. I'm just not sure that there's enough of a difference between today and 20 years ago. Still lots coming out of the market as people retire and start living off their savings.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

Every little pump people come out of the woodwork sayings it's a bubble it's a bubble it's a bubble. Vanguard is likely overweighted sidelined and their recommendations are justifying their already existing positions.

---

What do you mean Vanguard's existing positions? They're just a custodian; their positions are their customers' positions.

I think the best steelman here is that Vanguard's classic advice is for retail investors to just own a cross-section of the entire financial market. Granted that is presently more like 55/45 bonds vs equities than 70/30, but a far cry from most of us who would round to 100 equities (myself included).

chris1515 said:

---

Lately I've been curious how so many people buying into the S&P 500 is skewing the current market, especially through 401Ks.

Twice a month this flood of people show up to the market to buy the S&P500 stocks, and they mostly don't care at all about the price. They just buy. Every two weeks, they show up and effectively take billions of dollars of stocks out of the market thanks to their buy and hold strategies. And who is showing up to sell them those stocks?
I'm curious if that effect is big enough to make a difference.

---

Index fund managers aren't just making trades around biweekly pay periods. They are constantly making profile adjustments. The effect of 401K contributions going to be heavily damped. On the sell side are the millions of retirees steadily unloading their positions.

Vanguard is investor owned. So the ownership and all the advisors within have investment positions. And they are likely sidelined to some degree. Hence they calling for a down turn because that's what they want.

I can't see the article because it's behind a paywall but I am a Vanguard customer and I have their detailed asset allocation model. It is the exact opposite of what the post/headline says. It is 70% stocks and 30% bonds.

here is the source the story is based on:

https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/vemo/vemo-return-forecasts.html

I don't see where they suggest an asset allocation but they are projecting bonds to outperform stocks over the next decade.

Met with my Fidelity wealth manager last Thursday. My plan is 85% stock, 15% bonds. I'm 70.

Granted my expenses are covered by pensions and social security so I can afford to be more aggressive.

Vanguard misspelled GOLD

JobSecurity said:

---

10 years seems like a long horizon for this. Typical downturn cycle is what 2-4 years peak to peak?

---

S&P 500 returned a -0.9% from Dec '99 thru Dec '09.

Love the user name. Makes me laugh everytime.

03-07 were good years. 08 bad and 09 good. So the 99-02 really skews it. Would be better to deploy into 02-03. But you're holding bonds for 10 years you really miss out too. So while having a strong bond position may protect you during a down turn if you're not of the mindset to pivot you aren't really hedged.

You guys are crazy! A 70 year old at 85% stocks? Did I read that right?

My Dad is 76 and 90% stocks.

I'm 68 and 100% invested in stocks. And no, I'm not crazy.

You should get some crypto exposure

Man, some of y'all are ballsy! I hope your absolute number is quite high so you can survive a ride downward.

Or are nimble enough to pivot before that.