BSV
Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Fund ETF Shares
Mentions (24Hr)
0.00% Today
Reddit Posts
Exposure to btcoin/blochain via stocks and ETFs - Yay or nay?
Trying to recreate black scholes value with simulations
Let’s get back at BTC maxis!
There are talks on other autistic forums about a similar style Short Squeeze will happen soon. Can any here help and corroborate?
Bitcoin Creator Launches IP Claims Against Digital Currency Exchanges Kraken and Coinbase (COIN)
Kucoin BSV @ $200 🚫. Riskless Arbitrage/Hedge. Anybody in their right mind
The Original Bitcoin Protocol: What Is It and Why Does It Matter? [MNP Report]
Everything is falling into place for $BSV...going to turn the blockchain world upside down. Trust me get in now!
BIGG Digital Assets Inc.(CSE: BIGG/ OTCQX: BBKCF/ WKN: A2PS9W)Canadian Crypto Platform with Solutions to Trace Blockchain Transactions
BIGG Digital Assets Inc.(CSE: BIGG/ OTCQX: BBKCF/ WKN: A2PS9W)Canadian Crypto Platform with Solutions to Trace Blockchain Transactions
Mentions
You would not want to sell you would hold - these short term bond funds have a zig-zag pattern and drop every dividend. If you wanted to rebalance and buy stocks or metals you would want to considering taxes and after the dividend. I think you could buy $BSV that has a well balanced mix of short term bonds and it does appreciate or lose money depending on rates.
This really depends on your time horizon for this money. SGOV has already been recommended. Know that it's super short duration (0-3 months), making very similar to a HYSA. You could go for some longer duration but still short-term ETFs: SPTS: Short-term treauries, average duration 2 years BSV: 75% treauries, 25% corporates, avg duration 3 years VTIP: short-term TIPS (inflation-linked Treauries), avg duration 2.5 years If you know both exactly how much you need in the future and when, individual bonds or a CD are fine. I strongly recommend individual investors stick to government (treasury, agency, muni) when buying individual bonds. Anything else requires extra research and the disclosed financials aren't always truthful (see: 2008).
You want a **short-term** treasury fund. >TIP (iShares TIPS Bond ETF) Crashed hard in 2008 because CPI cratered and Lehman was the largest holder of TIPS at the time and dumped them all to raise cash. Also took a beating in 2022 from the rate hikes because intermediate duration (6 years). Both of these things are visible on TIP's full chart (why do people not look at charts?). A **short-term** TIPS fund like VTIP/STIP will have less volatility. VTIP/STIP returns have been better than BSV (nominal treasuries + investment grade corporates) in recent years because higher inflation. >AGG (iShares Core US Aggregate Bond ETF) Not short-term. Treasury holdings will keep it stable tho. Longer duration treasury funds have "crisis alpha" -- they *rise* in value during deflationary shocks. See the performance of TLT or EDV during 2008, Covid, or even this past April for an example. But they are not short-term. Only put in money you don't need for a long time.
So SGOV might be a good tax advantaged alternative to BSV? Yields seem similar between the two.
The shift from the Intermediate-Term Bond Fund (BIV) to a Short-Term Bond Fund (BSV or VGSH) is advised because your primary goal for the bond sleeve is capital stability acting as "dry powder" ready to be deployed into stocks during a correction. During periods of rising interest rates or general market volatility (like the 2022 fixed-income correction), intermediate-term funds with a higher duration (like BIV) experience greater price declines than short-term funds, thereby reducing the stable value of your reserve capital. A short-term fund, while offering a slightly lower yield, drastically minimizes interest rate risk due to its low duration, making it a more reliable and less volatile source for your tactical rebalancing and a better fit for your goal of maintaining optionality/liquidity for a down payment in the coming years, despite the tax inefficiency shared by both nominal bond types in a taxable account.
BSV, insane enterprise connections in the space and their unbounded update dropped earlier this month, might take a while but i am convinced it will take off
There's already more than 21M "bitcoin". Bitcoin has forked multiple times into separate blockchains: BCH, BSV, etc. Any value those other versions hold is value diluted from BTC. Since value in the world of crypto is arbitrary and based on subjectivity, at anytime, if enough people decided BCH was the more valuable bitcoin, the market would change. There's no underlying intrinsic metrics like in traditional markets. It's all arbitrary (and thus, materially meaningless)
I gave up Tbills a bit early and locked in rates in February by buying BSV when its YTM was 4.37% and avg maturity is 2.80 years. Currently its YTM is still 4.14% which remains higher than the rate of inflation, and you can rely on that yield for a few years instead of a few months as you do with Tbills. BSV is a Vanguard ETF that holds a 70/30 blend of Treasurys notes and good quality corporate debt. As their inventory matures, they use the cash to purchase debt with about 5 years until maturity, which puts BSV's average maturity right in the middle at 3 years.
So I did a mix of bond ETFs, some in euros, some short term, some inflation protected. I'm still not 100% sure about them, I have to do more research, my broker charges me 1$ per transaction so it's easy to rebalance VTIP, VECA, BSV
Here's a scenario. BTC keeps blocks capped. 99% of users hold their coins with intermediaries like Coinbase. It's discovered that these intermediaries are running on fractional reserves like today's banks. People panic but can't withdraw their BTC to their own hardware wallets because of on-chain congestion. Coinbase and other intermediaries "temporarily" freeze withdrawals. BCH/BSV prices in BTC terms spike. Users sell their BTC for anything liquid and bid for BCH/BSV. BTC was never meant to have a permanent block size cap.
BSV is a scam chain born of idiots failing to start another block war.
Yeah. Another possibility is that BTC doesn't fork and people move to BCH or BSV.
We're off to the races and NuNu is out to an early lead. 
Security. If Michael Saylor buys $10billion in BCH or BSV, people would instantly rent hashpower to double spend it to fuck. All low hashrate protocols are prone to this. Bitcoin has such a gargantuan amount of unconnected users, miners, etc that those things are no longer a concern. If you had a billion and decided to put a whole billion into it, chances are you'd be completely fine 5 years from now. This game theory applies to everyone playing the game of which crypto to buy. That automatically whittles down the list of 17,000 cryptos to a list less than two dozen. And of those, the most obvious choice is Bitcoin
$JAAA, $BSV (short end corp plus government) and VGLT (lower fee TLT.) $BLV is long end corp plus govt. I bought some TMF today for a trade.
I like your argument except for the fact that crypto currencies with identical protocols exist. As a matter of fact everything about the inner workings of bitcoin is open source and everything can be replicated (and do get replicated) in other coins. Lite coin is slightly altered bitcoin. BCH BSV NMC as well
When I sold in January I put everything in a fund equivalent to BSV because I thought it was basically as safe as the MMF. Dang it lol
I’d split it between VOO, VXUS, and BSV Choose your percentages based on your own needs/ risk tolerance.
Sold in March, cashed in a lot of my puts today. I only see this getting worse until JPow caves and lowers interest rates, and that won’t be for another 3 months minimum. Cash is in MM or BSV
I'm up 72 percent all time since the march lows of 2020 I'm still pissed at missing some crucial swings I should be up 200 % The past year I have scratched and clawed back and was up 80% til Trump took office But My portfolio is not s@p 500 shit some that have surprisingly held value good over the past few months are MKTX BSV EQNR (Norwegian Oil) CWT I am still waiting for Tesla to buy Nano Dimension
BSV has a 30 day SEC yield of 4.39% and did return 5.66% in the last year. What are you saying ? [https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/etfs/profile/bsv](https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/etfs/profile/bsv)
You are mistaken again. BSV has 4.4% portfolio and SEC yield.
BSV IS an ultra-short bond fund ETF. And it’s yield is worse than IEI which is 3-7 years treasuries
Can anyone explain why anybody would buy treasury bonds if HYSA gives more than that and guaranteed not going down in value? Answer: you make more money owning Treasuries. I posted the backtest of portfolios containing cash, Treasuries, or nothing except stock Subject. My advisor or rather JPMorgan automated portfolio bought a bunch of treasuries and bonds, while the equities consisted only 10% of the portfolio. Can anyone explain why would anyone do that instead of just putting the money you want to grow at a stable but low rate into HYSA? Answer: it will still grow faster and more stably than in HYSA, even in an environment like 1999, by over twice: https://testfol.io/?s=37nIP5PVsJ4 I literally can’t think of a reason. They go down with stocks sometimes, and the yield is like 1-2%. I previously gave you three reasons. They often go up when stocks go down. They return good yield for years on end. They don’t depreciate. It’s not even compensating for inflation. What’s the point? EDIT: Many people in the comments think bonds don’t go down in value, or that bonds always go up when stocks go down. That’s not true. Look up BSV - it had annual return -5.55% in 2022, -1% in 2021 and 3.75% in 2024. Also, HYSA is not cash, so comparing having stocks/bonds portfolio to stocks/cash is not what this post is about. HYSA is 100% cash dude. And you asked why people buy Treasuries and the reason is because people want to get rich. It’s part of a strategy pairing Treasuries with stocks. When the stock market has a dip, as far as I can see, 3 out of 4 times Treasuries go up instead of down. So if you have 70% stocks and 30% Treasuries and your stocks go down 30% and your Treasuries go up 10%, your portfolio is now 60% stock and 40% bond. Sell a quarter of your bonds and buy stock at 30% discount, and when the market recovers your stock goes up even faster because you own more shares than before the crash. That’s why people own Treasuries. You can’t do that with cash because cash doesn’t go up when stocks go down.
Duration. HYSA rates fluctuate over a shorter duration. A 10 year bond paying 4.4% pays it for 10 years. The yield is fixed. The bond value may vary, but the yield does not at the end of 10 years you get back the principal and thr 4.4% dividends along thew way have been paid. For a fund, which continuously rolls into new bonds as existing bonds held mature, you need to re-invest the dividends in the fund to get the current fund rate over the current fund duration. So, a bond fund should return the funds current yield over it's current duration if the dividends are re-invested to buy more bonds in the fund. BSV has a 2.6 year duration yielding 4.43% (https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/bsv/portfolio). Hold it for that long, re-investing dividends and the value of the shares held after 2.6 years is a 4.43% return. A deep read: [https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Individual\_bonds\_vs\_a\_bond\_fund](https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Individual_bonds_vs_a_bond_fund) From that page: *However, the dividends that the bond fund throws off can now be reinvested at a higher rate. The duration is the length of time that an investor needs to hold the fund for the increased yields to compensate for the decrease in NAV.* ***In that sense, duration represents the length of time it would take for the total value of the fund, with dividends reinvested, to be worth exactly what it would have been worth had interest rates not risen***
BSV is short-term, IEI is 3-7 years
The mean annualized return over the last 5 years on BSV is 1.2%. It went down with stocks in 2022. I didn’t say I think they always go down with stocks. I didn’t say that holding cash is beneficial. Did you read the post?
Short term bonds. Up 5% so far. $BSV and some gold streamers
I am interested in buying a house in the next 3 or so years, and I am trying to save for a 20% down payment. I have been contributing to my HYSA every month, but was recently recommended by a financial advisor to contribute 50% to a HYSA and 50% to Vanguard's BSV short term bond fund. After 2 years or so of saving, I'm probably about 40% of the way there (to having enough for a down payment/closing costs AND a 3-6 month emergency fund in my HYSA). For my particular goal and time-line, does this sound like the best approach to save money for the time being?
I still don't hold much in bonds as they just don't do much and I'm retired. You can hold an index fund of bonds like BSV and of the bond funds I hold it's only up 1.05%. I also hold BLV, GVI, SHY and both are down YTD. I wouldn't hold much in bonds. If the market tanks, bonds are up, but still.... You could hold some Real Estate ETF like VNQ up 14% this year.
Exactly. Please feel free to reply with the values of BCH, BSV, and BCG relative to BTC. They're not good...
The BSV doesn’t change very much for mature companies year to year… last 10-K has it at ~17%. So a 5.9 option to RSU ratio. Assuming granted at $145, option breakeven is ~$175, after which point options are more valuable. If you plan to hold long-term, then think maxing options is reasonable if you believe ~21% stock price growth or higher over the period is likely
18% option BSV is quite good leverage / 5:1 ratio… I dont understand the 92% RSU fair value, shouldnt that be 100%?
I would go max RSU Yea you can likely do a cashless exercise, but do options only breakeven with RSUs by their BSV ratio, and JNJ is not a high growth company… I would limit the risk of underwater options
BSV, SCHO, STIP, VCSH, and LQD. See my edit for why but idk anything so, you know, NFA.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and BitcoinSV (BSV) are two forks of Bitcoin that are trying to scale Bitcoin so that it could serve as a global peer to peer digital cash as described by Satoshi in the original Bitcoin whitepaper. BTC is currently trying to serve as a store of value and replace gold.
41% VTI, 19% VXUS, 30% BND, 2% BLV, 3% BSV, 5% to money market/SGOV. Intermediate at this point is where you’ll find the most value for fixed income now that the curve is reverting back to normal. This is a pretty passively managed portfolio but IMO bond funds that are actively managed tend to provide more value and better results.
Technically, Bitcoin in its current form, will almost certainly not last past 2080. Its current PoW security model is too inefficient and too insecure. Bitcoin Core devs have brought this up numerous times, and it just gets punted down to future generations to solve because it's too crypto-political. Bitcoin's heaviest-weight PoW consensus protocol is not secure in the long run. Nearly every Bitcoin fork (BCH, BSV, Bitcoin Gold, and dozens of others) has been successfully 51% attacked and reorged because PoW is inherently weak to 51% attacks when their security budget is insufficient. In fact, Bitcoin was already 51% reorged in both 2010 and 2013 back when it was much smaller, though those attacks had partial community support in retrospect. They didn't do sufficient damage to the chain. Bitcoin is currently a $1.5T asset protected by only $20B-$30B in mining equipment. As the halvings continue and its security declines, the security budget will fall, and then Bitcoin will be no more secure than its failed forks. To be secure, Bitcoin would either need to change its model, e.g.: 1. switch to a more secure and efficient consensus protocol like PoS 1. remove its supply cap and switch to tail emissions to extend its security budget 1. find another permanent stream of funding for its expensive security 1. or it could increase transaction to be $100-300/Tx. That's actually how much it currently costs in mining per transaction (based on 7 TPS, $100k BTC, 3.125 BTC per block subsidy)
The problem eith Bitcion is that it's the Fors Model T of cryptocurrencies and uses PoW, which is both extremely inefficient and insecure. Every Bitcoin transaction currently spends $110 worth of energy to mine. Every Bitcoin fork that uses its PoW consensus protocol has been 51% attacked, including BCH, BSV, and dozens of others. Even Bitcoin was 51% reoeged in both 2010 and 2013. The only reason Bitcoin is slightly more secure now is because its security budget is much bigger now. But as the halvings continue, its security budget will gradually disappear to a tiny fraction of what it is now. People won't want to pay $100 per transaction in fees to keep their transfers secure. Proof of Stake is way more secure and efficient.
Bitcoin is not secure in the long run. Nearly every Bitcoin fork (BCH, BSV, Bitcoin Gold , and dozens of others) has been successfully 51% attacked because PoW is inherently weak to 51% attacks when their security budget is insufficient. In fact, Bitcoin was already 51% reorged in both 2010 and 2013, though those attacks had partial community support. Bitcoin is currently a $1.5T asset protecte by only $20B in mining equipment. As the halvings continue, the security budget will fall, and then Bitcoin will be no more secure than its forks.
Other versions of Bitcoin such as Bitcoin Cash and BSV have negligible fees as they value Bitcoin as a peer to peer digital currency.
> Its open source, you can literally open a pull request right now to try to change how Bitcoin works. It doesn't mean you can just merge changes to main though, of course there are protections against that, just like any other open source project. Right, anybody can create their own fork of bitcoin, but the core code that is endorsed by Coinbase and the other top CEXs is the one controlled by a handful of people associated with MIT's digital currency initiative, who aren't beholden whatsoever to their community, but they are likely beholden to the corporate benefactors who give them grant money - and that's most obvious when you see that BTC refused to increase its block size to make transactions faster -- because one of their benefactors was the company making a "L2 solution" to address that. So there's a lot of politics and power plays with bitcoin that have less to do with whether the tech is as good as it could be. This is all documented in my documentary that you can watch. >> Gold has intrinsic, material value. Crypto doesn't. It's also not a hedge against inflation. >Opinion. LOL.. it's not an opinion bro. It's a fact. There's ample evidence to back up those claims. >Again, Bitcoin is an open source software project. You can fork it. There will only ever be 21 million of them, and given even static demand, in an inflationary economic environment, the USD is forever losing value, its not the Bitcoin is necessarily increasing in "value". There's more than 21 million "bitcoin". There's also BCH (bitcoin cash) and BSV (bitcoin satoshi's vision) and many others. They all trade at prices >0, so that's value they have siphoned away from BTC. That's a fact. You can pull a "No True Scotsman" fallacy and claim only BTC is legit, but that's not true. All you can ultimately say is BTC trades higher. >Who has said crypto can't be seized? Michael Saylor, among others. So did several other bitcoin luminaries that I quote in my documentary including Dr Adam Back. Watch [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tspGVbmMmVA&t=3943s). >Opinion again. Just because you, as a random redditor, have decided something, does not make it so. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It onus is on YOU to demonstrate blockchain does something uniquely better than what we're already using. I already demonstrated for 15 years, no such evidence has been produced. I even maintain a list of [debunked claims](https://ioradio.org/i/blockchain-claims/). So I have evidence of my argument, with detailed citations. All you seem to be able to do is say, "Well that's your opinion man..." and of course claims I don't know what I'm talking about, despite the fact that I can provide citations for all my claims... so who here is the one making false claims?
BSV is the best candidate I could find for a taxable account. Hold it for its stated duration (2.6 years) in order to experience a total return close to its stated Yield-to-Maturity (4.10%), of which 3.10% will arrive as a taxable dividend, and the remaining 1% will show up in BSV's price, for a capital gain. Basically, with BSV you're locking in today's yield for about 2.5 years. But, Bonus! Because of a peculiarity of the way bonds get repriced based upon their "duration", with BSV's 2.6 year duration, expect BSVs price to go up by about 2.60% for each 1% that rates go down, as a rule of thumb.
That's fine if you're investing for something that's a year away, but the point of the emergency fund is to minimize risk. You can't minimize risk without minimizing return. It's the tradeoff you take for an emergency fund. If you want higher return, that's what your (by you I don't mean you specifically, but this is the case for most people) non-emergency fund is for. BSV dropped from 77 to 74 in the span of 3 months, and from 82 to 74 in the span of roughly a year. Generally, people don't want that much loss of principal with an emergency fund. I'm not overconfident enough to think I can time the bond market.
money market funds like SPAXX paid out .01% in 2021, .26% in 2020, .04% in 2016 and .01% in 2015 and 2014. money markets have been good recently but historically in low interest rates environments that we're certainly headed into it's worth looking elsewhere IMO. BSV, a short bond fund, has historically beaten inflation and has had a maximum draw down of like 8%. That's where i'm headed as rates start to decrease
Warren Buffets Advice: 90% VOO 10% BSV Consistently investing every paycheque. Set it and forget it. Buy the ups and downs.
Yes, matching your up-to-five-years hold time with a fund's duration is a good idea. Holding a fund for its stated duration will let you experience a total return that's close to whatever that fund is currently showing as its Yield to Maturity. Some ideas from my own portfolio for you: SCHO average credit rating AAA, 100% Treasurys, 2yr constant maturity, YTM 4.66% BSV average credit rating AA+, 70% Treasurys, 3yr constant maturity, YTM 4.41% HYDW average credit rating BB-, No Treasurys All Junk But the Safest Junk, 4yr constant maturity, YTM 6.14% The last one HYDW follows a very interesting index that conservatively chooses issuers of junk on a sector-by-sector basis. For example if the median yield in junk-rated stuff for, say, the energy sector, is 7.00%, then only issuers offering less than that are considered. Then, on a monthly basis, if it's ever detected that an existing holding has been selling off and a threshold is hit, that holding gets culled and replaced with something new.
I use these ETFs: BND, BSV, XONE, XHLF, ICSH. I use them to reduce overall volatility of the portfolio and almost as a cash equivalent. All these except BND are short duration and super cheap.
>Assume something like March of 2020 happen, how would these ETFs behave? If you want to know how they would behave if something like March of 2020 happened, why not just look at their performance in March of 2020? https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?BIL,USFR,SHY,BSV,NEAR&p=6 >I know what would happen to the bond market, not sure how the effect translates to the ETF itself ETFs perform the same as their holdings. >Would the dividend payout increase given that bond prices would drop? Um, lower grade bond prices might fall briefly due to higher default risk but high quality short term bonds would not really change much in price. In fact, their yield would probably fall and price rise slightly and briefly as the Fed cuts rates to counteract negative economic conditions. Since short term bonds turn over quickly, they will return (including the price change plus new yield from there) their original yield over only a short lifetime. The low yield would continue on from there as the fund buys fresh bonds.
How about a bond barbell? some BLV, yes, but an even bigger helping of 2yr Treasury (SCHO or BSV). mix them in a proportion that achieves the weighted average duration you want.
Why do people start with such big accounts. Take all out besides 1k only invest 1k and try to make at least 2% per week. If you can do that you are beating the market. There's day trading, swing trading, and long term investing. It is in order from high risk high reward to low risk low reward. I would start with swing trading, buying and holding a stock for a few weeks or months and selling and researching and buying a new stock that is undervalued and sell when it's starting to get over valued. Look at high volume stocks if you want to day trade, make sure you do a lot of research on how to make better day trades, use stock indicators with tradingview, learn different types of trading like fair value gap, supply demand, etc. Investing is the easiest, just buy vanguard stocks. I like to save my money in the world stock market and US bonds so I do VOO, VEU, BSV and I do 90% stock 10% bonds since i'm young and prefer higher risk and bonds are a lot safer, you would want higher percentage in bonds the older you get. Practice day trading with paper accounts. Try to only use 10k in paper trading or even 1k you can probably try options but stocks are the safer bet, go to somewhere where you can buy and short stocks and be careful about getting margin called which means your account gets liquidated and you lose everything for using too much of your account and not having enough to cover your losses. Options and futures and forex are higher risk with 100-500+ times leverage. Stocks are lower risk and something you should switch to with larger than 100k account or even less. You don't get that money back unless you gamble and get lucky, just leverage the money you have left. Look up DRIP investing and compound interest. They say your first 100k is the hardest to make and you started off with that. I just remembered There's a somewhat safe options strategy called the wheel strategy. In options most people are the player but you can also be the casino, you can sell calls and puts if you have enough for 100 shares of a stock. Just sell it 1 week out and you should make like 2-5% I think but even if you get you options exercised and your forced to buy or sell at the price you put you just continue the wheel strategy and only missed out on money, you don't really lose money unless you hold on to the shares of a small cap stock that keeps going down, just sell it away and continue the wheel with another stock.
No one is stopping anyone from switching to BSV if they want to. The devs aren't *controlling* bitcoin, they're providing the bitcoin that people want, as evidenced by people not switching to a different fork.
I hold BSV and BLV but only for about 2 years now, should just keep riding it out right
>I think it's very strong point. Those aren't it's only Job. That's it's main job, if it's doing more than that it's overstepping its functions. Other functions like "regulating banks" don't really make much sense for BTC, since it's an inherently bankless system. >They don't directly control it. They are paid for specific computations. The control the miners have is to be part or not of a chain or fork. You can look at BCH, BSV, and whatever else to see chain decisions that BTC did not abide. If you agree with the changes, all your money is available in the BCH or BSV fork, so even disregarding miners, you as a participant of the system have full control of which system you engage with.
I mean, sure. But other things we use as a store of value don't up and down hundreds or thousands of percentage points in weeks/months/years. That's antithetical to their purpose. BTC has historically not ever stored value, in fact even right now it has lost money since its true inflation-adjusted ATH, people mostly use it for speculation. Even the idea of it being a store of value is post hoc to what it was originally created for. Digital gold was what the people who didn't want to change BTC to be more liquid came up with, the original idea was that it would be a currency. Which is why there's BCH And BSV, among others. BTC doesn't even hedge against the SP500, it tracks it pretty well. Both are approaching ATH, both were previously approaching ATH in 2017 as well.
Congrats to your parents on living the life they want. Not everyone can appreciate the desire to work well past the normal retirement age on a job you love. Part-time is not a bad option. A little more free time and still have a hand in the job one loves so much. Win/Win In regards to the proposed 5M portfolio, I see a number of issues where things can be improved. First of all investing in international stocks is really not diversifying. It's making the Portfolio underperform over time. [The track record of International stocks compared to USA stocks is poor.](https://swingtrader.trading/2023/09/18/international-stocks-track-record-is-not-good/) Also the Bond allotment seems excessive. The choice of VTI for the diversified USA ETF is great and having a small cap ETF to go with it is smart too. I would propose: VTI - 70% IJR - 10% (small cap blend) BSV - 10% BIV - 10%
First, your portfolio. You’re getting comments like “Why BSV/BIV?” and “Why not almost all VTI?” Not every portfolio has to look exactly the same, and you’re also old enough to remember several instances when a huge stock position would have been devastating. You have a diversified, balanced portfolio made up of low cost index funds. That is better than 90% of people out there. Second, your financial plan. You really need to retire and enjoy the fruits of your labor. I get that it is hard to give up a steady salary and the identity that comes from work, but you don’t need either. The one thing you’re not accumulating is time. Spend it with your wife and family, do the things you love, and understand that you’re still going to have a lot left in the bank when you kick the bucket.
You can easily retire, you probably like your work. But why BSV / BIV? VOO would’ve outperformed all of them.
At the bottom it slightly rephrases the question. "What the risk/reward analysis for BSV and BND funds." I get more good answers with Bing when it is finance or investing. I'm using a combination of BND, HYSA, MMF, CDs, iBonds, and Vanguard Wellesley in retirement. While accumulating I used VG Total Bond, and never thought about it much. But then...
I don't think this answers my question. I'm specifically interested in short-term bond funds and long-term bond funds when their ETF performance seems to be super similar. BSV has bonds that have an average maturity of 3 years, while BND has bonds with an average maturity of 10 years. Their yields seem pretty similar due to certain bonds maturing at any given point in time since the fund itself is kind of like a rolling bond ladder. What I'm asking is the risk/reward analysis for holding BSV (shortish 3 year bonds) vs BND (longer 10 year bonds) vs SGOV (0 - 3 month TBills) if they seem to have similar yield and growth over the last 5 years.
You buy a bond fund that meets your duration (When do you need the income?). If you're retired, you consider VUSB, BSV, BND, and something long. That applies to normal times for fixed income. The federal bank, responding to inflation and its effect on the economy causes uncertainty.
You can buy bonds, but BND and BSV have a LARGE selections of bonds they are diversifying over for you. In general if it was quick to just buy those and hold to maturity, I would do it too.
Ok. Like I said I didn't understand bond funds. I also bought TIP and am down 13.4% on it. I would be a lot happier had I put that money in HYSA, MM, CD, Treasuries as I would not be down \~$20K. I see BSV over that last three years (since I retired) has only lost 0.61% so that's better than FBNDs -2.41% or BNDs -3.39%. All I can say is thank goodness I didn't do what was recommended by a couple of advisors and drop 65% of my retirement money into bonds.
This turned into a long reply, but I wrote it for all readers, not just you, so here goes. Who knows, my guy. Some people are just so accustomed to inflationary assets like stocks, bonds or dollars that I think they just can’t stomach the idea that technology can create absolute scarcity. Because they don’t get that, they hear “number go up” and think it can only be a scam, ignoring the fact that value is not some absolute. In fact it isn’t absolute at all, that’s why art from famous artists can go for hundreds of millions of dollars (sounds pretty number go up to me). They say it has no intrinsic value as if anything has intrinsic value. All value is subjective. A 350 dually with a diesel engine isn’t worth shit to a woman in a nursing home. To a contractor that’s a high dollar commodity. Gold isn’t worth anything if you don’t have anyone who has the money to buy it from you at a fair price or if you aren’t manufacturing electronics. Bitcoin doesn’t either if nobody buys it. If everyone trusted dollars, bitcoin would be worth however much nerds would buy it for. It wouldn’t be worth shit if nobody invested in mining rigs. It wouldn’t be worth anything if literally every currency ever hadn’t been inflated to orders of magnitude of their initial worth. You smell what I’m steppin in. Some people are mad they missed the boat, some just have cognitive dissonance and act like they know it’s baseless even though they’ve spent a cumulative 7 minutes researching the topic. Some don’t like change. Some just distrust technology as a whole. A lot of people are too dense to understand nuance. People are fickle and en masse, idiotic and dishonest with themselves, dishonest with everyone they interact with because they will never take the hit to their ego that is being candid with yourself about yourself. Again, fuck all of them. Fuck me, dude. Forget all of this shit. Study of your own volition. Seek truth no matter how painful or condemning it may be to you or to people you love. Draw your own conclusions. And above all (and I swear I am not proselytizing, just a great example) remember that Jesus was murdered for preaching about love. JFK tried to fix the economy by printing US notes (as opposed to the federal reserve notes we use today, essentially the same premise as bitcoin in its reason for being created-scarcity, hard value) and denied the industrial military complex from going into Vietnam. He was literally trying to save the world and they murdered him for it. Whatever the mechanism is that makes swaths of people hate anything altruistic, you can bet that if someone were to create a sound monetary system, everyone would say it’s a scam. The mainstream media, politicians, reddit echo chambers. Well surprise surprise, someone did it. No it’s worth 5 figures, destined (in my view) for 6 and 7 figures, and still has not been hacked, has not been slowed, has not been changed once. People and companies have been hacked. You can do that with dollars and people do. That’s typically how ransoms work. It’s block interval changes, as it is designed to do. It has been hardforked into BSV, BCH, whatever, the core chain still runs today. “It’s only for criminals.” How many criminals hide dollars from the drugs they sell on a daily basis? How many prostitutes, pimps, human traffickers, cartels, politicians, police, use money to launder illicit funds? Fucking all of them. And don’t get me started on the energy thing because all of the fud around that is utter bullshit. I can name half a dozen ways at least our energy systems and the climate have directly benefitted form bitcoin. Don’t trust. Verify. And you know why bitcoin is worth your investment, your research, your time and money? Because it was literally designed for exactly that. Trust in a trustless system. All of it can be seen, all of it can be understood, all of it is viable, no matter how butthurt downvoters get reading this. It’s a matter of time before people realize this thing is the solution to the gaping fault in our society. One of them anyway. Will it make crooked politicians good? No. People, time, consequences, events, circumstances do that. It’s a start. It’s one fix in a sea of fuckups that is society. One day they’ll see it. In the immortal words of Daddy Nakamoto, “If you don’t believe it or don’t get it, I don’t have time to convince you, sorry."
Don't downvote him, he's right. There are still dozens of people who believe Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision (BSV) is the *real* Bitcoin. A few more who believe it's BitcoinCash.
Hi all - quick question on a proper way to track my personal performance with my investments. Some context beforehand: 1. I’m 32M, $130k a year salary. 2. I have a 401k and contribute 100% of company match. 3. I have financial advisors - they have me in a Roth, IRA, and a couple life insurance products. 4. I have an emergency fund in a HYSA. Okay so that being said, I’m blessed enough to have some money left over after my monthly expenses and “play money.” So I started investing into some ETFs as well (VXUS, VOO, SCHD, SCHF, BSV, BLV, BIV). I may have too many ETFs, so I’m considering divesting in some and reinvesting in ones I have. So my question: does anyone have advice on how to track real performance across all my investments? I’m thinking of just a simple excel that I update quarterly and that tracks real market returns together with what I’ve invested against expenses. And then I’d like to extrapolate for potential future performance to see where the investments could be in 5, 10, 15+ years. This type of modeling would also help me with the divesting piece above. I just don’t really know how to do all of this, so any advice would be greatly appreciated.
It moved from Reddit to Twitter around 2015'ish, when the fork wars were at their peak and all of the signal moved to Twitter. All that was left were the moon-bois, the lambo-bois, and the salty bagholders of BCH and BSV. There's a number of great resources available online. [lopp.net/bitcoin](https://lopp.net/bitcoin) is a very high-signal-to-noise one.
>You are correct in saying they are not usable on the BTC blockchain & yes they don't impact the 21 million BTC coins that will be minted Thank you. The reat of your comment is wrong, again. >a new variation of BTC which is called BTC cash There's no such thing as BTC cash, it's called bcash or BCH. And no, it's not scaling better than Bitcoin. They just made blocks larger. If you think that BTC is inferior to BCH because BCH has 8 times larger block capacity, learn about BSV (fork of bcash) that has thousands times larger blocks. Yes, they both are shitcoins. > in my opinion Good luck with your opinion. >Most people don't understand blockchain & the technology is still very much new & finding it's feet That's why Bitcoin's price is volatile and people still buy shitcoins. Give them a few decades and come back.
VIG, VYM, and VTI for your equities 20/20/10 BLV, BIV, and BSV for your fixed income 20/20/10 Annual yield is 3.73% so a $1m portfolio would generate $37k/year in dividends and interest Interest rates will drop eventually which will drop the yield. You could load up on some individual bonds to get more consistent cash flow but building and managing a bond portfolio can be difficult.
Uh. Hedge with BSV dude. Get just one. And then look into what lock to mint is. Locktomint.com. N now. I get downvoted. But seriously. Nothing more degen than BSV.
If you need to diversity your portfolio to manage risk, doing it sooner rather than later is probably more important than trying to find the right moment to do so. A fund would be the easiest way to do that. I don't think I'm qualified to to answer your question though, and there are other important factors you haven't shared that make it hard to answer about which way to go (is this a taxable account, what is the time horizon, etc.) Personally I'm in several bond funds (BSV, FXNAX, FCOR, VWETX) as part of a diversified portfolio, and the last few years have been rough for the bond funds but hopefully the future is brighter as rates drop. I just started buying individual bonds as well, and it's nice to have locked in some higher yields for sure. But I'm also nearing retirement age and thinking about fixed income and overall risk reduction. Good luck!
VOO vs VGIT vs BSV vs VCSH vs VCIT? I want to dump $280 a month into it and buy a rental property within the next 4 years.
No. Did u know that BTC has had several forks (BSV) that open soirce programmers create because they think its better BTC? Did u know Saylor reported a 163m LOSS exclusively for his BTC holdings? Did u know it's being pumped by whales to retail by whales who need an exit? I used to be bullish on everything, too. When BTC drops 10% soon MSM will say "it was due for a pull back, correction, profit taking, investors rook some off the table, whatever to justify the sharp drop into the pool of minnows. Don't be a minnow.
I think they will actually fill up with BSV while it is nice and cheap now and say it's the original Bitcoin, so people will dump BTC but will end up buying their BSV at $200,000
> I'm not saying it will be but why not? As I explained it is secure, decentralised and neutral. Those are only three qualities, and for Bitcoin specifically the "security" comes at an EXTREMELY steep cost in electricity. The way Bitcoins are generated also creates terribly class-inequality between those that did and those that didn't. If you think today's income/wealth inequality is bad just wait how fucked things will be if BitCoin becomes an actual asset that is traded by the mainstream. > Right now Bitcoin is inflationary, but with most of the coins being mined and the inflation rate being low (and will continue to decrease) most people would consider it to be deflationary. It's deflationary because if you use a BitCoin as money in a stable marketplace the increased scarcity of BitCoin creation causes the value of BitCoin vs the goods you can buy with it to rise. This is a problem because it essentially creates economic hoarding. A small amount of inflation is good in society because you don't just have someone get rich and sit on their money for the rest of their life. Inflation makes people want to spend their money, create jobs and pass on some of their wealth to others. BitCoin does not have that function, and it's directly at odds with it. > All of BTC's hard forks (BCH, BSV and their derivatives) have been priced as failures by the market, as they simply could not compete. Isn't that a problem? At least ETH successfully moved from PoW to PoS and saved some global energy consumption. As society and technology evolves, we've been able to improve global payment systems. Some of these systems have been imperfect, but as someone who travels internationally I've gone from having to bring cash with me and exchange to local currencies to literally being able to just use my credit card abroad. These have all been minor technological improvements that have been adopted over the years. Blockchain by nature is extremely resistant to mutability. BitCoin and BlockChain is a system optimized around security, decentralization at the cost of basically everything else. It's literally the epitome of software engineer "idealism". It's the kind of solution you come up with when you ignore the complexities and the reason why the complexities of systems its trying to replace exists. Majority of systems that deal with humans and human society need a little bit of "give" built into them.
>BitCoin, and coins made on the Blockchain are deflationary in nature, which makes it extremely bad as a currency because there is more value to holding it than ever spending it. Right now Bitcoin is inflationary, but with most of the coins being mined and the inflation rate being low (and will continue to decrease) most people would consider it to be deflationary. To my knowledge apart from ETH which is sometimes deflationary (still not important since it's monetary policy keeps changing) based on it's transaction volume no other coin is currently deflationary. Bitcoin can infinitely be subdivided so from Bitcoins to sats to msats and so on. I would imagine that people would only trade their Bitcoin for high quality goods or services or necessities. ​ >BitCoin is a weird tech asset that has no intrinsic use or value, but a shit ton of people trade it at crazy values. What happens when the smart people working on blockchain unveil the next iteration of blockchain that isn't backwards compatible with ETH or BitCoin, and it becomes a massive improvement over the old tech? Bitcoin's value comes from it being the most secure, decentralised, neutral network in existence (you can DYOR to verify this, it's a long explanation). Due to this with it's hard capped supply it cannot be debased, confiscated or diluted. Additionally it scales in layers. On the base layer it acts as a store of value, it's most prominent layer 2 Lightning, is a fast payment system (faster than visa in certain scenarios, It has been growing quickly over the last few years so it's inconsistency will eventually be fixed) and on top of this a censorship resistant form of media is being built. There are multiple layer 2s and 3s and potentially above being built which adds to the utility and value of BTC. BTC rarely has hard forks. BTC is the original and most prominent chain so you don't need to worry about backwards compatibility. One of BTC's principles is immutability on the base layer. Updates to it are rare and are always(99.9% sure) soft forks so they are backwards compatible. All of BTC's hard forks (BCH, BSV and their derivatives) have been priced as failures by the market, as they simply could not compete. BTC 's essential features from my point of view are near complete. The only things that need to be improved is better privacy generally and a non-custodial solution for if it grows to being used by the vast majority of the population. It's pretty much solved the blockchain trilemma by scaling on layers so I'm bullish on it. ​ >Maybe there is a future where the most popular transaction scheme is BlockChain, but it won't be BitCoin and it won't be today's iteration or Blockchain. I'm not saying it will be but why not? As I explained it is secure, decentralised and neutral. It has a fixed supply, no premine or ICO and it is continually scaling in layers to fix is shortcomings. So personally I don't see a reason why it couldn't be the most popular form of transactions. It would be nice if you could explain why you disagree.
VBTLX had a target duration of something like 8 years, so it paid pretty close to that duration of treasury bill at the time. It wasn't 0, though. I held it through the bond crash, it was returning about 1.7% annually in dividends before rates started going up and the NAV crashed. You can raise or lower your interest rate risk by selecting for duration. TLT fell a lot more than BND, which fell a lot more than BSV. Bonds are math and expectations of interest rates, and nothing more. What makes them a good or bad investment is whether you can guess what rates are going to do next, or you have the ability to hold for the full average duration of the fund.
reading this for the 18th time. hopefully one day BSV can take over micropayments and these kinds of posts can be compensated
You can buy stocks and get -40% to +50% in any given year, with an expected average around +10%. Or you can buy bonds and get a somewhat guaranteed 4% return. To lower risk when buying stocks, buy index funds. $VT is a good one, there are many good ones. To lower risk further, balance it with a bond fund, maybe even a short-term bond fund for you. So a good strategy for you might be 50% $VT and 50% $BSV. There's no guarantee that you won't lose money but it should grow at a modest rate (~7%) if given enough time.
I would allocate 90/10 stocks/bonds. You'll thank me later. Bonds & bond funds pay a steady (usually monthly) dividend. They smooth out your returns in the long-term. Specifically, short-term bonds are less volatile (i.e. less sensitive to interest rate chamges) while still paying you monthly to hold them. I would also look into QQQM. Doing some back testing recently I saw that diversifying a bit with VOO/SCHD/QQQM I was able to get higher ending balance, lower maximum drawdown, best year, worst year, etc. Using these 3 ETFs. Something like this: - 50% VOO - 35% SCHD - 15% QQQM - 10% BSV
I too was a dumbass who held lots of long-term bond ETFs through a predictably bad time to be invested in *anything* that moved inverse to interest rates. You live and you learn. I decreased most of my bond holdings (yes, I bought at the top and sold at the bottom - like a fucking dumbass). It's OK. I lost some money but I have time to make up for it. I'm not going retire for another 25 years. I had no business being so heavy weighted in bonds to begin with. Again, you live and learn. I've rebalanced into cash, growth stocks, and value stocks. I still hold some bond ETFs, but more along the lines of BSV and BND (BND is comparable with intermediate term BIV). I don't hold any long-term anymore. I am still parking money in MUNI bonds, e.g.: MUB. I'll sell out of that if I need some cash or if a crazy opportunity comes along (e.g.: March 2020) YMMV. None of us would be here talking shit on reddit if we could see into the future. We'd all be on Wall Street making stupid money.
You invested in long-term bonds, which are the most risky and are most sensitive to changes in interest rates. But if your time horizon is *long-term*, you shouldn't worry about it. Bond funds like this one pay a steady dividend month after month. However, IMO I would pick a diversified bond fund like BND or a short-term one like BSV if you prefer more stability/ reduced volatility.
High interest savings accounts are really just like ultra-short term bond ETFs right? There are many such ETFs/funds for that here (Vanguard's BSV). Or ICSH (BlackRock's Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF). In Vanguard if you just leave your money in the default 'settlement fund,' that's just a money market mutual fund that yields something near the current Federal Funds Rate, as do the various short-term bond ETFs (roughly speaking).
Vladolina is that you? Nice DD but wow they are scam artists in the purest form. Back in January they gave a 2 week notice that they were ending support of BSV after a "regular review", then auto liquidated at the lows of a crypto winter. Coincidentally transfers were unavailable during the last 5 days of the two week window. I believe this was before the recent SEC crypto drama, so not sure which 3 you're referring too as I transfered everything off the platform shortly there after and closed the account . They might turn profitable short term but long term if they continue to treat their customer base like shit they'll be an OTC pink sheet.
Hi, thank you for the response. BSV was actually sold today, it was there for fixed income. SCHD has been purchased as it’s been down and I’m bullish it will continue to grow & it further diversifies my portfolio. I do like your approach being heavily invested into tech. I will further invest more into technology with time but it’s relatively volatile so I don’t want to be overly diversified into solely technology.
BSV is for exposure to bonds. Although, BND may be a better choice?
23M $35,000 cumulative I want to hear Pros / Cons / general feedback about my current ETF Portfolio’s. I am bullish on technology and growth stocks which is one of the reasons I’m overly invested in technology & growth. Willing to hear criticism against it. Individual: BSV 2.54% MGK 4.05% SCHD 4.89% SOXX 6.62% VGT 17.47% VOO 47.23% (will rebalance to 50% and I add to it monthly) VUG 12.18% Roth: Maximizing yearly JEPI 4.99% (riding for a year or 2) VGT 31.51% VTI 41.12% VUG 11.17% XSD 11.20%
Also thoughts on BSV? It offers a great dividend yield, perhaps allocate 10 percent to that?
>Like most here, I haven’t apportioned anything towards bonds speak for yourself. >What am I missing? bonds are far more complex than stocks. if you're a novice, high-yield should not be your first buy. a good diversified mostly investment grade bond ETF should be the first go-to, or perhaps a short-term bond ETF. here's why: (a) investment grade bonds are paying in the ~4% range, like you'll see on BOND or TOTL (because bond indexes are weird AF I prefer active management for bonds funds YMMV). you're taking on a lot more risk for that 6% yield, because: (b) high-yield bonds are more likely to move like stocks than investment grade bonds, when the traditional purpose for bonds is to stabilize your portfolio. use this tool to find how closely assets are correlated: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/asset-correlations VOO and SPHY have a .71 correlation, where 1 is perfectly correlated and -1 is exactly opposite correlated. But TOTL is only .44 correlated with VOO, and BOND is at .40. a short-term bond ETF like BSV has a correlation of only .17
Worst: dumped about 9k into BSV at the very height of the crypto boom 2021. Had no knowledge of investing, trading, crypto, BTC, nothing - thought if you buy something that has increased a lot in price historically, just hold it until it's increased more before you sell, you're golden. I was deeply wrong and learned the hard way. I was also really into the idea of saving on taxes by holding for at least a year before selling anything. This led to my first mistake of not getting out of that horrible investment the 1 single time BSV experienced a peak high enough for me to have broken even. Second mistake, became discouraged by BSV's pretty contstant trajectory downward from there (plus learning more and more about the total scam and lie that was BSV) and missed plenty of opportunities to average down and get out. After a couple of years, RH (my broker for that trade) delisted BSV and due to restrictions in my state, I had no option to transfer coins out off the platform so was forced to sell at a massive loss of about 90%. Learnings: a ton, but top learnings - DO THE RESEARCH. DD is non-negotioable. Read the charts for entries, don't just jump in. Understand the context before taking risk. Understand the risk itself - examine every possible scenario regarding the fundamentals of the asset & the contract you are entering with the trade. Understand the very real risks of delisting and what your backup plan will be. Understand the full scope of entry/exit plans before you put your capital on the line. Learned a lot from this deeply expensive lesson, and it hurt bad. Still does. Best: Have been keeping my sizable savings in t-bills and t-bill ETFs to take advantage of current high rates on short termers. Doesn't yield a whole lot but it's like a tax-advantaged savings account for me until I feel ready to jump into riskier assets. Feel great about this decision as it was extremely well-informed and I understand exactly what I'm doing with it. From worst to best, I see myself on a great trajectory towards future success.
Obviously, your call, but TLT is down almost 20% in the last year. Not much of a hedge. You will be better off with shorter duration treasuries like BSV (down less than 3% ttm). BSV’s yield is slightly lower, but its price stability is much more resilient than long dated treasuries (like those in TLT) in an inflationary environment.
You can go all the way from holding money market to a 20 year duration bond fund, also choose mix of treasury vs corporate bonds etc. The biggest question is how long is your investment horizon is - once you have an answer invest in a bond fund of that duration. If you hold till duration you will likely not loose money - see explanation below: https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=360575 Example of short term etfs are BSV and VCSH. As someone else said they are not paying much more than a high yield CD, so it's mostly a toss up. With both of you withdraw early you pay a penalty.
I’m serious. BTC-eta hate scam coins. This would be EPIC.BSV is dirt cheap to at 42$ and if we all bought and YOLO-Ed we would be so rich!
What is your goal in adding bonds? The boglehead bond equivalents of VXUS and VT are BNDX and BNDW (the US version is BND). SCHP for TIPS. VGLT or EDV if you want long duration. BSV if you want short duration.
I am DCAing into ETF's slowly to start the year (and have been all 2022, hasnt worked out well but sticking with my plan for now). I have a decent amount of cash from a house sale sitting on the sideelines as well, I am debating if I should keep holding it until the market looks to be recovering and increase my auto invest or just increase my auto invest now. Also, I am making 3.3% on the cash in an m1 plus checking account, am hoping they come out with their 4.5% HYSA soon but while I am waiting, should I put the money in the schwaab money market making 4.2% currently? Also was considering putting some of it in short term bonds like VCSH or BSV, but I am not sure the risks of capital loss with those funds. If the fed raises again as expected, the value will go down, correct? ​ Thanks
Sounds dumb, but I really had no comprehension of interest rate risk and bond funds. I thought bonds would go up if stocks went down. Yes, that is the case 99% of the time, but this year showed me I need to have more diversification in bond duration. Slowly adding BSV and VGSH to my non-retirement portfolios.