Ritholtz Rejects Boomer Stock Crash Risk on Estate Tax Exemptions

Ritholtz基于遗产税豁免驳斥婴儿潮股市暴跌论 退休的婴儿潮一代不会引发股市崩盘，因为继承的股票享有提升计税基础的保护，能够在无需强制变现的情况下平稳传承给继承人。 在Future Proof现场直播中，嘉宾团首先解析了5%以上债券收益率的真相，详细剖析了单只债券与ETF的区别，并评估了利用TIPS对冲通胀的效果。Barry Ritholtz指出高端腕表是情感里程碑而非真正的投资品，坚决驳斥了婴儿潮一代抛售引发崩盘的迷思，并主张投机性“牛仔账户”应严格限制在净资产的5%以内。随后，税务专家Bill Sweet阐释了滚存IRA账户内的资产布局机制，强调合格账户虽无法进行税收亏损收割，却为高换手策略提供了无摩擦的运作载体。节目最后为权衡专业财富管理的自主投资者提供建议，阐明了与顾问合作如何在保护长期资本的同时不抑制投资求知欲。 优质债券收益率突破 5%，相比依赖波动估值倍数的股票，能提供由确定现金流支撑的吸引人回报；单只债券需持有至到期且不发生违约才能锁定到期收益率，而债券 ETF 则通过持续再平衡和换券来维持恒定久期。 (0:09) 面对通胀对名义固定现金流的侵蚀，TIPS（通胀保值债券）能保护本金购买力；而在财务规划中，优先偿还 7% 至 9% 的高息债务应先于奢侈品消费，高档手表更适合用于纪念重要人生里程碑而非单纯炫耀炫富。 (3:30) 婴儿潮一代退休抛售资产引发股市暴跌的担忧被过度夸大，逝世资产阶梯式基数重置（stepped-up basis）、生前赠与以及前 10% 家庭持有 80% 股票的财富高度集中现状均提供了有力缓冲；同时，美国 300 万至 500 万套单户住宅的结构性短缺也防范了房价崩盘。 (12:51) 投机性的“牛仔账户”（cowboy account）应严格限制在总投资组合的 5% 以内，仅作为满足交易冲动的行为学出口；长期主动选股表现极难与运气区分，10 年内击败基准的专业基金经理甚至不足 10%。 (18:48) 在退休账户（如 IRA）中无法进行税损收割，但免去了资本利得税摩擦，是配置债券及高换手率交易策略的理想场所；聘请财务顾问并非意味着放弃对市场的探索，优秀的顾问应同时承担起协助客户理解宏观动态与控制回撤风险的教育角色。 (23:35)

During a live broadcast from the Future Proof festival, Ben Carlson, Barry Ritholtz, Alex Morris, and Bill Sweet argue that sound wealth accumulation relies on behavioral discipline, structural asset location, and low-cost indexing rather than market timing or speculative consumption. Fixed-Income Mechanics and Inflation Realities (2:14) With high-quality bond yields surpassing 5%, Alex Morris explains that individual bonds guarantee their yield to maturity only if held to completion without an issuer default. In contrast, bond ETFs maintain a constant duration target by continuously cycling cash into new paper according to benchmark schedules. Morris also notes that bonds trade over-the-counter with dealer markups and inventory constraints, unlike exchange-traded equities that execute against the National Best Bid and Offer. Addressing concerns that inflation erodes fixed nominal cash flows, Morris maintains that skepticism of fixed income bets against the Federal Reserve's commitment to return inflation to its 2% target. For investors seeking purchasing-power immunization without extending duration risk, Morris highlights Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities and ultra-short Treasury vehicles as tools to maintain cash-like yields. Luxury Spending Rules and Milestone Horizons (8:11) Barry Ritholtz and Ben Carlson caution against treating luxury goods—such as high-end timepieces, collectible vehicles, and fine art—as legitimate investment asset classes, characterizing their pandemic-era price surges as unsustainable speculative frenzies. In response to an early-career physician balancing $200,000 in student debt with a desire for luxury watches, the panel advises that eliminating 7% to 9% debt and funding core retirement accounts must take precedence over five-figure discretionary splurges. Ritholtz stresses that high-end timepieces should mark meaningful professional or personal milestones rather than serve as superficial status displays. He observes that secondary market performance varies widely: while iconic references like the Rolex GMT-Master II experienced retail price growth from $7,000–$8,000 to $11,000 alongside a secondary peak of $25,000 before settling around $15,000–$16,000, less coveted models frequently trade 20% to 30% below retail. Structural Protections in the Boomer Wealth Transfer (12:51) Responding to concerns that baby boomer retirements will trigger massive market liquidations, Ritholtz argues that estate structures and demographic realities prevent catastrophic sell-offs. Federal Reserve and Pew Research figures show baby boomers control roughly $90 trillion of the $174 trillion in total US wealth, supplemented by $20 trillion from the Silent Generation, while approximately 40% of US homeowners hold zero mortgage debt. Ritholtz notes that public equity sales require counterparty transactions, leaving aggregate cash levels unchanged. Furthermore, tax incentives such as the stepped-up cost basis at death encourage holding appreciated equity assets in trusts, and the wealthiest 10% of households own 80% of equities. Combined with inter vivos transfers and a post-2008 single-family housing deficit of 3 to 5 million units, these dynamics absorb generational wealth without destabilizing broad markets. Active Management Limits and the Cowboy Account (18:48) For investors tempted to pick individual stocks alongside core broad-market holdings like Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) and Total Bond Market ETF (BND), Ritholtz recommends capping speculative "cowboy accounts" at 5% or less of a portfolio. This framework functions as a behavioral valve that scratches the trading itch without exposing an investor's standard of living to severe drawdowns. The rationale is supported by active management performance data: fewer than 50% of active managers beat their benchmark over one year, falling to roughly 20% over five years, under 10% over ten years, and virtually zero over twenty years. Citing finance professor Ken French, Ritholtz emphasizes that separating skill from luck requires a twenty-year record, meaning short-term outperformance typically reflects factor tilting rather than genuine predictive ability. Asset Location Discipline and Advisory Collaboration (23:35) Tax expert Bill Sweet clarifies that while qualified accounts like rollover IRAs do not permit tax-loss harvesting, their absence of immediate capital gains friction makes them ideal for tax-inefficient assets, ordinary income-generating bonds, and high-turnover quantitative strategies that would incur significant tax drags in taxable accounts. Addressing an investor concerned about outgrowing self-directed management, Carlson and Sweet emphasize that partnering with a financial advisor does not require surrendering market education. Sweet cites the Fidelity study demonstrating that deceased or inactive account holders routinely outperform active traders due to inaction, concluding that advisors primarily deliver value by providing behavioral downside protection and managing administrative complexity while engaging clients in ongoing market dialogue. The hosts emphasize that while individual investors can safely indulge personal interests—whether through small luxury milestones or capped speculative trading accounts—long-term financial security remains anchored in low-turnover indexing, strategic asset location, and disciplined debt management. The unresolved tension lies in how younger investors will navigate complex macroeconomic shifts and accelerating technological change without succumbing to performance-chasing or excessive portfolio tampering.

本期节目中，Ben Carlson、Barry Ritholtz、Bill Sweet 与嘉宾 Alex Morris 探讨了个人财富管理的核心逻辑，主张投资者应依靠确定性的数学法则与低成本宽基指数构建资产基石，将主动选股与投机仓位严格限制在极小比例，并借助税收制度与跨代财富转移机制理性看待宏观资金流动，而非恐慌于人口结构变迁或盲目追逐短期收益。 固定收益工具的数学逻辑与通胀对冲 (2:14) 针对高质量债券指数到期收益率重返 5% 以上的现象，Alex Morris 指出，与受情绪与估值倍数波动的股票市场不同，个券投资建立在严格的数学确定性之上；只要发行人未发生违约且持有至到期，投资者即可实现既定回报，其收益由定期票息与到期本金偿还共同兑现。然而，多数普通投资者持有的债券 ETF 采取恒定久期策略，会定期进行资产池再平衡与滚动买入，且场外交易债券在流动性、做市商加价和透明度上均不如公开挂牌撮合的股票市场。 针对通胀侵蚀名义固定收益的质疑，Ben Carlson 与 Alex Morris 认为，尽管 3.5% 的通胀率会压低实际回报，但押注通胀长期停留在高位相当于直接对抗美联储重返 2% 目标的政策决心。对于担忧购买力受损的投资者，Morris 推荐本金随通胀调整的通胀保值国债（TIPS），以及类似 F/m 发行的 3 个月期国债 ETF（RBIL）等超短久期工具，以此在美联储加息抑制需求、未来利率可能回落的宏观周期中锁定现金类回报，同时规避不确定的久期波动风险。 核心指数基石与微量投机账户的行为学设计 (18:48) 针对个人投资者如何处理主动选股冲动的疑问，Barry Ritholtz 提出了“牛仔账户”概念，但明确反对将 15% 至 20% 的资产用于投机，主张将卫星仓位严格限制在 5% 或更低。这种极小比例配置在本质上是一种行为学对冲：它既能为热衷市场博弈的投资者提供心理宣泄口与社交谈资，吸收可能干扰主账户的心智带宽，又能确保即使投机头寸彻底归零，也不会实质性削弱长期的核心生活水准。 主动选股的长期胜率在统计学上面临严酷现实。SPIVA 数据显示，第一年跑赢基准的主动基金经理不足 50%，五年期降至约 20%，十年期低于 10%，而二十年维度上能持续战胜市场的几乎仅限于少数传奇人物。引用 Dartmouth 教授 Ken French 的观点，投资业绩在缺乏 20 年完整周期的检验下很难区分纯粹运气与真实技能；多数投资者往往是将特定行业周期的贝塔红利误认为个人选股能力。因此，以全球股票（VT）和全债指数（BND）构建核心组合依然是大多数人积累财富的最优解。 婴儿潮一代财富规模与市场承接机制 (12:51) 针对市场担忧婴儿潮一代退休将引发大规模资产抛售潮的观点，讨论引用美联储数据指出，在美国约 174 万亿美元的家庭净资产中，婴儿潮一代掌握着约 90 万亿美元，且沉默一代持有的 20 万亿美元亦在交接之中；此外，约 40% 的美国家庭已彻底还清房贷。Barry Ritholtz 反驳了所谓集中抛售引发崩盘的观点，强调公开市场的每笔交易都是买卖双方的平价置换，所谓“场外资金池”在交易中并未减少，且全美前 10% 的高净值人群控制了约 80% 的公开市场股票，大多通过信托与遗产妥善封存。 在实际运作中，美国的税收制度与代际转移结构构成了强大的缓冲屏障。继承股票在被继承人离世后适用计税成本基础调高（Stepped-Up Basis）原则，免除了继承人被迫抛售变现的内生资本利得税压力；同时，越来越多的资助通过生前赠与（Inter Vivos）直接流向后代的教育与购房首付。叠加 2008 年金融危机后全美单户住宅建设存在的 300 万至 500 万套长期结构性短缺，人口代际更替并不会演变为灾难性的抛售踩踏，释放的资本也会通过代际消费与再投资重新循环。 税收区隔、债务清偿与专业顾问协作 (23:35) 关于具体理财决策，Bill Sweet 与 Ben Carlson 厘清了资产分布与生活消费的合理边界。在退休账户（如 IRA）中，虽然不存在税损收割机制，但由于其内部交易不触发即时资本利得税，最适合存放利息按普通收入征税的固定收益品种，以及换手率较高的趋势跟踪量化策略。而在个人资产负债表管理上，针对背负 20 万美元医学学生贷款的年轻医生，团队强调 7% 至 9% 的高息债务偿还必须绝对优先于 2 万至 2.5 万美元的奢侈品腕表消费；高价手表在 2020 年后曾被过度金融化，但本质上是消费品而非可靠投资品，只有在基本养老账户与债务规划完成后，作为里程碑纪念才有其情感价值。 对于担心自管资产下行风险的自决型投资者，讨论认为聘请专业财务顾问并不意味着必须放弃个人对市场的敏锐度。Bill Sweet 援引富达投资（Fidelity）著名的“休眠账户与逝者账户”收益反超活跃交易者的案例，说明频繁操作往往带来负收益，顾问的核心价值在于机制优化与纪律约束。优秀的理财顾问应充当教育者，在分担复杂的税务规划与组合再平衡之余，与客户保持对宏观叙事和前沿科技（如人工智能与自主无人机）的探讨，实现跨代际的认知互补。 总体而言，节目表明长期财富管理应以纪律性的指数配置、明确的税收区隔与严格控制的投机敞口为核心，同时正视老龄化与技术变迁带来的代际宏观演变。然而，对于未来年轻一代在承接庞大遗产后是否会打破既有传承结构、激进转向“死前归零”等非传统消费主义模式，讨论仍将其视为一个有待时间检验的开放变量。

## Background 本期视频由 YouTube 频道 The Compound 于 2026 年 9 月 17 日发布。内容录制于加州亨廷顿海滩举办的 Future Proof 大会现场，Ben Carlson 携手 Alex Morris、Barry Ritholtz 与 Bill Sweet，围绕 5% 债券真实收益、奢侈品消费时机、婴儿潮财富传承冲击、牛仔投机账户以及是否聘请财务顾问等听众问题展开了深入探讨。 ## TL;DR 节目首先破除了散户对当前 5% 债券到期收益率“稳赚保本”的误区，指出单只持有与债券 ETF 动态调仓的机制差异，并介绍了利用 TIPS 对冲通胀的逻辑。随后针对负债高薪医生的购表诉求，探讨了奢侈品从个人玩物演变为另类资产的现状，建议将购表作为人生里程碑的犒赏而非攀比炫耀；同时反驳了婴儿潮一代退休抛售将砸崩股市的恐慌论调，强调税基阶梯式递增与生前赠与对财富的平滑过渡。最后，嘉宾们深入分析了将 5% 以内小额资金设为“牛仔账户”的行为学价值、退休账户内资产存放策略，以及投资者在资产规模扩大后平衡自主学习与聘请投顾的实用准则。 ## Atmosphere & style 录制现场设立在阳光明媚的加州海滩边，海风吹拂、人流穿梭，穿插着安保挡镜头与嘉宾碰拳寒暄的花絮，呈现出极其轻松随性且充满生活气息的户外沙龙氛围。主持人和轮番登台的嘉宾们身穿联名花衬衫，语言风趣幽默，时常拿自己的炒股糗事和日常开销打趣，毫无说教感。在欢快的插科打诨之下，核心观点的输出却极其犀利、严谨且直击财务本质，给观众带来一种既像在海边派对与老友惬意闲聊、又像在接受顶尖财富管理私享咨询的生动体验。 ## Bulletin - [01:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=66s) 债券到期收益率虽重返 5% 以上，但债券 ETF 因动态调仓维持组合久期并不会持有到期，投资者无法获得单券持有至到期的确定性回报，且还面临通胀蚕食与场外交易摩擦成本。 - [12:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=771s) 婴儿潮一代坐拥全美超半数财富（约 90 万亿美元），但因税基阶梯式递增（Stepped-Up Basis）机制及生前赠与资助子女购房学费，市场并未出现恐慌性集中砸盘抛售潮。 - [18:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1128s) 投机性质的“牛仔账户”应严格控制在总资产 5% 以内，其本质是满足吹嘘与手痒心理的行为学引雷针，避免因小幅投机放大至 15%-20% 而拖累核心财富。 - [24:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1454s) 合格退休账户（如 Rollover IRA）内部提取一律按普通收入计税，导致税损收割与持仓周期控制失效，但免税再平衡特性适合配置债券及高换手率的趋势策略。 - [27:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1630s) 聘请专业理财顾问并非放弃躬身入局的认知成长，投资者可将复杂的税务筹划、遗产规划与下行风险控制外包，同时保持对宏观与商业前沿的敏锐洞察。 ## Key takeaways - [01:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=66s) 优质固收产品到期收益率超 5%，但单只债券需持有至到期且不违约才保本，普通债券 ETF 因持续再平衡无法锁定确定性收益率。 - [03:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=210s) 通胀是固定收益投资的头号杀手，在名义高利率下，配置挂钩 CPI 的 TIPS（通胀保值债券）是抵御实际收益率被侵蚀的有效对冲工具。 - [06:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=387s) 奢侈品在疫情后演化出金融与另类资产属性，但高息负债人群应优先偿清债务，待达成重大职业里程碑或人生关口再以名表犒赏自己。 - [10:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=609s) 绝大多数名表离店即贬值，只有少数爆款或贵金属款能保值，若核心财务规划扎实且 401(k) 存足，消费闲钱则属个人自由。 - [12:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=771s) 婴儿潮一代坐拥超 90 万亿美元财富，但所谓退休抛售砸盘美股的论调忽视了交易的换手本质，场外资金并未真正沉淀或凭空消失。 - [14:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=866s) 税基阶梯式递增（Stepped-Up Basis）免除了继承股票的即时资本利得税，叠加日益盛行的生前赠与，继承人缺乏大规模抛售的动力。 - [18:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1128s) 设立 5% 以内的投机“牛仔账户”可作为心智引雷针，既满足个股交易冲动与社交吹嘘需求，又隔离了核心退休金受损风险。 - [21:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1260s) 主动选股跑赢大盘的概率随时间拉长急剧衰减，十年以上超额胜率不足 10%，短期暴利多源于 Beta 暴露与运气而非真正技能。 - [24:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1454s) 合格退休账户（Rollover IRA）无法享受长期资本利得税率优惠，账户内刻意进行税损收割毫无意义，提取时一律按普通收入计税。 - [25:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1500s) 遵循资产存放策略（Asset Location），利息需按普通收入纳税的债券及高频调仓的趋势策略最适合放置于免税交易的合格退休账户中。 - [27:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1630s) 聘请理财顾问与保持个人商业认知并不冲突，外包税务筹划、信托遗产与仓位平衡能释放心智带宽，赋能创业与事业成长。 - [29:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1743s) 富达投资传奇研究显示，搬家断联或已故的静止账户往往跑赢活跃账户，高频交易常是对投资回报的巨大侵蚀，克制冲动至关重要。 - [29:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1775s) 资产体量每增加一个零，回撤带来的心理痛苦成倍放大；在蜂群无人机与 Agentic AI 等新技术涌现的时代，代际认知交流尤为关键。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=9s) 现场开场与 Tropical Bros 衬衫赞助趣事 在加州亨廷顿海滩（Huntington Beach）举办的 Future Proof 金融科技大会现场，《Ask The Compound》录制了本期直播节目。现场人头攒动、气氛热烈，Ben Carlson 担任主持人并向观众预告今天将有多位重磅神秘嘉宾轮番登台解答听众来信。 在进入硬核议题前，Ben 介绍了节目的赞助品牌——他身上穿着的 Tropical Bros 休闲夏威夷衬衫。Ben 回忆道，早在五年前第一届 Future Proof 举办时他就穿着该品牌的衬衫，结果现场许多人围上来摸材质、打听购买渠道，场面十分滑稽。此后双方展开深度联名合作，陆续推出了包括《Animal Spirits》联名款、《The Compound》联名款以及大会现场众多人上身的高尔夫 Polo 衫系列。嘉宾当场附和打趣说，昨晚自己穿着这件战袍去打保龄球，一连斩获三次全中（Strike），功劳全得归于这件衣服的魔力。 ### [01:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=66s) 债券收益率重返 5%：散户眼中的“保本”误区与 ETF 交易现实 首个问题来自听众 Jackson，他直截了当地发问：“我不太理解债券，现在买入是不是就等于近乎保证能拿到每年 5.2% 的稳赚回报？”为此，Ben 邀请了首位嘉宾——来自 F/m Investments 的 Alex Morris（Ben 调侃 Alex 公司刚被普信集团 T. Rowe Price 收购，理应请全场所有人喝一杯啤酒庆祝）。 Ben 指出，目前任何优质债券指数或高质量固收产品的到期收益率（Yield to Maturity）普遍超过了 5%，这是过去十多年未曾有过的盛景。相比股市靠情绪和市盈率波动驱动，债市底层由严谨的数学逻辑支撑。但 Alex 随即拆解了散户对“5.2% 确定性”的认知误区： - **单只债券 vs. 债券 ETF**：如果购买单只债券，只有在“发行主体不违约”且“投资者持有至到期”这两个前提下，才能最终兑现 5.2% 的到期收益率。但期间投资者拿到的只是每半年发放一次的票息（Coupon），本金和利息补齐需等 10 至 15 年到期日才能全额结算。 - **ETF 的持续再平衡与久期敞口**：大多数散户通过 ETF 投资债券以换取免选券、流动性高和税收优势。然而普通债券 ETF 并不会持有到期，而是为了维持特定的目标基准久期，在每周、每月或每季度进行动态调仓与再平衡。一旦到期或需要调仓，基金会重新买入新债，其收益率会随市场利率浮动。 - **场外交易（OTC）流动性与隐性摩擦**：债券不像股票那样在透明集中的公开交易盘（如苹果股票在 NBBO 最优买卖报价下透明执行）交易，而是严重依赖做市商库存、交易平台手续费和场外报价，嘉信理财（Schwab）或富达（Fidelity）等平台上几乎不存在免费买卖散装债券的情况。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 债券直投 vs 债券 ETF 运作模式对比 accDescr: 对比个人持有单只债券至到期与通过债券 ETF 投资的运行机制差异 subgraph DirectBond["持有单只债券"] A["买入特定高评级债券 (如 5.2% YTM)"] --> B["持有 10-15 年至到期日"] B --> C["每 6 个月获得固定票息"] C --> D["到期拿回全额本金与差额补贴"] end subgraph BondETF["持有债券 ETF"] E["买入债券 ETF 份额"] --> F["基金维持固定组合久期"] F --> G["定期再平衡与成分券轮换"] G --> H["收益率随市场新发利率动态浮动"] end ``` ### [03:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=210s) 通胀蚕食下的实收回报，与 TIPS 的对冲逻辑 Ben 抛出市场上普遍存在的质疑声：虽然 5% 的名义利率看起来非常诱人，但在扣除 3.5% 的通货膨胀率以及相关税负之后，实际真实收益率大打折扣，债市是否只是表面繁荣？ Alex 承认“通胀是固定收益投资组合的头号杀手”。但他深入剖析了美联储背后的政策博弈与对冲思路： - **美联储政策目标与加息逻辑**：美联储的目标是将通胀压回 2% 的长期目标区间。当天美联储加息 25 个基点，并暗示年底前可能再次加息，美联储的资产负债表与政策重心正在全力对抗持续性通胀。若投资者认定 3.5% 的通胀将长期固化，股票自然是长期抵御通胀更好的资产，但这与美联储极力促成的宏观趋势相悖。 - **抗通胀债券 TIPS 的防御功能**：若既想要债券的稳健收益又担忧通胀侵蚀，美国财政部发行的通胀保值债券（TIPS）是首选工具，其本金会依据消费者物价指数（CPI）进行调增。Alex 顺便宣传了其公司的超短期 TIPS 产品 RBIL（F/m 旗下），为追求低久期与对冲通胀的资金提供类现金回报。 - **利率与债券价格的跷跷板关系**：利率与债券价格反向变动。若美联储成功抑制通胀，经济增速放缓导致未来利率下行，短期内承受浮亏的债券将迎来资本利得的估值修复。 ### [06:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=387s) 负净资产医生能否圆名表梦？奢侈品从“小玩具”演变为另类资产 送别 Alex 后，Ritholtz Wealth Management 创始人 Barry Ritholtz 坐上嘉宾席。Ben 念出年轻听众 Sam 的来信： - Sam 是一名职业生涯刚起步的年轻医生，手握非常优厚的高薪，但目前背负 20 万美元的医学院学生贷款以及房贷，整体净资产仍为负数。 - 他的家庭添了小孩，自认信奉稳健低成本投资的“博格尔信徒”（Boglehead），在财务上极度规避债务。 - 然而，由于继承了一块 1970 年代的古董欧米茄（Omega）正装表，他深深迷上了高级腕表，渴望知道自己何时才能“名正言顺”地花大钱购置梦想中的奢华腕表。 Ben 坦言自己对名表无感，平时只戴 100 美元级别的平价手表，甚至抛出个人暴论：“劳力士其实长得没那么好看。”Barry 笑着化解审美争议，指出在 2020 年疫情大爆发之后，许多原本属于个人玩物（Baubles）的品类——如老爷车、古董腕表、艺术品与名酒——其市场逻辑发生了质的改变，几乎演变成了一种兼具金融属性的“另类资产类别”。当时大众手握大量补贴与闲置储蓄，电视上没有体育赛事转播，无聊与躁动的资金一窝蜂涌向了保时捷和劳力士，直接引爆了二级市场行情。随后，Barry 准备从自身资深藏家的视角，为负债的高薪人群划定消费奢侈品的财务边界。 ### [08:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=491s) 奢侈品消费的意义：为纪念里程碑还是单纯炫耀？ 讨论从关于时间的哲学闲聊切入——有人打趣说这简直像是“凌晨两点大学宿舍里抽了草以后的深夜空想”，但话题很快转向了现实中的奢侈品腕表。主持人直言不讳地指出，当今时代没有任何一个人真正“需要”一块手表，口袋里的手机走时精度远超售价十万美元的百达翡丽（Patek Philippe）等顶级名表。如果有人准备跳入买表的深坑，首先必须诚实地追问自己究竟为了什么；若仅仅是为了“秀一把（flex）”或者炫耀一块劳力士，那纯粹是在浪费金钱。 真正有价值的购买应当承载意义。Barry Ritholtz 分享了自己公司的故事：在律所/财富管理机构成立十周年之际，他为自己以及几位创始合伙人各购置了一块 2004 年款劳力士迪通拿（Rolex Daytona），并在表背刻上了每个人的名字。这个做法是他从一位私募股权投资人那里借鉴来的——那位投资人早在二十年前就买了 50 块表锁在保险库里，每当有员工升任合伙人便奖励一块。这样的名表不再是昂贵的浮夸饰物，而是一份记录奋斗与里程碑的厚重礼物。对于提问的听众（一位背负助学贷款的医生），大家的共识是：如果买表，千万不要为了炫耀，而应在达成重大的职业成就或迎来 40、50、60 岁等人生整数关口时，再将其作为纪念品犒赏自己。 ### [10:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=609s) 债务优先还是买表自由：合理预算与保值腕表探讨 对于背负着 7% 到 9% 高息学生贷款的年轻医生而言，去花两万到两万五千美元买表绝非明智之举。更稳妥的财务路径是优先还清高息债务、全力拓展自己的医疗业务，并持续投资于房地产与股票投资组合。而且如果真心喜欢机械表，市场上完全有两三千美元甚至一千美元以内的优质平替，比如天梭 PRX（Tissot PRX）、浪琴（Longines）或是格拉苏蒂（Glashütte）的入门款式。 买表与买车类似，绝大多数款式在离店的一瞬间便开始贬值，只有极少数爆款或贵金属款能保值甚至升值。Barry 提到了劳力士 GMT-Master II“蝙蝠女”（Batgirl）：十年前公价约七八千美元，如今官方售价约 1.1 万美元，他在两年前通过授权经销商（AD）按公价提表现货，当时二级市场上该表在疫情狂热期一度被炒到 2 万至 2.5 万美元，如今虽回落到 1.5 万至 1.6 万美元左右，但若买入时机和价格正确，依然不会亏钱。相比之下，带有经典闪电秒针的劳力士绿玻璃（Milgauss）因热度降温，在 Chrono24 或 Hodinkee 等二级市场上往往能以低于公价 20% 到 30% 的折扣买到。另外，诸如永恒玫瑰金、白金等贵金属表款，由于其本身含有昂贵的实金重量，天然具备较强的抗跌托底属性。不过众人总结的核心原则始终未变：只要个人财务规划井井有条，还清了高息负债，按部就班往 401(k) 账户里足额存钱且生活有盈余，那么把闲钱花在名表、球鞋还是华服上，完全是个人的消费自由。 ### [12:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=771s) 婴儿潮一代坐拥巨资：会撑起经济还是砸崩股市？ 听众 Steve 提出了一个宏观层面的尖锐问题：根据皮尤研究中心（Pew Research）与美联储的数据，全美 174 万亿美元的财富中，婴儿潮一代（Baby Boomers）坐拥高达 90 万亿美元（占比超过 51%）；若算上沉默一代（Silent Generation）即将转移的 20 万亿美元，全美三分之二的财富实质上集中在高龄群体手中。市场上多年来一直充斥着“一旦婴儿潮一代大举退休抛售股票，美股必将崩盘”的恐慌论调，但 Steve 询问：这庞大的养老金储备是否反而成了金融危机后抵御地缘政治波动的经济底盘？毕竟目前全美约 40% 的房主已彻底结清了房贷，其中大部分正是婴儿潮一代，他们没有沉重的负债负担，且手中的股票和房产净值远超预期。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 婴儿潮一代财富转移与市场交互机制 accDescr: 展示股票交易本质以及婴儿潮财富通过递增税基和生前赠与转移，化解抛售压力的逻辑流程。 subgraph Fallacy["市场交易本质（打破场外资金断言）"] A["买方持有 100 万现金"] -->|撮合交易| C["买方获得 100 万股票"] B["卖方持有 100 万股票"] -->|撮合交易| D["卖方获得 100 万现金"] style Fallacy fill:#f9f9f9,stroke:#999,stroke-width:1px end subgraph WealthTransfer["婴儿潮财富代际转移机制"] E["婴儿潮核心资产\n(VOO/苹果/亚马逊等)"] --> F{"转移方式选择"} F -->|遗产继承| G["税基阶梯式递增 (Stepped-Up Basis)\n免除即时税收，无需被迫砸盘"] F -->|生前赠与 (Inter Vivos)| H["资助子女买房 / 支付孙辈大学学费\n直接流入实体经济消费"] style WealthTransfer fill:#eef6ff,stroke:#2b7fff,stroke-width:1px end ``` ### [14:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=866s) 财富传承与代际动态：“场外资金”谬误与生前赠与 对于婴儿潮托底或砸盘的争论，现场嘉宾给出了两记核心反驳。首先，所谓“万亿退休资金在场外持续注入”的说辞，本质上与“7 万亿美元场外现金随时推高市场”的陈旧论调一样，犯了对交易机制的基本常识错误：股票交易永远是换手，一方拿 100 万美元现金买入另一方等值的苹果股票，交易结束后依然是 100 万美元股票和 100 万美元现金，场外资金并未凭空“消失在股市中”。 其次是财富继承的现实规则。全美前 10% 的富裕人群持有约 80% 的股票资产，当他们考虑财富安排时，最核心的工具是“税基阶梯式递增（Stepped-Up Basis）”。当下一代继承价值 500 万美元的先锋标普 500 指数基金（VOO）或苹果股票时，其计税成本直接调整为继承时的市场价值，无需被迫变现去支付资本利得税，子女完全可以继续让其长期复合增值，根本没有理由在市场上盲目抛售砸盘。 - **生前赠与（Inter Vivos Transfers）盛行**：越来越多的婴儿潮一代不再等到身故后分配遗产，而是选择“生前赠与”，资助子女购置首套房或为孙辈支付高昂的大学学费，在有生之年亲眼见证后代受益。 - **代际交替的必然规律**：历史上每一代人都经历过类似偏见（婴儿潮曾被预言是最穷的一代，随后轮到千禧一代被冠上此名），但随着时间推移，千禧一代已成长为人口规模最大的一代，最终也将接替婴儿潮成为核心财富拥有者。 - **房地产供给的硬约束**：婴儿潮一代目前并未出现大规模出售大户型住房（Downsizing）的现象；叠加 2008 年金融危机后全美单户住宅长期少建了 300 万到 500 万套，房屋短缺问题短期内难以消解。 - **退休崩盘论的破灭**：婴儿潮一代自 1946 年（二战后 4000 万美军士兵复员回国潮引发的婴儿潮）算起，早在多年以前就已达到每天 10,000 人退休的峰值节奏，但长久以来所谓的股市崩溃从未如末日论者预言那般上演。 ### [18:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1095s) 闲置资金的去向与消费冲动 几位主持人首先收尾了关于婴儿潮一代转移财富与消费的探讨。讨论焦点在于，若资金不再大量留在股市，而是作为继承转移给下一代或变现消费，市场需求将如何演变。主持人们指出，"钱总得有个去处"（money has to go somewhere），闲置资本从来不会真正静止不动，就像老话所说的“闲散的双手是魔鬼的工坊”（idle hands are the devil's work），一个人兜里只要揣着现金，不知不觉就会找到花钱的途径。 ### [18:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1128s) 投机仓位与“牛仔账户”：行为学止痒还是自我合理化？ 随后，Ben Carlson 念出了听众 Fred 的来信。Fred 与妻子正值 30 多岁，目前拥有大约 120 万美元的投资组合，底层资产以先锋全世界股票 ETF（VT）和先锋总体债券市场 ETF（BND）为核心大盘基石。但 Fred 同时保留了一个 15% 到 20% 的集中度极高的投机性个股仓位。Fred 自我解释称，这是为了在不危及核心资产的前提下“满足玩乐炒股的心痒”（play money itch）。但他非常疑惑：在核心组合之外特意保留小额或中等规模的投机卫星仓位，与 100% 全部投入指数基金相比，长远来看是否有实质性差异？是否存在一种在智识上保持诚实的方式来运作卫星投资组合，抑或这纯粹只是一种事后合理化（post hoc rationalization）？ Barry Ritholtz 接过话茬，引用了自己在书中提出的概念——“牛仔账户”（Cowboy accounts）。对于这个账户的资金上限，Barry 明确表示，资金比例最好控制在 5% 或以下。这一比例的设计初衷是一种行为学黑客手段（behavioral hack）：一旦投资大获成功，它能带来实际的体量回报；而若彻底崩盘爆仓，也丝毫不会动摇家庭的生活水平。Barry 坚决反对将仓位放大到 10%、20% 甚至 30%。他调侃道，牛仔账户的核心用途是在参加鸡尾酒会或周末烤肉派对时，满足人们热爱吹嘘、大谈个股代码的虚荣心——这通常是牛市才有的氛围。Barry 甚至拿自己打趣，称自己名下也有一个牛仔账户（一度口误说成“花花公子账户” Playboy account），最近打开一看还不到个人整体资产的 2%，但每天却霸占了他一半的心智带宽（mental bandwidth）。不过，这种心智消耗恰恰达成了其最大效用：它成功充当了“引雷针”，阻止了投资者去胡乱折腾自己真正托底的核心退休老本。 ### [21:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1260s) 主动选股的残酷概率：运气、技能与风险调整后收益 针对 Fred 拿 20% 资金单挑市场的做法，主持人们分析指出，既然 Fred 拥有 VT 和 BND 这种标杆，他就必须客观衡量自己的时间、精力与情绪焦虑是否配得上超额收益。Barry 列举了一组残酷的历史统计数据，阐明散户战胜基准的概率微乎其微： ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 主动管理型基金跑赢基准指数的历史衰减率 accDescr: 流程图展示随着投资期限拉长，主动战胜基准的基金比例从单年的不到一半持续衰减至二十年后的极少数传奇。 subgraph Timeline["时间周期与胜率衰减"] direction TB Y1["单年表现<br/>跑赢基准占比不足 50%"] Y5["5 年表现<br/>降至约 20%"] Y10["10 年表现<br/>低于 10%"] Y20["20 年表现<br/>仅剩凤毛麟角的传奇<br/>(巴菲特、林奇、达诺夫等)"] Y1 --> Y5 Y5 --> Y10 Y10 --> Y20 end ``` Barry 援引达特茅斯学院学者 Ken French 评价 ARK 基金的名言表示：“在拥有整整 20 年的长期业绩追踪记录之前，你根本无法判定一个人究竟是靠真本事还是单纯走运。”近些年某些人挑中了飙涨的半导体大牛股，表面上收益惊人，但其本质究竟是选股能力，还是因为他们在过去 10 年里一直跑输大盘、仅仅赶上单一行业风口爆发？如果把 100 万美元里的 20 万美元投机仓位拿去博取超额收益，其承担的 Beta 系数与风险极度不对称，期望将这 20 万做成 2000 万的概率极其渺茫。 为了说明这种心理偏差，Barry 分享了一个典型场景：他在各大投资峰会演讲时，常有夫妻走上前来，丈夫得意洋洋地递上一份持仓单，上面列满了联合健康（UnitedHealth）、微软（Microsoft）、亚马逊（Amazon）等 50 只大牛股，妻子则在一旁催促专家“快劝他改投指数基金”。当 Barry 问对方炒了多久，对方回答“40 年”，并表示自己在 1987 年股灾、2000 年互联网泡沫破裂、2008-2009 年次贷危机期间全都在“大笔扫货买入”。Barry 坦言：“夫人，我很想劝你先生买先锋标普500 ETF（VOO），但他确实是极少数的例外，他做得棒极了。”然而，绝大多数上台拿持仓求教的投资者手里的清单完全是另一幅惨状：账户里躺满了濒临破产的代码，甚至全是代号末尾带“Q”（代表破产退市重组）的仙股，而散户往往死活不愿割肉。人们永远只在赚钱时高谈阔论，却对亏损闭口不提。 ### [23:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1415s) 专家换席：欢迎 Roth IRA 大师 Bill Sweet 在结束牛仔账户的讨论后，Barry Ritholtz 准备下台换人。大家在场边相互打趣 Barry 身上那件极其具有复古质感的衬衫，笑称其非常有 Ben Carlson 的穿衣风格。随后，众人热情迎出了 Ritholtz 财富管理公司的资深合伙人、被誉为“大家最喜欢的 Roth IRA 专家”的 Bill Sweet。Bill 登台便与大家碰拳寒暄，主持人们打趣称今天在西海岸海滩边是名副其实的“晃动与烘烤”（shaking and baking），气氛火热。 ### [24:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1454s) 滚存 IRA 里的频繁交易迷局与资产存放策略（Asset Location） 台下递上了听众 Josh 的专业财务咨询。Josh 透露，自己多年来一直在由旧 401(k) 转换而来的滚存 IRA（Rollover IRA）账户里进行极其频繁的波段交易：有些持仓只放几天或几周，有些则放一年以上做定期动态再平衡。Josh 长期以来都自我感觉良好，坚信自己对“持股周期”（holding periods）的严格自律大有裨益。然而，随着退休临近，Josh 突然猛醒：在合格退休账户中，当未来提取资金时，所有款项都会被一视同仁地作为普通收入（ordinary income）计税，根本不存在长期资本利得税率的优惠。Josh 沮丧地发问：自己多年来在免税账户里煞费苦心地执行所谓“税损收割”（tax-loss harvesting）和持仓周期控制，是不是纯属无用功？既然资本利得优惠在此类账户中完全失效，到底什么样的投资策略与心理模型才真正适合合格退休账户？ Bill Sweet 幽默地安慰道：“哥们儿，过去的事谁也回不去。我回不到潇洒的 20 岁，回不到孩子们还在沙滩上玩耍的幼年，也回不到昨天去酒吧痛饮三品脱健力士（Guinness）黑啤之前的状态。”从财税本质来看，Josh 之前在 IRA 内部频繁买卖并没有产生任何违规惩罚（no harm, no foul），因为合格账户内部完全没有资本利得税和当期所得税。更重要的是，这赋予了资金极大的“机动自由度”（freedom of maneuver），投资者可以零税负成本地在 IRA 内部随意挪动再平衡资产。但 Josh 原本自鸣得意的“税损收割”在 IRA 内部确实毫无意义（“that dog will not hunt”）。 Bill 进一步从专业财务规划角度阐述了至关重要的**资产存放策略（Asset Location）**： - **债券类资产**：利息在常规应税账户中本来就要按照普通所得税率（Ordinary Income）纳税，因此放入 IRA 这一类具有税收递延优惠的合格账户中持有是最合理的。 - **趋势跟踪或高频调仓策略**：例如机构为客户配置的跟随市场上下波动的量化趋势策略，由于经常需要进出换手，若放在普通应税账户会频繁触发资本利得税，而放在税收合格账户（Tax-Qualified Accounts）内运作则是绝配。 - **退休提取规划**：未来从 IRA 提取时必须面对普通收入税率，这就需要 Josh 与财务顾问坐下来，设计一个精细的阶梯分流提取方案，而不是停留在无谓的账户内短线操作上。 ### [26:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1593s) 现场花絮与关于雇佣财务顾问的新提问 在问答间隙，现场发生了一段滑稽的小插曲。由于录制是在加州亨廷顿海滩（Huntington Beach）举行的 Future Proof 盛会户外现场，周遭人流攒动，至少有几十名参会路人无意中试图闯入摄影镜头。安保人员 John 不得不在镜头外充当“保镖”严防死守，甚至有熟人走过来想打招呼击掌（dap it up）都被现场一把拦下。 在欢快的现场气氛中，主持人们念出了下一位听众 Derek 的提问。Derek 目前 20 多岁，在科技行业工作，手头管理着一个普通应税经纪账户，正在认真权衡是否有必要聘请一名专业的全权委托财务顾问。 ### [27:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1630s) 自主投资与聘请投顾的抉择：如何平衡认知成长与下行风险 观众 Derek 发来提问，表达了许多自主投资者在资产积累到一定阶段后的真实困惑。随着投资组合规模不断膨胀，他越来越担心市场大幅回调会吞噬自己辛苦积累的财富。虽然他避开了散户抱团的迷因股（meme stocks）和高杠杆保证金交易，以往的资产配置也吃到了本轮牛市的红利，但他清醒地意识到，一旦真正的熊市来临，一位经验丰富的专业理财顾问（financial advisor）显然能更果断、更具系统性地控制下行风险。然而，让他犹豫不决的症结在于：在亲自打理投资组合的过程中，他对宏观经济、地缘政治和商业动态的认知突飞猛进，净值下跌的“吃面日”更是磨炼了他的纪律性；如果为了释放心智带宽去拼事业或创业而全盘雇佣投顾，是否意味着放弃了这种躬身入局（"skin in the game"）的持续教育机会？第一手实践经验究竟在何时会从“增值资产”沦为“认知负担”？ Ben Carlson 对这个提问赞赏有加，认为提问者展现出了极高的自我认知，思考方向非常到位。Ben 指出，寻求专业建议绝不是“非黑即白”的单选题，投资者完全不必在“自我学习”与“聘请投顾”之间二选一。事实上，优秀的理财顾问本身就将投资者教育视为核心职责之一，这也是他们持续输出内容的重要原因。客户完全可以将复杂的税务筹划（tax planning）、遗产规划（estate planning）和组合再平衡等专业执行外包出去，同时依然保留对市场脉搏的敏锐感知。投资机构的客户中固然有“只求省心、完全撒手不管”的类型，但也有一大批高净值客户会频繁向投资经理抛出深度问题，保持着对商业与宏观世界的旺盛好奇心。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 投资管理职责划分 accDescr: 展示投资者可以外包的专业模块与应保留的认知参与 subgraph Outsource ["可完全外包的专业服务"] T["税务筹划<br/>(Tax Planning)"] E["遗产信托<br/>(Estate Planning)"] D["下行风险对冲<br/>与仓位再平衡"] end subgraph Keep ["投资者保留的个人价值"] L["宏观与商业动态学习"] C["与顾问深度对话与反馈"] B["心智带宽释放用于创业/事业"] end Outsource -.->|专业赋能与兜底| Client["成熟投资者组合"] Keep -.->|保持敏锐度与主见| Client ``` ### [29:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1743s) 富达传奇研究的启示：频繁操作的代价与代际认知的碰撞 讨论随后延伸到投资者行为学的经典悖论上。Bill Sweet 提到了富达投资（Fidelity）一项经常被业内引用的传奇研究（尽管细节可能带有轶事色彩）：在该机构统计的所有账户中，跑赢大市表现最好的居然是两类人——第一类是因搬家变更了地址、没能收到账户对账单因此彻底放弃频繁交易的人；第二类则是已经离世的人。死者不会交易，账户自然被长期搁置。这一惊人事实揭示了一个残酷的规律：“交易活跃度（activity）不仅不是超额收益的代名词，反而往往是对投资回报的巨大损害”。许多自主投资者误以为每天紧盯盘面、频繁换仓是负责任的表现，但实际上最理想的状态是拥有一位值得信赖、能帮助自己克制冲动的顾问，并在迷茫时有人答疑解惑。 当资金规模逐步扩大、账户净值“后面多加了几个零”时，回撤带来的心理痛苦呈指数级上升。与此同时，金融市场本身的演化日新月异，当前市场充斥着“蜂群无人机（drone swarms）”和“智能体人工智能（agentic AI）”等前沿概念。对于六七十岁的传统投资人而言，这种颠覆性的商业语言往往超越了他们的传统框架，世界可能在某个时刻开始变得令他们难以理解。因此，年轻一代与年长一代之间的跨代际对话至关重要；年轻投资人或许没有所有终极答案，但往往对当下正在发生的技术与商业变革持有更加开放的包容度。 - **富达账户收益悖论**：表现最好的两类散户账户是“搬家遗失对账单的客户”以及“已经过世的客户”，不作为反而跑赢了频繁买卖。 - **资金体量的心理分水岭**：账户数字每增加一个零，同等百分比的回撤所造成的心理冲击和实际财富损失就会放大数倍。 - **顾问甄选法则**：如果聘请的理财顾问不能持续为客户提供市场与组合逻辑上的认知教育，或者彼此缺乏基础的专业信任，就应该果断更换。 ### [31:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1871s) 现场收尾与周边花絮：Future Proof 现场互动与节目结语 在加利福尼亚州亨廷顿海滩（Huntington Beach）举办的 Future Proof 财富节现场，几位主持人在上万名参会者环绕的热闹氛围中迎来了本期《Ask The Compound》直播的尾声。他们调侃在“上百万人的注视下”完成了这场生动的现场对谈，并特别推介了与服饰品牌 Tropical Bros 联名的全新周边服饰。与以往传统的葡萄酒印花衬衫不同，本次合作推出了透气干练的 Polo 衫，并特别针对女性观众推出了量身定制的剪裁款式。几位主持人在台上打趣着彼此的身材，最后提醒观众若有关于个人财务、资产配置或商业市场的任何疑问，可随时发送邮件至官方邮箱（askthecompoundshow@gmail.com），在现场观众的掌声中圆满收官。 ## Notable quotes > [03:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=210s) 通胀是固定收益投资组合的头号杀手。 — Alex Morris > [06:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=387s) 劳力士其实长得没那么好看。 — Ben Carlson > [18:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1095s) 钱总得有个去处。 — Ben Carlson > [21:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1260s) 在拥有整整 20 年的长期业绩追踪记录之前，你根本无法判定一个人究竟是靠真本事还是单纯走运。 — Barry Ritholtz > [21:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1260s) 夫人，我很想劝你先生买先锋标普500 ETF（VOO），但他确实是极少数的例外，他做得棒极了。 — Barry Ritholtz > [24:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1454s) 哥们儿，过去的事谁也回不去。我回不到潇洒的 20 岁，回不到孩子们还在沙滩上玩耍的幼年，也回不到昨天去酒吧痛饮三品脱健力士（Guinness）黑啤之前的状态。 — Bill Sweet > [29:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4&t=1743s) 交易活跃度（activity）不仅不是超额收益的代名词，反而往往是对投资回报的巨大损害。 — Bill Sweet ## Mentioned Ben Carlson, Alex Morris, Barry Ritholtz, Bill Sweet, Future Proof, Tropical Bros, Ask The Compound, Animal Spirits, The Compound, F/m Investments, T. Rowe Price, Schwab, Fidelity, TIPS, RBIL, Ritholtz Wealth Management, Omega, Patek Philippe, Rolex Daytona, Rolex GMT-Master II Batgirl, Rolex Milgauss, Tissot PRX, Longines, Glashütte, Chrono24, Hodinkee, Pew Research, 美联储, 先锋标普 500 指数基金 (VOO), 先锋全世界股票 ETF (VT), 先锋总体债券市场 ETF (BND), Ken French, ARK 基金, UnitedHealth, Microsoft, Amazon, Guinness, Roth IRA ## Video description On this live episode of Ask The Compound from Future Proof in Huntington Beach, Ben Carlson, Alex Morris, Bill Sweet, and Barry Ritholtz tackle listener questions on bonds, luxury spending, generational wealth, and managing an actively traded portfolio. They discuss what a 5%+ bond yield really means, how inflation affects fixed-income investments, and where TIPS can fit into a portfolio. Plus, when it makes sense to spend on luxury purchases like watches, whether baby boomers are really a threat to the stock market, how to think about a small “cowboy account” for speculative investments. This and more! 👕 Check out The Compound shop: https://www.idontshop.com 🎙️Listen to our podcasts: TCAF: https://podcasts.thecompoundnews.com/show/TCAF/ Animal Spirits: https://podcasts.thecompoundnews.com/show/animalspirits/ Ask The Compound: https://podcasts.thecompoundnews.com/show/ATC/ The Compound Newsletter: https://www.thecompoundnews.com/subscribe Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-compound-media/ Instagram: https://instagram.com/thecompoundnews Twitter: https://twitter.com/thecompoundnews Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thecompoundnews Investing involves the risk of loss. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be or regarded as personalized investment advice or relied upon for investment decisions. Josh Brown and Michael Batnick are employees of Ritholtz Wealth Management and may maintain positions in the securities discussed in this video. All opinions expressed by them are solely their own opinion and do not reflect the opinion of Ritholtz Wealth Management. See our disclosures here: https://ritholtzwealth.com/podcast-youtube-disclosures/ The Compound Media, Incorporated, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here https://ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers. #thecompound #investing #stockmarket #stocks [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9av6FNPWKT4)

[3:30] Alex Morris: 通胀是固定收益投资组合的头号杀手。 [6:27] Ben Carlson: 劳力士其实长得没那么好看。 [18:15] Ben Carlson: 钱总得有个去处。 [21:00] Barry Ritholtz: 在拥有整整 20 年的长期业绩追踪记录之前，你根本无法判定一个人究竟是靠真本事还是单纯走运。 [21:00] Barry Ritholtz: 夫人，我很想劝你先生买先锋标普500 ETF（VOO），但他确实是极少数的例外，他做得棒极了。 [24:14] Bill Sweet: 哥们儿，过去的事谁也回不去。我回不到潇洒的 20 岁，回不到孩子们还在沙滩上玩耍的幼年，也回不到昨天去酒吧痛饮三品脱健力士（Guinness）黑啤之前的状态。 [29:03] Bill Sweet: 交易活跃度（activity）不仅不是超额收益的代名词，反而往往是对投资回报的巨大损害。

[0:09] Jackson: I don't totally understand bonds. Is that the equivalent of near guaranteed 5.2% annual returns? [3:30] Alex Morris: inflation is the scourge of your bond portfolio [6:27] Ben Carlson: someone just stole my fleece vest for saying that. [8:11] Barry Ritholtz: Nobody needs a watch. [8:11] college weed 3 in the morning discussion [18:48] Barry Ritholtz: I like the idea of 5% or less. So if it does well it's meaningful and if it crashes and burns it doesn't affect your standard of living. [18:48] Barry Ritholtz: screwing around with the real [21:00] Barry Ritholtz: Ma'am, I would like to tell you this guy should be in VOO, but your husband's doing damn well. [23:35] Bill Sweet: Look dude, we can't go back... I can't go back to yesterday before I downed three pints of Guinness. [23:35] Bill Sweet: Ain't no such thing. That dog will not hunt [28:00] Ben Carlson: Good advisors will and should educate you. That is part of the job. [28:00] Ben Carlson: I don't want to completely give up on this. I want to stay informed and I want you to help inform me. [30:26] you start tacking on those zeros

[0:09] Welcome to Ask the Compound coming to [0:11] you live from Future Proof in Huntington [0:13] Beach, California. There's a million [0:15] people here, so we're going to have [0:16] multiple guests on the show today, [0:17] including mystery guest one right here. [0:19] Uh we're answering questions straight [0:21] from our compound inbox. Uh before we [0:23] get into it, today's show is sponsored [0:24] by what I'm wearing, Tropical Brothers. [0:28] Uh, I've been wearing these shirts for [0:29] years, but the first future proof here 5 [0:32] years ago, I had some of my Hawaiian [0:33] shirts on from them, and I got all kinds [0:35] of people going, "Hey, can I touch that? [0:36] What What kind of material is that? [0:38] Where did you get that shirt?" So, over [0:39] the years, we've actually collaborated [0:40] with Tropical Bros on Hawaiian shirts. [0:42] We did an animal spirits one, we did a [0:44] compound one, and we did a compound polo [0:46] golf now, which everyone here is [0:47] wearing. I'll have to get Alex one, too. [0:49] Uh, both men and women's fits. [0:51] >> Uh, I I bowled mine last night, and I [0:53] had three strikes, and I attributed a [0:56] shirt. [0:56] >> You look pretty good. Uh, tropicalb [0:57] bros.com. Click on collaborations to [1:00] find it. Um, all right. We got tons of [1:02] questions. We're going to start with the [1:03] most exciting market in the world right [1:04] now, the bond market. Let's do it. [1:06] >> Okay. Up first today, we got one from [1:07] Jackson who writes, "I don't totally [1:10] understand bonds. Is that the equivalent [1:12] of near guaranteed 5.2% annual returns?" [1:14] >> All right. So, let me give you some [1:15] context here. And we're joined by Alex [1:17] Morris today of FM Investments. [1:22] Alex has graciously promised to buy [1:23] everyone at the conference a beer later [1:25] because they just sold to T-roll price. [1:27] Is that correct? I [1:28] >> I'm not going to hold you. Thank you. [1:30] >> All right. Congratulations. [1:31] >> True. Thank you so much. [1:32] >> So, Alex is our as our resident bond [1:34] expert here. So, I I I tweeted something [1:36] out saying, "Hey, the if you just look [1:38] at the A, any sort of bond index fund, [1:40] any sort of high quality something, it's [1:41] yielding over 5% average yield of [1:44] maturity. We haven't had that in a very [1:45] long time. [1:46] >> We haven't had decade plus, [1:47] >> right? It's so people would have killed [1:48] for that yield in the 2010s, early 2020s [1:52] and there there are a lot of people who [1:54] just don't really get Duncan sometimes [1:56] you ask questions like I don't [1:57] understand how bonds work. So I'm [1:59] curious for high quality bonds, how do [2:01] you think of the starting yield? Because [2:03] the way that I see it is the stock [2:05] market is governed more by emotions. [2:06] Like what are people willing to pay for [2:07] earnings? Like you don't know it can [2:09] change. [2:09] >> Yeah. [2:10] >> The bond market is more governed by math [2:12] and numbers. So why don't you explain [2:13] what that means? [2:14] >> So if you're an individual investor and [2:15] you see 5.2% 2% yield and you buy that [2:18] bond, you will get that number assuming [2:20] it a doesn't default and b you hold it [2:23] to maturity. But maturity for some of [2:25] those bonds could be 10 15 years away [2:27] and you're not going to get 5.2% a year. [2:29] You're going to get whatever the coupon [2:30] rate is every 6 months let's say and [2:33] then at the very end all of your money [2:35] back and whatever else is necessary that [2:36] trs you up to that 5.2%. Most folks buy [2:39] bonds for ETFs which is a great way to [2:41] do it. It's more tax efficient. You [2:42] don't have to buy thousands of things on [2:44] based on QIPS. much easier. But they [2:47] rebalance, [2:47] >> right? And they're not maturing, right? [2:49] Some ETFs do, but these ETF is it's like [2:52] a constant duration to the benchm [2:56] >> Yeah. They they rebalance every week, [2:58] every month, every quarter. [2:59] >> Some bonds mature. They get that money, [3:00] they reinvest, right? [3:01] >> They have to go through some say, "Okay, [3:03] well, the risk profile now means we [3:04] should hold on to more cash than [3:06] reinvest today." Pricing isn't always [3:08] what you think it is. Bonds don't trade [3:09] on a lighted market in the same way that [3:11] stocks do where you can say this is the [3:13] exact price of Apple at the MBBO today. [3:16] You have to know where to find the bond. [3:17] You have you're going to get a different [3:18] price from different folks. Inventory, [3:20] you know, a constraints will make it [3:22] make your pricing change and the [3:23] platform you buy it on will have [3:24] different fees associated with it. [3:25] There's very little free bond buying on [3:27] Schwab, Fidelity, etc. in the same way [3:29] you see on equities. [3:30] >> So, here's the big worry and the the [3:32] other the push back I got because I was [3:33] saying, listen, call me crazy. 5% seems [3:36] like a very good deal, especially [3:37] relative to the last 15 years or so. [3:39] >> It's a great deal, Rob. So, the last 15 [3:41] years. [3:41] >> So, here's the push back I got from [3:43] people. Well, listen, after you account [3:44] for three and a half% inflation and you [3:47] know it's in taxes, it's not as great of [3:50] a yield as it thinks. So, what do you [3:51] think of that push back? Because my [3:52] thinking is every market deals with [3:54] inflation. Stock market has inflation, [3:57] gold, whatever you buy that inflation. [4:00] But I think the counter is well [4:01] inflation is the biggest risk to bonds [4:02] because you're getting a nominal amount [4:04] back. That could be. So what do you [4:05] think about that push back? Say, hey, [4:07] maybe this yield isn't as attractive as [4:09] it looks at first blush. [4:10] >> It's totally fair. Inflation is the [4:11] scourge of your bond portfolio. The goal [4:14] though is to get inflation down to 2%. [4:16] What you saw today with 25 basis point [4:19] hike, another one signaled by the end of [4:21] the year is the desire for the Fed to [4:23] get inflation back to its target. So if [4:25] you believe that inflation is at three [4:26] and a half%, it's always going to stay [4:27] there, then equities are probably a good [4:29] way to go because inflation stokes [4:31] equity values over the long run, which [4:33] good for them. But that's not what we're [4:34] going to try to do. The Fed, given its [4:36] massive balance sheet, is actually now [4:38] betting against you if that's the bet [4:39] you're going to do. If you're worried [4:40] about inflation and you still want the [4:42] return of bonds, the government has your [4:44] answer. And it's weird to say, "Hi, I'm [4:45] from the government. I'm here to help." [4:46] But here, they actually are. They offer [4:47] tips. Treasury inflation protected [4:49] securities bonds. Essentially, you buy a [4:51] treasury from them and they give you the [4:53] inflation rate to make sure you're [4:54] compensated for that. There are a [4:55] handful of other equities that that are [4:57] bond issuances that can try to mimic [4:59] features of that, but they're very [5:00] rarely. The other strange thing is that [5:02] the Fed is raising rates to try to slow [5:04] growth, right? To slow inflation. So, [5:06] it's not we're going to be in this [5:07] forever. If they succeed, guess what [5:09] happens if rates fall and growth slows? [5:12] The current environment is not going to [5:14] last forever. [5:14] >> Exactly. [5:15] >> And then that is you get the the [5:16] opposite because people are worried, [5:17] hey, if inflation keeps rising and [5:19] yields keep rising, that's going to hurt [5:20] my bond fund in the short term. [5:22] >> So, inversely related, rates go up, [5:24] prices go down. Exactly. [5:25] >> And eventually that could reverse. [5:27] >> It it not just could. The goal is it [5:29] will. If it doesn't, the Fed will have [5:31] failed miserably in its job. The Fed has [5:34] never done that and it has found a way [5:35] to succeed in achieving these goals in [5:37] the long run. You're going to see 25 [5:39] base points. If we believe the dot plot, [5:40] we're going to see 25 basis points at [5:42] the end of the year or before the end of [5:43] the year, too. And the last six words of [5:45] the statement that Kevin Worsh gave [5:47] today and gave last time, the committee [5:49] will deliver price stability. If there [5:51] was ever a more clear declarative [5:52] statement of we want rates, we want [5:54] inflation rates to come down and we will [5:56] do what we need to do with them with [5:57] with uh interest rates to achieve it. [5:59] That's it. [6:00] >> Perfect. All right. Give yourself a plug [6:01] real quick. [6:03] >> Plug FM. Well, we're talking about [6:05] inflation. You got to take a look at our [6:06] bill RBIL. It's the only ultra short [6:08] duration tips product on the market. If [6:09] you're worried about inflation, but you [6:10] still want to attract a return at 5%, [6:12] you're going to get cash rate. So, it's [6:14] closer to four today, but that's the [6:15] place to be. [6:16] >> All right. Thanks, Alex. Appreciate it. [6:17] >> Thanks so much. [6:17] >> Thank you. Uh, tell Barry he's got to [6:19] stop talking to people and get over [6:20] here. You can switch. [6:21] >> All right. [6:22] >> Thank you, Alex. Thank you. [6:27] >> All right. [6:28] >> Yeah. [6:29] >> All right. So, uh, up first today, we [6:31] got one specifically for Barry. [6:33] >> Next time Barry is on, I have a question [6:35] for him. I'm a very early career doctor, [6:38] so I've got $200,000 in student loans [6:40] and a mortgage, but I'm making a very [6:42] good salary. Not to brag, but I [6:44] inherited a vintage 1970s Omega dress [6:47] watch. I love it and I've grown to [6:49] really appreciate high-end watches. I've [6:51] got young kids. I'm basically a bogle [6:53] head and I'm fairly debt averse. At what [6:55] point can I start to seriously look at [6:57] spending on dream watches? I have a [6:59] negative net worth, but hopefully not [7:00] for long. That's from Sam. Okay. Doctor [7:03] who's in huge debt, but he's going to be [7:04] making plenty of money to make up for [7:06] it. Uh, you're more of a watch guy than [7:08] me. I'd buy like a $100 watches. You [7:10] know, you know these things more than [7:11] me. Um, don't get mad at me. My hot take [7:15] is Rolexes aren't that attractive [7:16] looking. [7:17] It's not for everybody, you know, that's [7:19] so subjective. [7:20] >> I may have someone just stole my fleece [7:22] vest for saying that. Um, so the [7:24] question is when can you spend on luxury [7:26] goods and like what point in your [7:28] financial journey is that okay? Like [7:30] when do you get permission? So, so one [7:32] of the interesting things that have [7:34] happened with a lot of my favorite dumb [7:37] bobbles, collectible cars, watches, and [7:41] you could take that sideways to art and [7:45] wine and whatever, is that they've [7:48] become an asset class kind of. [7:50] >> 2020 is like the prices took off like [7:52] crazy, right? [7:52] >> Very much so. Cuz people had cash. They [7:55] didn't know what to do. They were bored. [7:57] There was no sports on TV. Let's buy a [8:00] Rolley. Let's go buy a Porsche. Let's do [8:02] like people just had to do something [8:04] with their time and money. So my view on [8:08] watches which I've just always been [8:11] fascinated by the concept of time uh [8:14] philosophically time doesn't exist. It's [8:16] a human construct construct. There is no [8:19] chrono [8:21] 2 a.m. conversation college weed 3 in [8:23] the morning discussion. But um [8:26] >> but here's the interstellar before. [8:28] Here's the thing about watches. Nobody [8:31] needs a watch. [8:32] >> Your phone is much more accurate than a [8:35] $100,000 [8:37] PC or whatever you want to buy. [8:39] >> So, if you're going to go down that [8:42] rabbit hole, you have to ask yourself [8:44] why. [8:45] >> Like, if you want to just flex and show [8:49] off a Rolex, that's a terrible waste of [8:51] money. like these watches. We really [8:54] haven't talked about this. For the [8:56] firm's 10th anniversary, I picked up [8:59] four of these for me and my founding [9:01] partners because I thought it was a [9:04] significant [9:05] gift that I had learned from a private [9:07] equity guy who 20 years ago went out and [9:10] bought 50 of these and put them in a [9:12] safe. Every time someone becomes a [9:13] partner, they get a watch. So, I love [9:16] that idea. What model was that? [9:17] >> So, this is a 2004 Daytona. Um, and I'll [9:22] spare you the Rolex model number. And [9:24] then I engraved it with everybody's [9:26] name. So, it's not just an expensive [9:30] bobble. It's a meaningful gift, right? [9:33] Like it just logo. You need to buy new [9:35] ones. [9:35] >> Well, that's right. I got to go get four [9:37] more. [9:38] >> Sam said he inherited it, right? [9:40] Probably maybe from a maybe a [9:42] grandparent. Like maybe the idea is he [9:44] can give it on to the next generation or [9:45] something that way. That that's the the [9:48] next thing is you're going to buy a [9:49] pricey watch. Don't do it for the flex. [9:52] Do it because you hit a milestone [9:55] professionally or you turn pick a number [9:59] 50 60 70 whatever the big fat round [10:02] number is 40 um rather than have him go [10:06] out and spend 20 $25,000 on a watch. I [10:09] would much rather see someone like this [10:11] doctor pay down that debt, especially if [10:15] it's 7 8 9% cuz student loan debt tends [10:18] to be high. Um, focus on building his [10:23] practice, building his um, real estate [10:26] portfolio, his stock portfolio. [10:29] There are a ton of watches for under [10:32] $3,000. Under $2,000. [10:34] >> That's what I was going to ask you. [10:35] What's the the coolest watch for the the [10:37] price? So there's a a handful of long [10:39] jeans the toe PRX there's a run of [10:43] things uh I I like glassa which has a [10:47] range from you know $1,000 up to 10 20 [10:50] grand. Now when you buy most watches [10:54] like you buy most cars they're going to [10:56] depreciate in value but if you buy [10:59] certain like this watch is worth more [11:02] than I paid for it four years ago 5 [11:04] years ago. [11:05] >> That wasn't the point right? [11:06] >> That was never the point. if you're [11:07] buying it as an investment. [11:09] >> But his his main question to me is as [11:11] long as you're paying down that debt and [11:13] you're saving and you're putting money [11:14] into the 41k or whatever and like you [11:15] have that stuff, then spend your money [11:17] as on as stupid stuff as you want. I [11:18] don't watches, shoes, clothes, whatever. [11:20] >> As long as you have your stuff taken [11:21] care of. I if you have a plan, if you've [11:23] thought this out and you're sticking to [11:26] the plan and there's still plenty of [11:27] money left over, [11:28] >> spending on whatever you want to spend, [11:29] >> you want to go buy a a Rolex for so uh I [11:33] have a few versions of of different [11:36] watches. The Batgirl is a GMT. [11:41] 10 years ago, they're about 78 grand. [11:43] Now, they're about 11 grand new. If you [11:45] could get on your uh authorized dealers [11:48] list and buy one new for 11 grand. I got [11:52] one two years ago. I don't know what [11:54] it's worth today 15 16 in the middle of [11:56] the pandemic. They were 20 25. It got [11:59] stupid. Um so you want to park a little [12:02] cash and steal the if you buy it right. [12:05] If you buy a car right you won't lose [12:07] money on it. [12:08] >> Bull market conversations as always. All [12:09] right. Next question. [12:10] >> All right. I saw a cool Rolex the other [12:11] day. The Milgos. [12:13] >> Sure. [12:13] >> That one's cool. has a lightning bolt [12:15] second. [12:16] >> So you can buy that watch on the [12:18] secondary market at places like Krono 24 [12:21] Hodinki probably for 20 30% below list. [12:25] So they haven't retained their value cuz [12:28] people aren't crazy about them. There's [12:30] a run of things like the Explorer, but [12:32] some of the classic ones and the [12:34] precious metal ones move up to ever rose [12:37] gold, titanium, white gold. They have a [12:40] tendency to hold their value because [12:41] half the value of the watch is $4,000 [12:45] $5,000 an ounce gold. [12:47] >> All right. Well, [12:48] >> then we'll have a watch next episode. [12:50] All right. [12:51] >> Uh up next, we got one from Steve. So, [12:53] according to the Pew Institute, about [12:55] 51% of wealth in the USA is held by baby [12:58] boomers. I'm a retired baby boomer uh of [13:01] three years. I know you have talked [13:04] about the K-shaped economy, but are [13:05] there any stats regarding how retirement [13:07] accounts from baby boomers continue to [13:09] feed the market regardless of any [13:11] geopolitical events since the GFC? [13:13] >> Okay, so I checked his numbers. He's [13:14] right here. So according to the Fed, $90 [13:17] trillion out of 174 trillion in USA is [13:20] owned by the baby boomers. Add 20 [13:22] trillion from the silent generation, [13:23] that's probably going to go to the baby [13:24] boomers. We're talking twothirds of all [13:26] wealth essentially is is older people. [13:29] So, we've gotten the question for years, [13:31] are baby boomers going to crash the [13:32] stock market when they decide to sell. [13:34] This one is asking, are they actually [13:35] propping up the economy? Because if you [13:37] think about it, what is it, 40% of all [13:39] homeowners have no mortgage? That's [13:40] mostly baby boomers, right? So, they [13:42] don't have a lot of debt. They don't [13:43] care about that. Um, they have way [13:44] bigger portfolios than they possibly [13:46] could have thought. Way more home [13:47] equity. So, this I don't know, this kind [13:50] of makes sense to me a little bit. But, [13:52] >> so, two big push backs to it. First, [13:55] this reminds me a little bit of the cash [13:57] on the sidelines claim. Oh, there's 7 [13:59] trillion in cash on sidelines. That's [14:01] going to power the market. That's not [14:03] how trading of stocks work, [14:05] >> right? [14:05] >> I own a million dollars worth of Apple. [14:08] You want to buy a million dollars worth [14:09] of Apple. I have a million dollars worth [14:11] of stock. You have a million dollars [14:12] worth of cash. We do the trade. Now, you [14:16] have a million dollars worth of stock. I [14:17] have a million dollars worth of cash. [14:19] That's how sales work. So, there's still [14:21] the same million dollars on the [14:23] sideline. So, that doesn't work. Second, [14:27] if if we all work with clients who do [14:30] estate planning and are thinking about [14:32] what they're going to do and the two [14:35] biggest things they plan on doing with [14:37] their money is a [14:39] >> at the stepped up basis cost transferred [14:41] to their next generation, right? [14:43] >> So, their kids get round number $5 [14:47] million worth of VO or Apple, Amazon. [14:50] >> The top 10% holds 80% of the stock [14:52] market. That's right. most of it's [14:54] getting passed down. [14:55] >> So when that gets passed down, the kids [14:57] now have this giant stepped up value, [15:00] there's no reason to hit the bid because [15:02] they can let that appreciate and they're [15:04] starting at a very high level. So if the [15:08] if it was different, if the rules were [15:10] different, you would have to liquidate [15:12] that portfolio to pay part of the taxes. [15:14] So it transfers with no tax hit until [15:18] they sell it. [15:18] >> I think people put a little too much [15:19] into this. I I I tend to agree. [15:21] >> Right. And then the other thing is [15:24] we've been watching uh I'm a big fan of [15:27] intervivos [15:29] transfers instead of waiting to that's [15:32] Latin for while you're alive. [15:35] Intervivos. [15:36] >> So rather than do this do this from the [15:41] touche. Um rather than do this from the [15:44] grave. Hey, if your kids want to buy a [15:47] house or if you want to pay for your [15:50] grandkids college, why not enjoy them [15:54] living with your money, taking advantage [15:57] of it. So, [15:58] >> yeah, Nick was making that point last [16:00] week. [16:00] >> So, we're we're seeing a lot of that [16:01] take place and you know that hasn't [16:03] crashed the market. And then lastly, as [16:07] much as the it is always true, the [16:10] oldest generation owns most of the [16:12] wealth because they've had the longest [16:14] time to work, the longest time, [16:15] >> millennials will be the boomers one day. [16:17] Same thing, [16:17] >> and millennials are now the biggest [16:20] generation as a matter of numbers. Do [16:22] you remember all the stories about the [16:26] boomers are going to be the brokeest [16:27] generation, then the millennials are [16:29] going to be the brokeest generation? [16:32] Everybody, [16:32] >> we talk about the Gen Z. Guess what? in [16:34] the 2030s when the boomers sell their [16:35] houses, Gen Z is going to buy houses, [16:36] too. [16:37] >> So, [16:37] >> now Gen Alpha, though, they really are [16:38] going to be No, [16:40] >> they're a little behind the eightball [16:41] because everything has gone up so much [16:43] in price. And [16:45] >> we're recording this, rates are now a [16:46] little higher than they were uh this [16:48] morning because of the Fed hike. [16:50] >> Yeah. Plus, you have the boomers are [16:51] d-risking, too, right? It's not all 100% [16:53] equity portfolios, 6040 portfolios, [16:55] >> but they're not downsizing the houses [16:58] yet. And until that happens, look, [17:01] following the financial crisis, we [17:03] underbuilt single family homes, [17:05] depending on which study you want to [17:07] believe, 3, four, 5 million houses. [17:09] Until that backlog is worked off, it's [17:11] going to be a problem. So, I I'm not a [17:14] fan of any of these giant, oh, this is [17:17] really just the stock market's a Ponzi [17:20] scheme, and when the boomers retire, [17:22] it'll all crash. Boomers were retiring [17:24] 10,000 people a day. This has been going [17:27] on for years. is remember the boomers [17:29] started 1946. [17:31] Like I straddle the I'm in the valley [17:34] between the Gen X and the Boomers. So [17:36] I've been hearing this nonsense for [17:38] years. The Boomers are going to do this. [17:40] The Boomers going to it. It hasn't [17:42] happened. [17:42] >> It's like an 18-year gap or something. [17:44] My dad's at the top end of it. Yeah. [17:46] >> Think about it. The baby boom came about [17:48] when 40 million GIS returned from World [17:50] War II. Got to see their wives for the [17:53] first time in however many years. And 9 [17:55] months later, a lot of babies were born. [17:58] By 1955, 1960, that whole boom ethos had [18:03] faded. And yet, we still call that [18:05] generation boomers. [18:06] >> Now, it would have a meaningful impact [18:07] on the economy though if every baby [18:10] boomer decided they were going to [18:12] subscribe to the die with zero thing [18:14] instead of passing on their retirement [18:15] accounts to their their kids, right? I [18:17] mean, if in mass that became a thing, [18:19] >> I don't know what's the appetite for [18:20] stocks, houses, and whatever other crap [18:23] they have that they want to sell. just [18:25] rather than keeping the money in the [18:26] market if it was essentially being spent [18:27] on the [18:27] >> money has to go somewhere. [18:29] >> Yeah. [18:29] >> Right. And you know, idle money has a [18:31] tendency to find something. Yeah. Ever [18:34] walk around with some cash in your [18:36] pocket? Guess what? [18:38] >> You know, idle money seems to find [18:40] what's what's the old line? Uh uh idle [18:43] hands are the devil's work. It'll find a [18:46] place to be spent. [18:47] >> Yeah. All right. One more for Barry. [18:48] >> Okay. Up next, we got one from Fred. My [18:50] wife and I are in our mid30s currently [18:53] with a $1.2 $22 million portfolio [18:55] anchored to VT and BND. [18:57] >> Pretty good for your 30s. [18:58] >> Yeah. Uh we maintain a concentrated [19:00] sleeve 15 to 20% of the portfolio in [19:03] individual speculative stocks. I tell [19:05] myself this satisfies the play money [19:07] itch without endangering the core. With [19:09] that in mind, do you think there's a [19:11] meaningful long-term difference between [19:12] deliberately keeping a small or moderate [19:14] speculative sleeve and entirely and [19:16] sticking entirely to index funds? Is [19:19] there an intellectually honest way to [19:20] run a satellite portfolio or is it [19:23] almost always post hawk rationalization? [19:26] Thanks for all you do. [19:26] >> Okay, so in your book you write about [19:28] what do you call it? Cowboy accounts. [19:29] >> Cowboy accounts. Exactly. [19:30] >> What do you think is too much for a [19:32] cowboy account? [19:33] >> So I like the idea of 5% or less. So if [19:36] it does well it's meaningful and if it [19:39] crashes and burns it doesn't affect your [19:40] standard of living. if it's 3% or 5.5% [19:45] like I don't think it should be 30% 20% [19:47] 10%. Um it should so the whole purpose [19:51] of that behavioral hack is to scratch [19:55] that itch for the person who goes to a [19:58] cocktail party or a barbecue and loves [20:01] talking about stocks. Now admittedly [20:03] that's a bull market sort of vibe. Um, [20:07] but if that's what you you dig and if [20:11] you pull aside enough money that you get [20:13] to play with it. Um, I have a Playboy [20:16] account, a cowboy account that I play [20:18] with. Playboy account is something [20:20] different. Uh, I have a cowboy account [20:22] that I play with and the other day I [20:24] looked at it and I'm like, "Oh my god, [20:26] this is like less than 2% of my [20:28] portfolio." And when I think about my [20:32] personal account, this is probably half [20:34] of my mental bandwidth. You got to give [20:36] that up. [20:37] >> You spent all your time thinking about [20:38] this little piece of your portfolio. [20:40] >> But which is its purpose cuz it means I [20:43] am not screwing around with the real [20:45] >> and and this in Fred's question here, [20:47] >> he has the index fund to compare it to [20:49] as well. So if he's doing 20% of the [20:51] portfolio, he can say like am I actually [20:52] beating the index? Is it worth my time [20:54] and energy? Is it worth the worry? Or do [20:56] I need to rightsize it? So like he has [20:58] the offset he can look at. So if he's [21:00] looking at it from a purely performance [21:02] perspective, two things he has to keep [21:05] in mind. The first is any given year [21:08] less than half of active managers beat [21:10] their benchmark. 5 years it's 20%, 10 [21:13] years it's less than 10% and by the time [21:15] you get to 20 years a handful of people [21:17] and you know them, Buffett, Lynch, [21:20] Danoff, you know, go down the the run of [21:22] that. So the odds are against them. But [21:24] then you listen to what um I think it [21:26] was Ken French from Dartmouth and [21:30] someone had asked the question about ARC [21:32] and he goes, "We don't know if someone [21:34] is lucky or skillful until they have a [21:36] 20-year track record." So he could shoot [21:38] the lights out for 10 years. Was he just [21:41] lucky? [21:42] >> There's been a lot of people who have [21:43] picked some very good stocks lately. Is [21:44] it their is it their skill or is it the [21:46] market? [21:47] >> Were they just overweighted in semis and [21:48] they spent 10 years underperforming and [21:51] now they're crushing it? So it's really [21:53] hard to tell. So even if he beats the [21:57] market for 5 or 10 years, [22:00] you have to think of it on riskadjusted [22:02] returns. What's the beta of this stock? [22:04] What is the best case scenario? Does he [22:07] really think this 20 200 grand of the [22:09] million is going to turn into 20 [22:11] million? If the odds are against that, [22:14] you're spending a lot of time and energy [22:16] and you're not getting a lot of back for [22:18] the risk you're taking. I prefer to see [22:21] people roll that down to 5%. Every now [22:24] and then I'll speak at some conference, [22:26] some event, and a husband and wife will [22:28] come up to me and the husband will hand [22:32] me a paper and I'll look at he's got [22:34] United Health and he's got Microsoft and [22:36] he's got Amazon, he's got like 50 stocks [22:39] and really doing well. And the wife [22:42] says, tell him he should be indexing. I [22:44] look at the portfolio. I go, how long [22:45] you been doing this? 40 years. Ma'am, [22:48] your husband's the exception. He's done [22:51] really. I go, "What'd you do in ' 87?" [22:52] He goes, "I was a buyer." 2000 buyer. [22:55] 0809. Big buyer. [22:58] >> Ma'am, I would like to tell you this guy [22:59] should be in VU, but your husband's [23:02] doing damn well. [23:03] >> That's every investor's dream is to be [23:05] told that from [23:06] >> the other thousand people who come up [23:08] and hand me like, why do I see a lot of [23:11] bankrupt companies? Why is there a five [23:13] letter symbol with a Q at the end? He's [23:16] like, I really don't want to sell it. [23:17] >> No, no one brags about the losses. Only [23:18] the losses. [23:19] >> That's right. So, you know, what's the [23:22] upside? What's the downside? You have to [23:23] think about it in risk adjusted returns, [23:26] not just, hey, I did really well last [23:28] year. Okay. Were you lucky or were you [23:30] skillful? And that's really a [23:32] challenging question for most individual [23:34] investors to ask. [23:35] >> All right, Barry, appreciate it. [23:37] >> Yeah, we're going to swap you out for [23:38] Bill Sweet. [23:39] >> By by the way, I just want to point out [23:40] I thanks for wearing a shirt. [23:42] >> I had to wear my most Ben. [23:44] >> That's very nice. I like it. [23:45] >> Original vintage. So, [23:46] >> it's very nice. [23:47] >> Yeah, that's [23:48] >> I like the texture. Yeah, [23:50] >> it it it's it's as close to Ben wear as [23:53] I I have. [23:54] >> Yeah. [23:54] >> All right, get Bill over here. [23:55] >> We approve. [23:56] >> All right, Bill. Sweet. Bill, you're up. [24:01] >> All right, let's bring in uh everyone's [24:03] favorite Roth IRA expert, Bill Sweet. [24:05] >> Bill, welcome. [24:06] >> What's shaking, gentlemen? [24:08] >> We're shaking and baking on the West [24:09] Coast. [24:09] >> We're having fun. Good to be in person. [24:10] All right, we got questions just for [24:12] you. All right, up first we got one from [24:14] Josh. I've spent years actively trading [24:17] inside rollover IAS that originated from [24:19] old 401ks. Some positions held a few [24:22] days or weeks, others over a year, uh, [24:25] rebalancing, etc. Always assuming my [24:28] discipline around holding periods [24:30] mattered. As I get closer to retirement, [24:32] it recently hit me that when I [24:34] eventually take distributions, none of [24:35] that matters. It all comes out as [24:38] ordinary income regardless. Have I [24:40] essentially been wasting my tax loss [24:41] harvesting instincts in a qualified [24:44] account? And is there a broader lesson [24:45] here about the types of investing [24:47] behavior psychologically and [24:49] strategically actually uh belong inside [24:52] qualified accounts since capital gains [24:54] treatment basically disappears? [24:56] >> It's a long one. [24:58] >> Yeah. So is he basically confused? Was [25:00] he confused the whole time about how [25:01] these work essentially? [25:02] >> Right. Uh my my my answer would be look [25:05] dude, we can't go back. I cannot go back [25:07] in time. I can't go back and enjoy my [25:09] 20s. I can't go back to my kids are [25:11] young playing on the beach. I can't go [25:13] back to yesterday before I down three [25:15] pints of Guinness. Therefore, what I [25:17] would recommend is look, look at the [25:18] situation you've got now. And yeah, Ben, [25:20] you're right. There's no capital gains. [25:22] There's no income tax if everything's [25:24] held in qualified accounts. And that [25:25] gives you a lot of freedom of maneuver. [25:26] So, you can move around. We moved around [25:28] the country this week. We can move [25:29] around our assets within an IRA, [25:32] >> right? I I I don't So, he was thinking [25:34] about tax loss harvesting within this. [25:36] >> Yeah. No. Ain't no Ain't no such thing. [25:38] That dog will not hunt. [25:39] >> Yes. [25:40] >> Yeah. [25:40] >> The good news is no harm, no foul, I [25:42] guess. [25:42] >> Yeah. Exactly. [25:44] >> Right. [25:44] >> Exactly. So, one of the things we talk [25:46] about a lot, Edward Holtz, I'm a company [25:48] man, is we talk about asset location. [25:51] Where does it make sense to own this [25:52] specific asset? To me, gents, an IRA, a [25:55] tax qualified account. Bonds, you're [25:57] paying ordinary income anyway. That's a [25:59] great place to hold bonds. A trend [26:01] following mechanism, right? Like we have [26:02] gold tender. We roll that out for our [26:04] clients. It moves up down with the [26:05] market. and it trades in out. Tax [26:07] qualified account is perfect for that, [26:09] right? Because you're not paying gains [26:10] as you go along. So thinking about where [26:12] do you hold assets? That's that's the [26:14] conversation I would have hopefully with [26:16] an adviser to kind of structure what's [26:17] going on here, [26:18] >> right? Yeah. So maybe maybe now that [26:20] he's taking it out, there's another [26:21] conversation to be had. [26:22] >> Exactly. Exactly. So yeah, no capital [26:24] gains and you're looking at ordinary [26:26] income. So that becomes something you [26:28] can layer on in a distribution plan when [26:30] the time comes. [26:31] >> All right. Good stuff, Bill. And [26:33] >> I didn't give Bill these questions ahead [26:34] of time. Usually I do. [26:35] >> Yeah, [26:36] >> he's on a company man. He's dropped him. [26:37] He's a trooper. [26:38] >> Dropped him on me on the beach. [26:39] >> He's a pro. Even after going out to the [26:40] bars, [26:41] >> we got Miami Vice. [26:42] >> What a guy. Amazing. [26:43] >> We got one more question. [26:44] >> Okay. Up. Uh, last but not least, [26:46] >> by the way, John is doing a great job [26:47] bouncing over there. [26:49] >> People trying to walk into our shot. [26:50] There's a million people going on right [26:51] now. You hear? [26:52] >> I totally walked here to dap it up to [26:54] Duncan and John tackled me to the [26:56] ground. [26:57] >> Yeah. Uh, yeah. At least uh 40 people [26:59] have tried to walk into the shot. [27:00] >> We have We have one more. [27:01] >> Okay. Uh, last but not least, we got one [27:03] from Derek. I'm in my mid20s, work in [27:06] tech, and I'm considering hiring an [27:08] adviser. My taxable brokerage account [27:10] has grown to a size where I wouldn't [27:11] want the market to take back what I've [27:13] built. I'm confident in my allocation [27:15] decisions, almost confident in their [27:17] assertions, [27:18] >> uh, but they have certainly benefited [27:20] from the current bull market. I avoid [27:22] meme stocks and margin gambling, but [27:24] when a big downturn comes, a seasoned [27:26] adviser could manage downside risk more [27:28] deliberately. This is where I'm stuck. [27:30] The cost of being wrong feels more real [27:32] than ever. At the same time, I've [27:35] learned more about markets, geopolitics, [27:37] and economics than I could have imagined [27:39] by managing this portfolio myself. Red [27:42] days make me more disciplined and [27:43] grounded. If I get an adviser and free [27:46] up mental bandwidth for career growth or [27:48] my startup, I lose that ongoing [27:50] education and skin in the game mindset. [27:52] At what point does the firstirhand [27:54] experience stop being a value ad? And do [27:57] you factor this trade-off into [27:59] conversations with younger clients? [28:00] >> I like this question. This is very good. [28:02] He's thinking about this totally the [28:04] right way. [28:04] >> Very self-aware. [28:06] >> Now, here's the here's the thing. You It [28:07] doesn't have to be one or the other. [28:10] >> Good advisors will and should educate [28:12] you. That is part of the job. Yeah. [28:14] >> That's one of the reasons that content [28:15] is such a big part of what we do. [28:17] >> Yeah. [28:17] >> And our ad like we you can outsource the [28:20] expertise, right? The tax planning, the [28:22] estate planning, all that stuff. Like [28:23] you I'm using you because you're an [28:25] expert on [28:26] >> but you don't have to necessarily [28:27] outsource your knowledge of what's going [28:29] on. Now, we have certain clients who [28:30] that's their whole thing is like [28:32] just handle. I want you guys to do this [28:34] for me. I have other better stuff to do. [28:36] I have other time constraints. But we [28:37] have other clients [28:39] >> who pepper our advisers and pepper our [28:41] investment professionals with questions, [28:42] right? [28:42] >> Because they really are interested in [28:43] this stuff. And that's one of the [28:44] reasons I love the markets because you [28:46] do get to pay attention to all this [28:47] other stuff going on, the geopolitics [28:49] and the economics and what's going on [28:51] with individual companies and it's it's [28:53] really interesting. I for me so just be [28:56] it doesn't have to be one or the other. [28:57] can find an adviser who will use [29:00] education as a big part of what their [29:02] role is. [29:03] >> Totally. I was talking to Nail Bear uh [29:05] who's he was with Future Proof until [29:07] last year, jumped out to form an RA cuz [29:09] he loves these conversations, Ben, that [29:12] we're having with this client right now. [29:13] The thing I keep thinking about though [29:15] in the best case scenario is you have a [29:17] relationship with your adviser. They [29:19] understand you and they understand the [29:20] markets and you have confidence in what [29:22] they're telling you. However, the thing [29:24] gentlemen I always think about, it might [29:25] be apocryphal, but there's this Fidelity [29:27] study. The two types of investors that [29:29] outperformed everybody else were who? [29:31] There are two types that just kicked ass [29:32] everywhere else. Was it men? Was it [29:34] women? Was it old people? Young people. [29:35] What do you think? [29:36] >> I'd say older women. [29:38] >> Older women. [29:39] >> It's not fair, Bill. I know the answer. [29:40] >> Yeah, Ben knows the answer. So, it was [29:42] two types. One was people who had moved [29:43] and they changed their address. So, they [29:45] weren't getting their account [29:46] statements. Therefore, they weren't [29:47] trading based on what happened to the [29:49] streets this week. The second type was [29:51] dead people. If you're dead, you're not [29:53] trading your account. You just leave it [29:54] alone. So, paradoxically, activity is [29:57] not a proxy for better returns. In fact, [29:59] usually it's a detriment. So, it's [30:01] striking that balance to your point, [30:02] Ben, scratching that itch. And a lot of [30:04] people, they just want somebody to talk [30:05] to about their [30:06] >> If you have an adviser who's not [30:08] educating you, you have to find someone [30:10] else. [30:10] >> Yeah. Exactly. If you don't have faith [30:12] in what they're telling you, Yeah. it's [30:13] time to [30:14] >> But I'm going to be the exception of the [30:15] rule. [30:16] >> Oh, yeah. You're going to beat the [30:17] market. [30:17] >> Yeah. [30:18] >> But but as Dererick looks for advisers, [30:20] that's a big that's what I would tell [30:21] them. like I I don't want to completely [30:23] give up on this. I want to stay informed [30:25] and I want you to help inform me. [30:26] >> It's always going to be a mix. And just [30:28] in my experience, Jensen, this gets [30:30] harder as as you as you move on in age, [30:32] right? [30:32] >> Well, and we had a question last week, [30:34] the more money you have, obviously, the [30:36] more serious you're going to be about, [30:37] >> you start tacking on those zeros, those [30:39] draw downs really hurt. But the other [30:40] thing is the the market's dynamic, [30:42] right? what we're talking about right [30:44] now, freaking drone swarms and augentic [30:46] AI. This is not the language that [30:48] somebody usually in their 60s7s can [30:50] speak, right? The world stops making [30:52] sense to them at some point. And I do [30:54] think having that crossgenerational [30:55] conversation is extremely important, [30:57] right? And it's not that the younger [30:59] people have more answers, but I think [31:00] they're more open to the world as it [31:02] exists, not what existed 20, 30, 40 [31:04] years ago. [31:05] >> Yeah. I don't even know what Jenz's are [31:07] saying half the time. [31:08] >> What did you just say right now? [31:11] >> All right. Good stuff. We did it with a [31:13] million people around. [31:14] >> We're doing it live. [31:15] >> Yep. Uh remember, check out [31:16] tropicalbros.com for the new compound [31:18] collab. These are not just wine shirts. [31:20] They're polos. [31:21] >> Again, men and women, [31:23] >> people are tight. [31:24] >> Don't tell Nicole, but they did say the [31:26] women said they wanted a more women fit [31:27] with our clothes. We have the women's [31:29] fit for this, right? [31:30] >> It's true. [31:31] >> Yeah, [31:31] >> it's very nice. [31:32] >> Yeah, [31:32] >> I'm wearing it because I'm spelt. [31:34] >> You can pull it off. I can't. [31:36] >> If you have a question for us, ask the [31:37] compound show@gmail.com. [31:39] We'll see you next time. Thanks, guys. [31:40] Thanks, everyone.