Outside of governments forcing you, there is literally 0 reason to buy bonds EVER

the US government is supposed to guarantee US bonds u fucking cunt. the fact that this is even in question now means the US is fucking dead as a serious country

Bonds are Anon Babbletard level of investment.
No wonder they are being forced here, since this board is being raided by Anon Babbletards left and right.

1y time frame

Disregarding the retarded premise, should have bought bitcoin instead

also:

unpreform

you're ESL aren't you

I bought gold but not all investors are like that. the price of gold can go down at any moment, therefore there’s risk. bonds are guaranteed risk free.

If by esl you mean english scholarly laureate then yes

There is no such thing as risk free

The only risk with bonds is defaulting on the debt. If that happens to the US, the only thing worth a fuck would be gold, guns, pussy, and land.

Nope there is also opportunity cost, ask all the people holding the 10y when it was 2%

it’s the only asset that’s a guaranteed earning.

No, it isn't. There are a wide variety of assets that have similar properties yet aren't bonds.

opportunity cost is not risk, and the 10y notes falling in value is due to interest rate risk (which bonds do have until maturity).

stable return
lets say you're a boomer with a networth of 1.5 mil and you just want to live off guaranteed dividends. 4% return is decent. it doesn't pace inflation but there's not much downside

I'd say it is, you are paying a premium for no reason other than you are a massive pussy. A pussy premium

i buy 1 month US treasuries because they pay about the same interest as a high yield savings account except they are exempt from state and local taxes.

That's not *risk*, that's underperformance. Risk is *the probability of losing your money due to something you can't control*, not *losing out on getting even more money*.

I guess you could argue that bonds have a higher risk of underperformance, but that's generally not how financial people view risk. To quote our lord and savior Buffet, the first rule is to never lose money and the second rule is to never forget the first rule.

If gold is too volatile for your taste I don't recommend investing

Unless you panic sell the bottom you do not lose money, this is just the market timing arguement again

If you bought during 2000, it would've taken a decade to get your money back with equities. If you bought during 1929, it would've taken almost three decades to get your money back (all while you have to live with huge drawbacks). I know it's been a while since we've entered a real bear market, but the pain of holding equities at a seemingly perpetual loss is real.

if you bought in 2000 and kept dca-ing in on the way down you would be profitable way sooner. who the fuck just buys then stops when its going down

DCA is just buying over time, if you have no income or spare cash then you can't DCA. Doing the whole 10% bond 90% equity portfolio and continually rebalancing it every year forces you to take profits when equities overperform and dollar cost average when they underperform.

this post just tells me your poor and bonds aren't for you

if you're retarded then you lose money

ok there einstein. if you dont have money to dca in then dont buy lump sum and use the money you have to DCA

And what happens when you run out of cash to DCA? Unless you're the fed, you don't have unlimited capital and your income is not guaranteed. God forbid you're forced to SELL those equities at a loss when you're laid off and have no money to buy bread (the alternative being to borrow against it in a volatile market, which sounds nice but would've killed you during the 1929-1955 market). Going all in equities is betting that there won't be another 1929, because if there is you're fucked.

And what happens when you run out of cash to DCA?

then you wait. if you're forced to sell it means you invested money you cant afford to lose and no strategy will save you if you're selling bottoms (when you should be buying or at worst holding). even if you time absolute tops if you used your money over the span of a few years you'll be profitable rather quickly

if you're forced to sell it means you invested money you cant afford to lose

The amount of money you can afford to lose changes depending on the total amount of money you have and the income you generate. Trust me, if you have no bonds in your portfolio, the market tanks 85%, you lose your job, 25% of banks in the country go under, and food spikes in price due to an unforeseen crisis (dust bowl), you're going to be forced to sell shares eventually. That may sound apocalyptic, but it's exactly what happened 96 years ago.

no investment plan is foolproof, you're better off being partly in metals than bonds if youre worried about a crash. see how the bonds of people in weimar republic were doing

you're better off being partly in metals than bonds if youre worried about a crash

lol it would be a shame if the government were to force you to sell that gold to them (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102)

anyways your investment plan should be to secure your wealth from risk and grow it as much as you can, if a 1929 collapse destroys your portfolio so much you're forced to lose money, you're taking on too much risk. Regarding weimar hyperinflation, that's a whole other set of risk that actually would be great for equities, since equities would rise with the collapse of the dollar.

id rather have gold than bonds in a currency thats hyperinflated. some of that gold you might save wheres the other one is a sure loss

Yes, I agree with you there. Bonds die in hyperinflationary environments, gold and equities prosper. Equities die in economic failures, where bonds shine and gold may (depending on demand) shine. Ideally you want to be exposed to equities, bonds, and gold, with you living off the bonds' income so you're not forced to liquidate your other positions. When you enter Weimar mode, just borrow against your equities/gold because the asset your borrowing is going to become worthless anyways.

I work for an institutional investor and they fucking love bonds as they move more or less in lockstep with their liabilities
if you don't have any such responsibilities then yes bonds aren't an attractive investment

Ideally you want to be exposed to equities, bonds, and gold

I'll agree with you on that. I'd add crypto and real estate to that too. crypto less mandatory but if you're somewhat savy you can use a small portion of your investments for it, if not you're better off not touching it