Help with usury

[Anonymous No.56411464]

What are some good resource to learn about the role of different debt instruments in a portfolio?

Corporate vs government
Fixed-rate vs floating
Hedged vs unhedged
The role of capital notes and hybrids

[Anonymous No.56411571]

>>56411464
It depends, really. Do you want to be able to perform the optimization (mathematical) so as to be able to make a "provably" optimally composed portfolio or do you want to not lose the money?

[Anonymous No.56411602]

>>56411571
Not looking to have an ultra low risk investment that will remain standing even if everything crashes: I predict that there will be massive levels of inflation into 2024, and if this is paired with/followed by declines in equities, I want something that is negatively correlated, so that that I can cash in and rebalance.

[Anonymous No.56411637]

>>56411602
Now, now, let's not be so hasty! While you verbally say that, saying that is expected of every risk-manager. Of course, nobody is going to *say* that he wants an "ultra-high-risk" investment. Yes, ideally, we'd all want infinite returns with no risk at all. And maybe some chocolate-chip ice-cream on the side.
However, you have, if we were to reason this out, a proof of 2=1 in your mind, meaning you're provably insane. You will, of course, not agree to this proposition either. In fact, a specific part of your pre-frontal cortex is being triggered by these words right now that causes a small fragment of an intuitive min-max algorithm to be run, which you experience as, roughly, if were were to put it into words "grr, the bad man says bullshit, let me come up with the perfect retort that will quote-unquote 'defeat him'."
The fact that this occurs is wholly outside of your conscious control too, and denying it, though you might try, is pointless. And now you're thinking to say: "what are you talking about, you're just nuts, I said no such thing". Had I not made this specification, you, however, would very much have said just this, and had I not, in turn, made specification preceding that, you'd just have stuck to the "strategy" of "trying to defeat me (intellectually)", which would have manifested in your mind as you thinking of, let's say, some ROI- or convexity-analysis. I'm joking; you would not have actually thought of convexity-analysis - that's just un' dem high-falutin' words (terms; not words) which we like to name-drop to show how smart and educated we are.
How do I know this? Well, you listed off & and name-dropped a number of said high-falutin' terms - initialized by the, in itself, high-falutin' term "debt instruments" - like "corporate vs government", "fixed-rate vs floating".
Here's your thought now: "well, of course, why would I not be familiar with the appropriate terms, these are the designations", and similar such faux-Latin verbiage.

[Anonymous No.56411666]

>>56411602
And now that I'm making a second post due to my exceeding the 2000-character post-limit, you are thinking of "defeating me" by "attacking" this fact.
I can outsmart literally any human on this planet by far. Your mind is also incapable of accepting this fact, this is not under your conscious control, despite you thinking it is. Oh, what fun.
In any case: your thinking is, roughly, that you'll "get a bit of everything" - a strategy no more sophisticated than what is recommended by advertisements on Youtube for retail brokers like TD Ameritrade, eToro, etc., take your pick. Your little mind is now thinking of trying to geographically locate the gravity of the userbase of the aforementioned brokers and thereby contriving to call me a "poor", isn't it? Yes, I very much can read your mind.
The strategy of "diversification", while sounding "sophisticated", is only sound within a fairly specific parameter-space which you do not know about and do not understand - "you... you think you know everything, don't you?", he thought, internally tearfully, and now that I said that, it morphed into the more "self-assured" "you clearly think you are very intelligent".
On what basis that is any more sophisticated than "taking two things instead of one, and 2 is better than 1" do you propose these investments? Why are "corporate" bonds or "debt instruments" better than government bonds? Because one's from a company and one's from the government? The government prints the money and the Fed's job, at least according to its bizarre self-understanding, is to up- and down-regulate the economy by fucking up the flow of money selectively.
Have no fear, those people are just as deluded, if not more - they really should know better but don't. In any case: those two are not negatively correlated, that's an illusion, except in fairly technical circumstances with which you need not concern yourself.

[Anonymous No.56411667]

>>56411637
Bro, I'm asking for advice because I only understand these concepts at a superficial level.

[Anonymous No.56411673]

>>56411464
My late grand uncle once told me a life lesson: Never do business with a Jew.

God have his soul.

[Anonymous No.56411674]

>>56411667
I'm sorry, friend. I sometimes get carried away and fall into a semi-hypnotic state, please take no offense. I sometimes get a bit mean, my sincerest apologies. I'm not exactly sane anymore. That said, I do know a lot about finance.

[Anonymous No.56411691]

>>56411667
So anyway, to answer you question: corporate bonds are very, very, very risky, and I wouldn't get into anything but US government bonds either. And even in the US-case, you have more risk than people think. I'm not one of those "hyperinflation tomorrow"-guys, but the problem is that they really can inflate you away 1940s-style.
Fixed-rate vs. floating doesn't matter that much, though fixed-rate is obviously better nowadays. Nobody is going to suddenly pay 8% because the economy is so good. 5% on US bonds is the best you can do, really.
The problem with hedges is that at some point, the hedges fail too, like with AIG: people bought that CDS-insurance, but the insurance-company itself only has so much money. Hedges don't take into account counterparty-risk (AIG going bankrupt), so they look good on paper, but when SHTF, you just aren't hedged.
Capital-notes: they look good on paper too, but people always lose all their money on these. Like with the REITs: "guaranteed income". Then COVID & WFH hit and half of the office-buildings become empty.

Actually, the best you can do is pretty simple: if you want to stay in fiat, just buy 30D-2Y US bonds, simple as. That's the most hedged you can be, since the US government prints the dollars, they can't run out of dollars.

[Anonymous No.56411694]

>>56411666
Based Satan trips. Why have you been so anti Semitic recently?

[Anonymous No.56411718]

>>56411694
This may be a bit hard to believe, but... well, I'm still one person, but also... not completely. I know it sounds weird. I know: sounds weird. I can't really something like that sound not-weird. Let just chalk it up to it being 2023 and people go nuts, I don't fuckin know.
I'm actually don't pay enough attention to people to be anti-Semitic, I barely know what's going on or who I'm talking to most days, haha.

[Anonymous No.56411749]

>>56411694
>>56411667
Actually, let's just say I'm possessed. Simple as that. Though this one is a bit beyond the pay-grade your average priest and his squirting a little water around, lemme tell you. Super-cool, don't worry about it, but as an explanation. I hope the portfolio-advice helps, though, anon.

[Anonymous No.56411758]

>>56411718
Sorry man, I wanted to fuck with you until I saw your post earlier where you took it easy on the guy you were originally replying to. Thanks for helping him out in the end, and sorry about jumping onto you quickly with some made-up crap to stir the pot. Had I known you were going to be helpful to the other anon, I would have kept my mouth shut.

Thanks again anon. And for what it's worth, we are all losing our mental grip, slowly, and together. May the creator watch over you anon with love, so long as you keep spreading that same love to the world.

[Anonymous No.56411839]

>>56411758
No, it's cool. Super don't want to be scary. Just to make it clear. It's just that... yeah, as you say, we all have it tough.

[Anonymous No.56411870]

>>56411758
I would also like to say I'm very sorry for being hurtful.

[Anonymous No.56412724]

>>56411870
No problem at all, Anon. WAGMI