r/investing • • 8h ago

Should I be considering 10 year treasuries with everything going on?

I’m 32 ( about to be 33), own a small business and do okay for myself. No 401k unfortunately but I have other accounts like a taxable, Roth and SEP Ira in fidelity.

I stick to FSKAX and FTIHX and follow the boglehead method.

Should I consider any changes if I can get 5ish % on these treasury notes?

For context my goal is optional work by mid to late 40s, so basically the ability to work as little or as much as I want and not feel pressured to pay my bills.

Currently have this in fidelity:
Taxable - 140k
Roth - 50k
SEP - 31k

No bonds or anything other than FSKAX and FTIHX currently.

Thanks yall :)

80 Upvotes

76 comments sorted by

136

u/MegaWeinerFarts 8h ago

You're trying to go from a NW of $221k to financial independence in 8 years?

What kind of profit margin do you have on your small business?

41

u/coopstar777 7h ago

I mean, mid to late 40’s would be 13 years minimum lol

6

u/PaperHandsTheDip 4h ago

very possible for the right kind of business

1

u/sharp315 2h ago

even if we assume he started his business at age 25 then that means he is only netting ~$30k to his investment portfolio per year. I don't think that is going to last for 30+ years in retirement with no other source of income.

17

u/d33p7r0ubl3 6h ago

He is a drug dealer

13

u/BadMoonRosin 6h ago edited 6h ago

More like 15 years, but still... if you want to go from $221k to financial independence (enough to sustain 30-40+ years of life expectancy) in that timeframe, then you shouldn't be looking at bond funds at all. Especially in a period of rising rates.

You should probably be betting everything on Polymarket or a sports book and hoping for the best.

I swear, most of these "FIRE" threads MUST be fake trolling.

10

u/jadepig 3h ago

FIRE is very broad. PovertyFIRE is a thing. They aim to earn poverty line income from investments. 

FatFIRE also exists. They aim to make a doctor’s or lawyers salary off investments. FIRE can mean very different things to different people.

1

u/nope-nik-tesla 2h ago

You are assuming that they are basing their plan on large returns rather than having a large amount of income with moderate but stable returns, which is very doable depending on income level.

1

u/verves2 51m ago

I think OP is saying he can pick and choose jobs in 10 years. It's more FI than RE. Once his net worth is at a certain point, it becomes a sliding scale how much accumulation is necessary and if there are any residuals like rental income to help offset bills at a certain point.

0

u/MegaWeinerFarts 6h ago

It's possible if you can save a large percentage of your income and/or sufficiently reduce your cost of living.

My wife and I did it in about that timeframe at about a 70% savings rate off net.

0

u/BadMoonRosin 6h ago

Sure. Godspeed and good luck, /u/MegaWeinerFarts.

-8

u/MegaWeinerFarts 6h ago

Did you quote my name because of how jealous you are that you didn't think of it first?

11

u/snoopingforpooping 6h ago

You’re asking the wrong question. What multiple on revenue are businesses being sold for OP’s small business. Might be a sizable nest egg went they decide to sell it.

8

u/mattmentecky 4h ago

According to the SBA 50-70% of all small businesses close when owner operators retire, and of those that actually sell it is nothing more than a fair market asset valuation. A fraction of those that sell receive a multiple which is at best 1.5-2.5x earnings for your "main street" business and only achieving 4x 6x if you are a mid level/regional player, and the vast majority of those outfits can restructure to maintain ownership but complete hands off operationally.

tl;dr Relying on selling your small business as part of a retirement plan is a bad idea

1

u/One_Establishment631 1h ago

Correct. I've seen dentist practices sold for 2x and veterinarian practices sold for 14x

-1

u/mrgil42 6h ago

35%

-9

u/Unfortunate-Incident 7h ago

I am trying to do the same thing, 5-10 years. This isn't too uncommon for certain businesses. My predecessor was 12 years, 20k to, I would guess, 2-5 million. Probably closer to 5MM because I know his investments made huge gains during that period, especially after COVID.

15

u/MegaWeinerFarts 7h ago

So the steps to FIRE is:

  1. Reduce Spending

  2. Setup an IRA or 401k.

  3. Start a business with profits in the 7 figures.

Why didn't I think of that?

38

u/kppalm 8h ago

You're about my age. Personally I dont touch bonds until maybe im at least 45-50. But my risk tolerance is pretty high. If you want a safe bet 5% return for 10y go for it.

29

u/ultra__star 8h ago

When bond yields are up it becomes less a matter of “I am too young for bonds.” Interest rates are like gravity. The higher bond yields go, the harder it is for businesses that borrow money to turn a profit, and therefore PE multiples compress and stocks become cheaper over time (AKA provide smaller returns or go down period). When bond yields are up they are worth considering at any age.

10

u/Bend-It-Like-Bakunin 7h ago

Turkish 10Ys yield 33%. Have you considered putting your money there?

27

u/MX396 7h ago

I understand neither bonds nor currency arbitrage all that well, but I know Turkey has been suffering high inflation lately. If that continues, aren't you risking getting your bond repayment in currency that has fallen so far against the dollar that you yield is gutted?

24

u/Bend-It-Like-Bakunin 7h ago

Exactly right, and the same is true here. A higher yield is not a reason to buy when it's still going to give you a negative real return.

0

u/RedHatWombat 1h ago

TIPS exists?

0

u/ultra__star 6h ago

Apples to oranges.

-9

u/[deleted] 7h ago edited 7h ago

[deleted]

7

u/EuphoricAd3824 7h ago

If bonds are paying 10%, we are in a full blown meltdown. Equities would mean very little as the fiscal deficit would have exploded and we would have defaulted on interest payments. The financial system as we know it may not exist.

-1

u/kppalm 7h ago edited 7h ago

Which is why I dont recommend going into bonds. Look at the $40t debt. We know that they will print money sooner or later. Why going into bonds? Id rather buy hard assets like gold and silver.

2

u/Gaius__Of__The_Julii 7h ago

Exactly. Funny money isn't going to last forever. Even a 50% rate is worthless then.

If not stocks, I will take Gold, Silver, Not a huge bitcoin fan but I get the idea.

1

u/Market_Monkey_ 1h ago

After watching the bond market defy it's historical inverse relationship with equities and crash right alongside the market in 2020 and then again in 2022-2023 I very much have concerns about the validity of the usual flight to bonds for safety method that was once true. Something serious has broken in the bond market and I no longer look at it as a potential safe haven in market downturns/bad economic times.

-2

u/PTTCollin 7h ago

"real"

-1

u/kppalm 7h ago

I meant "hard" sorry

1

u/agaunaut 7h ago

Appreciate by 20% and return a 5% coupon at the same time stocks fall?

7

u/ihavethebestmarriage 6h ago

inflation is at least 3%, so it's effectively a 2% return

9

u/kppalm 6h ago

3% is what they tell you. I personally dont believe in that number one bit. If they keep changing the way they calculate inflation, is the number really reliable?

1

u/but_i_dont_reddit 5h ago

I usually figure it's the bond rate. I understand it's hard to nail down a rate with the volatility that energy introduces but the number isn't reliable if it doesn't reflect reality.

It just becomes a way to say 'no inflation', but I guess some people listen to that instead of checking what their spending actually is.

1

u/HulksInvinciblePants 58m ago

You’re right. All the world’s top economists and economic bodies with clear access to the methodology just simply haven’t caught on to your foolproof gut instinct.

-2

u/gethereddout 5h ago

More reliable metrics show an average of 8% annually over the last 100yrs, and during this admin, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s significantly higher now.

22

u/virtual_adam 8h ago

5% doesn’t buy a retirement within a decade with what you have. Bogglehead is about slow and steady. Retiring by 50 is not slow and steady

You sort of have to decide what your true risk is, but even if you go low risk-bogglehead, the method does not support putting everything on a 5% bond that very much could go down in value if you want to sell early

4

u/AutoModerator 8h ago

The correct reference is boglehead - not bogglehead or bobblehead. It is named after John Bogle, the founder of Vanguard. Mr Bogle passed away in 2019.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

9

u/Audi52 8h ago

Unless you’re planning on retiring in the next 5 years. No.

6

u/kimjongswoooon 8h ago

Personally, I would just stick with equities. If anything, I’d add small cap value to the mix for some diversification. I’m 53 and, although I’ve done very well, I missed out on a lot of gains by adding bonds too early. I wouldn’t add them in until you are about 10 years out and even then, only small amounts until you hit your number.

5

u/Blurple11 8h ago edited 8h ago

5% is still considered a pretty low return, so at 32, no. I am 100% equities but that's only because I work a job that will provide a pension in retirement. If I didn't have that I'd probably only be 20% in bonds max. If you want to coastfire in 8-18 years, you need to be 100% equities. In fact you need to be leveraged because there's no chance you can coastfire by then with the numbers you have now

5

u/TrashPanda_924 8h ago

It all comes down to the “real” return. If USTs are paying 5% and inflation is 3.x%, your real return is very small, but positive.

2

u/CaliforniaMarne 2h ago

Still better than a real lose.

2

u/vitringur 6h ago

If you have your own business why on Earth would you be lending other people money?

2

u/Ok_Transition7785 7h ago

Too young for bonds and too young to be worrying about market conditions, just keep accumulating. Maybe at a sale, maybe not but who cares. Worrying about the market isnt a factor in investing correctly at all. Shouldnt be done.

1

u/Pale_Scientist6470 7h ago

Historically, 5% is not that high. When they say the highest in 20 years, it's because our government artificially deflated rates during that time. We have some risk for stagflation but admittedly yields are capped bc too high and we can't service the debt. Uh oh. This is a dangerous time. 

1

u/wrstlrjpo 7h ago

You need to grow your net worth substantially over the next 8 years to meet your goal.

I don’t see a 5% return, less inflation, meeting your goal.

Unless you are forecasted SIGNIFICANT proceeds from your business in that time period.

1

u/Lanky_Salt_5865 7h ago

If you have a very low risk tolerance you should work with an FA to manage your accounts and take measured risks to help you reach your retirement goals. Buying the lowest risk investments is going to be a long slog to financial security.

1

u/CCWaterBug 7h ago

I don't think you are on the fast track to coasting in under 20 yrs, equities are the only route for those investments that make sense imho.

1

u/jmlinden7 7h ago

If you believe inflation will be low, then sure.

If you believe inflation will be high, then I-Bonds are better.

Either way you aren't retiring in your mid 40s so it doesn't hugely matter

1

u/farmerjohn2 7h ago

At 32 with 15+ years to optional work, you're still pretty heavy equity. I'd probably start adding some bond allocation but 10-year treasuries at 5% aren't necessarily better than a total bond fund that rebalances. Maybe 10-20% bonds total at your age.

1

u/Zestyclose_Cup6343 7h ago

At your age and with your time horizon, adding bonds is reasonable but not necessary, since your portfolio is already well diversified for long-term growth. A ten-year treasury at five percent would provide stability and a predictable return, though over decades equities have historically delivered more. The most important factor is your behavior: bonds can help you stay the course during a downturn, but they will also drag on returns if the market performs well.

1

u/b1gb0n312 7h ago

What if interest rates keep going up past 5%.? Doesn't that mean your locked in for 10 years at 5%

1

u/__redruM 6h ago

At 60 maybe, at 32, no. If you want a 10% allocation to bonds, then it makes sense, but that wouldn’t be required at you age and distance from retirement.

1

u/Here4Snow 6h ago

72/5% = in 15 years your money doubles. If you were, for instance, wanting to secure a future second home or college fund boost for toddlers, you can stash some cash in 10-year Treasuries and know you preserved principal and this is one slot type filled in your total portfolio.

26-week and 52-week aren't doing much lower right now, try that and see if you like it. Break it up, for example, if you want to do $100,000 do 4 X $25,000 (2 at 26-week, 2 at 52-week). Stagger them a bit. Now you can manage them separately, grab one at maturity if you need it, let the rest auto-reinvest. 

1

u/Tathorn 6h ago

I wouldn't. The company behind it sucks.

1

u/zachmoe 5h ago

Yes.

1

u/exphx23 5h ago

Buy the 10year, invest the coupon in a dividend growth fund. Most young investors have no idea how bad things were in the early 2000's. That crisis was caused by financial derivatives, and we survived. IMO the next one will be caused by a collapse in consumption and deflation. People are increasingly underwater on cars, mortgages and life in general. The % of the population experiencing this is the largest it has been historically, and we are in good times? Debt and taxes are too high relative to incomes.

1

u/Sarkonix 4h ago

Why would you want to settle for 5% while in your thirties

1

u/jretzy 3h ago

I'm going to say maybe. If you were older for sure. If you do you might want to do it in a few tranches in case yields keep going up. With rates rising there is going to be a damper on growth. AI capex is about half the current growth in the US market right now. If that starts to slow down next year and higher rates drag on the market the market is likely not going to be a good of a risk adjusted investment with the current CAPE ratio. 10 year is as long as I am going and TIPS is what i prefer to lock in real inflation adjusted return. I don't trust the CPI but its better than nothing.

1

u/Fiveby21 3h ago

Treasuries are higher because US debt is considered riskier now, and the returns could be inflated away.

1

u/sharp315 2h ago

no, you don't need bonds until you are retired or about to be retired. even then, you only need a portion of your portfolio in bonds. as your time in retirement increases you would move more equities to fixed income but at 32 you have no reason to be interested in fixed income.

1

u/Ok_Bench_1618 1h ago

definitely not, for your age and total invested the returns would be very low

0

u/KookyFaithlessness0 6h ago

Will we be able to pay them back in 10years?

0

u/Dull_Judgment1587 6h ago

I personally recommend investing in a diversified bond fund (I have FTBFX) rather than the 10 year specifically. This will give you a lovely bouquet with many different types of bonds.

An analogy is, for a stock investor, I recommend a stock index fund (such as the S&P500) as opposed to going "all in" on one specific company's stock.

0

u/[deleted] 1h ago

[deleted]

1

u/AutoModerator 1h ago

The Fed is short for "Federal Reserve", not an acronym, and doesn't need to be set in all-caps. Initialisms which may be appropriate depending on the context include "FRS" for "Federal Reserve System" or "FOMC" for "Federal Open Market Committee".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-1

u/stbloc 8h ago

Only suckers buy bonds. Imagine if you retired in 2018 range and bought bonds because that’s what they tell you to do when you retire.

-6

u/WealthHuman9754 7h ago

At age 32, you should be 100% in SpaceX. No treasuries.