Early Retirement Portfolio Income, 2016 Mid-Year Update

dividendmono225I like the idea of living off dividend and interest income. Who doesn’t? The problem is that you can’t just buy stocks with the absolute highest dividend yields and junk bonds with the highest interest rates without giving up something in return. There are many bad investments lurking out there for desperate retirees looking only at income. My goal is to generate portfolio income that will keep up with inflation.

A quick and dirty way to see how much income (dividends and interest) your portfolio is generating is to take the “TTM Yield” or “12 Mo. Yield” from Morningstar quote pages. Trailing 12 Month Yield is the sum of a fund’s total trailing 12-month interest and dividend payments divided by the last month’s ending share price (NAV) plus any capital gains distributed over the same period. SEC yield is another alternative, but I like TTM because it is based on actual distributions (SEC vs. TTM yield article).

Below is a close approximation of my most recent portfolio update. I have changed my asset allocation slightly to 60% stocks and 40% bonds because I believe that will be my permanent allocation upon early retirement.

Asset Class / Fund % of Portfolio Trailing 12-Month Yield (Taken 7/31/16) Yield Contribution
US Total Stock
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSAX)
24% 1.83% 0.44%
US Small Value
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES)
3% 2.98% 0.09%
International Total Stock
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VTIAX)
24% 2.71% 0.65%
Emerging Markets Small Value
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS)
3% 3.14% 0.09%
US Real Estate
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSLX)
6% 3.21% 0.19%
Intermediate-Term High Quality Bonds
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VWIUX)
20% 2.82% 0.56%
Inflation-Linked Treasury Bonds
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VAIPX)
20% 0.82% 0.16%
Totals 100% 2.18%

 

The total weighted 12-month yield was 2.18%. This means that if I had a $1,000,000 portfolio balance today, it would have generated $21,800 in interest and dividends over the last 12 months. (I will note that the muni bond interest in my portfolio is exempt from federal income taxes.) For comparison, the Vanguard LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund (VSMGX) is an all-in-one fund that is also 60% stocks and 40% bonds. That fund has a trailing 12-month yield of 2.04%, taken 7/31/2016.

Both of those yield numbers are significantly lower than the 4% withdrawal rate often quoted for 65-year-old retirees with 30-year spending horizons, and is even lower than the 3% withdrawal rate that I usually use as a rough benchmark. If I use 3%, my theoretical income would cover my current annual expenses. If I used the actual numbers above, I am still slightly short. I will admit that planning on spending only 2% is most likely too conservative. Consider that if all your portfolio did was keep up with inflation each year (0% real returns), you could still spend 2% a year for 50 years.

I still like this income yield calculation as very conservative lower bound that adjusts for stock market valuations (valuations go up probably means dividend yield go down) as well as interest rates (low interest rates now, probably low bond returns in future). As an aspiring early retiree with hopefully 40 or even 50 years ahead of me, I like having safe numbers given the volatility of stock returns and the associated sequence of returns risk.

Early Retirement Portfolio Asset Allocation, 2016 Mid-Year Update

portpie_blank200Here is a roughly mid-year 2016 update on my investment portfolio holdings. This includes tax-deferred accounts like 401ks, IRAs, and taxable brokerage holdings, but excludes things like our primary home and cash reserves (emergency fund). The purpose of this portfolio is to create enough income to cover household expenses.

Target Asset Allocation

aa_updated2015

I try to pick asset classes that will provide long-term returns above inflation, distribute income via dividends and interest, and finally offer some historical tendencies to balance each other out. I don’t hold commodities futures or gold as they don’t provide any income and I don’t believe they’ll outpace inflation significantly. In addition, I don’t have enough “faith” in their fundamentals to hold them through an extended period of underperformance (i.e. don’t buy what you don’t can’t stick with).

Our current target ratio is 70% stocks and 30% bonds within our investment strategy of buy, hold, and rebalance. With a self-managed, simple portfolio of low-cost funds, we minimize management fees, commissions, and income taxes.

Actual Asset Allocation and Holdings

1604_portpie

Stock Holdings
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSMX, VTSAX)
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VGTSX, VTIAX)
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES)
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS)
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSIX, VGSLX)

Bond Holdings
Vanguard Limited-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VMLTX, VMLUX)
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VWITX, VWIUX)
Vanguard High-Yield Tax-Exempt Fund (VWAHX, VWALX)
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX, VAIPX)
iShares Barclays TIPS Bond ETF (TIP)
Individual TIPS securities
U.S. Savings Bonds (Series I)

Commentary
Since my last quarterly update, I’ve done the “just keep swimming, just keep swimming” thing and continued dollar-cost-averaging into the same investment mix. Nothing seems like a great deal, but I remain optimistic. I have not made any sell transactions. I still hold WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES) and WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS), as I still like the idea of holding a bit extra of those asset classes even though the ETFs available are not all that great.

I’m still somewhat underweight in TIPS mostly due to limited tax-deferred space as I really don’t want to hold them in a taxable account. (I should note that shares of TIP and VIPSX are up roughly 7% YTD, but the forward real yield is now negative). My taxable bonds are split roughly evenly between the three Vanguard muni funds. The average duration across all of them is roughly 4.5 years.

A simple benchmark for my portfolio is 50% Vanguard LifeStrategy Growth Fund (VASGX) and 50% Vanguard LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund (VSMGX), one is 60/40 and one is 80/20 so it also works out to 70% stocks and 30% bonds. That benchmark would have a total return of -0.87% for 2015 and +6.61% YTD (as of 7/31/16).

I like tracking my dividend and interest income more than overall market movements. In a separate post, I will update the amount of income that I am deriving from this portfolio along with how that compares to my expenses.

Home Country Bias in Stock Market Investing

Vanguard has a new research paper about global asset allocation. One of their findings was that market-cap-weighted indexed portfolios provided higher returns and lower volatility than the average actively managed fund. Thus, they suggest that a good starting point for all investors is a portfolio that is weighted according to the world’s relative market values.

However, in every country that they examined, investors on average had a home-country bias, tending to own more equity from the country they live in than the market-cap weighting would suggest. The chart below is rather striking. Found via Reformed Broker and Abnormal Returns.

homebias1

homebias2

Americans on average hold roughly 80% in US stocks, while the US market makes up 50% of the global market. However, the average Canadian resident holds roughly 60% in Canadian stocks while only making up 3% of the global market. Australian residents hold roughly 66% in Australian stocks while only making up 2% of the global market. I find this very interesting.

This is where I should state proudly that my stock holdings are split 50% US and 50% International, with equal amounts of the Vanguard Total US ETF (VTI) and Vanguard Total International ETF (VXUS) or their mutual fund equivalents. However, I admit that I do worry about the political and economic environments of other countries, especially given current events. On the other hand, I worry that I am being influenced by recent past performance. I usually end up telling myself that I am buying the haystack and letting the markets work themselves out over the long run.

The Vanguard paper also offers a guide to weighing various factors in deciding the amount of your home bias. Here’s a summary chart:

homebias3

The Power of Default Settings: 401(k) Auto-Enrollment

A new ProPublica article by Lena Groeger discusses the power of default settings in our life – from organ donations to computer font settings. Included was an interesting case study of a company who implemented automatic enrollment into the company 401(k) for new employees. Here’s the drastic difference in the 401(k) participation rate (vs. time at company) for the two groups, auto-enrolled (AE) and not:

autoenroll1

Keep in mind, in both cases the employees could have changed their participation status at any time. No change was ever required, only the default initial setting was changed.

The study cited also points out the auto-enrolled default settings could also make some employees save less than they would have otherwise. For example, if the initial deferred percentage is only set at a 2% savings rate however, many people will just stick to that number whereas if they picked on their own it would be higher. People may believe the default setting to be the “expert recommended” or “popular” choice.

The same thing applies for escalation of savings over time. If there is no auto-escalation feature that increases the savings rate as income increases, some people will stay at the initial default savings setting for years or decades.

Suggested Best Practices. By combining their findings, the following best practices are presented as an example.

  1. Auto enroll all current and future employees into the plan.
  2. Set the initial deferral percentage at no less than 6 percent.
  3. Employ an automatic increase of a 1 or 2 percent deferral rate, to a maximum of no less than 15 percent.

Most of have a lot of great goals (eat better, save more, waste less time), but it will always be hard to make the best decisions all the time. We should respect the power of default settings, and use the same concept to help keep us on the right path for the future. For example, at our company retirement plan, we have an auto-escalation feature but we must opt-in manually. If I invest the energy to turn that option on today, we’ll have a better default for future years, knowing we might get lazy in the future.

Housing Investment Returns = Price Appreciation + Rental Dividends

Professer Robert Shiller has a new NY Times article entitled Why Land and Homes Actually Tend to Be Disappointing Investments. He computes the historical, long-term inflation-adjusted returns for both farmland and housing:

Over the century from 1915 to 2015, though, the real value of American farmland (deflated by the Consumer Price Index) increased only 3.1 times, according to the Department of Agriculture. That comes to an average increase of only 1.1 percent a year — and with a growing population, that’s barely enough to keep per capita real land value unchanged.

According to my own data (relying on the S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, which I helped create), real home prices rose even more slowly over the same period — a total increase of 1.8 times, which comes to an average of only 0.6 percent a year.

Over the same time period (1915 to 2015), the total inflation-adjsuted return of the S&P 500 index including dividends is roughly 6.7% annualized. Here is a recent version of his famous Home Price chart:

shilller2016

Shiller is a smart guy and so I’m sure he knows this, but he always seems to leave out the fact that most people don’t just buy a chunk of land and let it sit there idle until they are ready to sell it again.

  • People use farmland to grow stuff. You know, things like apples and corn and cows. Or you could charge rent to farmers.
  • People either charge rent to others or avoid paying rent themselves on residential housing.

These are all additional sources of investment return beyond just price. Therefore, even if you assume your home’s price will only rise between 0% and 1% above inflation over time, you are still getting more “return” from it in the form of either rent or imputed rent.

Rent will rise roughly with inflation. Indeed, the biggest portion of the Consumer Price Index is housing as shown in the graphic below (source). The great majority of the Housing component is “rent of primary residence” and “Owners’ equivalent rent of primary residence”.

cpi_pie_chart

From FRED, here’s the rent part of CPI divided by overall CPI for as far back as the data series goes (1947). Sometimes rent grows faster than CPI, sometimes rent grows more slowly than CPI. Mostly, it evens out, as one might expect.

cpirent1

For most of the last 20 years, rent has increased faster than CPI inflation:

cpirent2

Estimating your “rental dividend” return. If you have a house that costs $200,000 that would otherwise be rented for $1,000 a month, that is a price-to-annual-rent ratio of 16.7. The inverse of that number is a rough idea of the annual “rental dividend” you could get from the house. That is, $12,000 divided by $200,000 is 6%. Now, a proper real estate investor would take out things like property taxes, insurance, repairs and maintenance. Let’s continue to be very rough and call that 3%. Now, if you assume both rent and expenses will rise roughly in step with inflation, that is an additional 3% real return.

Adding the two parts together, and you’re getting a very rough 3% to 4% real (inflation-adjusted) return. Now, most people acknowledge that housing is local and your specific return can vary widely. Your housing price return if you bought a house in Detroit in 1985 and a house in Mountain View, California is quite different. At the same time, your current housing rental dividend return is going to be a lot higher in Detroit than in Mountain View, California.

(I’m not nearly as familiar with farmland, but I do know people who rent out their property to farmers and ranchers. They seem satisfied with the arrangement. I’m also not including all the psychic rewards of owning your home like being able to remodel and customize things as you wish, nor am I including the costs of doing that remodel.)

If you look at various broad estimates of future stock and bond returns, they are not forecasting much more than 3% to 4% real returns on a diversified and balanced 60/40 stock/bond portfolio. Do housing prices only go up? No. Is every house a good investment? No. However, I also don’t agree with the broad statement that land and homes are disappointing investments.

I’ve explored my own situation and income tax effects more in the previous post Mortgages, Imputed Rent, and Early Retirement.

US Stock Ownership in Taxable vs. Tax-Deferred Retirement Accounts

If I was going for a clickbait title, I’d say “No one invests in taxable accounts anymore”. The Tax Policy Center has a new report by Rosenthal and Austin about how the share of U.S. stocks held by taxable accounts has dropped significantly over the last 50 years:

tpc_stockowner

Here’s another view of how the share held by retirement plans has increased:

tpc_stockowner2

The current numbers:

  • ~25% of US corporate stock is held in taxable accounts.
  • ~37% of US corporate stock is held in IRAs, defined contribution (401k) plans, defined benefit (pension) plans.
  • ~38% of US corporate stock is held by foreigners, non-profits, insurance companies, and other plans (governmental, 529 plans).

Between 1965-2015, the percentage held by taxable accounts dropped from ~85% to ~25%. The inverse finding is that the percentage held by tax-deferred retirement accounts and foreigners went from 15% to 75%.

That means that today, 75% of US stock owners may not care about the federal tax rates on dividend and capital gains, because it doesn’t affect them. Either they aren’t fully exposed to those taxes, or the taxes are deferred and withdrawals are tax at ordinary income rates. This trend could affect future tax policy.

Where Should You Focus Your Energy? Earn , Save, Grow, or Preserve

While I often talk about your savings rate as an important metric for reaching financial freedom, I also follow that up by talking about managing both parts of that formula: earning more and/or spending less. Focusing your energy on a specific task is often better that trying to do everything perfectly and getting frustrated when you can’t juggle all the balls at once.

Financial planning expert Michael Kitces has come up with a helpful framework called The Four Phases Of Saving And Investing For Retirement that is related and also takes into consideration your portfolio size. This graphic he created explains it well:

fourphases

Here are my own notes and paraphrasing (please read original post for his own words):

  • Earn. First, you need income. Focus on your human capital to help you earn more. Invest energy into your education, career skills, and network (surround yourself with good people). If it fits your personality, take a risk and start a business.
  • Save. Once you have significant income, be sure to save a big portion of it. Create systems and habits to help keep your spending modest. A 30% or 50% savings rate for above-average earners is not out of the question.
  • Grow. Once you have significant savings, spend some time developing a set of solid investment beliefs and a written plan. Devote time specifically to learning about investing and/or find and hire a trusted advisor. Your money should always be making more money.
  • Preserve. You should only need to get rich once. Do you have proper insurance in place? Create a long-term plan to preserve and ultimately live off the income from your investment portfolio and other assets.

You can pay attention to the other areas, but I like this lifecycle method of prioritizing your finite time and energy.

Morningstar Target Date Fund Comparisons: Vanguard, Fidelity, T. Rowe Price

tdfauto

Target Date Funds (TDFs) get their name because they adjust their portfolio holdings automatically over time based on a given target retirement date. The overall growth of TDF assets continues, especially within employer-based 401(k) and 403(b) retirement plans. Morningstar recently released its 2016 research study called 2016 Target-Date Fund Landscape:

After laying out a general overview of the target-date industry, this year’s report highlights analysts’ best practices in comparing and contrasting target-date series according to Morningstar’s ratings pillar framework, demonstrating the benefits of going beyond conventional evaluation practices.

I found the report full of interesting statistics and insights, but at 84 pages it is also rather long. Here are what I consider the highlights.

The Big 3 providers are still Vanguard, Fidelity, and T. Rowe Price. As you can see below, they combine for 70% of all TDF assets. This number is actually slightly lower than three years ago, however. Vanguard is the current leader, taking over Fidelity’s spot.

target2016morn4

All Target Date Funds are NOT created the same… Consider the huge gap in possible equity percentages vs. time (glide path).

target2016morn1

…but the Big 3 TDFs are all relatively similar. Before retirement age, the glide paths are very close. They start to differ more significantly after the retirement target year.

target2016morn2

Vanguard leads the way with the highest total assets, lowest expense ratio, and the only Gold Morningstar Analyst Rating. You can feel the effect of Vanguard in that the average asset-weighted expense ratio has decreased industry-wide every single year since 2009. You can bet that this wouldn’t be the case of Vanguard wasn’t so successful.

target2016morn3

We personally have access to T. Rowe Price and Fidelity TDFs in our respective 401k plans, although we don’t own shares of either. I would recommend my own family to buy the Vanguard Target Retirement family of funds. If you own one of the lesser-known TDF families, I would download the Morningstar paper and see how it compares. You may be surprised by the inner workings.

Real Estate Crowdfunding Experiment #2: Fundrise Income eREIT Review

fundrise_logo

Updated with Q2 2016 performance results. My second real estate crowdfunding investment is $2,000 into the Fundrise Income eREIT. (REIT = Real Estate Investment Trust.) Their investment claim is being the “first ever low-fee, diversified commercial real estate investment available directly online to anyone in the United States, no matter their net worth.”

Fundrise is one of the first real estate companies taking advantage of the recent JOBS Act that allow certain crowdfunding investments to be offered to everyone, as previously it was limited only to accredited investors. You must be a US resident and your investment cannot exceed the greater of 10% of your gross annual income or net worth.

Here’s a quick overview of the features:

  • Low investment minimum ($1,000)
  • Quarterly cash distributions
  • Quarterly liquidity (you can request to sell shares quarterly, but liquidity is not always guaranteed)
  • Low Fees (claimed to be roughly 1/10th the fees of similar non-traded REITs). Until Dec 31, 2017, you pay $0 in asset management fees unless you earn a 15% annualized return.
  • Transparency (you get to see exactly what properties are held)

Essentially, instead of investing in a single condo building, I am now putting my money into a pot of money that will invest in a basket of different commercial real estate properties.

Why not just invest in the Vanguard REIT index fund? Well, I happen to think most everyone should invest in VNQ if they want commercial real estate exposure. I own a lot more of VNQ than this Fundrise investment. VNQ invests in publicly-traded REITs, huge companies worth up to tens of billions of dollars. VNQ offers wide diversification and you have daily liquidity. But as publicly-traded REITs have grown in popularity (and price), their income yields have gone down.

As with other crowdfunding sites, Fundrise deals with specific, smaller deals with (hopefully) higher risk-adjusted returns. This eREIT diversifies your money across multiple properties, but we’re still talking examples like a $2 million townhouse complex, or a $2 million boutique hotel. An analogy might be made with “micro-cap” investing. From their FAQ:

Specifically, we believe the market for smaller real estate transactions (“small balance commercial market or SBC”) is underserved by conventional capital sources and that lending in the market is fragmented, reducing the availability and overall efficiency for real estate owners raising funds. This inefficiency and fragmentation of the SBC market has resulted in a relatively favorable pricing dynamic which the eREIT intends to capitalize on using efficiencies created through our technology platform.

A positive feature is the ability to request liquidity on a quarterly basis, but it is not guaranteed that you can withdraw all that you request (similar to some hedge funds). Here’s a comparison chart taken from the Fundrise site:

fundrise_ereit1

Why Fundrise? It can be hard to differentiate between the various crowdfunding websites. One way that I feel that Fundrise differs is they are more picky about the deals they choose to fund. Talk about higher standards is one thing, but I’ve been tracking them for a while and Fundrise really does offer far fewer deals than the other competitor sites I have signed up with. For about a year now, every deal that I’d been interested in filled up within 24 hours. Even this eREIT had a waitlist. Will this selectivity last? I don’t know, I hope so. Will their selectivity produce higher, safer returns? I don’t know, I hope so.

Dividend income updates.

  • 1st Quarter 2016. 4.5% annualized dividend was announced. This is the first complete quarter of activity, so the dividend size is expected to increase once funds are fully invested. The portfolio included 13 commercial real estate assets from 8 different metropolitan areas, with approximately $31.5 million committed as of March 31, 2016.
  • 2nd Quarter 2016. 10% annualized dividend announced, to be paid mid-July. Portfolio now includes 15 assets totaling roughly $47.25M in committed capital.

Screenshot from my account:

fundrise2016q1

I think the Fundrise Income eREIT is an interesting concept. There may be a waitlist to join, but they do work through it. I am simply sharing my own results, not making an investment recommendation as I don’t know your situation. This is a higher-risk, speculative investment.

Fidelity Index Mutual Fund and ETF Expense Ratios

fidodrop0Fidelity Investments recently announced expense ratio drops on 16 index mutual funds and 11 indexed sector ETFs, effective July 1st, 2016. They are the second-largest index mutual fund manager in the industry with many asset in employer-sponsored retirement accounts, although if you include ETFs they are farther down the list.

Fidelity Investments®, one of the industry’s largest, most experienced providers of low-cost active and index investment products, today announced that effective July 1, 2016 it will reduce total expenses on 27 of its equity and bond index mutual funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs). The average expenses across Fidelity’s index fund line-up will decrease to 10.2 basis points (0.102%), down from 11.6 basis points today.

Mutual Fund Share Classes. This is in combination with their recent renaming of share classes, which for retail accounts are called Investor Class ($2,500 minimum) and Premium Class ($10,000). These are in close alignment with Vanguard’s Investor and Admiral share classes.

fidodrop1

Highlights. I’ll include some of the more popular expense ratios for retail accounts, although many people may have institutional-class funds in their employer 401(k) plans as well. Most dropped by either 0.01% or 0.005%. Note that they no longer use the “Spartan” name. For example, the Spartan 500 Index Fund is now the Fidelity 500 Index Fund.

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund. Investor 0.09% Premium 0.045%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund. Investor 0.10% Premium 0.045%
  • Fidelity (Developed) International Index Fund. Investor 0.19% Premium 0.08%
  • Fidelity Global ex U.S. Index Fund Investor 0.18% Premium 0.11%
  • Fidelity Total International Index Fund Investor 0.18% Premium 0.11%
  • Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund Investor 0.30% Premium 0.14%
  • Fidelity U.S. Bond Index Fund Investor 0.15% Premium 0.05%
  • Fidelity Inflation-Protected Bond Index Fund Investor 0.19% Premium 0.09%

Here is the full list:

fidodrop2a

fidodrop2b

Brexit

ukflag2A few of you are waiting for me to talk about Brexit. Part of me is honored that you care about my opinion. The other part of me is appalled that you care about my opinion. Why would you listen to me?!? 😉 Here goes:

  • I don’t know what’s going to happen.
  • Nobody else knows what’s going to happen.
  • The media makes money when it speculates on what is going to happen and you pay attention to them. So they will continue to speculate.
  • Whatever does happen will takes years to unravel at the minimum. That means a lot of uncertainty for a long time. If you sell during times of uncertainty and buy during times of relative calm, you’ll likely be selling low and buying high. Not a very good recipe for investing success.
  • If you are truly a long-term investor, then you must know that some crazy things are bound to happen over long periods of time.
  • You could see this event as another “stress test” of your plan. The United States also has a big election coming up this year, so you should prepare for even more uncertainty.

Overall, I am not making any changes to my investment plan. Instead, I would try to maintain focus on what you can control. Financially, that means:

  • Investing in yourself, your skills, your network, your career.
  • Track and/or control your household spending.
  • Shore up your cash cushion, emergency fund, whatever you want to call it.
  • Managing your investment expenses, including trading costs, management fees, and taxes.

Index Funds: The Movie

ifabookHave you been unsuccessfully searching Netflix for a 72-minute documentary about index funds? Well, your wait is finally over. Game of Thrones, watch your back! 🙂

Also adapted from a book of the same title, Index Funds: The 12-Step Recovery Program for Active Investors systematically attacks the various reasons that people approach individual stock-picking and/or paying for actively-managed mutual funds. For example, there is the idea of picking an all-star manager, the idea of market timing, and the idea of picking individual stocks.

I would warn that content is targeted more towards investors with some experience and less towards novices. They apparently also recognized that the material can be rather dense, and thus also broke it up into 12 parts. Here is Part 1:

Both the book and film were created by Mark Hebner of Index Fund Advisors (IFA), a fee-only wealth management firm that offers mutual funds from Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA). Found via co-producer Robin Powell. As the book promotes the purchase of DFA funds, which can only be bought through affiliated advisors such as IFA, the material can be seen as self-promotional. However, having read the original book 10 years ago, I did not feel that the content was overly self-promotional. If you focus on the academic research by Nobel Laureates and historical data presented, there is a lot of useful knowledge to be gained.

If you’re interested in more detail, you can buy a physical copy for $8 at Amazon, a Kindle eBook version for $3, or you can navigate through all the content online at IFA.com for free.