June/July 2017 TSP Allocation Analysis

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE POST. CLICK HERE FOR THE CURRENT TSP ALLOCATION GUIDE UPDATE.

06/11/2017

This month I write about the potential impact of the ongoing turmoil in DC and some danger signs from the employment indicator. Once again, this starts treading into political grounds and I’ll remind everyone that I’m not sharing my views on politics or favoring one side over the other, but rather discussing what impact the current craziness may have on my investments.

First up though, I want to thank everyone who donated to support the site after my shameless panhandling in last month’s update. For a little while after the post went live, my PayPal notifications sounded like that scene from Breaking Bad when Walt Jr. created the webpage for people to donate for Walt’s medical bills. (That’s a pretty obscure reference, but totally worth it for those of you who got it.) In all seriousness, I was overwhelmed by the generosity of so many people and will put those contributions to good use.

Speaking of which, I have been trying to transition the site from HTTP to HTTPS which means that any data sent between your browser and the website is encrypted. Not a big deal for a site like this one, but a little step to make it a bit more secure. Unfortunately, that hasn’t gone smoothly so if you have any trouble accessing the site, please let me know so I have more error data to work with.

Bottom line up front: I will be sticking with an allocation of 100% TSP C Fund in both my existing balances and new contributions this month (and probably for the foreseeable future). But remember a few months ago when I said not to attach too much importance to a single poor jobs report and to see what things looked like over a few months? Now we have had three lousy jobs reports in a row. So I’m not as confident as I was and you should probably read that boring economic indicator stuff below which you usually skip.

Thrift Savings Plan Fund Returns

May was a very solid month for the C fund, although I once again wish I had been smart enough to have been in the I Fund this month:

  • TSP C Fund:  1.41%
  • TSP S Fund:  -0.77%
  • TSP I Fund:  3.76%
  • TSP F Fund:  0.81%
  • TSP G Fund:  0.19%

And the TSP Funds year-to-date through 06/09/2017:

  • TSP C Fund:  9.68%
  • TSP S Fund:  7.31%
  • TSP I Fund:  14.58%
  • TSP F Fund:  2.62%
  • TSP G Fund:  1.03%

Russia, Politics and the Thrift Savings Plan

Comey FlynnI will caveat this with reminding you that I didn’t think the UK would vote for Brexit and didn’t think Trump would be elected president, so I have been bad at predicting major political events lately. That said, I don’t think Trump is going to be impeached (GOP controlled House and Senate, public acceptance of behavior which previously would have been disqualifying, lack of a smoking gun, etc.).

But I do think the investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 election and the extent to which members of the campaign either leapt or were pulled into that will last for at least as long as Trump’s presidency. Mueller would not be hiring the prosecution dream team he is if he had been briefed on the evidence and was just making sure the I’s were dotted and the T’s were crossed on a report detailing Russian interference but no collusion on the part of any Americans. People are likely going to prison, but it is probably going to take years for that to happen.

A much lesser issue, but the one which is actually appropriate to discuss on this blog, is what impact that is likely to have on the stock market.

Let’s start with the worst case scenario (or best depending on your politics). If we go all the way back to Watergate, a quick look at the charts would certainly make you believe that the scandal caused the stock market to tank. The break-in took place in June 1972, the market peaked at the beginning of 1973, and then fell about 50% until Nixon’s resignation in August 1974. But that doesn’t tell the whole story. The scandal didn’t begin to envelope Nixon and the White House staff until July 1973, by which point the US economy was already plunging into a recession which was exacerbated by an OPEC oil embargo later in the year which tripled oil prices. To be sure, the Watergate scandal did not help investor sentiment or market stability, but it was not the primary driver of the bear market.

The Clinton impeachment may be even more instructive because it took place during a more modern stock market. The market fell sharply in the months leading up to the release of the Starr report (down 20% from July 17 to September 9, 1998), but the primary drivers of that decline was the collapse of a hedge fund (Long-Term Capital Management) and a Russian economic crisis. And once things came to a head, between the start of impeachment proceedings on October 8, 1998 through the conclusion on February 12, 1999, the market saw a 28% gain.

Which brings us back once again to the conclusion that politics may have some day-to-day impacts on the market, but that medium and long-term results are driven by the economy.

The other Politics

Between the multiple investigations into Russian interference in the election and the battle over health insurance reform, there isn’t going to be much space left this year for major legislation which would potentially benefit the stock market. I don’t think we will see significant tax reform this year (or next), although there will certainly be some tweaks and claims of victory. Increased federal infrastructure spending similarly doesn’t look like it will materialize – in fact at this point it looks like infrastructure spending will decrease over the next few years.

What does that mean for our Thrift Savings Plan investments? I think to some degree the cut to corporate tax rates is already priced into the market, so if it becomes clear that isn’t going to happen we could see a small (5%) correction. But otherwise, as long as the economy keeps growing I don’t think the politicians are going to have much impact for the rest of 2017.

One Last Thing While We are Talking About the Politicians

You probably saw the flurry of articles and tweets about the potential for drastic cuts to Federal employee retirement programs after the White House released its budget proposal. The actual proposal was short on details, but the briefings around it made it clear that they envision implementing a wishlist of Heritage Foundation proposals to gut the system. A good run-down on the key points is in this Washington Post article.

The worst case scenario would include a $5000 cut in actual take-home pay for the average Fed, as well as effectively halving the value of a Fed’s pension by the end of their retirement due to elimination of cost of living adjustments.

The administration’s proposal doesn’t mean all, most or even many of these cuts will actually make it through Congress. And doesn’t reflect the political reality that it is much easier to impose cuts on voiceless future employees rather than current ones. But it is something to keep a close eye on as the budget process gets underway on Capitol Hill because this Congress and administration are more likely to take these actions than any during my Federal service. And once the cuts are made, they almost certainly aren’t coming back no matter who takes office during the next election cycle.

May’s Economic Numbers:

In this section I discuss the key indicator data I use in determining where I think we are in the economic cycle and what that data means to me in deciding how to allocate my Thrift Savings Plan balance. (These indicators are explained in some detail in How to Determine the Current Phase of the Business Cycle.)

Employment numbers:

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 138,000 in May, well under estimates of 185,000 jobs.

To make things worse, jobs numbers for March were revised down from 79,000 to 50,000, and for April were revised down from 211,000 to 174,000. With these revisions, employment gains in March and April combined were 66,000 less than previously reported.

So over the past 3 months, job gains have averaged only 121,000 per month, which is very weak. For comparison, roughly 200,000 jobs were created monthly under Obama during the recovery after the recession ended in 2010. For more comparisons, 166,000/month during Reagan’s entire presidency (with a smaller economy and workforce), about 54,000/month under Bush 1, 242,000/month under Clinton, and 58,000/month under Bush 2 when 2002 is excluded to account for the recession he inherited.

And hourly wages increased just 2.5 percent from May 2016, a decrease from the trend and way below average as you can see in the chart below:

I obtain this data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

I won’t panic based on these numbers, but I will be watching closely to see where we go from here.

Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI):

As usual, I pulled up the most recent report from the Institute for Supply Management. Any number above 50 indicates growth in manufacturing and anything over 43.2 indicates an expansion of the overall economy. The May PMI reading of 54.9 is a strong number:

Manufacturing expanded in May as the PMI registered 54.9 percent, an increase of 0.1 percentage point from the April reading of 54.8 percent, indicating growth in manufacturing for the ninth consecutive month. A reading above 50 percent indicates that the manufacturing economy is generally expanding; below 50 percent indicates that it is generally contracting.

A PMI above 43.3 percent, over a period of time, generally indicates an expansion of the overall economy. Therefore, the May PMI indicates growth for the 96th consecutive month in the overall economy and the ninth straight month of growth in the manufacturing sector.

The past relationship between the PMI and the overall economy indicates that the average PMI for January through May (56.1 percent) corresponds to a 4.0 percent increase in real gross domestic product (GDP) on an annualized basis. In addition, if the PMI for May (54.9 percent) is annualized, it corresponds to a 3.7 percent increase in real GDP annually.

The last twelve months:

Yield spreads: The yield curve moved up and became slightly flatter in May. I get this information from the Cleveland Fed, who had this to say:

Using the yield curve to predict whether or not the economy will be in recession in the future, we estimate the expected chance of the economy being in a recession next May at 10.4 percent, up from April’s 9.8 percent and March’s 7.4 percent. So the yield curve is optimistic about the recovery continuing, even if it is somewhat pessimistic with regard to the pace of growth over the next year.

Money supply growth rate: Money Supply M2 (which includes savings deposits, money market mutual funds and other time deposits which can be quickly converted into cash or checking deposits) increased from February to March.

Money Supply M2 in the United States increased to 13435.60 USD Billion in April from 13390.60 USD Billion in March of 2017.

The growth rate is what is meaningful here, and you can see that it is moving at a good clip:

Conclusion

All of which leads me to believe that we remain in the Mid/Growth/Performing stage of the business cycle and so I am going to continue to allocate all of my balances and contributions to the TSP C Fund.

Things I Like

This is probably a bit of a one-off, but after my work phone was recently upgraded to a Samsung S7 I realized that it was capable of wireless charging and that sounded wonderful since I was fiddling around with cords about a dozen times a day and I just like things like that. Apparently only the SESers in my organization rated free cordless chargers, so I had to find one on my own. I read a lot of reviews and finally settled on a Pleson Ultra Slim Fast Wireless Charger, because it was a top seller on Amazon and for $15, no big deal if it didn’t work.It did work and for some reason it gives me more pleasure than anything else I have bought this year. Setup was as simple as plugging my existing charging cable into the pad. If you have a cell phone capable of wireless charging, you really need one of these.

The Next Update

I send out a notification of these updates (or allocation changes during the month) to the email list which you can subscribe to here: Subscribe. If you want to see what I am reading throughout the month, I also have a twitter account to which I usually post items of interest which I stumble across for investors, Feds and the military a few times a week at: @TSPallocation

What’s in it for me?

I don’t ask anything except that you share the site with your colleagues so we can continue to expand the community of feds and service members helping each other in a free, transparent, no-pressure environment (although if you want to, you can donate to support the site here). You can help by telling the person sitting next to you, linking to this site from your own webpage or blog, liking it on Facebook, sharing on Twitter and in other investing forums, or actively participating on our Message Board. So if you found this post useful, please share it with your friends and colleagues using the email and social sharing buttons below right now. Thanks!

 

11 thoughts on “June/July 2017 TSP Allocation Analysis”

    1. If you read TS Paul’s previous post about this issue, he believes federal employees are unique, in that we have guaranteed pensions, most private employees do not. Therefore, we do not have to be as cautious. Keep your money growing by continuing to fully invest in stock funds, regardless of your retirement horizon.

  1. Can you let us know what your PIP for the C fund has been from last year and last quarter ? I was thinking of going into just one Fund and sticking with it.

  2. You absolutely have the right to monetize your website! You have provided me with so much valuable insight into how our markets work. I know this information has always been available on the world wide web, but you’ve done an excellent job of explaining everything in layman’s terms. I appreciate it, and I wish you financial success with this website, too!

  3. Paul I hope you are an Amazon Affiliate. I need a charger for my s7 edge and will click your link to purchase the one you recommended here. Thanks for the market update, always good stuff!

  4. Can’t tell you how much I appreciate these posts. Actually, they’re awesome! You have added thousands in value to my TSP vs the lifecycle funds. Quick question:

    I’ve also been watching the I Fund climb steadily since the beginning of the year. Could you share your reasons why you decided to stay 100% in the C Fund?

  5. I read the Washington Post article you referenced and I am not so sure the budget calls regarding FERS retirement are as detrimental as the article makes them out to be. The plan is to just mandate an increase in Fed’s contribution to TSP to match the government contribution (so 5%, which most of us who read this blog are likely doing anyway, if not more) by 1% over the course of 5 years. The article says this is the same as a mandatory tax…..which I don’t get because it’s going into our TSP. We’d be paying ourselves more, just not taking home as much IF AND ONLY IF we’re contributing less than 5% already. The cuts to COLA are more concerning especially for those on the GS scale where salary increases are more or less fixed instead of performance rated like banded pay scales. Changing the top 3 rule to top 5 is also a hit, but I don’t see these changes as being detrimental like the article sates, “If this change is made, federal employees will no longer have a secure retirement. Period.”

    1. Matt,
      The plan is NOT to increase our TSP contributions. The plan is to increase our FERS retirement contributions. If you don’t know what this is, check out your leave and earnings statement. Rates do vary depending on when you were hired.
      For example, a normal fed hired before 2013 pays 0.8% of their pay into the FERS retirement system while the government pays 13.7% into this same system on their behalf. If we have to start matching 13.7% , that will be a significant pay cut. For me, it would be about $370 every pay period.

      1. Ahh, I see. Thanks for cluing me in. Didn’t make the connection there. Unfortunately I joined the government service after they boosted the FERS buy in to 4.4% (or at least that’s what mine is). A coworker and I jokingly compared FERS contributions and mine was more after my first year than the total they payed in after 4 years! The government contribution on my LES is 11.9% of my gross wages. Did they plan on raising it to 13.7?

        Now I see why folks are so upset by the proposition. I still wouldn’t use the “No fed has a secure retirement anymore” language to describe it, but that is a very hefty kick to the groin! especially if COLA isn’t going up at all in those years. Especially to those on a fixed pay scale.

  6. As a recent retiree (and investing neophyte), an obvious concern is a severe drop in the markets early in this new phase of life, especially in light of the uncertain political atmosphere we’re living in. I’ve found my TSP allocation (G-40%, C-30%, F-15%, L2020-15%) to have done fairly well over the years. But certainly there’s always room for improvement. What is the best way of protecting my portfolio in such precarious times?

    Thank you.

  7. Thanks for providing this information. As a middle enlisted, every little bit of edge helps meet those retirement goals. Much appreciated!

Leave a Reply