Thanks for the comment. I was trying to make clear this is a short-term strategy in a rising rate environment where you eventually want the principal back and don't want to take much risk. In accounts with longer term goals like retirement accounts you'd probably mix equities and more diversified bond funds.
Is there a way you think the strategy and when it's appropriate could be made more clear?
It's a good article and the strategy is appropriate as part of a more diverse portfolio. My point wasn't that the article was bad, but that holding till maturity only gives the illusion of bypassing interest rate risk.
"The only real risk to principal is being locked in to a rate that's lower than inflation for an extended period."
> Is there a way you think the strategy and when it's appropriate could be made more clear?
I think it's a useful strategy as part of a diversivied portfolio. As the GP mentioned:
> Prudent portfolios include equities as well as debt.
Your guide to building a treasury ladder would be useful to someone implementing Harry Browne's Permanent Portfolio concept, which holds 50% of its assets in US Treasuries. However, building a diversified portfolio is likely outside the scope of your guide.
Is there a way you think the strategy and when it's appropriate could be made more clear?