GovernmentExecutive.com

The two most reliable funds in the Thrift Savings Plan posted minimal gains in February, while all other funds lost ground.

The G Fund, which is made up of short-term Treasury securities specially issued to provide a higher return than inflation without any serious risk from market fluctuations, grew the most, with gains of 0.24 percent. Its 12-month earnings were 4.66 percent.

The F Fund, which is invested in fixed-income bonds, earned 0.16 percent in February. The fund posted the biggest long-term gains in the TSP, earning 7.52 percent in 12 months.

The international investments represented in the I Fund experienced a slight drop from the previous month, falling 0.66 percent. It has dropped 0.22 percent in the past 12 months.

The S Fund, which invests in small- and mid-sized companies by tracking the Dow Jones Wilshire 4500 Index, dropped 2.05 percent in February. The fund posted losses of 5.85 percent for the year, the largest long-term losses of any fund in the TSP.

The C Fund, composed of common stocks on the Standard & Poor's 500 Index of the largest domestic companies, dropped the most in the last month, falling 3.28 percent. Its 12-month losses were 3.59 percent.

The TSP also has life-cycle (L) options, which are a blend of the five basic funds that automatically grow more conservative as investors near retirement.

All the L funds experienced minor losses in February.

L 2040, intended for employees with a target retirement date around the year 2040, dropped 1.80 percent; L 2030 fell 1.51 percent; L 2020 lost 1.25 percent; and L 2010 went down 0.59 percent. The L Income Fund, designed for employees with planned retirements in the very near future, lost 0.22 percent.

Two L funds also posted losses for the year. The L 2040 Fund lost 1.11 percent and L 2030 lost 0.37. L 2020 gained 0.57 percent in 12 months, L 2010 earned 2.80 percent and L Income made 3.50 percent.

COMMENTS

• Breathe deeply. Ride it out. In the long run it will balance out. Been there, done it and expecting to retire with a tidy nest egg. HR Specialist Posted March 10, 2008 6:48 AM
• I really hate to kill any sacred cows but … while Clinton isn’t the one who started all the NAFTA stuff (there were “guilty” parties on both sides, as happens with MANY issues), I might allow that he could be “blamed” for its implementation; if blame is the correct term. However, if you are open enough for some actually data, Vet, try taking a gander at the “Trade Talks” article by Daniel Gross for Newsweek, 4 Mar 08. It’s online so it shouldn’t be hard to find. The article offers a balanced unemotional and analytical analysis of current politics, national feelings, and the actual economic impact/results of NAFTA. I will agree that for certain pockets, NAFTA was a blow to the workers, particularly when coupled with other economic factors and an uncaring, bottom-line type of management; but to think so across the board and the nation? I would have to reconsider that stance strongly; particularly in light of most economists’ views of the Clinton administration’s economic scorecard. This article may also help you understand that regardless of what party or which candidate wins, this current emotional play acting isn’t likely to have a long term impact; or, rather, any impact at all. Tip off Posted March 7, 2008 1:05 PM
• Retired Air Traffic Controller, Clinton is responsible for "outsource American jobs". Clinton signed NAFTA and portrayed it as a great benefit to the US. Expect more of the same form the New Clinton. Vet Posted March 7, 2008 8:55 AM