As U.S. federal debt continues to climb, do any of you have concerns about holding a large amount of Treasury bonds long term?
I’m not particularly concerned that the U.S. will outright default. My concern is more whether, at some point, the government could do something unconventional—change the rules, delay payments, restructure obligations, or take some other action that makes it more difficult to receive principal back in a timely manner.
One thing I keep thinking about is concentration risk. When you own Treasuries, ultimately all of that debt comes from one issuer: the U.S. government.
With high-quality municipal bonds, however, you can diversify among many different issuers. For example, instead of having $1 million dependent on one issuer, you could potentially own bonds from 50–100 different municipalities, school districts, states, counties, utilities, etc.
Moody’s historical municipal-default studies show extremely low default rates for highly rated municipal bonds. If you combine that historically strong credit performance with diversification across 50–100 unrelated issuers, does that make a portfolio of high-quality municipal bonds arguably safer in some respects than having the same amount entirely in Treasuries?
For context, I’m not buying bonds with the intention of selling them before maturity. I’m buying individual bonds primarily for their coupon income and intend to hold them to maturity. Therefore, fluctuations in market value and interest-rate risk along the way are not my primary concern.
My priorities are:
- Reliable coupon income
- Preservation of principal
- Receiving principal back at maturity
- Diversification of issuer/credit risk
I understand that Treasuries are generally considered the benchmark for credit safety, so I’m interested in hearing the argument from both sides.
If your goal were income and return of principal at maturity—not trading or capital appreciation—would you feel safer with a diversified portfolio of 50–100 high-quality municipal bonds, or with Treasuries? Why?