Here is the source: https://www.janus.com/insights/bill-gross-investment-outlook https://www.janus.com/insights/bill-gross-investment-outlook How does he bene

Here is the source: https://www.janus.com/insights/bill-gross-investment-outlook https://www.janus.com/insights/bill-gross-investment-outlook How does he benefit ? The way to win on the stock market is sometimes and somewhat cynically referred to as OPM (other people's money). Bill Gross has managed to convince a few large clients to invest in bonds through him (their money - his decisions) and has made quite a bit of money because of a sustained streak of good decisions. How does he benefit ? By convincing more people to put their money in one of his funds. A more balanced report of what he's talking about is possible. Right now he feels that it is a necessity for capital preservation to be well protected against a large downside (which would translate into a big surge in interest rates). On the one hand "past performance is not an indicator of future performance", on the other hand, it would be foolish to ignore this voice. People should realize what the cost of "stimulating the economy" has been : long-term low-risk investments have done extremely poorly for 10, even up to 15 years in some cases. High-risk investments have done well, but with several big "oops" moments that challenge capital preservation. Combined with this, regulation of pension and bank investments across the globe have emphasized capital preservation and forced these organisations to put significant investments in low-risk-and-now-extremely-low-yield investments. This currently means, if you're under 35-40, you effectively don't have a pension if you're not in the 0.1% (ie. you're not a director at least ? You don't have a pension). That age is going up, and it's not like it's doing any favors for people who are older. In other words: we've forced banks and pension funds to move away from "more risky" things, nonzero odds of failure for certainty of far-off failure. We have decided to have an almost-certain failure of our pension systems, so governments can spend more today "to save the economy". That save part is in quotes because while people were quite certain that was what they were doing 8 years ago, let's say that the enthousiasm for this viewpoint has gone below freezing in the past year or two. A more cynical person might say that governments have decided that while they will constantly loan money, they will no longer pay interest. Bill Gross' critique is that this is the feedback mechanism that balances governments spending against private sector growth spending (because the government is a negative for the economy. It's a necessity, roads, healthcare, etc, but a negative. If the public sector grows "too much", as history has proven time and time again, a total crash follows). Assuming there's no total crash (because you don't prepare for that. If that happens, it's over and what you did or did not do doesn't matter. So you prepare for the other options), what people are predicting will happen, given the models of 1972, 2001, 2008 and even before 1929 and the like is that a sudden massive inflation spike will occur coupled with a fall in asset prices (like houses and ...), and especially a fall in stock prices.