I can find JPMCD5 ( up today to 98 from 75 last week!) but no BACCD5 or SCHWCD5 or GSCD5

HSTRX
I will look at it again, although I am always concerned about Hussman's consistency and performance.
He writes these amazingly clear market commentaries with those beautiful graphics, claiming the roof is about to fall in, with data to support his position on valuations etc.
Then HSAFX is 75% stocks, HSTRX 75% short term bonds and HSGFX is 103% long with a short position of 35% so net 70% equity
I can never figure him out

see below of bank perpetual preferred summary via Bloomberg:
Issuer Spread (bps) Yield
Citizens Financial 2775 30.47%
Bank of New York Mellon 1386 17.13%
Capital One Financial 1066 14.19%
PNC Financial Services 907 12.70%
Citigroup 805 12.03%
State Street 743 12.26%
U.S. Bancorp 723 10.69%
JPMorgan Chase 716 11.38%
Goldman Sachs 642 10.36%
Bank of America 634 10.24%
Truist Bank 586 9.97%
Wells Fargo 563 9.62%
TD Group US Holdings 534 8.62%
Morgan Stanley 350 7.72%

I remember those headlines. The headlines may be the worst when 10-yr rolling-returns are poor, but that would have been a great time to buy, or at least to hold on (for those who stuck with it up to that point. Below is a weekly StockCharts 1990- (as far as it goes) for $SPX (SP500) and ROC(520) (bottom panel) that is close to 10-yr cumulative rolling-returns; see the low point in 2009. Corollary - 2009 would have been the worst time to sell.
Live link may default to 1-yr https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=W&st=1990-01-01&id=p24824348520

I ran across this link on today's edition of Ben Carlson's blog, "A Wealth of Common Sense". As a testament to diversification, it refers to the notion that "The Lost Decade" only refers to the returns of the S&P500.
Lost Decade

FCNCA is UP ~55% in pre-market trading.
https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/FCNCA?qsearchterm=fcnca

There are reports on Twitter LINK that CNBC has removed the 5-yr CDS data for several major US banks. These had tickers of "nameCD5 (for 5-yr CDS)", so for JPM, that would be JPMCD5 (now 0 results).
The apparent rationale seemed to be that this sort of data was being misused and causing unnecessary panic. An alternative would have been to be more educational. As it is, the free CDS data are hard to find.

First Citizens Bank of NC (FCNCA) is buying most of the assets of the failed Silicon Valley Bank of CA. The FDIC will have some equity in FCNCA and a loss-sharing agreement with FCNCA. The FDIC deposit insurance fund will take a big hit.
"...As of March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bridge Bank, National Association, had approximately $167 billion in total assets and about $119 billion in total deposits. Today's transaction included the purchase of about $72 billion of Silicon Valley Bridge Bank, National Association's assets at a discount of $16.5 billion. Approximately $90 billion in securities and other assets will remain in the receivership for disposition by the FDIC. In addition, the FDIC received equity appreciation rights in First Citizens BancShares, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina, common stock with a potential value of up to $500 million...The FDIC and First–Citizens Bank & Trust Company entered into a loss–share transaction on the commercial loans it purchased of the former Silicon Valley Bridge Bank, National Association...The FDIC estimates the cost of the failure of Silicon Valley Bank to its Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) to be approximately $20 billion..."
https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2023/pr23023.html

@Derf, this concept of forward rates works best for 2 bonds with the maturity of the 2nd just the double of the 1st. Otherwise, there are too many variables and assumptions. So, it will work for 2-yr Note (3.76%) and 4-yr Note (3.40% ?).
So, the key value then will be 2 x 3.40 - 3.76 = 3.04% for 2-yr in 2 yrs.
There is a formal name for these forward rates, e.g. 1-yr, 1-yr forward; 2-yr, 2-yr forward, 5-yr, 5-yr forward, etc. The idea can be applied to interest rates, loan rates, inflation rates, etc.

Question seems a little unclear @Derf.
- If you mean you have to take some $$ out of the tax shelter (what I think you mean) than depending on tax bracket you might want to invest it in municipal short-term bonds or any number of taxable options like CDs and cash. My understanding is that short term T-Bills are exempt from federal income tax state and local taxes. I-bonds were a very hot item here a year ago. The yield has come down some, but look into those if investing up to $10,000. On the muni-bond side I have in the past used PRIHX. It really stunk up the joint in ‘22. But what didn’t? I’d have no problem steering someone to that if it met their needs.
- If you mean what to do with money still under the tax-deferred umbrella, but which you plan to take as a RMD at some future date, than why not sell off some of your different assets in a way that maintains your current allocation and move the proceeds into a money market fund until you need to actually withdraw it? That’s what I do. And it can be a cumbersome process if maintaining existing allocation is important to you; so some fore-planning recommended. In doing that you can also accomplish at the same time any rebalancing you may need to do by moving funds first from those assets than have done better and grown in proportion.
”With sell in May & go away, I'm thinking fixed or possible split 50-50 equity & fixed.” Here you add a new wrinkle. “Sell in May”’s staunchest advocate left the board a while back. I’ve never put much sock stock in the approach - although it has many advocates. But, yes, if you’re planning on reducing market exposure soon, then taking some of that out as a RMD would make sense.
Your last point raises the question of how aggressive one may want to be positioned at this time. Personally I’m currently skewed a bit to the aggressive side. Just slightly overweight growth compared to fixed income, but not by a whole lot.

If you read the panic-news, Schwab/SCHW 5-yr CDS have about "tripled" to 120s (from 40s), but that (absolute) level still isn't concerning. Credit Suisse CDS near the end were 300s (of course, they also crossed 120s at some point). These are in bps.
Barron's this week has a bearish (but sloppy) story on SCHW. I will watch how it trades on Monday. It is still above +73.5% from 2020 Covid low. https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/990/thread
BEARISH. Schwab (SCHW; cash-sorting – lot of cash is leaving Schwab because its brokerage accounts don’t offer money-market funds as core/settlement account and Schwab Bank rates are paltry; 50% of 2022 revenues were from net interest revenues; the HTM portfolio is carried at par, but if marked-to-market, losses would well exceed the capital base; Schwab points out that the AFS portfolio (already market-to-market) will provide ample liquidity; insiders bought stock to boost confidence; stock may remain weak; a full-page ad on its government SNVXX and retail-prime SWVXX money-market funds is on pg 21; pg 14)
Schwab has issued statements such as that even if 100% of its bank deposits leave, it has enough liquidity to meet that. And its insiders have bought stock.

No directly responding to your question ... Quickly scanning Bloomberg, Deutsche Bank 5 yr CDS is around 205. The article below from Bloomberg on Friday also provides some insight:
By Macarena Muñoz
(Bloomberg) -- Deutsche Bank AG was at the center of
another selloff in financial shares heading into the weekend.
The German bank tumbled 12% on Friday. Credit default-swaps
on Deutsche Bank’s euro, senior debt surged to the highest since
they were introduced in 2019. Other banks with high exposure to
corporate lending also declined, with Commerzbank sliding 9% and
France’s Societe Generale falling 7%.
The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the emergency
rescue of Credit Suisse last weekend has rattled investors and
raised questions about the broader stability of the financial
industry at a time of soaring interest rates and high inflation.
The moves follow losses in US banks yesterday, which
tumbled even after US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told
lawmakers that regulators would be prepared for further steps to
protect deposits if needed.
“The situation will not be solved by comforting words, but
will only be mitigated with concrete facts and figures,” said
Andreas Lipkow, a strategist at Comdirect Bank. “Patience is
therefore required and the coming quarterly figures from banks
will be highly scrutinized.”
Separately, a tier 2 subordinated bond by Deutsche Bank
surged toward face value on Friday after the lender unexpectedly
announced its decision to redeem the note early.
The notes, which mature in 2028, had slumped to as low as
90 cents in the aftermath of Credit Suisse’s takeover. While
pricing had recovered in recent days, they were still indicated
at about 94, suggesting a large probability of Deutsche Bank
skipping its call option.
The pressure on European banks is coming after regulators
and company executives have sought to reassure traders about the
health of the industry. The government-brokered takeover of
Credit Suisse by UBS is “no indication” of the state of European
banks, Deutsche Bank management board member Fabrizio Campelli
said at a conference yesterday.
He also said that the German lender’s retail deposits are
“very diversified” and hence don’t have the kind of
concentration risk that seems to have persisted at Silicon
Valley Bank.
Deutsche Bank Junior Bond Surges as Firm Defies Call Skip
Fears
The Stoxx 600 Banks Index was 4.4% lower on Friday, making
it the worst-performing sector in Europe.
“The greater danger is the economic outlook and indeed how
both the economy and the financial system will cope with a
recession,” said James Athey, investment director at Abrdn.
“That’s when asset impairment is more likely. But of course the
former can easily precipitate the latter, so it’s a fragile
situation.”
--With assistance from Farah Elbahrawy.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Macarena Muñoz in Madrid at [email protected]
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Rodrigo Orihuela at [email protected]
Charles Penty, Lynn Thomasson

- Ben Levisohn wrote the “Up & Down Wall Street” lead column this week and certainly sounds bearish. Takes a “not too nice” dig at J. Powell and the latest .25% rate hike.
- Lewis Braham has an interesting article on the importance of fund managers having “skin in the game.” Says several studies have demonstrated that funds with larger manager investment perform better than peers that lack substantial manager investment. Article looks at several specific funds in which the managers have a large stake. Quotes several managers. The SEC requires managers to disclose personal investment amounts in their own funds once a year. Using those figures, Lewis mentions several having anywhere from 50,000-100,000 to over a million dollars invested in their own funds.
- There’s an article discussing big retailers as an investment. Very positive on Costco, Walmart snd others. I’m still too rattled from having watched K-Mart go from a small “Five & Dime” operation to a highly valued retail juggernaut and than eventually to a heap of ashes - all in my lifetime - to want to play with any big retailers.
- There’s some positive commentary on gold in other section(s). Nothing too profound. A bit late to the party. Elsewhere I read that James Stack on Friday reduced the target allocation to financials in his model portfolio. Like the Barron’s gold column - also a bit late. (In fairness - Barron’s has been positive on gold / precious metals for some time - at least back as far as January.) Away from home so haven’t spent the time I should have reading Barron’s. Hope to get caught up in coming week. Are any of the contributors bullish? Please say yes. :)
(Edited / corrected post after some additional reading & re-reading))

Does anyone know where one would find charts of credit default swaps for the banks?
I don't believe for a minute that this banking crisis is contained at all. So why are Schwab CDS blowing out if everything is ok per Chuck, CEO etc...? Why? Irrational fear, no trust/confidence in Yellen, Biden etc?
I can't believe that Deutsche Bank is still operational in its current form. I actually just sold 100% of a fund last week that held their stocks via swaps and had DB as the counterparty (Not that I have any knowledge of what could happen etc, it is just that nope, even if I get a whiff of something might go haywire, in this climate I am Daddy to Basecamp I'm out.)
I couldn't care less if I miss the next 25% upside in the market but sure would be tough if I didn't head for the bunker when I sniffed the 'Nader was coming...
Got Gold? "This is contained" "Safe and Effective" "Ruble to Rubble"...blah blah blah?
What say you, irrational thinking on my part or does everyone have their head in the sand?
Baseball Fan

I like the 'In-Kind" strategy:
8-strategies-for-optimizing-rmds-from-iras

Note, @bee linked article above from Forbes is out of date and incorrectly states when RMD's must be started. SECURE 2.0 Act is now law. Owners of retirement accounts must start taking RMDs at age 73.

@Old_Joe. +.1. Your remarks about the possible hazard of a 5 year CD @5% in the face of declining rates are insightful. And loading up on such counting on the FDIC is an example of a moral hazard.

I just checked and Fidelity charges $75 for Vanguard and Dodge and Cox funds. A $50 fee would have been a real investor improvement for Fidelity but I guess Abigail Johnson needs to keep her net worth over $20 billion !

Don't forget Schwab funds. Fidelity charges a $75 transaction fee for those as well.
Brokerages extract fees from mutual fund families to carry their funds on the brokerage platform even when the platform charges investors a TF to trade those funds. If a fund family won't pay the fee for shelf space, the brokerage may decide to charge investors a higher transaction fee, or it may simply choose not to carry the fund family.
I assume that Fidelity gets value in being able to say that it offers Vanguard, D&C, and Schwab funds, regardless of how many people actually pay the higher TF.

Fidelity's $75.00 transaction fee for Vanguard and Dodge & Cox funds has been in place for years.
Their transaction fee for most other fund families is $49.95.

The following two funds have performed well for me and have been worry-free.
Collectively they comprised 36% of my total portfolio at the beginning of the year.
Interm. Core-Plus Bond: DOXIX
Foreign Large Blend: MIEIX (invested in CIT "clone")
Edit/Add:
I've owned the following fund for ~5.5 years in my HSA and am pleased with its overall performance
but it's only a small slice of my portfolio.
Large Blend: PRILX