Most people agree that the worst negative impact is to have to sell equities at the bottom because you need the money to live on. So you should not have money in the market that you will need to live on for the foreseeable future.
The question is always "how long is the foreseeable future". A very long time it turns out.
I looked at DJA and SP500 worse case losses over last 100 years and how long it took to get back to peak and stay there.
Pundits usually say five years of expenses is enough to keep you from selling at the bottom, but this ignores the two "double bottoms " ie in the 1930s and 1970s when stocks crashed again and the "lost decade" of the 2000s
It took 10 years for DJA to get past it's peak in 1973. It took 13 years for SP500 to get past 2000 peak.
Our good buddy John Hussman believes we could be in for a 60% decline from here.
https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc230319/
So I try to ensure I have enough cash and bonds ( after accounting for Social Security and dividends etc ) to live on for at least ten years. I am retired without a pension, so what I got is all I am going to get!

Introductory question: if it were economically better to roll half the 401(k) into an IRA, wouldn't the benefit be even greater if you rolled the whole 401(k) into an IRA?
It's pretty clear that if your tax rates (or those of your beneficiaries) are lower in retirement, you're better off keeping the money in your 401(k). That's assuming you would use the same investment, the only difference being an extra 5 basis points in expenses.
Say you continue employment for another decade. (After retirement, you'd have RMDs in the 401(k) so there would be little reason to keep the money in that higher cost vehicle as opposed to a lower cost IRA).
So your investment cost for not moving the money would be about 10 x 5 basis point = 1/2%. (This ignores the minuscule compounding effect of 5 basis points.) That is petty in comparison with the reduction in taxes (if any) post-retirement.
OTOH, even if there is no reduction in taxes, by moving $500K to the IRA, you'd lose the (investment) use of the taxes owed on $20K/year. That is, you lose the tax deferral value of keeping the RMD amount tax-sheltered.
At 40% (your current tax rate), that's $8K in taxes paid early that you won't have to invest. And you lose the use of an additional $8K each year for however long you still work and could defer RMDs with your 401(k).
Let's say that you get 5% return on your S&P 500 investment. If you leave the $500K in the 401(k), then each year, for so long as you work, you'll have an additional $8K earning 5% ($400) that you wouldn't have had by using the IRA. That's $400 extra the first year, $800 extra the second year, etc. The cost to you for those earnings is 5 basis points on $500K/year or $250/year.
Of course you'll owe taxes on those extra earnings once you withdraw them from your retirement plan. So the gain isn't quite this large, but it's still clearly positive. Even if your taxes don't go down in retirement.
The choice seems obvious. Saving 5 basis points is not worth the loss of use of tax money, let alone potential lower tax rates if distributions are deferred until (actual) retirement.
It might be worth the additional flexibility, but that's a whole 'nother story.

An interesting thread, Twitter LINK.
European AT1/CoCo market has sold off and may have been compromised despite supportive statements from the ECB, EBA (European Banking Authority), SRB (Single Resolution Board) that what happened to (Swiss) Credit Suisse AT1/CoCo bonds CANNOT HAPPEN IN THE EU.

Surprisingly, there hasn’t been much discussion or analysis of ETNs (Exchange Traded Notes) in the aftermath of Credit Suisse disaster.
The ETNs are DEBT obligations of the ISSUER/sponsor. So, the health of the issuer is critical for the ETN holders. Yet, in all of the discussions of Credit Suisse issues, its ETN exposure wasn’t even mentioned. This even as in the UBS takeover/rescue of Credit Suisse, almost $17 billion of AT1/CoCo debt was extinguished by government order (a credit-event was declared) when that was ahead of the common stock (that finally had some residual value). But because it wasn’t an outright bankruptcy, the Credit Suisse ETNs should be OK for now as the debt obligation of Credit Suisse will become the debt obligations of UBS.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/161485/#Comment_161485
Another risk of ETNs is that their CREATION/REDEMPTION mechanisms may be disrupted by the issuer, or the ETN may be discontinued/liquidated in what may be very UNTIMELY for the ETN holders. Some ETNs are +/- 2x or even +/- 3x that further magnify risks (they escaped the recent ETF reforms to limit LEVERAGE).
Credit Suisse US ETNs include those for gold, silver, oil, MLP with AUM of under $500 million (tickers for Credit Suisse related stuff are avoided here as those may change). UBS also has ETNs related to equity and HY bonds with AUM under $200 million. It is unclear if UBS will maintain Credit Suisse ETNs.
No news is good news?
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/985/thread

I have a $1M 401-K with a company which invests it in a Vanguard 500 Index Fund (and charges me $9K annually (0.09%) to manage it). I'm still working (and plan to continue), I max out my contribution, my firm makes a modest match, hence no RMD yet.
I have a $750K Traditional IRA, also in the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, which Vanguard charges 0.04% to manage. I must take a $30K annual RMD. I'm in the Federal 35% tax bracket.
I calculate that if I rollover half my 401-K into a traditional Vanguard 500 Index Fund IRA, my 401-K fee would be cut in half, but the RMD would increase to $50K. The additional $20K would be reduced to $12K by federal and state taxes.
I don't need the extra income. I already make use of QCD's for part of the current RMD.
The way I see it, a rollover would give me greater flexibility, but not much tax advantage.
Anyone have suggestion?

Thanks for the article. These days it is all about the rating just as Fox News. Talking about journalism malpractice.
Senators Warren is spot on and she and a number of Democrats voted against passing the 2018 deregulation on part of regulatory ruling of the Dobb-Frank Act. Had that been in place, this banking failure may have been prevent.
https://vox.com/business-and-finance/2023/3/13/23638655/silicon-valley-bank-trump-fdic-banking-law

Morningstar’s take on Buffet potential help with the regional banks.

Any Berkshire Action Would Like Be Capital Injection, Not Acquisition
With all of that in mind, we would expect any action on the part of Berkshire-Buffett in the near term, with regards to the U.S. regional banks, to involve the same kind of capital injection (and Buffett seal of approval). This would be in exchange for high-coupon preferred stock (which is more tax efficient for an insurer) and warrants to buy common stock if anything happens at all. As such, that lifeline will not come cheap for those interested in going that route.
What we do not expect to see is Berkshire stepping in and buying a bank. The firm has shown no interest in holding more than a 10%-15% stake in a U.S. bank primarily because ownership above that threshold comes with reporting requirements and oversight from the regulators that Berkshire is not all that interested in adhering to.

https://morningstar.com/articles/1144873/another-banking-crisis-another-call-to-buffett

Not much of an economy if 5.25% is enough to slaughter it.

"constantly beeping/buzzing/blinking with something to give viewers another dopamine hit"
That’s a reference to Cramer? Right?

All central banks (EU Australian Canadian Japan USA) open up piggies accts again... Just like that the last 16 months of inflation war cries ceasing... Large monies maybe free flowing soon again.... Get ready
Uncle power likely halt or raise very small perhaps last time to 0.25% on TUES.
Economy get slaughtered if rates remain above 5.25%for an extended period of time.

Bump, if one wants to watch markets again before Monday open.
After 5 pm, CST for FINVIZ , and for Global Indices, as their markets open around the globe.
Popular Global ETF's This list will populate changes at the U.S. market open.

@ dtconroe and @DavidF, please see @bee’s posting on WealthTrack.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/58534/wealthtrack-weekly-investment-show/p8

Leading Wall Street economist Nancy Lazar discusses the resilience of the U.S. economy, despite several canaries in the coal mine examples of financial strain. Lazar shares her insights on why the economy is holding up better than expected and what we can expect moving forward, including the impact of the Federal Reserve’s efforts to slow down the recovery.

Nancy thinks we are entering a recession in the next 12 months, even with conflicting data on strong employment numbers, high wages, decent earning reporting and an inverted curve.
I too think a 25 bps rate hike is likely this week.

Yeah - I expect .25 this week as well.

Powell could do +25 bps with future guidance for pause or slowing pace. The CME FedWatch is showing +25 bps--hold--cut--cut....for the next few FOMC meetings.
https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/interest-rates/cme-fedwatch-tool.html

I'm guessing that the next raise will be .25%, but likely not this week. That would be incredibly poor timing, with a deaf ear to the marketplace reality (warranted or not.)

ECB did .50 the other day, despite the CS issues over there. IMO the fed's in a catch-22 this week.

"I limit the amount of my CDs to $50k to 100k."
$25 to 50k here. But maturities from 4/23 out to 11/25.

I'm guessing that the next raise will be .25%, but likely not this week. That would be incredibly poor timing, with a deaf ear to the marketplace reality (warranted or not.)

I am not concerned about a recession, resulting from a couple of troubled banks. I will be interested in seeing how the Feds react to the recent bank issues, but I am still expecting them to raise rates slightly, likely no more than .25%

Excerpt:

The conversations come as Buffett has been a savior to the banking sector in the past. The chairman of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.B) invested $5 billion in Bank of America (BAC) in 2011 as he tried to bolster the bank due to its losses tied to subprime mortgages. In 2008, Buffett came to the aid of Goldman Sachs (GS), investing $5 billion in the bank in the depths of the financial crisis.
Regional banks may need the help of Buffett after several of the banks' stocks cratered this week, such as Western Alliance Bancorp (WAL), KeyCorp (KEY) Comerica (CMA) and Zions Bancorp (ZION), after the twin failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3948701-warren-buffett-talking-to-biden-administration-on-banking-crisis-report
The original article is in Bloomberg but it is behind a paywall.
No detail release yet. In BOA case, WB got their preferred stocks at his asking price and dividend yield. Both were aimed at lowering his investment risk knowing that there is a high probability the government will come to help. FED did shortly. Read somewhere he made many folds over his initial investment with little risk. We will see what Buffet will ask for this time. Despite his age, he is a great investor.

I continue to buy short term CDs--bought two, 9 mo CDs, at 5.2% each, a few days ago. I limit the amount of my CDs to $50k to 100k. All of my recent CD purchases are either 6 month, or 9 month CDs. I have four other CDs maturing this summer, and I expect to be purchasing additional CDs when those mature. Until I am convinced that the Feds are going to stop raising rates, I prefer the shorter CDs.