Where can I find historic performance data on Barclays Aggregate Canadian Bond Index?
I couldn't find historical data either, so I contacted Vanguard Canada and Barclays; Vanguard replied that  This index was developed for Vanguard, and thus historical information is available as of the inception of the fund. Unfortunately, that means that the only existing data on historical returns are in the link in your question. Vanguard also sent me a link to the methodology Barclay's uses when constructing this index, which you might find interesting as well.  I haven't heard from Barclays, but I presume the story is the same; even if they've been collecting data on Canadian bonds since before the inception of this index, they probably didn't aggregate it into an index before their contract with Vanguard (and if they did, it might be proprietary and not available free of charge).
Indices such as SP500 are typically including dividends - the payment of dividends doesn't impact the value of the index. Where can I find data on these dividends?  I found data on dividend yields, but these give me access only to the sum of dividends over the last year. This in turn can change either because there are new dividends being paid, or because you stop counting last year's dividends... Smallest risk of default would depend on where Alice and Bob live I suppose, but lets assume they are in a lower yielding nation where default is not a big concern.  Remember for instance that Greece was a lower yielding nation at one point and that the US has defaulted before. Let's start with Bob because he is easier to analyze.  Yield curves inversions generally pre-date recessions which is generally not so good for Bob as rates tend to drop during recessions and he will be at the short end of the curve so his bonds will be less sensitive.  However, he will generally get higher yields in good times to make up for this, but these higher yields come with a price in that he is generally much more sensitive to yield changes and can get much larger swings in portfolio value. First off as JB mentioned Alice would likely own inflation-linked (IL) bonds.  Which behave fairly differently from Bob's bonds. However, to keep this simple lets say they live in a place without IL bonds or IL bonds are not a consideration.  Then generally Alice has lower yielding bonds in good times but may do very well when the fed steps in during a crisis. So, who wins in the long run?  Likely Christi who owns a mix of a broad index of stocks and bonds in a risk mix where she wouldn't have to sell in downturns.  Especially, as Christi wouldn't have to pay the trading costs of moving her whole portfolio between long and short bonds.  Between Bob and Alice however Bob would likely win in the long run as the markets generally reward risk taking in the long run.  Still inflation (even without the IL bonds) and general rate trends (long-term rates are historically low right now) could have Bob losing for uncomfortably long periods. I found a possible data source. It offers fundamentals i.e. the accounting ratios you listed (P/E, dividend yield, price/book) for international stock indexes. International equity indices based on EAFE definitions are  maintained by Professor French of French-Fama fame, at Dartmouth's Tuck Business School website. Specifics of methodology, and countries covered is available here. MSCI is the data source. Historical time interval for most countries is from 1975 onward. (Singapore was one of the countries included). Obtaining historical ratios for international stock indices is not easily found for free. Your question didn't specify free though. If that is not a constraint, you may wish to check the MSCI Barra international stock indices also. Well the article did mention that if you continually beat your bookmaker you're likely to get rejected in future which is hilarious, but personally I have actually bet on sports and I've found that it's a fairly easy game to win at if you don't go for bets with huge odds and I don't think I've ever placed a bet where after I lost and said 'what the hell just happened'. I only really bet on rugby and soccer though, so team sports may be a bit less prone to corruption from the bookmakers.  I'm not saying I think this is a safe way to do business though, I don't think day trading is either. I think they are both speculation. I just think that sports betting has a lot more for a speculator to work with before they develop a strategy.   For instance, I always bet on New Zealand winning a rugby game, their players line up as the top in their respective positions and their game strategy essentially has the rules of the game exploited to the maximum. All of the data on this team based on their past performance is actually applicable to their future performance, skilled players usually continue to be so up till a certain age, skilled coaches who stay in their position mean no variation in team strategy. That makes me feel confident that even though New Zealand might lose a game here or there,  that they will continue to be winners, and even though the gains on their wins aren't much, consistently winning with them over time builds up to a nice bit of profit.   With day trading in the stock market, so much of the variation in prices is due to non accounting fundamentals, and even though historical data can be useful we know that investor sentiment, secret information, and a myriad of other factors mean that unless you are extremely experienced or have a natural eye for reading markets that most traders will lose. I know developing strategies do work for some people, but I think I've seen it said on this sub a couple times that 'trading strategies work - until they don't.' I only speak as a uni student who has limited research beyond Bloomberg articles etc... but from what I can tell, the majority of day traders lose money eventually, and even with AI, the profits are only noteable when the capital input is extremely high.   Sports events can't really be swung by the confidence of supporters, and yes corruption is rampant in sports as with every industry, but at least the data you have tells a fairly good story about where the bets will head in the future. Somewhat.  The balance sheet will include liabilities which as Michael Kjörling points out would tell you the totals for the debt which would often be loans or bonds depending on one's preferred terminology.  However, if the company's loan was shorter than the length of the quarter, then it may not necessarily be reported is something to point out as the data is accurate for a specific point in time only. My suggestion is that if you have a particular company that you want to review that you take a look at the SEC filing in full which would have a better breakdown of everything in terms of assets, liabilities, etc. than the a summary page.  http://investor.apple.com/ would be where you could find a link to the 10-Q that has a better breakdown though it does appear that Apple doesn't have any bonds outstanding.  There are some companies that may have little debt due to being so profitable in their areas of business. There was this /r/offmychest post yesterday from a person claiming to work for a large investment bank as part of their default risk modelling team. The poster claims that the commercial and real estate lending divisions have been fudging numbers regarding default risks due to a lack of oversight and a bunch of bad commercial loans are about to become due. They further claim that a rise in interest rates could prevent many commercial properties from being able to properly ~~finance~~ refinance their loan. Here is the post: https://www.reddit.com/r/offmychest/comments/77a1vw/i_work_in_bankingfinance_risk_management_i_am/. Any one have any thoughts?            I also found this link on the Mises blog (though it is a year old) that discusses how delinquency rates on commercial and industry loans have been steadily rising since bottoming out in 2015: https://mises.org/blog/delinquency-rates-rising-new-crisis-approaching. Could be something to keep an eye on. I would love to see some more updated data on delinquency. FYI, I am assuming you are an individual investor.. The rates on the website may change, if the government decides so. Anyway it is a UK government website, so it would reflect the changes immediately. "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://bankunderground.co.uk/2017/08/08/your-country-needs-funds-the-extraordinary-story-of-britains-early-efforts-to-finance-the-first-world-war/) reduced by 95%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Financing World War I required the UK government to borrow the equivalent of a full year&amp;#039;s GDP. But its first effort to raise capital in the bond market was a spectacular failure.  &gt; As part of a project looking at the financing of World War I, the ledgers of investors who purchased the 3&amp;frac12;% War Loan have been analysed for the first time.  &gt; These reveal the startling truth about the failure of the first bond issue of the Great War and the extraordinary role of the Bank of England in covering and then concealing the shortfall in funds.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6tfsn0/hacker_news_the_extraordinary_story_of_britains/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~189875 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **War**^#1 **Bank**^#2 **Loan**^#3 **investors**^#4 **bond**^#5"