When It Comes to Healthcare, Think Big

To the Editor:
Unless you’re a medical doctor or have some kind of science background, it’s risky to buy many of the smaller healthcare companies (“Washington Is Disrupting Healthcare. 16 Stocks From Roundtable Pros That Can Win,” Healthcare Roundtable, Sept. 26). I own UnitedHealth Group at an average cost basis of $298 and Pfizer at $24. I’ll patiently hold both and collect dividends, especially on Pfizer, which yields over 6%.

**Steven Kaskel

On Barrons.com**

A Bad Credit

To the Editor:
In 1912, J.P. Morgan said, “Gold is money. Everything else is credit” (“The Stock Market Is Up, but the Dollar Is Down. What It Means for You,” Up & Down Wall Street, Sept. 26). The world is starting to see the dollar as a bad credit, which explains the dollar’s slide and gold’s meteoric rise. The dollar is a long way from losing its role as a transactional currency, but well on its way to losing its role as a store of value.

**Gene Sweet

Chicago**

Fixer-Uppers

To the Editor:
Given the trade-related headwinds that the auto sector has been dealing with lately, and rising prices for newer vehicles, O’Reilly Automotive seems well positioned to capitalize on folks’ increasing desire to buy parts for, and renovate, aging cars (“Why This Auto Parts Stock Is Worth Its Premium Price,” The Trader, Sept. 25). It also helps that the company boasts strong fundamentals.

**Mitch Sabbagh

Halifax, Canada**

Managing Risk

To the Editor:
Allan Sloan highlights a predicament that is also common in managing money for retail clients (“Pity the Poor Money Manager, Just This Once,” Sloan’s View, Sept. 25). Investing and financial planning are all about trade-offs. There’s no perfect strategy that lets investors capture all of the gains, avoid risk, and eliminate taxes. The goal is to position clients to meet their objectives. If that means missing out on gains and incurring taxes in order to manage risk, then so be it.

**Jonathan I. Shenkman

West Hempstead, N.Y.**

Obvious Trade-Off

To the Editor:
The recent article on the risks of bringing alternatives to the masses lost me when the author’s complaints over a few venture-capital duds was briefly interrupted by mention of a 70-times return (“How Alternative Investments Can Go Wrong for Average Investors,” Other Voices, Sept. 26).

Isn’t this the obvious trade-off in venture capital? Seventy times covers quite a few duds.

**Brian Birnbaum

Washington, D.C.**

Send letters to: mail@barrons.com. To be considered for publication, correspondence must bear the writer’s name, address, and phone number. Letters are subject to editing.