Looking back, the 2010s might go down as the easiest investing environment in recorded history.

The reason why should be clear – that is, if you understand this ironclad law of finance...

Money flows where it's treated best.

This "rule" offers a simple explanation for why investors make choices. After all, a market is driven by nothing more than the decisions of millions of individuals. And what do those individuals want?

Easy... they want to make as much money as possible, with the least amount of risk possible.

We all understand this intuitively. That's what everyone wants. Today, I'll share why this made the 2010s an easy decade for investors... and what it means right now.

Say you have a choice between Investment A and Investment B. Investment A offers low risk, but a zero-percent return... Meanwhile, Investment B offers moderate risk and a 15% return.

Where do you think investors will flock? Which asset will they buy hand over fist?

It's a no-brainer. Money will flow where it's treated best... And folks will pour capital into Investment B.

This example might seem silly. You might think it's impossible to find a market environment where the right choice is so obvious.

But that was effectively the setup U.S. investors were given when I began my career in 2010. And it's what defined those easy years...

Back then, the U.S. stock market was recovering from the global financial crisis. Prices were moving up. But valuations were still dirt cheap. The S&P 500 Index traded for a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of about 15... compared with today's P/E ratio of roughly 25.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve had cut interest rates to zero for the first time in history. And the new zero-percent interest-rate policy would clearly last for years.

Because of that, low-risk bonds paid next to nothing. The 10-year Treasury yield fell below 3%... its lowest return in decades. And investment-grade bonds only paid a fraction more.

So, after inflation, buying bonds was a guaranteed way to lock in a long-term gain of roughly... zero percent. Not great.

With that context, my silly example makes a bit more sense. Of course, we have the benefit of hindsight today. But even without it, the investment landscape in 2010 was dead simple.

The U.S. stock market treated money much better than bonds in 2010. So folks bought U.S. stocks... and prices soared.

Over the past 15 years, the S&P 500 has returned 14% per year. Meanwhile, a broad basket of bonds has returned just 2% per year.

That's just the start of it, though. You see, U.S. stocks haven't just crushed bonds over the past 15 years. They've crushed just about everything.

Foreign stocks... emerging markets... foreign bonds... commodities... you name it. No matter which one you look at, U.S. stocks were the better bet over the past 15 years.

This situation has led to an interesting outcome...

It has brainwashed a generation of investors into thinking that buying anything besides U.S. stocks is always a bad idea. In their experience, all it does is lower your returns.

In short, they assume that the U.S. still treats its money best. But that's no longer true.

Instead, you can buy at better values... which should lead to better long-term returns... outside of the U.S.

Tomorrow, I'll show why that's true... and how you can take advantage of it yourself.

Good investing,

Brett Eversole