Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Investing Returns on the S&P500

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 357 posts

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#131

Post by arjie »

blueprint wrote: post #78
pbreit wrote: post #34

I am not a financial advisor and this is not financial advice! Robinhood seems like an OK way to keep a free portfolio of ETFs approximating a Vanguard all-in-one fund. My super-unscientific portfolio is loosely based on Vanguard's LifeStrategy Growth & Moderate Growth funds with a sliver of MGK that seemed to both boost returns and moderate declines. A $5k portfolio would be 6 MGK (10%), 19 VTI (40%), 23 VXUS (20%),…

Stay far away from Robinhood. What a bunch of scammers. Not only is their software terribly buggy - and in core functions, too, like... Oh, I don't know, calculating the actual portfolio value instead of giving a figure 200% off. But their customer service blatantly ignores droves of customers' emails when those customers report bugs or request that their so-called Instant account be degraded because it turns out to…

IIRC, it displays value incorrectly when you have just deposited money.

What did you think Instant was and why did you want it disabled?

What's the scam?

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#132

Post by nostrademons »

greeneggs wrote: post #49
sks wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dont get taxed until you sell. The performance shown here is for a buy and hold strategy.

No, you do get taxed on dividends.

You do, but that's why dividends are becoming increasingly rare in the stock market. Many firms are preferring buybacks instead, which cause a pop in the stock price for remaining stockholders and so get taxed as capital gains.

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#133

Post by kspaans »

dharma1 wrote: post #57
dforrestwilson wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. If you're right 51% of the time when you invest you're going to get rich. Unfortunately the odds of you being right 51% of the time are incredibly low. 2. Heed Rule #1, and put most (if not all) of your money in broad market ETFs. 3. If you DO decide to actively invest, think about your strengths both in terms of character and industry knowledge and play to those. I don't know jack about healthcare and have had my…

+1 on ETFs. And I guess, think about at what point in the cycle you want to invest in equities. They are quite highly priced at the moment.

Market timing is a fool's game. Find out the right asset allocation for your personal risk tolerance and retirement goals, stick your money in, rebalance annually (contribute monthly if fees are low), and then sit and wait.

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#134

Post by charlesdm »

jgalt212 wrote: post #115
charlesdm wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 for using industry knowledge. Most of my money is invested in ETFs, however, I've been able to beat the market by significant amounts when I invested in tech stocks because I understood what drives the price. There are plenty of small cap tech stocks that have doubled / tripled the last few years. Understand the market, understand the product and technology well, and you can do significantly better than any wall s…

> Understand the market, understand the product and technology well, and you can do significantly better than any wall street analyst. Don't rush into it, but do your research. Look at the numbers and the growth potential. This is very dangerous advice because it just ain't true. Under efficient markets, you can do equally well as "any wall street analyst"

1. Markets aren't efficient. They're full of emotion and greed. They can be irrational. Just look at Brexit - even stocks that had zero exposure to the UK (directly or indirectly) sold off significantly.

2. Why would you assume you can't do better than an analyst, in your area of expertise? Someone who understands tech well will be able to make better tech investments, than, let's say, investments in mining. That seems pretty obvious to me. That doesn't means you'll always get it right, but it does increase chances significantly.

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#135

Post by ianai »

VLM wrote: post #109
jakozaur wrote: post #12

I don't think it is fair to say that next 100 years will be same as last 100 years: 1. GDP growth is not as high as it used to be anywhere in developed world: http://www.oecd.org/std/productivity-stats/oecd-compendium-o... 2. USA is superpower at the peak. Plenty of other stock market economies hasn't been so successful. E.g. Argentina used to be one of the richest country in the world. Investing in history is easy,…

A tuyere is a weird, tough, heat proof, somewhat hard to make (depending on your local technological level) compressed air nozzle. If there's a steel mill blast furnace nearby, you can make a fat stack of cash making and selling tuyeres. Its kind of a specialists metalworking job in that an idiot can make one that doesn't last and falls apart at the worst possible time causing thousands of dollars of missed productio…

Or, the finance market has priced itself above the average income. Without a doubt, the US economy would produce more if there were higher demand - financed by higher wages. That would increase financial market participation.

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#137

Post by kspaans »

iaskwhy wrote: post #106
ryandrake wrote: post #92

Funny how his time horizon stretches out to 150 years, where the vast majority of people don't live past 100, and have probably, what 25-35 or so years of investing time in their lives? The insanely long term is a simplified look at the stock market as some money-multiplication machine, but I don't think it is really that to most people. Given a normal person's time horizon, the difference between "did I start invest…

I'm usally more worried about having a long term investment, say for 30 years and on the 25th year another 2008 takes place, I might not have 20 years to wait by then.

In the 25 years leading up to 2008 you will probably find that you already gained more than the drop. Also worth noting that the markets were fully recovered within 5 years (and usually sooner).

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#138

Post by nostrademons »

VLM wrote: post #109
jakozaur wrote: post #12

I don't think it is fair to say that next 100 years will be same as last 100 years: 1. GDP growth is not as high as it used to be anywhere in developed world: http://www.oecd.org/std/productivity-stats/oecd-compendium-o... 2. USA is superpower at the peak. Plenty of other stock market economies hasn't been so successful. E.g. Argentina used to be one of the richest country in the world. Investing in history is easy,…

A tuyere is a weird, tough, heat proof, somewhat hard to make (depending on your local technological level) compressed air nozzle. If there's a steel mill blast furnace nearby, you can make a fat stack of cash making and selling tuyeres. Its kind of a specialists metalworking job in that an idiot can make one that doesn't last and falls apart at the worst possible time causing thousands of dollars of missed productio…

Many information-age business models (SaaS, marketplaces, advertising & other grow-first-then-monetize consumer businesses) are even more dependent upon capital than their industrial-age predecessors, since they run at a loss until they completely saturate a market and then turn on the money spigot. They've just been going to the private markets rather than the public markets because the Information Age started with a massive speculative bubble that scared everyone off. I think that as people realize that the Internet is real and actually will change everything about society, they'll be an increasing call for the general public to get in on this wealth creation.

Re: Investing Returns on the S&P500

#140

Post by encoderer »

jakozaur wrote: post #29
mac01021 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what alternative method do you propose for predicting growth (or decline) over the next century?

I don't have a crystal ball. However, it would be more useful if more stock indexes would be considered than just one S&P 500. E.g. Dow Jones: http://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historica... Also from other nations.

Nobody uses the dow. It's price-weighted. It's most famous for being reported at the 6PM local news. But seeing the Russell 2000 would be great.
Post reply on HN