301–310 of 509 posts
You maximize your returns by beating the market. You beat the market by being more clever than the market. Where do you have the resources to beat the market?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why isn't the tl;dr: 1. put 6 months of expenses in a high-yield savings account that is easily accessible + liquid in case of emergencies 2. max out tax-advantaged accounts. $19.5k/yr 401k + $6k/yr IRA. allocate into anything similar to a target date retirement fund with healthy exposure to US total market/probably light bonds depending on age 3. put the rest in a brokerage account, allocated in the same things your…
That's good retirement planning advice for normal situations. Having a $450k cash windfall adds a few wrinkles -- there are more investment options available (e.g. buy a house with cash), and the tax consequences of those various options can be very different. I don't think most people need a financial advisor, but if I had a $450k pile of cash and I wanted to understand the tax consequences of various investments I…
1. In general, since the 1970s, house prices have across the United States tracked inflation. The price per square foot on a house, on average, is exactly the same as it was back then (houses are more expensive because the average US house has gotten bigger, and in some metros like SF, city councils have flatly refused to allow building to buff up house prices).
2. A mortgage is basically free when you discount inflation and deduct the interest. The fed target for in the US is roughly 2%. This means that a 2% interest mortgage is free money, i.e. while you pay a 2% interest rate, the principal is worth 2% less, as you get to pay off the 2020 house price using 2021 dollars. So a 2.675% APR mortgage has an effective cost of 0.675%.
3. If you're working you get to deduct the entire 2.675% (of the first $750,000 in mortgage), so you get back up to 45% of it if you're in the top tax bracket. As such, the effective interest rate discounting inflation and interest tax deduction is negative, -0.53% APR.
4. On top of the interest rate on a 30-year fixed being effectively negative (i.e. generating value), you can invest the other 80% of $450,000. You should have no trouble generating 7% per year on that $360,000.
5. In aggregate, your return on capital by making a 20% down-payment on a $450,000 house at 2.675% APR in the top tax bracket could easily be ((0.53% + 7%) * $360,000) per year, plus your house should appreciate in value at inflation, but because it's a 5X leveraged investment, you're generating (2% * $450,000) per year on a $90,000 down-payment.
So, your total return could be:
1. $90,000 @ 10% + $360,000 @ 7.53% or...
2. $450,000 @ 2%.
Given the lack of fees or penalties for pre-payment, you can always pull the ripcord if your situation no longer makes sense by just paying it off.
A nearly even allocation between: SPY, GLD, TLT, HYG, VXX (or equivalent sector standins) Has a very good very stable yield for many, many decades. To have anything better, one must learn a lot about investing and keep after it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the op but I wish downvoters would comment giving their reasons. I remember seeing something about this in the atlantic a while back, and it would be good to know if/why it's a bad argument.
There's this weird social energy surrounding index funds that's very aggressive about preaching that they're the only viable option and that everything else is ridiculous. To be honest, this energy is another input that increases my skepticism of the whole thing. These days, whenever you see an argument downvoted instead of rebutted, there's likely something to it.
One of the early slurs was that index funds were communism (pretty daft, but probably effective in the US). The latest is this scaremongering "what if all investment were into index funds" (answered several times in this thread).
From the perspective of index fund advocates, unsophisticated investors are systematically getting ripped off and the daft propaganda only adds to the offense.
This is probably why you're picking up an aggressive preachy vibe from advocates.
The empirical data is however unambiguous and there is now a lot of it.
> I'm not comfortable investing the entirety into an index fund, given the current socio-political climate. Over the the long term there is not really anything better to do with it than equities: the Great Depression, World War 2, gold standard retirement, 1980s inflation, etc. Even if you only invested in the peaks, you'd still do quite well over the decades: * https://awealthofcommonsense.com/2014/02/worlds-worst-m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dividends are left-pocket right-pocket. Dividends can help you psychologically, but in a way, it’s like forced selling once per year or per quarter. Edit: if it helps you to invest, by all means, do it. But since dividends are mostly psychological, there is no point in limiting your stock picks to companies with a high dividend.
On the other hand, companies with long histories of sustained and rising dividend payments also tend to outperform the S&P500 in terms of total return (dividends + capital gains), and do so with lower volatility. Reasons include having a business that is profitable and stable enough to sustain such payouts and a management culture that appropriately balances shareholder interest (by paying dividend) against the long-…
> a management culture that appropriately balances shareholder interest (by paying dividend)
In theory a company should invest in whatever has the most favorable risk-return profile. If it pays dividends, that means dividends are judged by management to be the best risk-return profile among all other alternatives. A company can pay zero dividends and still protect shareholders interests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's good retirement planning advice for normal situations. Having a $450k cash windfall adds a few wrinkles -- there are more investment options available (e.g. buy a house with cash), and the tax consequences of those various options can be very different. I don't think most people need a financial advisor, but if I had a $450k pile of cash and I wanted to understand the tax consequences of various investments I…
For what it's worth, at 2.675% interest on a 30-year fixed, buying a house in cash makes very little sense, and a mortgage can counterintuitively earn you money. 1. In general, since the 1970s, house prices have across the United States tracked inflation. The price per square foot on a house, on average, is exactly the same as it was back then (houses are more expensive because the average US house has gotten bigger,…
2. homeowner's associate fees
3. property taxes
4. maintenance/upkeep
don't those cut into your "compare a house to investing in index funds" example?
Right now is a challenging time to invest. In general I would lean towards well managed active funds versus pure index funds. The markets are in a time that a good active manager can get you some added return. With that said I'd probably lean towards something like the all-weather portfolio. See: https://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/all-weather-portf... Note: this portfolio does cost you some potential upside i…
Just skimming some of the replies here makes me think you will get better advice on the Bogleheads forum [1]. Despite the minimalist appearance it is actually a great place to get sensible financial advice. I would start with the wiki page on managing a windfall [2], then search through older replies to similar questions. This kind of question gets asked there a lot, so there should be some recent threads. [1] https:…
Writing an investment policy statement is something bogleheads recommend doing which I would suggest as well. The statement helps guide investment decisions based on goals you wish to achieve.
The most important part of investing is staying the course. Staying the course is hard in bad markets like 2008 or during the pandemic which is why accurately assessing your risk tolerance is so important.