• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How to Invest for Retirement

Darren870

Member
Hm, seems the consensus is to just buy and sell as soon as I can, assuming it's value is greater than what I paid for it. I was thinking more, hold on to it for 10+ years and reinvest dividends. Maybe I should just buy and sell.

Thanks for the input, everyone. I'll have to mull it over. I think the buy and sell strategy is decent if I decide not to buy and hold.

It's because you're putting a lot of eggs in one basket. I knew guys that held and then the Financial crises happened and they are just now back at What they purchased for. And I know guys that are still way down because they never sold and the prices will never go back to those levels for their company.

You prett much get 15%+ no matter what. My ESPP was the same as Ghaleon. Well we had it so it was 15% minus the lowest of two or three 6 monthly cycles. At one point we we're buying at 12 and selling at 42 as the stock went up so much in a year.
 

tokkun

Member
I just opened up a Vanguard Roth IRA and maxed it out with $5,500. Now I want to invest in the starters like the 500 Index Fund and Total Stock among others but they all have a minimum of $3000 to buy. Does that mean I have to wait a couple of years to amass more than $5,500 so I can get into more than one fund?

You can always buy ETFs instead of mutual funds. Vanguard's passive index ETFs have the same expense ratios as the Admiral Shares versions of the mutual funds, but the minimum purchase is just one share, which is typically in the $10-200 range.

Hm, seems the consensus is to just buy and sell as soon as I can, assuming it's value is greater than what I paid for it. I was thinking more, hold on to it for 10+ years and reinvest dividends. Maybe I should just buy and sell.

Thanks for the input, everyone. I'll have to mull it over. I think the buy and sell strategy is decent if I decide not to buy and hold.

You should sell immediately. Holding any significant amount of company stock that you could sell opens you up to additional risk through lack of diversification and correlated risk to your job security. If you need some encouragement, read some stories about people who participated in the employee stock program at Enron.
 

Swig_

Member
It's because you're putting a lot of eggs in one basket. I knew guys that held and then the Financial crises happened and they are just now back at What they purchased for. And I know guys that are still way down because they never sold and the prices will never go back to those levels for their company.

You prett much get 15%+ no matter what. My ESPP was the same as Ghaleon. Well we had it so it was 15% minus the lowest of two or three 6 monthly cycles. At one point we we're buying at 12 and selling at 42 as the stock went up so much in a year.

It wouldn't be my only investment. I own a few mutual funds that have done pretty well over the lifetime of me owning them. It would kind of be like Warren Buffets owning Coke strategy, since they seem like a fairly stable company. But yeah, maybe I should just sell at the 15%. Can't get a much better return than that.
 

Badabing

Time ta STEP IT UP
You can always buy ETFs instead of mutual funds. Vanguard's passive index ETFs have the same expense ratios as the Admiral Shares versions of the mutual funds, but the minimum purchase is just one share, which is typically in the $10-200 range.



You should sell immediately. Holding any significant amount of company stock that you could sell opens you up to additional risk through lack of diversification and correlated risk to your job security. If you need some encouragement, read some stories about people who participated in the employee stock program at Enron.

Sage advice. Cannot recommend this enough.

I am in the exact same situation as the poster above. Enrolled in ESPP at work, 15% discount, yadda yadda.

You can enroll twice per year, and I did not sell the first round. I ended up losing out on the 15% because the stock went down sharply just after acquiring the stock. Later enrollments netted an actual gain because I acquired more stock at a much lower price and a fluctuation on the day of my sale bumped up the price a bit. I still have the stock from my first round and I honestly wonder if I can ever sell it.

But I don't wait around anymore. I just sell it for the 15%+.
 

NH Apache

Banned
O wise money people,

The wife has been pushing to speak to someone in person about out financial future. She has also been stressing that she wants to talk to someone for free. After some research, I see that "free" financial advice usually isn't. Does anyone have any opinions on what our options are? (edit: she tells me that her company gets free advice through Pincipal, if that's worth anything.)

We are with Chase if that helps with anything. TIA
 
O wise money people,

The wife has been pushing to speak to someone in person about out financial future. She has also been stressing that she wants to talk to someone for free. After some research, I see that "free" financial advice usually isn't. Does anyone have any opinions on what our options are?

We are with Chase if that helps with anything. TIA

If you want advice that really looks at your needs not the investment/insurance brokers you will have to fork money over for unbiased advice. Don't expect professionals to do their work for free.

Try to tell your wife this discussion is going to potentially involve millions of dollars over a lifetime and getting good versus bad advice can cost you dearly so it is perfectly reasonable to pay for good advice early on.

Now where you can get such advice I am not sure.
 
My work offers only American Funds actively managed mutual funds and portfolios. Expense ratios are .56% to .75% it looks like. Work only matches up to 1.5% of salary.

Still worth doing? I max out my Roth IRA and up to now have also been contributing to my regular taxable portfolio.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
My work offers only American Funds actively managed mutual funds and portfolios. Expense ratios are .56% to .75% it looks like. Work only matches up to 1.5% of salary.

Still worth doing? I max out my Roth IRA and up to now have also been contributing to my regular taxable portfolio.

1) Definitely fund the IRA first.
2) What are the American Fund options you have? We may be able to offer advice on your (shitty) options.
3) Complain to HR. Someone in HR is getting rich off your investments, and it won't be you.
 
^^ Definitely complain and, if it's within your power and all other things held equal, find somewhere else to work. This is part of your compensation package, and those funds' expenses are seriously robbing your gains. It's like working out on a low protein diet.
 

tokkun

Member
My work offers only American Funds actively managed mutual funds and portfolios. Expense ratios are .56% to .75% it looks like. Work only matches up to 1.5% of salary.

Still worth doing? I max out my Roth IRA and up to now have also been contributing to my regular taxable portfolio.

Is it a 1:1 match up to 1.5%?

It is pretty hard for a match not to be worth it. Maybe your fees are 0.5% higher than they would be elsewhere, but if you are getting an instant 100% return on investment, it is going to take a long time for the fees to eat that away.

Did a quick back of the envelope calculation comparing $2X compounding at 5% annually versus $X compounding at 6% annually. It takes about 70 years for the lower basis / lower fee investment to pull ahead. And that is with a 1% fee difference.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
What's the advantage of having a financial planner vs. managing funds myself?

We're talking employer pension, 401k, 403b, IRAs, 529s for the kids. Nothing exotic, all pretty much target date funds right now. We used to have a family member who was a financial planner take care of things, but now that's no longer an option.

We met with a family friend planner who has a 1% annual management fee. Is this reasonable, are his services even needed or should we just leave things alone?
 

ty-tan

Neo Member
My work offers only American Funds actively managed mutual funds and portfolios. Expense ratios are .56% to .75% it looks like. Work only matches up to 1.5% of salary.

Still worth doing? I max out my Roth IRA and up to now have also been contributing to my regular taxable portfolio.

I'm in a similar situation for a simple ira. Your situation may be different but here's what I do. Put 100% into American Funds money market which is no load no fees. Then every few months I roll over a good portion of it to a Vanguard IRA. Works with a simple IRA not sure about others.
 

Amory

Member
Is the $18k 401k contribution cap only for money I directly save, or is it the total of my contribution and my company match?

If it's just money I save, I don't understand how people hit the max in a year unless they make a ton of money...yet I see a lot of retirement advice articles saying I should be trying to hit the max every year.

I save a good amount (currently ~$12k a year between my contribution and my employer's match) and that's by contributing 7% of my salary. To hit the $18k max I'd have to be contributing like 20% of every paycheck. That seems crazy.
 
Is the $18k 401k contribution cap only for money I directly save, or is it the total of my contribution and my company match?

If it's just money I save, I don't understand how people hit the max in a year unless they make a ton of money...yet I see a lot of retirement advice articles saying I should be trying to hit the max every year.

I save a good amount (currently ~$12k a year between my contribution and my employer's match) and that's by contributing 7% of my salary. To hit the $18k max I'd have to be contributing like 20% of every paycheck. That seems crazy.

The 18K is just you. You + the employer match can actually be up to 53K.
 

Mairu

Member
Is the $18k 401k contribution cap only for money I directly save, or is it the total of my contribution and my company match?

If it's just money I save, I don't understand how people hit the max in a year unless they make a ton of money...yet I see a lot of retirement advice articles saying I should be trying to hit the max every year.

I save a good amount (currently ~$12k a year between my contribution and my employer's match) and that's by contributing 7% of my salary. To hit the $18k max I'd have to be contributing like 20% of every paycheck. That seems crazy.

By saving more!

My company does not match, but I'm currently contributing 20% - I'm still not at the point where I'd be hitting the contribution cap though.
 

embalm

Member
Is the $18k 401k contribution cap only for money I directly save, or is it the total of my contribution and my company match?

If it's just money I save, I don't understand how people hit the max in a year unless they make a ton of money...yet I see a lot of retirement advice articles saying I should be trying to hit the max every year.

I save a good amount (currently ~$12k a year between my contribution and my employer's match) and that's by contributing 7% of my salary. To hit the $18k max I'd have to be contributing like 20% of every paycheck. That seems crazy.
It isn't crazy. It is dedication. Based on your percentages it sounds like we make close to the same amount of money. Several years ago I was saving nothing towards retirement and it seemed impossible. Today I am saving about 30% of my net earnings.

I have made life decisions to make this possible. Here are a few of the changes I've made.
I sold a Jeep Wrangler and bought a Prius, this saved me $150 a month in gas and the Prius was cheaper, newer, and had fewer miles.
I only go out for lunch once a week, this saved me $120 a month.
I refinanced my home after several small improvements, this got rid of my PMI, it lowered my payment, and lowered my interest rate; this saved me $350 a month.

I took that extra money and I put it towards paying off debt then I put it towards retirement savings.

My goal is to save 45% of my net income eventually. I support a wife and daughter and still I have many more personal expenses that I need to cut. I still spend too much on lunch, I have a nasty habit of smoking, I enjoy buying too many rounds at the bar, and so many other things.

So it is possible and it's not crazy. You have to really look at what is more important. When my daughter is in college I will be able to retire. That is important to me.
 

jstevenson

Sailor Stevenson
O wise money people,

The wife has been pushing to speak to someone in person about out financial future. She has also been stressing that she wants to talk to someone for free. After some research, I see that "free" financial advice usually isn't. Does anyone have any opinions on what our options are? (edit: she tells me that her company gets free advice through Pincipal, if that's worth anything.)

We are with Chase if that helps with anything. TIA

A lot of fee-based financial advisers should give you an initial consultation for free just to meet with you and see if you are a good fit. They ultimately will want you to invest with them and get into their structure for sure, but many will review things with you and help you get on a path to that.

Just make sure whoever you do meet with is fee-based and a fiduciary.
 
1) Definitely fund the IRA first.
2) What are the American Fund options you have? We may be able to offer advice on your (shitty) options.
3) Complain to HR. Someone in HR is getting rich off your investments, and it won't be you.


  • American Funds EuroPacific Growth (AEPGX)
  • American Funds Growth Portfolio (GWPAX)
  • American Funds Investment Co of America (AIVSX)
  • American Funds Income Fund of America (AMECX)
  • American Funds Bond Fund of America (ABNDX)
  • American Funds Money Market Fund (AFAXX)
 

GhaleonEB

Member
  • American Funds EuroPacific Growth (AEPGX) - 0.83%
  • American Funds Growth Portfolio (GWPAX) - 0.75%
  • American Funds Investment Co of America (AIVSX) - 0.58%
  • American Funds Income Fund of America (AMECX) - 0.56%
  • American Funds Bond Fund of America (ABNDX)
  • American Funds Money Market Fund (AFAXX)

I used to be in the EuroPacific, Income and Investment funds. I'm so sorry. Those are awful options.

I added the expense ratio with a link to the AmericanFunds page to your post.

Personally I'd avoid the EuroPacific and Growth funds, as they are the higher fees and more narrowly focused in purpose than the others (Euro international and growth stocks, respectively) and which leaves you the Income and Investment funds.

The Investment and Income funds are pretty similar, TBH. The latter favors larger cap stocks with higher dividends, and some equities, the former mid-cap. They've had similar returns. I suggest doing some reading on those two and on their respective strategies.

Do you have to pay a commission on the front end of the purchase as well?
 
I used to be in the EuroPacific, Income and Investment funds. I'm so sorry. Those are awful options.

I added the expense ratio with a link to the AmericanFunds page to your post.

Personally I'd avoid the EuroPacific and Growth funds, as they are the higher fees and more narrowly focused in purpose than the others (Euro international and growth stocks, respectively) and which leaves you the Income and Investment funds.

The Investment and Income funds are pretty similar, TBH. The latter favors larger cap stocks with higher dividends, and some equities, the former mid-cap. They've had similar returns. I suggest doing some reading on those two and on their respective strategies.

Do you have to pay a commission on the front end of the purchase as well?

Thanks. Employer matches 50% up to 1.5% of salary gross. American lists 5.75% front load fee, but I don't see anything about that on our paperwork, so I'm waiting to hear back from our administrator.
 

Tahnit

Banned
I am 36 and just set up a Roth IRA mutual funds account through American funds that my bank help me set up.

Is this a good strategy?

If you can pm me answer so I don't have to dig. Thanks!
 

Amory

Member
So, this might be stupid but is there any reason I should hold off because of the election. Like wait for inauguration?
Nah. There's no point in trying to predict the market when it comes to long term investing. Start saving as early as possible
 
Nah. There's no point in trying to predict the market when it comes to long term investing. Start saving as early as possible

I'm just worried about a tanking market. Like in 2008 did it go below what most people started with? That's what I'm most worried about. Not potential losses of gains
 

Cyan

Banned
So, this might be stupid but is there any reason I should hold off because of the election. Like wait for inauguration?

Are you starting with a big lump sum that you're going to invest all at once? If so, you could consider dividing it up and doing it more slowly piece by piece, if it'd make you more comfortable.

If you're thinking of starting a 401k, IRA, etc, that you're going to regularly put more money into, there's no real reason to wait. Start now and don't look back.
 

tokkun

Member
I'm just worried about a tanking market. Like in 2008 did it go below what most people started with?

Yes.

That's what I'm most worried about. Not potential losses of gains

If you are investing in the stock market, you have to be prepared to take losses. It is true no matter who is President. That is the reason the stock market has higher expected returns than a savings account does. A crash is always a possibility, too.

When I first started investing, the market dropped like a week later and took about a year to break even. With the 2008 recession it was something like 3 years for the indices to recover. The key thing about retirement investing is that you don't have to worry as much about this stuff if you are keeping your money in for 20 or 30 years. The people who invested just before the crash in 2008 still ended up making a profit if they kept their money in.
 
Are you starting with a big lump sum that you're going to invest all at once? If so, you could consider dividing it up and doing it more slowly piece by piece, if it'd make you more comfortable.

If you're thinking of starting a 401k, IRA, etc, that you're going to regularly put more money into, there's no real reason to wait. Start now and don't look back.

This opening an IRA (roth) since my 401k doesn't start for another 6 or so months.

It'll be a vangard so not everything in stocks
 
Yes.



If you are investing in the stock market, you have to be prepared to take losses. It is true no matter who is President. That is the reason the stock market has higher expected returns than a savings account does. A crash is always a possibility, too.

When I first started investing, the market dropped like a week later and took about a year to break even. With the 2008 recession it was something like 3 years for the indices to recover. The key thing about retirement investing is that you don't have to worry as much about this stuff if you are keeping your money in for 20 or 30 years. The people who invested just before the crash in 2008 still ended up making a profit if they kept their money in.

Yes, but I hear where he's coming from. If a big crash comes (and I think most of us feel we're due) then by jumping in then rather than now he could potentially double the amount of shares he can get in whatever he's investing in. If he's got a big lump sum, I can certainly see why he's hesitant to jump in at record highs, a decade after the last big crash, and with the clown we have taking over the country.
 

Cyan

Banned
This opening an IRA (roth) since my 401k doesn't start for another 6 or so months.

It'll be a vangard so not everything in stocks

If you're going with Vanguard, it's important to be aware that their funds have minimum investment amounts. IIRC the amounts are lower if you're using an IRA, but they're still there.
 

Wellington

BAAAALLLINNN'
Yes, but I hear where he's coming from. If a big crash comes (and I think most of us feel we're due) then by jumping in then rather than now he could potentially double the amount of shares he can get in whatever he's investing in. If he's got a big lump sum, I can certainly see why he's hesitant to jump in at record highs, a decade after the last big crash, and with the clown we have taking over the country.

Here's the solution -

Invest regularly during normal times.

If there is a market downturn (and your job/income is not affected), invest your regular amount and more.
 

tokkun

Member
Yes, but I hear where he's coming from. If a big crash comes (and I think most of us feel we're due) then by jumping in then rather than now he could potentially double the amount of shares he can get in whatever he's investing in. If he's got a big lump sum, I can certainly see why he's hesitant to jump in at record highs, a decade after the last big crash, and with the clown we have taking over the country.

If any of us could exactly predict crashes, we would be fabulously wealthy. Take a look at The Big Short. The guys successfully predicted the crash, but still got almost wiped out because it occurred years later than they thought.
 
If any of us could exactly predict crashes, we would be fabulously wealthy. Take a look at The Big Short. The guys successfully predicted the crash, but still got almost wiped out because it occurred years later than they thought.

I suppose what it boils down to is if you think the next big crash, whenever it comes, is going to crash to where it is now or higher. If not -- if it crashes to even say 12,000 -- then that lump sum would buy you more then than now. It's not so much a matter of timing the crash as estimating how far it will crash, isn't it?

In other words, if you buy in now, you're buying in at a market that's at 16,000. Is it going to climb to 24,000 and then crash back to 17,000? Seems highly unlikely. Seems much more likely it will crash to somewhere below the all-time highs we are currently sitting at.

Please correct me if I'm figuring something wrong, I'm obviously no genius at this stuff.
 
I suppose what it boils down to is if you think the next big crash, whenever it comes, is going to crash to where it is now or higher. If not -- if it crashes to even say 12,000 -- then that lump sum would buy you more then than now. It's not so much a matter of timing the crash as estimating how far it will crash, isn't it?

In other words, if you buy in now, you're buying in at a market that's at 16,000. Is it going to climb to 24,000 and then crash back to 17,000? Seems highly unlikely. Seems much more likely it will crash to somewhere below the all-time highs we are currently sitting at.

Please correct me if I'm figuring something wrong, I'm obviously no genius at this stuff.

You're just adding a further dimension you're not only timing the market you are also predicting the amplitude of rise/fall. Both of which are losers games.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. Invest now if you can and ride out the market. We will always be close to historical highs.
 

tokkun

Member
I suppose what it boils down to is if you think the next big crash, whenever it comes, is going to crash to where it is now or higher. If not -- if it crashes to even say 12,000 -- then that lump sum would buy you more then than now. It's not so much a matter of timing the crash as estimating how far it will crash, isn't it?

In other words, if you buy in now, you're buying in at a market that's at 16,000. Is it going to climb to 24,000 and then crash back to 17,000? Seems highly unlikely. Seems much more likely it will crash to somewhere below the all-time highs we are currently sitting at.

Please correct me if I'm figuring something wrong, I'm obviously no genius at this stuff.

Two things:

1. You are assuming that if a crash occurs that you will buy in at the bottom. That is actually really difficult to do. You are not going to know when a crash is finished. I remember in 2009 when the Dow hit bottom around 6000, people were saying "Don't buy in yet, it's going to 4000". Pretty soon it was back at 8000, and people were saying "Don't buy in now, it just went up by 30%".

2. You also need to include dividends in your calculations. Total market dividend is around 2%, so you get that much return every year even if stock prices stay frozen in place.
 
I'm contributing to a Vanguard S&P500 fund in my 401k through work. Not too long ago I noticed this wasn't a mutual fund but a collective investment trust. This is fine, right?
The fund is OAMN. Also why is the fund so much lower than the S&P 500 itself in the graph?

I have a Target retirement fund that is also considered a collective investment trust, OABV. I'm just checking to make sure these funds are fine and I'm not missing out.

I also have a question about 401k contribution limits. I switched jobs this year and rolled my first 401k into my current employer's plan. I put $1,200 into the original plan this year and I'm coming up to $16,800 in the new plan. The old 401k didn't have any matching while my current one has 50% match up to the limit.

I read if you haven't rolled over the old 401k you can contact the old 401k plan and remove the excess contributions, which would maximize my matching amount for the year. Am I out of luck since I rolled it over already? Not a huge deal if I can't, but I'm curious.
 
I'm contributing to a Vanguard S&P500 fund in my 401k through work. Not too long ago I noticed this wasn't a mutual fund but a collective investment trust. This is fine, right?
The fund is OAMN. Also why is the fund so much lower than the S&P 500 itself in the graph?

I have a Target retirement fund that is also considered a collective investment trust, OABV. I'm just checking to make sure these funds are fine and I'm not missing out.

Those funds look fine. OAMN's graph is off in the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year charts, but the fund is barely more than a year old and it seems like the site's graphing algorithm is just blowing it. If you look at the YTD and 1-year graphs, you'll see it's actually tracking the S&P 500 perfectly.
 

tokkun

Member
I have a Target retirement fund that is also considered a collective investment trust, OABV. I'm just checking to make sure these funds are fine and I'm not missing out.

The deal with Trusts is that they can offer lower fees than mutual funds because they are subject to fewer regulations. Most significantly, they don't have to keep a certain amount of the funds in cash.

The idea of requiring mutual funds to keep a large enough amount in cash is to ensure a certain amount of liquidity if investors want to withdraw their money. This is not so much of an issue for funds in 401k plans, since they limit investors' ability to withdraw and offer a small set of choices, so there is less reason to swap funds. So the lower fees generally make them a win for investors.
 
You're just adding a further dimension you're not only timing the market you are also predicting the amplitude of rise/fall. Both of which are losers games.
.

Not exactly; I'm saying when it crashes, which it inevitably will, buy in then.

Two things:

1. You are assuming that if a crash occurs that you will buy in at the bottom. That is actually really difficult to do. You are not going to know when a crash is finished. I remember in 2009 when the Dow hit bottom around 6000, people were saying "Don't buy in yet, it's going to 4000". Pretty soon it was back at 8000, and people were saying "Don't buy in now, it just went up by 30%".

You don't need to buy in at the bottom. All I am saying is when it crashes, and I think it will be in the next year or two, it is going to crash below 16000, and I think everyone would agree.

2. You also need to include dividends in your calculations. Total market dividend is around 2%, so you get that much return every year even if stock prices stay frozen in place.

True.
 
You don't need to buy in at the bottom. All I am saying is when it crashes, and I think it will be in the next year or two, it is going to crash below 16000, and I think everyone would agree.

I would beg to differ!


Justify it all you want but you are pretending to know the future and that is damn hard to predict. It's timing the market any way you cut it. And for longterm investment (like retirement) there is literally no good reason too risk it. Dump the money in the market asap and forget about it.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
With year end coming, I've been once again thinking about how another year has passed and wondering if we're on track with retirement savings. I'm getting old, which means I've been saving for retirement for a while at this point (since 2000); not the oldest in here, but all the folks posting about just getting started has made me realize just how long it's been, and I thought I'd offer a bit of perspective from someone who's been doing this for a while (and made my share of mistakes along the way).

Back in 2007 I built a dead-simple compounding savings table, showing what I thought we'd be investing per month and then extending it out for 25 years (my desired retirement age, from that point). It assumes the standard 8% growth.

A lot has changed in our priorities, how much we put in, how the market has done, etc. since I made the file. But I still go back to it, assumptions unchanged, as it gives me a simple goal to check our progress against. As months and even years go by, it has often felt like we're making very little progress, so it's been nice to have a measuring stick to see how we're doing. It ends with my desired age and savings. Here's how it looks right now, after a bit over nine years:

YTu074s.png

I wanted to post this given the recent discussion about market timing. I did this in 2007, but my wife and I opened our Roth IRA's in early 2000 - talk about bad market timing. We've now been through two crashes, and through it we've never timed the market. We just kept investing automatically every month, with extra bits as income allowed. Rode the market down, rode it back on up, investing both directions.

Two market crashes later, we're right on track. I don't feel confident saying I could have done better if I tried to time the market (and I'm 13 years into a finance career). I just do what I do in other parts of my life: just kept plugging away one bit at a time. It's working out just fine.

This is totally anecdotal, but there's a wealth of research indicating this anecdotal experience is very much the norm. Start saving when you can, and stick to your plan as the market does its thing.

(As an aside, it's a little nerve-wracking to be over 1/3 of the way to the end of the goal in time, but only <20% of the way there in raw savings. Ah, the power of compounding returns. Here's hoping it keeps playing out.)

The thread is nearly 3 years old and I'm feeling a wee nostalgic. Hope everyone is doing okay.
 

Niahak

Member
The thread is nearly 3 years old and I'm feeling a wee nostalgic. Hope everyone is doing okay.

I'm sure I speak for others as well when I say this thread has been exceptionally helpful. Thanks for all the advice you and everyone else in this thread have given over the years. I've only been doing an IRA for a few years (and 401k for 5 or so) and the discussion here was a big initial motivator in getting things in line.

Between this and automatically pushing money into savings at the beginning of each month, I have a good deal more financial confidence (and spend less money on games - which is a good thing, especially in a world where I can just get the same ones a little later).
 

Wellington

BAAAALLLINNN'
The thread is nearly 3 years old and I'm feeling a wee nostalgic. Hope everyone is doing okay.

Wow man thanks for that, very encouraging that on a 10 year horizon you are slightly ahead of schedule considering that the 10 year timeline includes the 2008 crash as well as more recent dips.

I know you have also accelerated your debt (mortgage) repayment as well. Does the graph look even better if you were to take your full net worth into account?
 

PlayerOne

Banned
is it advisable to go for specific ETFs like $HACK (cybersecurity), or ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy)?

I have put in ~$25k Canadian into my TFSA, going for $27k before 2016 ends, and $31k within the first 5 months of 2017.

Now, I have a bunch of ETFs and funds in my TFSA. Mainly the typical TD e-series and Vanguard, iShares ETFs. (all equities: S&P, US Total, Canadian, International, Emerging Markets, Global except Canada, etc.) and a couple of randoms (iShares Global Water, iShares Global HealthCare).

Now, I'm looking to buy Clean Energy and Cybersecurity ETFs.

a5IcumK.jpg
 

M-PG71C

Member
I just wanted to simply post thank you to everyone who posts regularly in this thread. A lot of what I have learned over the last couple of years in terms of investing came from here. The advice has been invaluable and my wife and I are well on our way in having a good retirement when we become older.
 
is it advisable to go for specific ETFs like $HACK (cybersecurity), or ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy)?

We are all very simple minded around here and try to keep it easy.

We don't pick winners and loosers here as if we could we would be bazillionairs.

Broad whole market ETFs is the way to go, not trying to guess which market or company is going to be performing well in the next 1, 2, 5, 10, 30 years.

I just wanted to simply post thank you to everyone who posts regularly in this thread. A lot of what I have learned over the last couple of years in terms of investing came from here. The advice has been invaluable and my wife and I are well on our way in having a good retirement when we become older.

image.php

;D
 

RSTEIN

Comics, serious business!
Great job Ghaleon! I do the same thing. It's so important. If you can't quantify it, you can't manage it!
 

PlayerOne

Banned
We are all very simple minded around here and try to keep it easy.

We don't pick winners and loosers here as if we could we would be bazillionairs.

Broad whole market ETFs is the way to go, not trying to guess which market or company is going to be performing well in the next 1, 2, 5, 10, 30 years.

That's a no, then? Just put it into Vanguard US Total Market ETF???
 
Top Bottom