Related Posts
Thoughts on moving to Calgary for cheap housing?
Any realtor recs? Looking to buy in Seattle
More Posts
Why hike letter is not released yet?
Conversation Starter
Conversation Starter
Pwc ke fyde in this comment thread!!
Hi, I recently came across Scaler's MS program, which offers masters degree in collaboration with Woolf University (European University). And, I am looking move to Canada in near future. Will the master degree offered through this course will be accepted by the education evaluation institute WES? If yes, is it considered as equivalent to Canadian Masters degree? Scaler Academy Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
#TeamKhabib
Let’s go!
Additional Posts in Personal Investment Chatter
Rising Star
Enthusiast
Any good non-tech stock buys?
Is Tesla still worth it?
Can you still make money off of crypto?
What are you buying in this market dip?
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Type faster
I disagree with ZS. In what world is 10% "far too high" for bonds? Your current allocation is fine, go for low fees. TDF's are okay as well, but not great for brokerage accounts tax wise.
Yea I'm with D1, that looks reasonable to me. There's some merit with going 0% bonds with that long of a time horizon but it'll come with slightly higher risk. Splitting hairs, you're solid OP!
Target date fund - automatically readjusts your portfolio weights (bonds, US vs. Global equities, etc.) on different investments based on your targeted retirement age
P1 - I am assuming you are investing for retirement and have a long time horizon like myself. If that is true, what you are doing has been proven by decades worth of investment research to be an ineffective strategy. Additionally, volatility over 3-5 year periods really shouldn’t bother you if you are investing for retirement. You should be focused on how much you will have in 20-30 years. I would recommend googling the following phrases and reading more: “Percent of hedge funds that have beaten the S&P 500”, “Time in the market vs timing the market”, “Cost of not being invested on the market’s 10 best days.” If you still feel confident that you can predict the timing of the market and you know something that 90% of hedge funds and other investment professionals don’t, keep doing what you’re doing.
Gotcha, yea the fees on TDFs usually make me steer clear of them.
I’m mostly in cash/ST treasuries and am covering short positions and selling cash covered puts to buy in case it goes lower. Folks seem to care more about “asset allocation” than rule #1 - don’t lose the money.
Low fee ETFs. Thoughts on risk and diversification with this portfolio? Suitable for 30 year time horizon? They are split between different tax treatment accounts as well (e.g. Roth IRA, Brokerage, pretax 401k).
Far too high % in bonds unless they are short term and you are trying to time the market (not recommended). Would advise being even more aggressive than what a TDF would be with this investment horizon
Thanks for input @ZS. What is a TDF?
I am retiring in max 30 years and the idea that 10% in bonds is too high is ridiculous—I think it’s too low. Are you 20 or 40? Is there potential to return to work in retirement if market tanks? If not, more bonds, and start now. I use 120 minus age...some still use 100. Also, think about your equity in physical real estate you own, if any, as part of your net worth and consider if you need any more exposure through a REIT.
@K1- The portion of your portfolio that you will be spending for retirement related expenses should gradually shift to less volatile assets (e.g. cash and bonds) 3-5 years in advance of you actually spending the money. You should have a solid plan so that you never have to quickly liquidate volatile assets (e.g. stocks). If you shift your asset allocation far in advance of you actually spending the money, you should never be in a situation of liquidating positions in a down-market. I agree that any physical real estate you own should be accounted for when considering total real estate exposure. And to answer your question I am 24 years old.
OP, thanks for the investing 101 info. That’s exactly what I said, and the whole reason I told you to use the 120 minus age rule to help you move your positions naturally as you progress to retirement. Given you want to retire early I would consider sticking with the 100 rule—in that instance you are underweight in bonds and cash.
Gotcha, I misunderstood you. No condescension intended! And I am a skeptical that I should have 24% of my portfolio in “safe” assets right now. Seems like I would be missing out on a lot of potential returns.
I know..it’s a hard rule to follow but it does impose discipline...