Know how much is coming in, know how much is going out calculated on a yearly basis. The going out should be no more than 70% of the coming in. Invest the rest in funds that mirror the stock market until you have a nest egg equivalent to 3-4 years salary. Then hire an investment professional who is not paid on commission but instead paid based on the growth of assets under management. Pay particular attention to your risk tolerance levels (all reputable investment firms will have huge questionnaires that will help you figure out your risk tolerance) and generally invest 1 step more conservatively than your acceptable risk tolerance. Rebalance your portfolio based on investment professional recommendations no more frequently than every 3 months. Keep in mind that once or maybe twice a year is usually sufficient.
@Oogiem
First time hearing there are "investment professional who . . . [are] paid based on the growth of assets under management" Thank you
Understood professional investment firms paid based on assets under management no matter what . . . even in the midst on zero growth and/or negative returns for different asset allocations under particular/general asset management?
However, despite seemingly low AUM % fees and 100% of all/any undisclosed external expenses/costs . . . have seen net distribution gains on tax filings effect result in . . . dollars-&-cents . . . where the rubber meets the road bottom-line . . . goes more like this:
1/3 Taxes in dollars-&-cents, 1/3 Professional Investment Firm/Team in dollars-&-cents, 1/3 Risk-Taking Investor in dollars-&-cents . . . which are all expressed from dollars-&-cents gains since nobody actually accepts "% currency" as payment including Professional Investment Firms:
The above after Tax gain results:
50% for 'Professional' Non-Risk Taker [0% drawdown potential] in dollars-&-cents depending on
what the market does
50% for Hard-Working/Saving Risk-Taker [50% - 90% diversified drawdown potential] in dollars-&-cents depending on
what the market does
Again, perhaps all in dollars-&-cents might be a more suitable way to evaluate capital management/service value?
Perhaps the Professional Investment Firms are, for no extra-charge, just kidding/bantering with me when the say they charge as a % of AUM . . . what they really mean to say is dollars-&-cents of AUM + 100% of dollars-&-cents of all/any undisclosed external expenses/costs no matter what? Those professionals crack me up
"%" to the Investment Industry are what Chips are to casino's to ever so slightly nudge participants from the reality of
their provisions?
Perhaps:
1. Paying an hourly fee might make more economic sense
2. Working with a no-fee financial planner at a branch office of one of the major brokerages from
Three-fund portfolios possible available in one's particular area?
As more additional unreliable financial education:
Publicly traded Berkshire Hathaway . . . B series for the 'little people' . . . which like the market at large, has had 50% drawdowns and a weird price glitch 2024 QII would essentially be a non-dividend professionally managed diversified market portfolio for nil given their low overhead
Ps. Warren Buffet has changed his tune on giving multi-billions of his shares to the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation and previously overpaid billions for Kraft/Heinz at his and shareholders expense . . . hate when that happens
For some strange reason, when money is involved there are a plenitude of options?
Thank you very much
As you see
GTD fit. . . .