Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: if you had 10,000 to invest

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Price County, WI
    Posts
    422
    Hey Zoe,

    I just made a comment about Treasury I Bonds, but they cannot be held in an IRA, to my knowledge.

    You are 50 and you have a 20-year assumed tenure of ownership. Are you planning to withdraw income at all from your investments during the 20 years?

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,606
    I am not planning on withdrawing anything during the 20 years, just living on what I make during that time.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    297
    Vanguard S&P 500 index fund. Dirt cheap.

    Agree with bae; at age 30, buy equities. There's no such thing as risk-free investing, but time is your friend.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,593
    I hear you about the age thing. What would you do if you were Zoe's age, at 50, with 20 years?
    I'd probably still go all in with equities if I knew I could work 20 more years.

  5. #25
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Tybee View Post
    I hear you about the age thing. What would you do if you were Zoe's age, at 50, with 20 years?
    I'd probably still go all in with equities if I knew I could work 20 more years.
    I'm 54 now, and am running at 50% equities, 30% real estate, 20% bonds. The bonds are local-issue bonds for things I wanted to see happen and support. Otherwise I'd be 60% equities, 40% real estate I suspect. "Real estate" for this purpose includes mortgages I privately fund, and shared-equity purchase deals I participate in to help with affordable housing.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by bae View Post
    I'm 54 now, and am running at 50% equities, 30% real estate, 20% bonds. The bonds are local-issue bonds for things I wanted to see happen and support. Otherwise I'd be 60% equities, 40% real estate I suspect. "Real estate" for this purpose includes mortgages I privately fund, and shared-equity purchase deals I participate in to help with affordable housing.
    Would you classify REITs as real estate? I don't, but some people seem to. So how would you classify Catherine's Vanguard REIT fund?

  7. #27
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Tybee View Post
    Would you classify REITs as real estate? I don't, but some people seem to. So how would you classify Catherine's Vanguard REIT fund?
    For my purposes, I'd lump it under "real estate". But that's just for planning for my specific scheme.

    I think the stock market guys last year created a new sector, "Real Estate Sector", and reclassified REITs from the "Financial Sector" class into the new Real Estate class.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Price County, WI
    Posts
    422
    When I was 50, I was somewhat less averse to risk than I am now. It was 1999.
    I do not quite understand Tybee's comment <paraphrased> "I'd probably still go all in with equities, if I were 50, and IF I knew I could work 20 more years." To each his own tolerance for risk. I would appreciate clarification from Tybee about his assumptions about risk of loss (maximum drawdown) in a 100% equity portfolio. John Hussman's stated estimate is -50% to -62%, and I can understand his method in arriving at that range.

    After a decline in the SP500 of 50-62%, I would probably regard equities as lower risk than they are now.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by dado potato View Post
    When I was 50, I was somewhat less averse to risk than I am now. It was 1999.
    I do not quite understand Tybee's comment <paraphrased> "I'd probably still go all in with equities, if I were 50, and IF I knew I could work 20 more years." To each his own tolerance for risk. I would appreciate clarification from Tybee about his assumptions about risk of loss (maximum drawdown) in a 100% equity portfolio. John Hussman's stated estimate is -50% to -62%, and I can understand his method in arriving at that range.

    After a decline in the SP500 of 50-62%, I would probably regard equities as lower risk than they are now.
    My assumption had more to do with the 20 year time frame, and the idea that she could leave it in there and weather market ups and downs. But that would depend on how much money I brought in and how much money I had to put into the 401k. If someone is going to work 20 years and not touch the money, then I am not sure that it's that much difference between 30 and retiring at 50 and 50 and retiring at 70.

    My own portfolio is allocated differently, split about 50/50 between equities and fixed income, but I cannot work full time anymore, I have a disability, I am 61, etc. etc.

    If I had a lot more money, I'd probably have 60% fixed income at my age.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,341
    I'd call REITs a sector fund specializing in real estate. It's probably just terminology.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •