Anonymous
9
Discussion (9)
Learn how to style your text
Shengshi Chiam, CFA
17 May 2020
Personal Finance Lead at Endowus
Reply
Save
This number is not scalable and not catered to an individual's ability. As such I avoid such vague numbers. A better rule of thumb is to ask what is your current income and scale from there:
Reply
Save
While the 100K goal is a great milestone to hit, financial goals should ultimately be individualised. There are many factors to consider, including age, annual income, family situation and others. In "The Millionaire Next Door", Thomas J. Stanley groups accumulators of wealth according to this formula, which attempts to account for 2 variables: age and annual income.
The formula is: Age x pre-tax annual household income from all sources, except inheritances / 10 = your “expected” net worth
"Prodigious accumulators of wealth" are people who have a net worth twice their expected level. Instead of focusing on an absolute number (e.g. $100K), it might be more worthwhile using a formula such as this and reaching for whatever number is expected for your age and annual income.
Reply
Save
Okay, correct me if I'm wrong but I think everyone here misunderstood your question. Since you specified passively, my intepretation is that you want to know if you should invest passively or actively before you have your first 100k.
It depends.
Honestly, let's first point out trying to beat the market is a fool's errand and 99.9% of people fail either due to lack of knowledge, emotions or uncontrollable circumstances. When stock picking, some times even good and logically sound companies picked based on a solid investing strategy can completely fail. As a young investor with small capital, this would probably devastate you and throw you off investing entirely. I'm not saying its impossible to beat the market, but know that its a tough and emotional journey.
On the other hand, passive investing allows you to focus on increasing your earning power without the stress and extremely likely failure.
Buttttt if you intend to actively manage your investments eventually anyways, my recommendation is go for it, even before you hit 100k. Firstly, the losses now from mistakes you make will be smaller than when you're managing a larger portfolio. Secondly, its good to get your feet wet and build experience. It'll also let you change your mind to invest passively if you decide to do so.
Reply
Save
Cryotosensei
14 May 2020
Blogger at diaperfinancingfund.blogspot.com
I think it all depends on how self-motivated you are. in the woke salaryman's blueprint, he stated h...
Read 5 other comments with a Seedly account
You will also enjoy exclusive benefits and get access to members only features.
Sign up or login with an email here
Write your thoughts
Related Articles
Related Posts
Related Products
4.7
1293 Reviews
StashAway Simple Guaranteed 3.55% p.a. (Guaranteed rate)
Cash Management
INSTRUMENTS
None
ANNUAL MANAGEMENT FEE
None
MINIMUM INVESTMENT
3.5%
EXPECTED ANNUAL RETURN
Mobile App
PLATFORMS
4.5
956 Reviews
4.7
656 Reviews
Related Posts
I think passively investing beyond $100k, even to $1million, or to any amount, makes sense.
Focusing on your human capital and earnin ability when you are young take precdence in my opinion, so I totally agree with him!
We spoke about it in a webinar here:
https://endowus.com/insights/webinar-fuss-free-...