Assuming I have a time horizon >10 years.
Edit: thanks for all the replies!!
Yes. So much yes.
As much as I hate to send you to Reddit, the r/personalfinance flowchart is hard to beat for most people. I’d recommend you start there to make sure you’re not overlooking something like your emergency fund.
Is there a reason to focus on 401k (beyond the employer match) before HSA? Isn’t HSA more tax savings advantageous, even if just limited to health care expenses?
I’m not certain why they have HSA after 401k and IRA, but some possible things I can think of:
- HSAs can be harder to take advantage of of the triple tax benefit if you’re retiring early (that is, still younger and healthier)
- HSAs probably have worse investment options than an IRA
- Allowing the user to optimize their Roth vs Traditional mix
Again, I don’t really know because you’re right about the HSA triple tax advantage making it seem better than IRA or 401k, but I’m sure there was a reason given if you care to trawl the subreddit.
Not really if you exclude the employer match from consideration.
It would be worth it with even $10. Do it.
That’s 600/yr and a long enough horizon that most diverse portfolios are likely to be net positive (I’m seeing about 5,000 gained with 8% growth in a basic savings calculator)
I’d spend those 10 years trying to free up cash flow but time’s a powerful weapon regardless
It’s worth saving - investing (I assume you mean in the stock market/index/mutual fund) probably wouldn’t yield very significant growth but it is worth saving what you can.
Investing accidently helped me save. If I have money in an account, and I need to use it, I will, but by buying stocks and bitcoin, I don’t have that money, I have things that will increase in value that I can sell for money. And there have been a few desperate times that I had to do that, but my brain is far more unlikely to take a hypothetical future loss, than spend all my money today.
Removed by mod
I remember back s decade ago and using it to buy a coffee. It was slow back then. Can’t think of the time it takes now.
Why would the absolute amount of money matter for investing vs. saving cash? Assuming he finds a broker for which absolute transaction fees are negligible, the only important factors should be time window and risk tolerance, both of which are independent of the absolute saving rate.
Specifically if for retirement, time is your best friend. Anything you can put aside will be multiplied down the years and be much more when you need it most
Yes. If you can afford it, dumping that money into an ETF like VT, VTI, or VOO every month for the next 10 years is very likely to result in you turning a profit. Start with a Roth IRA and don’t bother with a standard brokerage account until you’re able to max out the contribution limit. If you want to do anything more complicated than buy big low cost ETFs study up first and go slow.
Yes. I started with 50/month using Autopilot to get in on the Pelosi investment portfolio. I am up 18% for the year.
S&P is like 23% this year, chasing Pelosi has apparently underperformed.
Yes, and actually with low amounts of money to work with you can make your contributions very efficient. To best spend save for retirement, choose the first option from this list that applies to you (and if you are able to save more later, go down the list after exhausting each option):
- 401k up to maximum company match
- pay off high-interest (>4%) debt
- IRA up to the contribution limit
- investment-type HSA up to the limit
- max out 401k contribution
- personal investment account without tax advantage
For most people, it’s recommended to use a traditional 401k and a Roth IRA, but it varies by situation. As for what to invest in, I would recommend a popular low cost ETF or index fund, like Vanguard or SPY. You can also look into ESGs if you want to do good with your money, but your expected earnings may be lower. I’m in ETHO and TICRX.
You might check out fire@lemmy.ml or personalfinance@lemmy.ml if you have questions about getting started.
Do you have emergency money?
First start emergency fund, then take care of debt. Then build a savings for emergency fund, then invest.
For anyone with stable income, only debt who’s interest rate is at or above the potential interest you would earn investments should be paid down first. Any debt at a rate lower than you stand to earn, should be paid over time. Any debt lower than the rate of inflation should be paid as slow as the terms allow without penalty.
So my order of priority is: high interest debt>emergency fund>tax deferred investing>ira and investing>low interest debt>even more cash holding>debt below inflation.
Not everyone has stable income. And for them, attacking debt isn’t always possible, especially after they go to get their car inspected and have a $1000 bill to settle in order to get to work for their unstable income. That’s starting your emergency fund goes first.
You need your initial emergency fund to reasonably cover “a bump in the road”. You then get stable, attack debt, and build emergency fund to be 3-6months expenditures, in case of a serious emergency.
Only then do we begin gambling in the investment markets.
High interest debt is an emergency. Anything in the emergency category gets paid first. High interest debt is a trap, you can’t hope to meet any other goal in life if you don’t take care of that first.
Yes, saving is like a muscle you need to do it to get better with it. It’s far easier to turn 50/months into 200/month as your income grows, than starting at 200/month.
Compounding debts need to go first if their interest is higher than your savings.
I just put extra money in a 5% high yield savings account. It’s not exciting, but there’s no risk and it will pay off over time
There’s also hardly any reward (comparatively speaking). Yields are crazy high right now on savings accounts, but they’re going to continue to drop, vs investing in the stock market (over the long term) is much more likely to maintain a much higher rate of return. Even at 5%, you’re really only getting about 2% growth since inflation is stuck at 3% right now. That compares to a long term average in the stock market of 7-9% after inflation.
Not to say that OP should do that, necessarily. Especially if they haven’t built their emergency fund which is far more important than investing, until you have a safe amount.
You’re probably right, as I’m not an expert, so thanks for your input. I am still worried of how the stock market will change with the upcoming trainwreck
You gotta remember the time horizon, even with historically bad presidents in office, if you smooth the line of the stock market returns over 10, 20, or 30 years, it ends up looking like a really, really good as an investment opportunity. Especially if you’re into dollar cost averaging.
Basically, if Trump tanks the stock market by going way overboard with things like tariffs, that would (at least looking at historical trends, I’m no financial expert or anything) make for a killer time to buy into the stock market because you’re getting stocks at a “discount.” Then when a different president / legislature comes into office, and if they turn around the economy, your investment would rise faster than otherwise expected.
Again, you gotta do what’s right for you, this isn’t me saying you should absolutely invest or anything, especially if your basic needs aren’t met or your emergency savings aren’t at a good enough level to last 6–12 months unemployed. This is just how it has been for the last ~100 years.
Nah, just piss it away.
