|
The NASDAQ fund is not a very sensible choice for any longterm investor. For a longterm investor interested in index funds, it is all about how a fund represents an asset class, the indexing methodology, etc. The NASDAQ 100 funds do not make sense any way you look at it. You can arguably say the S&P500 also makes less sense than broad market indices from MSCI or CRSP, but it still better than something like the NASDAQ fund (since the S&P500 is a good proxy for US large caps and has an understandable cap-weighted system).
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
Thought I'd follow up on my search for online-based automated investment tracking tools. I discovered that wikinvest.com launched an investment tracker - sigfig.com - that is absolutely everything I was looking for: auto-synchronizes investments with my brokerage account(Vanguard in my case), excellent analysis tools, widely supported on mobile platforms, and isn't Mint.com. I highly recommend anyone looking for the same thing to check it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 03:33
|
|
|
SuperCaptainJ posted:Thought I'd follow up on my search for online-based automated investment tracking tools. This looks cool as hell, but man am I dubious about giving all my brokerage credentials to a 3rd party. The data in the db may be encrypted, but apparently there is a method to decrypt it, log in and sync every day. So I dont see how a rogue developer wouldnt be able to access accounts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 06:57
|
|
|
I too feel a little uncomfortable giving all my brokerage accounts' credentials to a no-name third party tool. It's too bad that Mint's investment tracker SUCKS. I've even gone through and tried to manually adjust all of my cost basis info and it still has goofy gain/loss numbers that I don't know how the heck it is coming up with. And it still shows securities that I sold off more than a year ago. I use Mint for everything else, but man their investment tool is worse than useless, it's straight up wrong and misleading.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
Guinness posted:I too feel a little uncomfortable giving all my brokerage accounts' credentials to a no-name third party tool. It's too bad that Mint's investment tracker SUCKS. I've even gone through and tried to manually adjust all of my cost basis info and it still has goofy gain/loss numbers that I don't know how the heck it is coming up with. And it still shows securities that I sold off more than a year ago. Yeah, Mint's lovely investment tracker is why I started looking elsewhere. I've had some exposure to financial software engineering in my career, so if you're interested in technical crap, let me give you the high-level version of why I don't worry about it at all: -Account info and all investment data is encrypted with 128-bit or 256-bit AES security. This means that there is no computer or organized network of computers in existence that could brute force decrypt your information within our lifetimes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brute_force_attack#Theoretical_limits -Your password is the "key" to decrypt this information. When you type in your password, it too is encrypted, sent to their servers, where it is decrypted, and used to decrypt your account and financial info. Your password is not stored on their servers, and is never available to a human being. All of this is happening over SSL (uses the same 256-bit AES security), which means that it is nearly impossible for anyone to intercept this process, and even if they did, they couldn't do anything with the info being transmitted. There are really only two security holes in this setup, both of which would be your own drat fault, and only one would be malicious: -If you use lame passwords, reuse passwords across sites, or otherwise get your password leaked, someone else could obviously sign in and look at your stuff. They still couldn't move money, or find any personal information to help steal your identity, but they would know your financial situation and that might help them identify you as a worthwhile target. -At the bank I was working at, the key to decrypt your password is randomly computer-generated at the software's deployment and is never available to a human being. This includes the most senior personnel and developers at the company. This is industry-standard, and I am sure SigFig and Mint.com work the same way. If you were to let your account information leak to someone, and that person turned out to be an insanely talented hacker that somehow gained root access to SigFig/Mint's servers, and were able to navigate freely undetected for long periods of time in order to identify potential decryption keys among thousands (millions?) of compiled values, then they could potentially unlock your account information and access your accounts directly. I am not losing any sleep over this ever happening to anyone, much less myself. Anyways, I totally respect the 'better safe than sorry' attitude, but that's why I and a lot of other people ain't skeered. SuperCaptainJ fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Oct 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Someone obviously hasn't read all the complaints of Diablo 3 and WoW players who have had their accounts "hacked" despite nobody EVER being able to see their password. Encryption doesn't do much to prevent anyone from stealing your password, because the easiest ways to steal passwords are with keyloggers and phishing. Keyloggers are a real problem and despite what antivirus software you run, you probably have had one on your computer in some form at some point in time. The main reason that this kind of thing is pervasive in the gaming world and not in the banking world is that people who manage to get information like this by and large do not want the pressure of the real police / FBI trying to crack down on their poo poo. If they started hacking into bank/brokerage accounts then you can drat well bet they would face some some serious investigations. Anyway, the point I'm trying to make with all this is that having a financial tracker like Mint or Sigfig isn't really going to do much to compromise your information anymore than it is already (and it probably is).
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
Bank information gets stolen nearly constantly, and has been even before the internet existed. Not exactly sure what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
flowinprose posted:Anyway, the point I'm trying to make with all this is that having a financial tracker like Mint or Sigfig isn't really going to do much to compromise your information anymore than it is already (and it probably is). Exactly. "Harry" posted:
I'm talking about the detailed explanation I made of the only 2 entry points that are theoretically possible to access your account information. My point isn't that your info is 100% safe, it's that it isn't any less safe than it was before if you use these services.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 16:29
|
|
|
Harry posted:Bank information gets stolen nearly constantly, and has been even before the internet existed. Not exactly sure what you're talking about. We're talking about the difference between someone stealing your credit card / debit card and using it to rack up a few hundred dollars in charges vs. someone getitng into your brokerage account and potentially stealing thousands to hundreds of thousands. The former happens pretty often, the latter not so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
I decided to use that sigfig site and at least the mobile version only provides advice for the short term. The one it said I should look into using only looked good because sigfig only looked at the: last 3 years, it did not so good before that. Sigfig does not ask about tax information so the advice could end up lowering your return if you do not calculate your rate when looking at the numbers. Edit: The website only shows the last year of information. I must be missing where I can increase the amount of time. Yaos fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Oct 21, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2012 06:18
|
|
|
So I'm moving the money I had saved up to go to grad school into the market with long-term goals because I'm certain I want to continue working full time and don't need more than a 6 month emergency fund on hand. This is basically future midlife crisis money. I have no need or desire for it now, this is above and beyond retirement savings (I'm maxing out my Roth IRA and nearly maxing my Roth 401k). I don't need this money for a house down payment, I really see no way I could need it within the next decade. I'm comfortable with risk. Does dollar cost averaging actually do anything, or should I just pick a day and throw all of it in at once? For starters, I'm going to put 30% in VGTSX (total international stock index) and 70% in VTSMX (total stock index). I could do Admiral shares if there's a significant benefit for it, but I'd have to put it in as one chunk rather than doing some dollar cost averaging and putting small bits in on what seems like down days. If my time scale is that large should I just toss it in today and stop worrying?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
Weinertron posted:Does dollar cost averaging actually do anything, or should I just pick a day and throw all of it in at once? For starters, I'm going to put 30% in VGTSX (total international stock index) and 70% in VTSMX (total stock index). I could do Admiral shares if there's a significant benefit for it, but I'd have to put it in as one chunk rather than doing some dollar cost averaging and putting small bits in on what seems like down days. If my time scale is that large should I just toss it in today and stop worrying? Put it all in at once. This has been discussed at length here before and if you already have the money on hand it is better for long-term gains on average to put it all in at once (assuming you think the market will go up long-term, which you would or otherwise you wouldn't be investing in it at all). This is especially true if putting it in all at once allows you to get a better fund with lower costs like the Admiral shares.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
flowinprose posted:Put it all in at once. This has been discussed at length here before and if you already have the money on hand it is better for long-term gains on average to put it all in at once (assuming you think the market will go up long-term, which you would or otherwise you wouldn't be investing in it at all). This is especially true if putting it in all at once allows you to get a better fund with lower costs like the Admiral shares. Thank you so much. I'm not touching this for many years to come but I can't help looking at news about Apple and spooked investors. Edit: 0.06% expense ratio. Hell yeah, Vanguard. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
I'm interested in a three-fund portfolio with, ultimately: 55% Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund 20% Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund 25% Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund I've got $30,000 ready to go. Admiral shares are available of all three funds, but they require $10,000 per fund. Would I be better off launching into this with a 33-33-33 split and Admiral shares and reallocating over time, or should I only go for Admiral on the 55% so that I can have my target allocation right off the bat?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:I'm interested in a three-fund portfolio with, ultimately: Historically, your allocation will account for more of your returns than the difference in expenses. Since Vanguard's non-admiral expense ratios are quite low anyway, you should go with the allocation you want. If you invest more later, I believe they give you the option to convert your shares.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:I'm interested in a three-fund portfolio with, ultimately: If you drop below $10k they'll very politely reduce your shares to Investor shares anyway. Get admirals for your domestic stock index fund, investor shares for your other two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
I'm a US citizen currently working in Thailand and was wondering what my options are for investing. I've lived here a few years already and I don't have any plans to come back to the US any time soon. The main problem is that I don't make more than the earned income exclusion for expats, so I can't contribute to an IRA/Roth IRA. The other problem is that companies like Vanguard require you to be a US resident. So, for long term investing what should I look at besides IRA/Roth IRA/401(k) as an expat and is there another company that is good for investing from overseas? I could always lie and use my parent's address, but I don't know if that could cause any problems in the future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
Jenna Talia posted:I'm a US citizen currently working in Thailand and was wondering what my options are for investing. I've lived here a few years already and I don't have any plans to come back to the US any time soon. Check with your bank. They should be able to give you some good information. If not, I can put you in touch with my broker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
My 401k has a few default funds to pick, or there is the option to put it in a self directed account. The self directed account is with Hewitt. They have a $12.95 per trade fee. Some mutual funds, however, can be bought and sold with no transaction fee. There are a shitload of funds like this, but no Vanguard funds. The ones they have listed seem kind of expensive relative to VOO, mostly >.5%. So far I have just been accumulating like $1000 at a time and then bought a Vanguard ETF. Does this make sense? Is there a way to move my 401k from Hewitt to Vanguard? Would it be better to put the money into regular mutual funds instead of ETFs?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
Celot posted:Does this make sense?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 13:24
|
|
|
Alereon posted:You cannot move your 401k while still employed. Does your employer match contributions to your 401k? Painting with a broad brush, 401k plans tend to be rather lovely (because they're structured to benefit the employer and provider, not you), so people only put money in them to get the employer match. If you don't get a match just put your money into a Vanguard IRA. If you do get a match, contribute whatever amount you need to to max out your match (usually 6%) and put it in the best options you have available. Usually index funds have comparatively low expense ratios. Yes, it's matched to 6%, and I contribute an extra 2% over that. I don't really want an IRA just because I don't think I have the discipline to save if it's not just withheld from my paycheck. What about index fund ETFs vs index funds? e: So far I have most of my money in VOO (S&P 500) and VCSH (short term corporate bond). I want, within the next year, to accumulate something like the following ratio: S&P 500: 30% Total World Stocks: 20% Emerging Markets: 10% Large-cap Value Stocks: 10% REIT: 10% Short-term corporate bond: 20% Is that a reasonable way to do it? Celot fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Oct 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 15:51
|
|
|
Celot posted:Yes, it's matched to 6%, and I contribute an extra 2% over that. I don't really want an IRA just because I don't think I have the discipline to save if it's not just withheld from my paycheck. Looks like a reasonable mix. There's probably some overlap with the S&P 500 fund and the value stock fund. Check the holdings to see if it makes sense to have two funds that hold essentially the same securities. Same thing with Total World and Emerging Market funds. Could be some overlap. REITs are more of a somewhat risky income play, but 10% shouldn't make or break you. But about the IRA - you should be able to set up automatic contributions from your paycheck for an IRA. I'd be shocked if any plan you looked into wouldn't have this option. Some might have minimums, but it could come out of your paycheck automatically - just like your 401(k) contributions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 16:26
|
|
|
Often minimums are waived if you have direct deposit set up as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 16:27
|
|
|
Thanks, this is all very helpful. Can anyone explain ETFs vs mutual funds for me though? Like, which one do I want?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Celot posted:Thanks, this is all very helpful. Can anyone explain ETFs vs mutual funds for me though? Like, which one do I want? The upshot is that for a retirement account that will be held long-term there really isn't a meaningful difference, which to me means you should stick with mutual funds. ETFs are traded like stocks, which means they can be traded throughout the day at fluctuating prices. This doesn't help you if you're holding long-term. There can also be stock-like fees associated with trading ETFs. ETFs offer Capital Gains Tax advantages, but that doesn't matter if you're holding the assets in a tax-advantaged account. It seems to me that the one advantage ETFs offer that still exists in a retirement account is lower expense ratios, but since Vanguard's expense ratios are already so low that's not very compelling. For comparison (I took only a quick look and did NOT thoroughly confirm these funds have identical holdings), the Vanguard Large-Cap Index mutual fund (VLACX) has an expense ratio of 0.17%, while the Vanguard Large-Cap ETF (VV) has an expense ratio of 0.10%. While comparatively this is a large difference, in absolute terms you're comparing against an average expense ratio on the order of ~0.75% so the difference is meaningless. If you had to pay a fee to acquire the ETFs that's like 10 years to break even (I pulled that number out of my rear end).
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
I'm about to start a new job, which means it's time to roll my 401k over from my (soon to be) previous employer. Can anyone shed some light on this process? 1. Could I roll it over to a different company if I wanted to? (e.g. Fidelity to Vanguard) 2. Does it roll over to another 401k, or an IRA, or do I have to choose? What are the advantages of each? (assuming I do get a choice) 3. Should I note down my current investments, so that I could go with something similar with the new account? Or SHOULD I go with something similar?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 05:13
|
|
|
syphon posted:I'm about to start a new job, which means it's time to roll my 401k over from my (soon to be) previous employer. Can anyone shed some light on this process? Wrote a big response and then browser crashed. Very short summary 1) Either a) keep in old 401k b) rollover to new 401k c) rollover to an IRA 2) Most likely your best option is C. 401k's can have crappy funds to choose from, and with an IRA you can pick the custodian you want (i.e. Fidelity or Vanguard) 3) Rebalance at least once a year, I'd just roll your money over now into target date retirement fund and then look at the allocation of your total portfolio.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 05:41
|
|
|
So I suppose I should check in to see if I'm doing this whole "investment" thing right. I'm 25 and been working at my "career" job for about half a year now. I contribute 8% of my paycheck pre-tax to my 401k, and my employer contributes 6% - half of this goes into the company stock fund. I put 100% of my portion into a Lifecycle 2050 fund (ran by ING), because I've been getting a 15% return on my investments. I think the only better performing fund was the Science & Technology Fund. Every now and then, I sell the stock fund and move those funds over to the Lifecycle 2050 funds, because the company stock funds never perform to the level that the Lifecycle fund does. Anything I should be doing differently? I'm pretty happy with 8% for now, since it's the maximum that my company will match (matches 100% for the first 4%, 50% for the next 4%).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
Daeus posted:Wrote a big response and then browser crashed. Very short summary Don't leave your 401k at your old employers place, they can charge you service fees for that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
Both my old and new employers use Fidelity. Should I wrap it into a new 401k account, or IRA? What are the differences really? I have a Roth IRA as well, but is a traditional IRA taxed in the same manner as a 401k? (as opposed to a Roth IRA).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 19:03
|
|
|
syphon posted:Both my old and new employers use Fidelity. Should I wrap it into a new 401k account, or IRA? What are the differences really? I have a Roth IRA as well, but is a traditional IRA taxed in the same manner as a 401k? (as opposed to a Roth IRA).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
syphon posted:What are the differences really? Even though both your old and new employers are using Fidelity, it's likely that they'll have different selections of funds. If you roll over into your new employer's 401(k), you'll be limited to just the funds available through that plan. By rolling over into a self-directed IRA, however, you'll be able to choose your own funds. Goons tend to recommend Vanguard because it has funds with incredibly low expense ratios and management fees, which are probably the biggest drag on one's retirement savings. I believe you can roll over into either a traditional (rollover) or a Roth IRA. The former is treated exactly the same, taxwise, as your 401(k), so it's free for you to do. You'll pay taxes on your withdrawals when you retire. With a Roth, you pay into the account with after-tax dollars, but you pay no tax on the withdrawals when you retire. People who expect to be taxed at a higher rate when they're retired than they're paying right now should consider a Roth. People who expect to pay a lower tax rate when they're retired than they're paying right now should consider a traditional. People who aren't sure or want to hedge their bets should consider a mix of the two. If you roll over money from a traditional IRA or a 401(k) into a Roth, I think you have to pay some taxes on that event. Someone else more familiar with the rules should comment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
I think that about answers my question! I'll probably roll-over my old 401k into the new company-provided 401k and leave my existing Roth IRA separate. Thanks for all the pointers guys!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Anything I should be doing differently? I'm pretty happy with 8% for now, since it's the maximum that my company will match (matches 100% for the first 4%, 50% for the next 4%). Can you provide the actual name and ticker symbol of the Lifecycle fund you're investing in? I'm interested in looking at the expense ratio in particular. In my company 401k the target-date funds are terrible investments because the expense ratio is more than double the other funds, nearly 10X what I pay at Vanguard. As a result I keep my Vanguard Roth IRA in a Target 2050 fund but keep my 401k in stock funds I expect good long-term growth out of. Finally, I'll caution you about just looking at the returns of funds without considering the underlying reasons. For example, I'm in about the same boat as you in terms of when I started saving, and my company 401k was managing INCREDIBLE returns (>20%) up until about a couple weeks ago. The reason was simply that I had started investing prior to and during a recovery, so I was just incredibly lucky to come in at the right time to get the gains but not the initial losses. That said, a lot of those gains have been erased recently, but that just means I get another opportunity to buy assets cheaply before the prices recover. Standard disclaimer regarding me not being an expert and to seek other advice applies. Alereon fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Oct 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
How does one find the expense ratio charged per fund? (for Fidelity specifically, but also in general)
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
Look at the fund's prospectus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
Or if you are using fidelity specifically, look at the features and fees tab. It's literally the first number there. Link to a random example: http://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/fees-and-features/315910299
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Alereon posted:First, as a general rule you do not want to hold your own company's stock as part of a retirement account. This is for risk control: If your company goes bankrupt, not only are you out of a job and your source of income, you lose the retirement savings that were invested in the company. The only plausible exceptions are if you believe your company will beat the market long term (and keep in mind that you are probably not able to predict the company's performance and it will cost you a hell of a lot if you are wrong), and/or can buy the stock at a discount below market through an employee stock purchase program (and even then it probably isn't smart to hold it long-term). That makes sense. That's generally why I usually end up selling the stock once I get a decent amount of it and convert it into Lifecycle 2050. I'm not too worried about my company going under, though. Also, my life cycle fund is custom to the company. The expense ratio is $4.30 per $1000. When I first invested as an intern last year, the market took a terrible crash, and I ended up losing about 10% in the middle of the year, but gained it back (and then some) by year end. I definitely realize that these things fluctuate. seiferguy fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:So I suppose I should check in to see if I'm doing this whole "investment" thing right. I wouldn't try to get to fancy with putting more money into funds that are performing and taking money out of funds that aren't. Basically, you're buying high and selling low - all other things being equal. The thing to take away from huge, long term funds especially is that they trend towards average, with very few exceptions. I do agree that you should try to minimize your exposure to your own company's stock - but be wary of chasing a fund higher and higher. Eventually it will come back to earth. If you like one fund, and it goes lower, that should be a reason to buy more, not to sell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2012 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
Daeus posted:You cannot contribute to any 401k other than your current one. I'm not sure if that is what you meant by manual vs automatic. Unless your current 401k is in company stock, the future of the company is no risk to the investments held in your 401k. You basically have two choices to make: Does rolling over a 401k into a Roth IRA contribute to the $5k/year limit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 23:08
|
|