|
I would avoid bonds in a taxable account, which is 20% of that fund. Are you looking for a long time horizon? If so, load up on stocks and increase your bond allocation in your tax advantage space to balance out your portfolio. Specifically stocks that don't pay dividends.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
Rocks posted:There was a strategy I read in Tony Robbin's Money Master the Game that was to pay off the next month's principal every month, thereby being able to pay off your mortgage in half the time (roughly). Otherwise I don't think it works like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
I'd like to start a second long-term savings fund for my daughter, 3, that I can put a small amount of money in monthly (20-50 bucks). I figure now's the best time to start compounding interest for her when she's this young. She's got a 529 already so I'm looking for something not restricted to withdrawals for certain expenses. She can't have an IRA without income, so is there some other tax-advantaged vessel I don't know about or should I just open a custodial brokerage account and put it all in VTSAX?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
Gray Matter posted:I'd like to start a second long-term savings fund for my daughter, 3, that I can put a small amount of money in monthly (20-50 bucks). I figure now's the best time to start compounding interest for her when she's this young. She's got a 529 already so I'm looking for something not restricted to withdrawals for certain expenses. She can't have an IRA without income, so is there some other tax-advantaged vessel I don't know about or should I just open a custodial brokerage account and put it all in VTSAX? I'm curious about this as well, so far as I could figure out the only non-education-specific option was basically UTMA which isn't tax advantaged per-se besides maybe potential kiddie tax implications.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
I'm helping my spouse fix her 403b allocations and was wondering what advice folks in here would have for me given her options. Her 403b plan is managed via nationwide and here are the default funds:quote:AmFds Inc Fd Am R3 0.92% I think I'll probably end up plunking 100% into FidAdv Free 2050 A since it looks like there's no way to use individual funds to get a better deal. Does this sound about right, given the options? There's also the fund window, which has access to most everything, but it looks like anything ordered from there has an additional .35% ER tacked onto it. Going through this makes me happy about having the TSP. It's so much better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:There's also the fund window, which has access to most everything, but it looks like anything ordered from there has an additional .35% ER tacked onto it. You could probably use this to buy all Vanguard (or other) index funds and still come out ahead, even with the extra 0.35% ER. For example, Vanguard's S&P 500 fund (VFINX) is 0.16% so 0.51% with the extra .35, still half of the 1.02% of the Fidelity fund. Or Fidelity's S&P 500 fund is FUSEX (really? F U SEX?) only has a 0.09% ER. 2500 min. If you can get the Admiral shares (VFIAX), 10k min, it goes down to 0.4% total. drat that's a terrible 403b. totalnewbie fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Mar 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Any reason to prefer VTSAX over VTI?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:Any reason to prefer VTSAX over VTI? Mutual fund vs ETF is such a non-issue you could flip a coin if you wanted to. A good discussion: http://jlcollinsnh.com/2014/08/18/stocks-part-xxv-hsas-more-than-just-a-way-to-pay-your-medical-bills/#comment-4212839
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
The only real benefit to the ETFs is that they get the admiral fund expense ratios without the $10k minimum. Otherwise... the mutual funds can be bought in fractional shares which is a plus. Buying and selling runs at market close which can be a negative. ETFs have to be bought in full units (reinvested dividends will provide fractional shares) and have to deal with buy/ask spreads (which will add a penny to your purchase price and subtract a penny from your sale price). It's fine to have a preference, but everyone agrees that they're both perfectly acceptable ways of holding index funds that are exactly equivalent in all the ways that matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Thanks! I bought VTI in a taxable account years ago, and I've been putting a lot of my wife's IRA in it as well just out of familiarity. Wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something important there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
My spouse recently transferred some investments from a taxable actively managed fund at a wealth management firm to her Vanguard brokerage account. The transfer went smoothly aside from the wealth management fund never bothering to forward cost-basis information to Vanguard, something she’s trying to resolve. The investments are a fairly well balanced mix of a few dozen stocks and bonds with an age appropriate allocation, about the only criticism is that it’s (much) less diversified than an index fund. She’s trying to decide what to do with these investments next, as far as we can tell the options are: 1) Sell the investments now and invest the money in Vanguard mutual funds (probably a Target fund) 2) Sell the investments over time, spreading out the capital gains and providing the opportunity to employ some sort of tax harvesting strategy (???) 3) Do nothing: let the investments sit in the brokerage account, try to rebalance occasionally Option 1 (sell everything now) is the strong favourite, as we both have very little patience for dealing with investments and tax issues. The downside is paying a not-insignificant capital gains tax this year (and obviously losing out on 30+ years of compounding on the taxed amount). Additionally holding the stocks in the brokerage account costs nothing while the Vanguard funds have a small but non-zero management fee. It also makes transferring the investments to Vanguard a bit silly in retrospect, as it would have been easier to have the former investment manager just sell everything himself and mail her a cheque. On the other hand we’re both financially illiterate and would be interested in hearing other opinions. Is there a good reason to not sell the stocks to buy mutual funds? Why might we want to spread the sales out over time (for reference any gains would already be considered long-term)? I should mention that we probably don’t know enough to effectively rebalance or harvest capital losses, so options 2 and 3 would probably require hiring an tax or investment advisor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
DNK posted:The only real benefit to the ETFs is that they get the admiral fund expense ratios without the $10k minimum. This is the post I've been looking for for 6 months. Thank you
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:My spouse recently transferred some investments from a taxable actively managed fund at a wealth management firm to her Vanguard brokerage account. The transfer went smoothly aside from the wealth management fund never bothering to forward cost-basis information to Vanguard, something she’s trying to resolve. The investments are a fairly well balanced mix of a few dozen stocks and bonds with an age appropriate allocation, about the only criticism is that it’s (much) less diversified than an index fund. She’s trying to decide what to do with these investments next, as far as we can tell the options are: Your situation sounds a little more advanced than the Newbie thread so getting a tax and/or investment advisor/CFP might be worth it but what are your goals for this money? What is the purpose and what is the timeframe? Example: Is this for retirement in 30 years or 5? Or are you trying to buy a house with the money in 6 months? And if you don't mind... what stock exactly are we talking about and in what quantity?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
So for my 401k I'm thinking of switching from Vanguard target retirement fund for 2055 (has an ER of 0.05%) to a mix of stock and bond funds, since their retirement fund gives 90% stocks and 10% bonds while I'd like 70% stocks and 30% bonds. My employer's plan doesn't have a domestic stock fund that contains both small/medium and large cap stocks. Instead, it has Domestic small/med cap stock fund with an ER of 0.05% Domestic large cap stock fund with an ER of 0.02% International (apparently large companies?) stock fund with an ER of 0.07% Domestic total bond market fund with an ER of 0.04% For comparison, the target retirement fund contains domestic and international stock funds and domestic and international bond funds. So if I don't use it then I won't be able to get international bonds. Does going ahead with a 70/30 split sound insane? If not, how do I know how much to split between the domestic large company fund and the domestic small/med company fund? Also, if I move some of my 401k into Vanguard's REIT index fund (with an ER of 0.01% which seems super low to me), then what happens if the fund distributes dividends? Are they reinvested or are they basically treated as cash somehow and not allocated? EDIT: I just found this: https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Approximating_total_stock_market Is that basically the solution to my problem of figuring out how to split small/med and large cap funds? Just dump 80% of my domestic stock allocation into the large one, and dump the remaining 20% into the small/med one? oliveoil fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
How soon are you looking to retire? 70/30 is pretty safe on the pre-retirement side of investing. Hell once you are fully retired you're going to want to be 80/20 - 55/45 or so depending on how long you need that money to last. Do you not have access to earlier target date funds that would shift more into bonds? Vanguard 2030 target date is almost 72/28. If you just want to create your own fund that is fine too, just throwing that out there. Determining your Large vs med/small mix is similar to figuring out your stock / bond mix. It's all risk related. Small tends to be more risk higher return in the very long term. In terms of tax questions, are these investments in tax sheltered accounts or no? If they are not sheltered, you will pay taxes on any dividends or interest earned even if you reinvest them. You are talking about your 401k so I assume tax sheltered, but just want to be crystal clear. I wouldn't worry about REIT at all until you are very comfortable with portfolio building in general, to the point where you don't need advice outside of making minor tweaks to your overall portfolio. Basically, we need more information around your life circumstances to give better advice. When are you planning / would like to retire. How much do you want to have in retirement. What are your gut feelings towards risk (if you are risk adverse but choose risky investments, you are likely to sell off the farm in a down turn. If you don't mind risk but choose low risk options, you might be working a lot longer than you want). Based on your post I'd say you should do some more reading. Have you read the 4 pillars yet? If not I'd suggest doing 80/20 through a target date or life strategy fund if possible for now while you learn more. The 4 Pillars is great for teaching the basics of portfolio building. I think it is wise to include some international options for diversification, which as you mention, the target date funds will accomplish. What made you come up with the 70/30 number? Your expense ratios are absolutely fantastic for a 401k, so that's great. I wouldn't feel bad what so ever about sticking with the 2055 fund if that's around your retirement date. I don't mind a some additional risk myself, so at age 32 I'm at a 88/12 stock bond mix and planning to shift to that to around 80/20 at age 40-45. Edit: Oh. oliveoil posted:How do I evaluate a fund? I've got all my 401k contributions in a target retirement fund for 2055 with vanguard, but they allocate 90% stocks and 10% bonds, which bothers me. I was thinking of switching to either one of their earlier retirement funds (e.g., 2025 or 2030 retirement trust select funds, but they don't get me to to the 70/30 stock/bond split I want. The 2025 one appears to be 65/35 stocks/bonds and the 2020 one appears to be 72/28 stocks/bonds, which seems strange. oliveoil posted:I'm 27 and want to be able to rebalance from 70/30 to 100/0 stocks/bonds when stocks stop doing so well. Also, the book If You Can recommend something closer to 30% bonds than the 90/10 split I've got now. Post all of the fund names and ERs available to you and we will help you build a portfolio from it, assuming this is your only investment? 70/30 is pretty conservative for your age. If you need to lock onto a number while you educate yourself more, I would get with 80/20. I personally would recommend 90/10 (staying in the fund you are in now) but you sound risk adverse. Loan Dusty Road fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
oliveoil posted:EDIT: I just found this: https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Approximating_total_stock_market Yup, that's the ratio. Bogleheads Wiki has you covered for almost anything. What's the International fund? Chances are it's good enough, I pity people who have TSP and have to buy emerging markets, small caps, a Canadian fund, and maybe a South Korean fund to simulate Total International.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Zero One posted:Your situation sounds a little more advanced than the Newbie thread so getting a tax and/or investment advisor/CFP might be worth it but what are your goals for this money? What is the purpose and what is the timeframe? Good point, I should have been clearer. These transferred investments are part of my spouse's retirement savings, so the relevant timeframe is ~30 years. Getting the opinion of a tax accountant/investment advisor has certainly occurred to her, right now we're mainly trying to understand what sorts of questions she should be asking. quote:And if you don't mind... what stock exactly are we talking about and in what quantity? The former wealth management firm purchased a selection of stocks that are essentially a subset of the US large-cap market, with purchases allocated roughly in proportion to market capitalization. There are stocks from ~35 different companies with between 10-100 shares in each company, and then ~10% invested in bonds (mainly from one large US investment bank and a municipal bond ETF). To be frank it looks like the former investment advisor was trying to approximate the performance of a large-cap index fund without simply purchasing an index fund/ETF. At least the returns have been roughly in line with the broader market, so it's not like there's a rush to liquidate a terrible investment (especially now that there are no more manager fees).
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:The former wealth management firm purchased a selection of stocks that are essentially a subset of the US large-cap market, with purchases allocated roughly in proportion to market capitalization. There are stocks from ~35 different companies with between 10-100 shares in each company, and then ~10% invested in bonds (mainly from one large US investment bank and a municipal bond ETF). To be frank it looks like the former investment advisor was trying to approximate the performance of a large-cap index fund without simply purchasing an index fund/ETF. At least the returns have been roughly in line with the broader market, so it's not like there's a rush to liquidate a terrible investment (especially now that there are no more manager fees). It may not be a BAD investment, per se. It takes a surprisingly few stocks to almost mirror the S&P 500 with pretty good diversity. I seem to remember reading (maybe in Common Sense in Mutual Funds) that a well chosen small number of stocks, like 10-12, can get you very close to tracking the index. Remember that "diversity" in a stock fund isn't arithmetic, and going from owning 30 stocks to owning 500 stocks barely moves the needle. There are certain inherent advantages to owning actual stock (voting, options) that you don't really get with a big fund, but they mainly matter for sophisticated and well-capitalized investors. I was considering building my portfolio that way until I realized how much more of a pain rebalancing would be and that I wouldn't have the capital available to make it effective any time soon. The point is, as long as your investment advisor was doing his job well, he was probably using a perfectly valid investment strategy. If you're managing your own money, however, you're better off going with the index fund strategy. It's much simpler.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
I'm in the UK and have been looking into getting started with investing. I want to follow the Lazy Portfolio route but am slightly fazed by the US centricity of it all. "Domestic equity" refers to the US, whereas domestic for me is obviously the UK. Does it matter though? It doesn't really make any difference to me if I pick a US equity index rather than a UK one, right? Same with a bonds/gilt index?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
I Like Jell-O posted:It may not be a BAD investment, per se. It takes a surprisingly few stocks to almost mirror the S&P 500 with pretty good diversity. I seem to remember reading (maybe in Common Sense in Mutual Funds) that a well chosen small number of stocks, like 10-12, can get you very close to tracking the index. Remember that "diversity" in a stock fund isn't arithmetic, and going from owning 30 stocks to owning 500 stocks barely moves the needle. Thanks for the response, we weren't giving enough consideration to the idea that just holding the stocks could compare favorably to switching over to index funds. I looked more into the consequences of the “sell everything” option, and was a little surprised to see it resulted in a mid 5-figure lower value (in present dollars) after 30 years of compounding compared to just holding the stocks in the brokerage. This calculation assumes the stocks perform similarly to the broader market, which might not actually be a bad assumption at present. Realistically we can't hold the stocks indefinitely as it's clear we don't want to deal with rebalancing etc. Now we're taking a closer look at selling the stocks over time to minimize capital gains tax without feeling that we have to sell ASAP to buy index funds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
I was recently laid off from my company and I now have a new job with a better 401k (Vanguard instead of Fidelity w/ BrokerageLink). I was planning on just rolling over my Fidelity 401k into my Vanguard 401k however I noticed that my Fidelity 401k is still showing the unvested contributions in my balance, and thus I am theoretically still earning on those. Who owns the increased value of unvested money? Is it better for me to keep my money in 401k to keep earning on the ~10.5k in unvested money until they claw it back, or will they claw back any potential earnings on that 10.5k as well making it a moot point?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
I'd like to take a portion of our emergency fund and find a method of making more than ~1% interest on it. Some sort of basic index fund investment that I can back out of in a month or so if we both lose our jobs and one of us ends up in the hospital or something. Not looking for lots of risk, and not working with a ton of money really just 2.5-5k. Any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Don't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
I need some advice on 401(k) funds. I just started a new job and I can elect to start contributing to my 401(k) on April 1st. It's through Transamerica. I've been looking through the fund options, and they're not great and the 401(k) doesn't have a match. I contribute however much I want, and at the end of the year, based on profits, my company plops some money in as their contribution. They contribute at the end of the year regardless of whether I contribute or not. One of my coworkers said that the percentage the company contributes usually amounts to 6-8% of my salary. I have to be with the company for a year before this happens though, so I probably won't see any contribution from the company until December 2018. I was planning on putting away 8% of my salary, but now looking at the funds, I'm not so sure. Here are the funds and their ER's: Fund --- Net Expense Ratio--- Gross Expense Ratio SHORT BONDS/STABLE/MMkt Transamerica Partners Gov MM--- 0.80%--- 0.87% Stable Pooled Fund --- 0.55% Wilmington/Metlife Stable Class 25 --- ? Interm./Long-term Bonds John Hancock Bond R4 --- ? Aggressive Bonds Templeton Global Bond Adv --- 0.68% --- 0.71% Large-Cap Stocks Invesco Diversified Dividend R5 --- 0.54% --- 0.55% JPMorgan US Equity Sel --- 0.76% --- 0.81% Vanguard 500 Index Admiral --- 0.05%--- 0.05% American Funds Growth Fund of Amer A --- 0.66%--- 0.66% Small/Mid Cap Stocks JPMorgan Mid Cap Value A --- 1.24% --- 1.42% Oppenheimer Main Street Mid Cap Y --- 0.86% --- 0.86% Goldman Sachs Small/Mid Cap Growth Instl --- 0.93% --- 1.05% Goldman Sachs Small Cap Value Instl--- 0.97% --- 1.01% International Stocks American Funds EuroPacific Gr R5 --- 0.54% --- 0.54% American Funds New Perspective A --- 0.77% --- 0.77% Vanguard Total Intl Stock Index Admiral --- 0.12% --- 0.12% Target Date American Funds 2055 Target Date Retire R4 --- 0.81% --- 0.81% I already have a Roth IRA through Vanguard that I max every year, I just put it all into their target date fund for 2055. I obviously will want to go with the two Vanguard funds for the 401(k), but I'm not sure what to do for bonds or even how much to put into what. Or if I should just suck it up and throw it into the target retirement fund even though it's at .81% since I might not be able to do better by picking individually. Any advice?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Marman1209 posted:I'd like to take a portion of our emergency fund and find a method of making more than ~1% interest on it. Some sort of basic index fund investment that I can back out of in a month or so if we both lose our jobs and one of us ends up in the hospital or something. Not looking for lots of risk, and not working with a ton of money really just 2.5-5k. Any suggestions? There are various cds with a bit more interest, and i bonds were mentioned as something that makes sense as well due to the current rate, but either of those is going to lock your money for 3-6 months more or less before you're going to be able to withdraw or withdraw without penalty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Steampunk Hitler posted:Is it better for me to keep my money in 401k to keep earning on the ~10.5k in unvested money until they claw it back, or will they claw back any potential earnings on that 10.5k as well making it a moot point? It's a moot point. They track the earnings on the unvested portion and will treat unvested earnings the same as the unvested principal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
baquerd posted:There are various cds with a bit more interest, and i bonds were mentioned as something that makes sense as well due to the current rate, but either of those is going to lock your money for 3-6 months more or less before you're going to be able to withdraw or withdraw without penalty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
Especially for an emergency fund you don't plan to use. If you lose some of the interest in that rare case, no big deal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
My wife has student loans at: 13k - 5.9% 15.5k - 5.59% 8k - 5%. I have some money invested in individual , taxable stocks that has done well, but I am looking to reduce our individual stock exposure while cementing some long term gains. At first I was thinking about putting it into bonds or something else safe, but then I realized that bonds wouldn't do as well as the interest we are losing on her school loans. Does this make sense? I would plan to payoff the 5.9% and 5.59% loan, and then use the money that was going towards those loans to bump up our retirement accounts each month, because right now we are only contributing enough to get our employer matches + plus maxing our IRAs each year. grenada fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Mar 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
laxbro posted:My wife has student loans at: Is your tax situation such that you're able to deduct interest paid on these student loans? Because that does complicate things (very) slightly. Overall I would say your plan is a good one, especially because it will increase your retirement contribution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
baquerd posted:There are various cds with a bit more interest, and i bonds were mentioned as something that makes sense as well due to the current rate, but either of those is going to lock your money for 3-6 months more or less before you're going to be able to withdraw or withdraw without penalty. My wife's credit union (Alliant) has CDs that won't impact principle after 7 days, which actually kinda seems like a no brainer if it's just sitting in savings anyway. As far as I bonds go, would it make sense to buy a handful on a regular basis? Our emergency account has been mostly just sitting for a while, but I've decided until we have to take on some sort of extra debt burden I'm just going to feed it automatically for a while. If, say, every 4 months I buy 3 100 dollar I bonds, up to a certain point? I know gently caress all about bonds beyond the stack of EE bonds my grandmother got me when I was born, and the handful we have somewhere hidden... I figure I could eventually just end up with a 34% savings/33% CDs/33% I bonds mix once the bonds start getting to a year old so the only penalty I'd get hit with is last 3 months interest. This is also in order of use, where dipping into the bonds means we have seriously hosed up (blew all credit, family is dead, both fired/laid off) since we have no serious obligations, debt or otherwise. Not making bank but not crazy, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Is there a consensus on how TIAA-CREF mutual funds compare to corresponding Vanguard funds? My cursory impression is they perform similarly but TIAA-CREF has >5 times higher expense ratios (up to 0.9% for their Growth and Income fund). However I'm concerned my long-term investment knowledge doesn't extend beyond "low expense ratios are good" and "give John Bogle my money". If I can invest in either fund for long term passively invested retirement savings (30+ year time frame, ideally with as little work as possible) I'm wondering if there's any reason to choose TIAA over Vanguard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
I recently had a pretty big change in my situation and I wanted some extra eyes on it to make sure that I'm not missing anything. I recently took a pretty large pay cut (61k to 46k) to move to a new job in an area with a much lower cost of living. Previously, my retirement situation was pretty easy. I had a traditional 401k, Roth IRA, and that was it. Now, I have a situation where I have quite a few asterisks that are making an optimal decision hard to make. The main points/asterisks are: - I have a pension that is based on years of service and the 3-highest earning years over that period. - My position doesn't have a ton of room for growth, but there is the potential of leaving for different departments and having my pension carry over. - If I stayed in my current track, then I could probably end up around 60k maximum salary over many (20+) years. - My new city has a local wage tax of a flat 1.25% on all income and I do not currently live or plan to retire in this city, but I pay it because my job is there. All that being said: - I believe I will be in the 25% bracket for a portion of my contributions - It is very difficult to tease out what my final salary and pension will look like - There is a 100% chance that I will keep paying my city wage tax throughout my career, but a 0% chance that I will in retirement - My current employer offers a Roth and a Traditional option with no match I've been leaning towards doing full Roth, but the wage tax is basically an "extra" 1.25% in gains from traditional contributions. I also have no clue how my pension or salary will play out over the long-term, but I have a vague window. Right now I do about 80% Roth and 20% traditional just to hedge my bets, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking anything and I know that is definitely now the optimal ratio for sure. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
I think you probably won't be in the 25% bracket at all since you'll have a personal exemption and the standard deduction. That ought to knock you down into the 15% bracket. That being said, while Roth vs Traditional 401k is definitely a consideration at 15%, if you get raises or your situation is such that you have several thousand in the 25% bracket, I would suggest traditional, as you're (somewhat) unlikely to pay higher than 25% federal in retirement. You'll more or less be paying an extra 10% tax just on what you're putting into retirement. Especially if you're still going to be maxing a Roth IRA, which you should before you think about 401k. In that case you should definitely do traditional - in my opinion. Also that's a hell of a savings rate so good on you if you can do that. Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Ugh I have a large yearly contribution to make but the market is up 20% yoy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Ugh I have a large yearly contribution to make but the market is up 20% yoy. It'll be up 30 years from now though! Or we'll be living in Fury Road, one of the two. So diversify into guzzoline.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Ugh I have a large yearly contribution to make but the market is up 20% yoy. When someone posts something like this, they should be required to also post "I believe that I can time the market." Maybe you do. That's fine. But you should have to state it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
potatoducks posted:When someone posts something like this, they should be required to also post "I believe that I can time the market." I still made the contribution but I don't have to be happy about not getting it on sale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:I think you probably won't be in the 25% bracket at all since you'll have a personal exemption and the standard deduction. That ought to knock you down into the 15% bracket. I believe that you're right. I'm going to get an annual cost of living raise (usually 1% or 1.5%. Boo) and forgot to factor in the standard deduction. I'm not maxing my work retirement account, but I ended up with around 11k in there from last year. My savings rate (with my mandatory 5% for pension) is around 35-40% currently, but will probably go down this year because I'm losing my cheap housing / roommates because one of them wants to live by himself and get a house before he "gets priced out" of the market. I'll probably just shift it to 100% Roth until I am deeper into the 25% bracket even though that wage tax is obnoxious and avoidable with a traditional right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
Nocturtle posted:Is there a consensus on how TIAA-CREF mutual funds compare to corresponding Vanguard funds? My cursory impression is they perform similarly but TIAA-CREF has >5 times higher expense ratios (up to 0.9% for their Growth and Income fund). However I'm concerned my long-term investment knowledge doesn't extend beyond "low expense ratios are good" and "give John Bogle my money". If I can invest in either fund for long term passively invested retirement savings (30+ year time frame, ideally with as little work as possible) I'm wondering if there's any reason to choose TIAA over Vanguard. Assuming you are looking at utilizing a retirement account, there is merit per the matching guidelines and whatnot in OP. If we are talking about your IRA or Roth IRA, then I don't know why you would. FYI: These are the building blocks I use in my 403/457 (Institutional, so your ER may vary if you don't have access to that class): TIAA-CREF Bond Index Fund (Institutional) TBIIX ER .12 TIAA-CREF Equity Index Fund (Institutional) TIEIX ER .05 TIAA-CREF International Equity Index Fund (Institutional) TCIEX ER .06 TIAA-CREF Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (Institutional) TEQLX ER .23 The 2 international is because TCIEX doesn't have developing markets like VTIAX does. It has been several years since I've looked into it, but 80% TCIEX/20% TEQLX is what I have that set on autopilot to try to approximate it... You should probably double check me tho (I mean to do that sometime soon).
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 18:50
|
|