- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
J.P. Morgan suggests for me...
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:16 pm
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:16 pm
I'm a thread starting machine today. Recently logged into my JP Morgan retirement account (401k) and they had some suggestions as to how I should diversify my account. Because i'm just getting into investing i'm hoping some of the more experienced guys on this board can provide some insight. The one that I'm surprised about below is the International Stocks. They want me to increase my portfolio and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the International market a little in flux right now?
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:17 pm to CHiPs25
31 yrs left to retire and they saying 15% fixed income???? frick that. At the most you should have maybe 3% fixed income right now , at the most.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:21 pm to roguetiger15
Is that because Bonds have little risk and therefore provide small growth?
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:35 pm to roguetiger15
quote:
At the most you should have maybe 3% fixed income right now , at the most.
Disagree. One might do well to have some short-term bond exposure.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 10:02 pm to foshizzle
Someone with 30+ year time horizon before retiring shouldn't be considering FI.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 10:03 pm to foshizzle
Dp
This post was edited on 11/16/14 at 10:04 pm
Posted on 11/17/14 at 6:42 am to roguetiger15
quote:
31 yrs left to retire and they saying 15% fixed income???? frick that. At the most you should have maybe 3% fixed income right now , at the most.
agree. makes ZERO sense to have 15% in bonds, especially at current rates.
their proposal is a low risk, low return portfolio that will under-perform the market 90% of the time. at 31, I would be 100% in stocks.
while it is conventional wisdom to always have some bonds in one's portfolio, historical performance does not support that view.
"Stocks had risen more than bonds over every 30-year period from 1861, according to Jeremy Siegel, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School in Philadelphia, until the period ending in Sept 30" written in 2011.
old article (2011), but relevant historical data
since the market has rallied since 2011, I'd think that recent 30 yr period is now back to stocks outperforming.
This post was edited on 11/17/14 at 6:57 am
Posted on 11/17/14 at 7:12 am to Ole War Skule
I would have a small allocation to fixed income for volatility suppression.
Posted on 11/17/14 at 8:39 am to CHiPs25
Just go with a target fund.
I've gone with one that is approx. 10 years after I'd like to retire to be a little more aggressive. Vanguard 2060, specifically, and will retire in 2050 or sooner.
I've gone with one that is approx. 10 years after I'd like to retire to be a little more aggressive. Vanguard 2060, specifically, and will retire in 2050 or sooner.
Posted on 11/17/14 at 8:48 am to TigerDeBaiter
For the past few years I have been in the Vanguard 2045 which is when I plan to retire. After reading some information last year I moved my Vanguard 2045 to a Vanguard 2055 and the I diversified into Large Cap and Small caps as well. So in my portfolio, I have 88% in the 2045, 4% in 2055 and Large/Small cap.
Posted on 11/17/14 at 9:44 am to TigerDeBaiter
Isn't it likely that a target fund would have similar allocations and still charge you more in operating expenses?
Posted on 11/17/14 at 11:34 am to seawolf06
Expense Ratio is .18% very minimal. It's even lower once you get into admiral shares
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News