Started By
Message

re: I’m surprised to see so many advocating for 15 year mortgages on here

Posted on 3/7/20 at 7:10 am to
Posted by kywildcatfanone
Wildcat Country!
Member since Oct 2012
119460 posts
Posted on 3/7/20 at 7:10 am to
Yeah, at my age, 55, I don't need to invest the additional, I would rather get the 15, pay on it till 62, and let my SS start paying my house payment at that point.
Posted by Jag_Warrior
Virginia
Member since May 2015
4126 posts
Posted on 3/7/20 at 1:27 pm to
quote:

Yeah, at my age, 55, I don't need to invest the additional, I would rather get the 15, pay on it till 62, and let my SS start paying my house payment at that point.


A common theme in a lot (most?) of the threads that attempt to show one debt vs. investment strategy always being superior to another is that the OPs tend not to understand the concept of risk adjusted returns, age appropriate investments or just the simple fact that not every poster is in the same life situation as every other poster.

This 8% (average - wink wink) return comes up again & again, simply because that's close to the historical return of the S&P 500. Nothing is typically said about the peak to trough drawdowns that the market has experienced during certain periods. And very few seem to understand the concepts of risk adjusted returns, or even what a Sharpe ratio is.

But say, in your case, if you were heavily invested in an S&P 500 fund, that likely would NOT be age appropriate - depending on your other retirement assets, of course. And the lower returns you'd be receiving from being in things like income funds, or just less risky investments, would most certainly be major factors in your 30 vs. 15 decision... in addition to the fact that you probably wouldn't want to be saddled with a mortgage when you're 85. It likely wouldn't make good sense for you to get a longer dated mortgage, at a higher interest rate, just so you could invest the lower payment delta into a lower yielding income security.

But for others, once they fully understand the concept of risk adjusted returns (in addition to this "opportunity cost" that they like to refer to), and have a handle on how long they'll actually be in the house and what age appropriate investments are yielding... the 30 yr. really may be the best decision.

Every situation is different. That's all I'm saying. Contrary to what's being suggested in the OP of this thread, there is no universally correct answer.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram