馬虎活得糊糊塗塗，糊塗做事馬馬虎虎
難得糊塗。望能幫助大家解答投資理財的問題。使大家在投資理財的過程中， 不馬馬虎虎以及不糊糊塗塗被人忽悠, 盡快實現財務自由。
It is very important for any investors to consider asset allocation. Fixed income is a major part of investment asset allocation as the investors close to the retirement age or in the retirement. It is easy to say that you can handle the stock market risk when the market is at or near all-time high. During 2008 and 2009, you would wish you have more fixed income investments. Let's look at an example.
A husband and a wife were 60 years old in 2007 with $2M investable asset.
|
100% Stock |
||||
|
Date |
Couple Age |
VTI Price |
VTI |
Total |
|
10/9/2007 |
60 |
77.75 |
2,000,000 |
2,000,000 |
|
3/9/2009 |
62 |
33.70 |
866,937 |
866,937 |
|
10/9/2017 |
70 |
130.93 |
3,368,191 |
3,368,191 |
1st scenario: they put their retirement money all in Vanguard Total Stock Index Market ETF (VTI). On 10/9/2007, their portfolio reached $2M. During the 2008 financial crisis, their portfolio dropped to $866k from $2M when they were 62 years old and ready to retire, but that 56% portfolio value loss will make them very nervous about their retirement at 62.
|
50% Stock / 50% Bond |
|||||
|
Date |
Couple Age |
BND Price |
VTI |
BND |
Total |
|
10/9/2007 |
60 |
75.32 |
1,000,000 |
1,000,000 |
2,000,000 |
|
3/9/2009 |
62 |
75.92 |
433,468 |
1,007,966 |
1,441,434 |
|
10/9/2017 |
70 |
81.73 |
1,684,095 |
1,085,104 |
2,769,199 |
2nd scenario: they put 50% to VTI and the other 50% to Vanguard Total Bond ETF (BND). During the 2008 financial crisis, their portfolio only lost about 28% of its value and they had $1.44M left. That should not derail their retirement plan at the age of 62.
28% loss comparing to 56% loss is a huge difference for someone at 62. You just don’t have time to recover from the loss since you need the money for retirement. If this happens to someone in the 30s or 40s, they will have plenty time to recover. These two examples have illustrated why we need to diversify the stock market risk at or near retirement. What they know is that the 50/50% allocation is a lot less volatile and riskier than the 100% allocation.
