Occupier wrote:Sounds fine there is nothing wrong with the target 2040. Dave
Can you get a head start on your IRAs by making contributions for tax year 2012 (last year)?
goodoboy wrote:I have a question before going forward: Why asset allocation across multiple accounts? Why not set the IRA and Roth IRA to vanguard 2040 and let it go, and then treat the 401K as one portfolio. Just asking.
goodoboy wrote:Can you get a head start on your IRAs by making contributions for tax year 2012 (last year)?
Yes, I can get head start by starting to contribute from Jan to April for the tax year 2012 on the Roth IRA and then begin the 2013 year in April. I hope this makes sense.
hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote:I have a question before going forward: Why asset allocation across multiple accounts? Why not set the IRA and Roth IRA to vanguard 2040 and let it go, and then treat the 401K as one portfolio. Just asking.
You certainly could put the IRAs on auto-pilot with a target date fund, and then treat the 401k's as one portfolio. For the IRA's, choose whichever target date fund is 70/30. Or, choose a combination of LifeStrategy funds -- put half your funds in the 60/40 one (Moderate Growth), and the other half in the 80/20 one (Growth), and you'll have a 70/30 blend.
One reason many Boglehead investors don't create a mini-portfolio in their 401(k) plans is because their 401(k) plans have some weak or expensive options, but your options are pretty good.
Looking just at your 401(k) and her 403(b), your 401(k) is around 70% and hers is 30% (or at least it will be after a year). Conveniently, you could hold the 500-index fund and Bond fund in your plan, and the extended market and international fund in her 403(b), at roughly the same percentages I listed above in my earlier reply.
You could even do a mini-portfolio in the 401(k), and a mini portfolio in her 403(b), but then your 401(k) would lack US small-caps (unless you have a small-cap fund that you didn't list). This is why, if you go with the target-date-funds-in-the-IRAs strategy, it would be good to think of your 401k and 403b as a blended portfolio, so you can complement your 500-index fund with her extended market index fund in a 80%/20% blend.
The only drawback to this, and it's minor, is that some people would favor the Vanguard Total International Stock Market index fund over the Fidelity international fund; that's why I tried to leave the international funds out of your 401k/403b and instead use Vanguard for international. The Fidelity fund tracks the MSCI EAFE index which is large-cap stocks in developed markets (see http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Fidelity_Investments); the international fund in your 401(k) tracks the same benchmark as well. The Vanguard fund contains large-cap developed market stocks as well as emerging markets and small-cap stocks and Canadian stocks too, for that matter. at their market caps. The Vanguard fund is a more complete international fund. You will, of course, have that fund in your target date or LifeStrategy funds, so at least you'll be getting some exposure to those sectors.goodoboy wrote:Can you get a head start on your IRAs by making contributions for tax year 2012 (last year)?
Yes, I can get head start by starting to contribute from Jan to April for the tax year 2012 on the Roth IRA and then begin the 2013 year in April. I hope this makes sense.
If that's the case, then you might as well backfill your IRAs for the 2012 tax year. If you manage to be able to save more this year, then you can squeeze more into your IRAs for the 2013 tax year. And if you don't, then it will be the same either way.
hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote: For the IRA's, choose whichever target date fund is 70/30. Or, choose a combination of LifeStrategy funds -- put half your funds in the 60/40 one (Moderate Growth), and the other half in the 80/20 one (Growth), and you'll have a 70/30 blend.
goodoboy wrote:The target I would like to use for the IRAs (IRA, ROTH IRAs) is the 2040 target, but the AA is 90/10 (http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Vanguard ... ment_Funds) I am not sure why they so aggressive. I could choose the 2025, but I am not sure if a few years down the road, they make it more conservative. My plan was to change the AA to 60/40 once I turn 40 years old.
goodoboy wrote:Yes, the International Fund in the 401K is not too good. I prefer to use her and his 401k as one portfolio because she has a good extended fund to go with the SP500 index. The only problem is the International Index funds in the 401K is not that good.
goodoboy wrote:I am considering making the 3 IRA accounts in the LifeStrategy Funds. How did you calculate the 60/40 and 80/20 to the 70/30 blend? So basically, I can make HIS Roth IRA 60/40 and then make her Roth IRA 80/20. The only question is what to do with the His IRA?
goodoboy wrote:If I understand correctly, the LifeStrategy Funds, I have to manually allocate on my own, where the Target Fund will change automatically.
hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote:The target I would like to use for the IRAs (IRA, ROTH IRAs) is the 2040 target, but the AA is 90/10 (http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Vanguard ... ment_Funds) I am not sure why they so aggressive. I could choose the 2025, but I am not sure if a few years down the road, they make it more conservative. My plan was to change the AA to 60/40 once I turn 40 years old.
Goodoboy, target date funds do have a "glide path" toward less stocks and more bonds, as you mentioned. (See detailed Vanguard paper: https://personal.vanguard.com/pdf/icrtdf.pdf). Therefore, if you do select the 2025 fund, then yes, it will start getting more bond-heavy. If you're not yet ready to go that bond-heavy, then you can skip forward to the 2030 fund, etc. As much as you want to go on auto-pilot, you will still need to pay attention every few years or so to make sure your overall asset allocation is where you want it to be.goodoboy wrote:Yes, the International Fund in the 401K is not too good. I prefer to use her and his 401k as one portfolio because she has a good extended fund to go with the SP500 index. The only problem is the International Index funds in the 401K is not that good.
You'll have to decide if that potential shortcoming is worth the extra administration to split the funds out. At least you'll have some broader international exposure in the IRAs through the Target Date or LifeStrategy funds.
Given that you're just getting your feet wet, I wouldn't stress out about this too much. Just go with your plan for a year or so, and if you feel inclined in the future, after reading more and becoming more comfortable with all this, then consider these semi-advanced options.goodoboy wrote:I am considering making the 3 IRA accounts in the LifeStrategy Funds. How did you calculate the 60/40 and 80/20 to the 70/30 blend? So basically, I can make HIS Roth IRA 60/40 and then make her Roth IRA 80/20. The only question is what to do with the His IRA?
You could either put the IRAs all in the same target date fund that has a 70/30 split, and then every five years or so, push back to the date to whichever target date fund has a 70/30 (or whatever you want your AA to be at that future date).
Therefore put one Roth IRA in Growth, put the other Roth IRA in Moderate Growth. And put the traditional IRA in a 50/50 split.
If you put $1,000 in a 60/40 fund, and $1,000 in a 80/20 fund, you'll wind up with a blend of 70/30 . Example:
LifeStrategy Growth
Stocks: 80% * $1,000 = $800
Bonds: 20% * $1,000 = $200
LifeStrategy Moderate Growth
Stocks: 60% * $1,000 = $600
Bonds: 40% * $1,000 = $400
When you combine these two funds:
Combined stocks: $1,400 ( $800 + $600)
Combined bonds: $600 ( $200 + $400)
Combined total = $2,000
Which makes these blended percentages:
Combined stocks: 70% ( $1,400 / $2,000 = 70%)
Combined bonds: 30% ( $600 / $2,000 = 30%)
Combined total = $2,000
This combined total winds up with 70% stocks + 30% bonds. Keep in mind that with this LifeStrategy blend, you may still need to rebalance. If the stock market goes way up, then the Growth fund will get bigger relative to the Moderate Growth fund, and vice versa.
For example, lets say after a year, stocks get hammered. You might have just $800 in Growth and $900 in Moderate Growth. This will look like:
LifeStrategy Growth
Stocks: 80% * $800 = $640
Bonds: 20% * $800 = $160
LifeStrategy Moderate Growth
Stocks: 60% * $900 = $540
Bonds: 40% * $900 = $360
Combined stocks: $1,180 ( $1,180 / $1,700 = 69.5%)
Combined bonds: $520 ( $520 / $1,700 = 30.5%)
Combined total = $1,700
Actually, there goes my theory. Even if these funds lose 10% and 20%, your blended AA barely budges.
Anyway, no matter what you do, you will need to keep track of your investments from time to time to ensure your asset allocation does not veer too far off.
Within your 401k/403b, you'll still need to check in every year or so. If stocks go up a lot, then you should rebalance which will have the effect of exchanging stocks for bonds. And if stocks fall and bonds hold their value, then you'll be exchanging bonds for stocks. If US stocks climb and international stocks descend, then you might need to exchange US stocks for International to get back to your 75/25 ratio. ETc. etc. That's what rebalancing is: you wind up selling high and buying low in order to return your AA to your desired target.goodoboy wrote:If I understand correctly, the LifeStrategy Funds, I have to manually allocate on my own, where the Target Fund will change automatically.
Correct. But as noted above, I think you'll still need to do some monitoring of your accounts, at least annually. You can't just ignore it for 30 years
One last thought: check out the 401k and 403b and see if they don't have a target date fund or similar all-in-one fund. If they do, and if they are composed of index funds and don't have a ridiculous expense ratio, then you might want to consider them.
goodoboy wrote:I would like to have a 70/30 AA, 50%-stocks, 20%-Intel
SSSS wrote:goodoboy wrote:I would like to have a 70/30 AA, 50%-stocks, 20%-Intel
Intel? Like the company? Or was that an autocorrect for "international" or something?
hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote: you will still need to pay attention every few years or so to make sure your overall asset allocation is where you want it to be.
goodoboy wrote:hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote: you will still need to pay attention every few years or so to make sure your overall asset allocation is where you want it to be.
After reviewing and reading the Vanguard Target Fund pdf you sent and other asset allocation and starting to think at age 34, 70/30 asset allocation could be a bit too conservative. I was following Jack Bogle rule of thumb that mentions your bonds should be near your age, but I am reading around and seeing more aggressive suggestions. I am thinking of setting my AA to 80/20 (because I don’t want to be too conservative) for now, start reading some the recommended books here and determine how to pick a decent AA. Also, most asset allocator tools used with my criteria lends towards a 80% stocks allocation. My risk tolerance is pretty high. Back in 2008, not knowingly I was 100% stocks during this whole time. I just kept on working. Of course then I had no clue, and just knew I wanted be all stocks at the time.
Can you recommend a book or some calculations to perform to determine a good educated calculation on AA for a 34 year old? Our plan retirement age was between 60-62.
Until then I will write up my investment strategy for a review as discussed earlier.
Thanks for any comments.
hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote:hoppy08520 wrote:goodoboy wrote: you will still need to pay attention every few years or so to make sure your overall asset allocation is where you want it to be.
After reviewing and reading the Vanguard Target Fund pdf you sent and other asset allocation and starting to think at age 34, 70/30 asset allocation could be a bit too conservative. I was following Jack Bogle rule of thumb that mentions your bonds should be near your age, but I am reading around and seeing more aggressive suggestions. I am thinking of setting my AA to 80/20 (because I don’t want to be too conservative) for now, start reading some the recommended books here and determine how to pick a decent AA. Also, most asset allocator tools used with my criteria lends towards a 80% stocks allocation. My risk tolerance is pretty high. Back in 2008, not knowingly I was 100% stocks during this whole time. I just kept on working. Of course then I had no clue, and just knew I wanted be all stocks at the time.
Can you recommend a book or some calculations to perform to determine a good educated calculation on AA for a 34 year old? Our plan retirement age was between 60-62.
Until then I will write up my investment strategy for a review as discussed earlier.
Thanks for any comments.
Goodoboy, what you're asking might be the most critical decision in all of investing. It can be hard to answer this question. That being said, the difference between 70/30 and 80/20 isn't that big of a deal. Where I think a "wrongly chosen" asset allocation can be a problem is in these three cases:
1. Someone with a large balance chooses an aggressive AA, like 80/20, but they can't stick with it. Then the financial crisis hits in 2008. Their stock holdings drop from $500,000 to $250,000. Out of fear and despair, they sell in March 2009 at the bottom after they can endure no more, and then sit on the sidelines in cash for the next couple of years, waiting for the right time to get in, and miss out on the 75% + recovery. Now they've locked in their losses.
2. Similar to above, a 65-year-old wants to retire, but they had too much of their portfolio in an aggressive AA. Now that they're in retirement, the 2008/2009 financial crisis hits, their balance is plummeting, then need to take withdrawals, and they don't have the time to wait it out and let their balance recover. By taking withdrawals, they're forced to sell shares at a huge loss without the chance to recover.
3. This person is terrified of losing money in the stock market, so they pick an ultra-safe AA of 25/75 their whole career. This person may not earn enough. To make up for their lack of gains, they will need to save more.
You need to make sure you're not Person 1. Person 1 probably should have had a 60/40 or a 50/50 allocation, or maybe even 40/60, so they could sleep at night through the crash. Many, many people fall into this trap.
Person 2 should have been on a retirement glide path. Unfortunately, many many people had this happen to them in 2009. Many had to go back to work, cut back on expenses, etc.
Person 3 - you don't sound like this person.
I'd start with reading the "Asset Allocation" page in the wiki and go from there. It's hard to let any online calculator tell you what your AA should be since it's so personal. You can read forever on this topic if you wanted to, and each new thing you read will make you want to change your mind. Vanguard, FYI, is often said to be too aggressive in their target date plans. See: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=97444 for example.
retiredjg wrote:Here are a few ideas that I didn't see suggested above. For now, I'll just use your original 70/30 ratio for simplicity.
1) You don't have to use Roth IRA at all. Instead contribute more to the 401k and 403b. You would contribute in the same ratio you have been using for the last few months (about 50% to US stocks, 20% to international stocks, 30% to bonds if I recall correctly). This is a reasonable choice in the 25% tax bracket - it just reduces your taxable income more. However, since you do want some Roth IRA assets at some point, even though this is a reasonable choice, I'm not sure it is the best choice.
goodoboy wrote:1. After using http://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tools/ca ... taxcaster/ and running some numbers for 2013 tax bill approximation. Right now, I calculate about a tax bill of about $5300 for next year to send to government. Add on $2750 (11000 x 25%) or the ROTH IRA, so that's about a $8050 check to send to government next year. That's alot for us to pay as I our total salary will be about $122K next year.
2. ROTH IRA, I know this the ultimate decision for this depends on if I believe my tax rate will go up when I retire and ofcourse the 401k fund options. However, if we are redrawing only $60K (pre-calculated in todays number) from our retirement funds (401K) a year in our retirement years this will put us in the ruffly in about the 15% tax bracket. And I can only assume a tax rate of 25% 30 years from now for that same $60K case incase tax rate increases. This will approximate to the tax rate to date. Is my logic thinking correct for the most part? Right now my income is $97K per year, I can only assume it will go up over the next 30 years.
3. If contributing the more to 401K, how do I determine how much my taxable income will decrease per year? Do I subtract the additional contributes from the earned income in the turbotax tool above? My w-2 shows 95,921.61 now and this is with 6% company match.
4. I may just need to reduce to one ROTH IRA for now, and when my wife turn 34 years old, evaluate, and then start her ROTH IRA, besides I do plan to retire before her by 2 years. Hopefully by then she can contribute more income to our saving rate.
This is confusing. Putting money into Roth IRA does not add to your tax bill. But putting money into traditional 401k will subtract from your tax bill.
Also, if your total tax bill is only $8050 for a total income of near $100k, that's very low - in fact it doesn't seem right. Are you talking about how much you owe when you file or how much you pay in total tax all year?
I think a better balance would be $17,611 to the 401k/403b and $5,500 to Roth IRA. If one 401k/403b is better than the other, put more money in the better one.
goodoboy wrote:When I run the numbers on turbo tax I get balance due equals $5300 http://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tools/ca ... taxcaster/ . So this is how much I approximately owe the government for 2013.
Now, if I add the extra tax for the ROTH IRA contribution (5500 x .25 = $1375), would this mean I owe the government 1375 + 5300 = $6675 (approximately)? I did not see a place on the taxcaster to show ROTH IRA contributions.
Here 403b options is better than mine and cheaper, but her contributions amount is less than mine per year. She has the total stock market index, bond and international and much cheaper. I will present a asset allocation in a little bit of what I think is best.
retiredjg wrote:Do you mean you will pay that much with your 2012 tax return (filing now through April 15) or how much you think will be due a year from now for your 2013 taxes?
No. This is money that has already been or will be accounted for in your salary at some point. It is not more salary. Contributions to Roth IRA are not reported on your income tax return that's why taxcaster doesn't ask for it.
If hers is better, you might want to put as much in there as she possibly can. This might mean putting less in yours, but that's OK.
Is this what you mean? Because I don't want to miss the company match. goodoboy wrote:Thank youretiredjg wrote:Do you mean you will pay that much with your 2012 tax return (filing now through April 15) or how much you think will be due a year from now for your 2013 taxes?
This is how much I think will be due a year from now on my 2013. I am just trying to get an approximate figure.No. This is money that has already been or will be accounted for in your salary at some point. It is not more salary. Contributions to Roth IRA are not reported on your income tax return that's why taxcaster doesn't ask for it.
I'm a bit confused now, so when and how will i pay the taxes on the ROTH IRA contributions each year?![]()
goodoboy wrote:Ok, I see now. I have already paid taxes on the ROTH IRA cause its coming straight from my pay check (after-tax dollars). Now, I understand better. I don't have to pay an additional 25% on $5500 and send to the government as I previous stated.
Am I correct, I think so.
goodoboy wrote:Currently, we both are getting the company match. But when we decide to contribute more, yes indeed I will get her to contribute more and just pay one of her bills with my own money for sure.Is this what you mean? Because I don't want to miss the company match.
Thanks for your help.
retiredjg wrote:goodoboy wrote:Currently, we both are getting the company match. But when we decide to contribute more, yes indeed I will get her to contribute more and just pay one of her bills with my own money for sure.Is this what you mean? Because I don't want to miss the company match.
Thanks for your help.
Be sure that you each get your full match, but once that's done, put as much as you can in the better plan.
) as she has great options and great low cost and good index funds to pick from.But given that, I would pick the target funds just for simplicity. Yes, they're more expensive but you won't have to fuss with them. They will work for all your accounts.
His 401k
(SMTIX) JPMorgan SmartRetirement 2040 Fund Institutional Class (0.79%)
Her 403b/401k
(FFFFX) Fidelity Freedom 2040 Fund (0.62%)
His Rollover IRA at Vanguard
(VTTHX) Vanguard Target Retirement 2035 Fund (0.19%)
His/Her Roth IRAs at Vanguard
(VTTHX) Vanguard Target Retirement 2035 Fund (0.19%)
You keep mentioning changing jobs. Are you planning on it? Do you expect it to happen soon?
Since her plan is so much better than yours could she contribute more to hers to get the better options and you contribute less? Is this possible?
retiredjg wrote:I'm going to bump this up because an edit does not send an email out to people following the thread.
I'm not sure right now just what my preference is. There are lots of choices. My one firm preference right now is to put more into traditional 401k/403b than into Roth (whether that is 1 Roth IRA or 2 Roth IRAs).
retiredjg wrote:Well, I've run into one small problem. At the beginning of the thread, I thought you planned to invest $8,751 in His 401k, $3,360 in Her 403b, $5,500 in His Roth IRA and $5,500 in Her Roth IRA. Now the $11k for the Roth IRAs seems to have disappeared. Why is that money not included in what you plan to put into the 401k/403b?
goodoboy wrote:The entire $11K that was going to both ROTH IRAs will now go to 401k/403b?
The entire $11K that was going to both ROTH IRAs will now go to 401k/403b?
I'm not sure She is allowed to put that much in Her 403b (because of the low salary). Can you find out please?
goodoboy wrote:Yes I can find out if she can contribute more to her 403b. Not sure the difference between 403 and 401k.
retiredjg wrote:Total 401k/403 Portfolio = $12,295 <---Percentages below are based on this number.
His 401k 83.8% $10,300
44.8% American Beacon S&P 500 Idx Instl 0.16%
15% Dreyfus Bond Market Index Basic 0.15%
24% American Beacon International Equity Index 0.24%
Her 403b 16.2% $1,995
11.2% Spartan® Extended Market Index Fund 0.07%
5% Spartan® U.S. Bond Index Fund Advantage Class 0.10%
You would change what you currently have in the 401k and 403b to this above and then make contributions at about the same ratio to keep your allocations near your target.
Contributions = $23, 246
His 401k $19,752 <---- $3,758 to bonds, $5,579 to International, $10,415 to 500 Index
Her 403b $3,494 <---- $2,603 to Extended Market, $891 to Bonds
These contribution numbers do not have to be exact. I didn't round off to easy numbers so you could see the math if you want to. Let me know if it doesn't make sense.
Not included in percentages above:
His tIRA $36k
Target 2030 or LifeStrategy Growth
If you had some extra money at the end of the year, you could put it in a Roth IRA just using either TR 2030 or LifeStrategy Growth and it would not affect the ratios in your 401k/403b plans.
Is this what you have in mind?
I don't disagree with other posters who have encouraged you to just use a target type fund in each account. That would be easiest and only cost a little more each year. However, you seem to want to "get this right" and optimal now even though it doesn't matter much right now in terms of dollars. If the above makes good sense to you, it's a pretty good choice.

retiredjg wrote:Total 401k/403 Portfolio = $12,295 <---Percentages below are based on this number.
His 401k 83.8% $10,300
44.8% American Beacon S&P 500 Idx Instl 0.16%
15% Dreyfus Bond Market Index Basic 0.15%
24% American Beacon International Equity Index 0.24%
Her 403b 16.2% $1,995
11.2% Spartan® Extended Market Index Fund 0.07%
5% Spartan® U.S. Bond Index Fund Advantage Class 0.10%
You would change what you currently have in the 401k and 403b to this above and then make contributions at about the same ratio to keep your allocations near your target.
Contributions = $23, 246
His 401k $19,752 <---- $3,758 to bonds, $5,579 to International, $10,415 to 500 Index
Her 403b $3,494 <---- $2,603 to Extended Market, $891 to Bonds
These contribution numbers do not have to be exact. I didn't round off to easy numbers so you could see the math if you want to. Let me know if it doesn't make sense.
goodoboy wrote:1. To approximate the total stock market index should the mix be 80% to S&P 500 and 20% extended market?
The mix I was considering was for AA is 80/20:
Total Market Index = 60% (45% S&P 500 and 15% extended, is that correct or does it matter much??)
Bonds = 20%
International = 20%
Is my idea correct?
2. If using the allocation you suggested will my total fees be 0.72% (I added .16+.15+.24+.1+.07)?
Thank you
2. If using the allocation you suggested will my total fees be 0.72% (I added .16+.15+.24+.1+.07)?
Thank youNo. That's not how you do it. You would have to figure the ER for the amount of money in each fund and then add them altogether. But you could get a rough estimate. My eyeball guess is the portfolio has an average ER of .2%. So for each 10k invested, the expenses would be $20. That's cheap.
retiredjg wrote:goodoboy wrote:1. To approximate the total stock market index should the mix be 80% to S&P 500 and 20% extended market?
Roughly, more or less. Your idea (45% S&P 500 and 15% extended) is 75% and 25% instead of 80% and 20% and that is close enough. It might give you a very small tilt to small cap, but many people would consider that desirable.The mix I was considering was for AA is 80/20:
Total Market Index = 60% (45% S&P 500 and 15% extended, is that correct or does it matter much??)
Bonds = 20%
International = 20%
Is my idea correct?
It is a little different from what I suggested, but still a fine idea. My idea has a little less extended market and a little more international. But your idea is just fine too and certainly well within the ranges suggested.2. If using the allocation you suggested will my total fees be 0.72% (I added .16+.15+.24+.1+.07)?
Thank you
No. That's not how you do it. You would have to figure the ER for the amount of money in each fund and then add them altogether. But you could get a rough estimate. My eyeball guess is the portfolio has an average ER of .2%. So for each 10k invested, the expenses would be $20. That's cheap.
These number changes daily with the market.retiredjg wrote:It looks very good to me. My only concern is this - this year, your allocations work out with your contributions almost right down to the dollar. At some point in the future, this won't be the case. You'll need to add a fund to Her 403b to make things work out right. That shouldn't be very difficult though.
You've done a good job of learning how to manage a fairly simple portfolio. With some practice, you'll soon be able to handle more complex issues if you need to. But, if you are like me, you might need to make some notes to remind yourself of what you've learned!
goodoboy wrote:I have one more question. Is it true that, for instance, by continuing to buy the same funds (for instance the SP 500 index), over time this will increase dividends returns as well? Thanks
goodoboy wrote:
I have one more question. Is it true that, for instance, by continuing to buy the same funds (for instance the SP 500 index), over time this will increase dividends returns as well? Thanks
retiredjg wrote:goodoboy wrote:I have one more question. Is it true that, for instance, by continuing to buy the same funds (for instance the SP 500 index), over time this will increase dividends returns as well? Thanks
I'm not exactly sure what this question means.
Return to Investing - Help with Personal Investments
Users browsing this forum: Bracket, bsperr, Clearly_Irrational, FinancialDave, MnD, mnvalue, ogd, pingo, Scott S and 45 guests