fareastwarriors wrote:I'm 25. I been working for 2 years now. I'm actually glad I starting out during these "tough" times. I feel like if I started my working life when things are booming, I might not understand what it will mean to be financially prudent. I might think that stocks/houses/other assets only go one way, up. Or I might have unrealistic views of my salary or benefits and that despite having no skills/experience I might think I deserve to be paid millions of dollars or something like that.
I believe if I keep making financially smart decisions, then eventually I will get "there" and I will "make it." I have a job. am debt-free, have savings, and have a small but growing nest egg. I think there are many things which I cannot control but it is up to me to adapt and figure it out. I think I'm doing okay.
Tough situations are there to test my character and it will only make me stronger. I still think the future is bright.
Browser wrote:I'm retired and am living off my nestegg now. As I look back at my journey and see all the twists and turns it took, I have to say that (except for the being old part) I'm grateful I'm not starting out in these days of financial and economic troubles.
fareastwarriors wrote:I'm 25. I been working for 2 years now. I'm actually glad I starting out during these "tough" times. I feel like if I started my working life when things are booming, I might not understand what it will mean to be financially prudent. I might think that stocks/houses/other assets only go one way, up. Or I might have unrealistic views of my salary or benefits and that despite having no skills/experience I might think I deserve to be paid millions of dollars or something like that.
I believe if I keep making financially smart decisions, then eventually I will get "there" and I will "make it." I have a job. am debt-free, have savings, and have a small but growing nest egg. I think there are many things which I cannot control but it is up to me to adapt and figure it out. I think I'm doing okay.
Tough situations are there to test my character and it will only make me stronger. I still think the future is bright.
momar wrote:I think young people are more worried about never recovering from graduating into the worst job market in 80 years. Wasted generation.
momar wrote:I think young people are more worried about never recovering from graduating into the worst job market in 80 years. Wasted generation.
Dr. Market wrote:As a 25 year old planning to retire in 40 years, I am not worried about the long-term outcome of my investing plan but I think achieving real returns in the current environment will be more difficult than most Bogleheads anticipate. I think that the combination of current bond and stock prices are unsustainable in the long-term in real dollars and that something will give in the next 5 years or so.
I predict stocks will be much higher in 5 years and much much higher in 30 years. No one can predict an "event" in the next 5 years.
Stocks are on the high end of valuations based on earnings and bond yields are only appealing for long duration issues. In order to justify current stock prices, the economy will either have to grow at an unusually high rate (generating real returns) or there will be high inflation (with unpredictable real returns). But, either of these cases are going to be bad for holders of long-term bonds.
P/E ratios for US are around historical averages and Europe and Emerging market stocks are down right cheap. Bond yields however indicate their expected returns are going to be about 70% lower than in the past. The spread in expected returns between stocks and bonds is very large.
In terms of playing defensive for the next few years, I think TIPs are a partial solution if held to maturity in tax-advantaged accounts, but then you risk losing out if the world does return to strong growth. Further, some commodities or commodity stocks could be excellent plays today but are too risky to go "all in" on. For example, I think that uranium as well as phosphorus-based fertilizers could end up being superb long-term plays, but they are not suitable for the core of an investment portfolio. Also, I do consider gold to be a inflation hedge but I will not buy it until the price is much closer to its production cost.
Pure speculation.
Putting it all together, I think young investors should be investing at either a 50:50 or 60:40 ratio of stocks to bonds at current valuations. Personally, I believe no one should be at 90% stocks right now if they are not considering their investments to be speculative. I don't think fussing over % allocations of stocks into U.S./International/Emerging etc is going to change anything significantly.
Yes it does matter. International is much cheaper = much higher expected returns at the moment. Plus you want to reduce single country risk. High stock allocations are speculative? Uranium is not? 50:50 for a young investor is generally going to be way too conservative and smells of recency bias.
However, a young investor should think very carefully about the bonds he or she buys as these will vary more widely in their returns after 30-40 years than stocks. I think that young people should allocate their bonds among TIPs, short-term corporate bonds, and 30 year Treasury Bonds/STRIPS depending on their willingness to take risk. I believe all young investors will benefit by owning TIPs and that they should treat short-term corporate bonds essentially as a cash position for re-balancing that should keep up approximately with inflation. I personally like 30 year bonds and STRIPS as a counterbalance to stocks that upside potential but I would not recommend them to conservative young investors.
While we all need a stock/bond portfolio as part of our overall financial plan, I think the best returns young people are going to get right now are from investing in their own careers. Or, if able and suited, to start or buy their own business where they can get a much lower price per earnings than in the general market.
Take with grain of salt.
DM
momar wrote:I think young people are more worried about never recovering from graduating into the worst job market in 80 years. Wasted generation.
Putting it all together, I think young investors should be investing at either a 50:50 or 60:40 ratio of stocks to bonds at current valuations. Personally, I believe no one should be at 90% stocks right now if they are not considering their investments to be speculative. I don't think fussing over % allocations of stocks into U.S./International/Emerging etc is going to change anything significantly. However, a young investor should think very carefully about the bonds he or she buys as these will vary more widely in their returns after 30-40 years than stocks. I think that young people should allocate their bonds among TIPs, short-term corporate bonds, and 30 year Treasury Bonds/STRIPS depending on their willingness to take risk. I believe all young investors will benefit by owning TIPs and that they should treat short-term corporate bonds essentially as a cash position for re-balancing that should keep up approximately with inflation. I personally like 30 year bonds and STRIPS as a counterbalance to stocks that upside potential but I would not recommend them to conservative young investors.
Browser wrote:I'm retired and am living off my nestegg now. As I look back at my journey and see all the twists and turns it took, I have to say that (except for the being old part) I'm grateful I'm not starting out in these days of financial and economic troubles. Is that just because I'm an Old Fart, or do things look sorta dismal to you young investors as well? I remember being fairly optimistic and not worrying too much about building a nestegg and retiring comfortably when I was starting out. How do things look to you younger investors these days?
How do things look to you younger investors these days?

grap0013 wrote:Dr. Market wrote:As a 25 year old planning to retire in 40 years, I am not worried about the long-term outcome of my investing plan but I think achieving real returns in the current environment will be more difficult than most Bogleheads anticipate. I think that the combination of current bond and stock prices are unsustainable in the long-term in real dollars and that something will give in the next 5 years or so.
I predict stocks will be much higher in 5 years and much much higher in 30 years. No one can predict an "event" in the next 5 years.
Stocks are on the high end of valuations based on earnings and bond yields are only appealing for long duration issues. In order to justify current stock prices, the economy will either have to grow at an unusually high rate (generating real returns) or there will be high inflation (with unpredictable real returns). But, either of these cases are going to be bad for holders of long-term bonds.
P/E ratios for US are around historical averages and Europe and Emerging market stocks are down right cheap. Bond yields however indicate their expected returns are going to be about 70% lower than in the past. The spread in expected returns between stocks and bonds is very large.
In terms of playing defensive for the next few years, I think TIPs are a partial solution if held to maturity in tax-advantaged accounts, but then you risk losing out if the world does return to strong growth. Further, some commodities or commodity stocks could be excellent plays today but are too risky to go "all in" on. For example, I think that uranium as well as phosphorus-based fertilizers could end up being superb long-term plays, but they are not suitable for the core of an investment portfolio. Also, I do consider gold to be a inflation hedge but I will not buy it until the price is much closer to its production cost.
Pure speculation.
Putting it all together, I think young investors should be investing at either a 50:50 or 60:40 ratio of stocks to bonds at current valuations. Personally, I believe no one should be at 90% stocks right now if they are not considering their investments to be speculative. I don't think fussing over % allocations of stocks into U.S./International/Emerging etc is going to change anything significantly.
Yes it does matter. International is much cheaper = much higher expected returns at the moment. Plus you want to reduce single country risk. High stock allocations are speculative? Uranium is not? 50:50 for a young investor is generally going to be way too conservative and smells of recency bias.
However, a young investor should think very carefully about the bonds he or she buys as these will vary more widely in their returns after 30-40 years than stocks. I think that young people should allocate their bonds among TIPs, short-term corporate bonds, and 30 year Treasury Bonds/STRIPS depending on their willingness to take risk. I believe all young investors will benefit by owning TIPs and that they should treat short-term corporate bonds essentially as a cash position for re-balancing that should keep up approximately with inflation. I personally like 30 year bonds and STRIPS as a counterbalance to stocks that upside potential but I would not recommend them to conservative young investors.
While we all need a stock/bond portfolio as part of our overall financial plan, I think the best returns young people are going to get right now are from investing in their own careers. Or, if able and suited, to start or buy their own business where they can get a much lower price per earnings than in the general market.
Take with grain of salt.
DM
Welcome to the forum! I pretty much disagree with just about everything you wrote. See above.
HomerJ wrote:2000-20xx - Bear Market - 13 years so far
Default User BR wrote:Browser wrote:I'm retired and am living off my nestegg now. As I look back at my journey and see all the twists and turns it took, I have to say that (except for the being old part) I'm grateful I'm not starting out in these days of financial and economic troubles.
That's pretty funny. I started out in the early 80s. Talk about fear and uncertainty! The thing is, I didn't have the sort of resources that young people have today (like this forum, for instance) so I made all kinds of wrong moves.
Brian
HomerJ wrote:[quoteThe young people who started in the 2000s are accumulating at a steady price... When the next bull market begins (2018?), they will have a nice nest-egg that might grow 5-10 times by 2035.
1913-1929 - Bull Market - 16 years
1929-1946 - Bear Market - 17 years
1946-1966 - Bull Market - 20 years
1966-1982 - Bear Market - 18 years
1982-2000 - Bull Market - 18 years
2000-20xx - Bear Market - 13 years so far
I think every generation gets a bull and a bear. Better to start with the bear and end with bull than the other way around.
I'm still very optimistic about the future. I see a billion people joining the middle-class over the next 20 years, and many of them are going to want to drink Coke. 3-D printing will change manufacturing. Maybe cheap energy will become available. Maybe bio-engineering will finally take off. Who knows what will happen next and what will spur the next big bull market... All I know is I plan to retire in 2025, so a big bull market starting in 2018 and lasting until 2035 sounds pretty good to me.
Let's hope the pattern holds (but in case it doesn't, I'm saving like mad and not counting on a huge 5x-10x return from the market by 2035).

Grt2bOutdoors wrote:Default User BR wrote:That's pretty funny. I started out in the early 80s. Talk about fear and uncertainty! The thing is, I didn't have the sort of resources that young people have today (like this forum, for instance) so I made all kinds of wrong moves.
You've been to a library before, right? Remember the catologing system with the decimal points? Not as user friendly as a pc, still you can't deny the information was not available.
Default User BR wrote:Grt2bOutdoors wrote:Default User BR wrote:That's pretty funny. I started out in the early 80s. Talk about fear and uncertainty! The thing is, I didn't have the sort of resources that young people have today (like this forum, for instance) so I made all kinds of wrong moves.
You've been to a library before, right? Remember the catologing system with the decimal points? Not as user friendly as a pc, still you can't deny the information was not available.
There's a great difference between the information being available somewhere to the highly motivated individual, versus available to all easily. As a young person, I didn't even know what I needed, let alone where to find it. As far as I was concerned, stocks were for rich people and not for little folk like me.
Brian
HomerJ wrote:Browser wrote:
The young people who started in the 2000s are accumulating at a steady price... When the next bull market begins (2018?), they will have a nice nest-egg that might grow 5-10 times by 2035.
1913-1929 - Bull Market - 16 years
1929-1946 - Bear Market - 17 years
1946-1966 - Bull Market - 20 years
1966-1982 - Bear Market - 18 years
1982-2000 - Bull Market - 18 years
2000-20xx - Bear Market - 13 years so far
I think every generation gets a bull and a bear. Better to start with the bear and end with bull than the other way around.
Dr. Market wrote:
Yes, perhaps I shouldn't be making any predictions but the OP asked how things looked and that is just my own outlook.
Also, I am not trying to be defensive but I also disagree with much of what you say as well.
1) There have been many 5 year periods where the stock market hasn't had positive real returns. I know I am taking the losing side of the bet here but it is just an opinion and I am not advocating not holding stocks for this very reason.
I bet you a virtual beer stocks beat bonds 2013-2017. Likely by a large margin.
2) If international developed or emerging market stocks are so obviously undervalued relative to U.S., you could use that information to become excessively wealthy regardless of where the overall stock market goes (assuming you believe markets are efficient in the long run). How is that any more speculative than my own small sector bets that I didn't encourage anyone else to make. Please take a look at what sectors or individual stocks are pulling down the P/E of the EM indices. There is going to be a healthy dose of low P/E emerging market banks. I have no strong feelings on the relative valuation of EM banks, but EM is a higher risk/reward place than developed markets. Buying stocks on margin has a higher expected return as well.
A very simplistic estimate for real returns is 1/PE. That gives you about 6% real for US and 8-10% for developed international/emerging markets. Obviously it depends on what part of the market you are looking it. Therefore, international expected returns are ~25-40% higher than US at the moment. You'd really have to ramp up international to make a significant impact on your overall returns. I didn't want to develop a shifting valuation strategy so I'm not doing anything about it.
3) What is so wrong with 60:40 or 50:50? Both of these ratios are classic portfolio allocations and allow for meaningful re-balancing between stocks and bonds. This is why I think bond choice is more important than stock choice since there isn't much opportunity to re-balance among U.S., developed, and emerging stocks when all global indices are so closely correlated. To me, 90% stocks is a speculative/aggressive tilt that is favored due to recency bias.

kupo wrote:momar wrote:I think young people are more worried about never recovering from graduating into the worst job market in 80 years. Wasted generation.
This compounded with the increasing debt burden of tuition and the lack of proper financial education... I can only thank the random walk that lead me to:
- entering the job market before 2008
- discovering this website
grap0013 wrote:Dr. Market wrote:
Yes, perhaps I shouldn't be making any predictions but the OP asked how things looked and that is just my own outlook.
Also, I am not trying to be defensive but I also disagree with much of what you say as well.
1) There have been many 5 year periods where the stock market hasn't had positive real returns. I know I am taking the losing side of the bet here but it is just an opinion and I am not advocating not holding stocks for this very reason.
I bet you a virtual beer stocks beat bonds 2013-2017. Likely by a large margin.
2) If international developed or emerging market stocks are so obviously undervalued relative to U.S., you could use that information to become excessively wealthy regardless of where the overall stock market goes (assuming you believe markets are efficient in the long run). How is that any more speculative than my own small sector bets that I didn't encourage anyone else to make. Please take a look at what sectors or individual stocks are pulling down the P/E of the EM indices. There is going to be a healthy dose of low P/E emerging market banks. I have no strong feelings on the relative valuation of EM banks, but EM is a higher risk/reward place than developed markets. Buying stocks on margin has a higher expected return as well.
A very simplistic estimate for real returns is 1/PE. That gives you about 6% real for US and 8-10% for developed international/emerging markets. Obviously it depends on what part of the market you are looking it. Therefore, international expected returns are ~25-40% higher than US at the moment. You'd really have to ramp up international to make a significant impact on your overall returns. I didn't want to develop a shifting valuation strategy so I'm not doing anything about it.
3) What is so wrong with 60:40 or 50:50? Both of these ratios are classic portfolio allocations and allow for meaningful re-balancing between stocks and bonds. This is why I think bond choice is more important than stock choice since there isn't much opportunity to re-balance among U.S., developed, and emerging stocks when all global indices are so closely correlated. To me, 90% stocks is a speculative/aggressive tilt that is favored due to recency bias.
50:50 is conservative for young accumulators even by BG standards. Have you noticed the HUGE run bonds have had? Best predictor of returns is current yield. Look at the current yield on 30 year treasuries. Do you think they are going to come anywhere close to their historical return of 5.5%? It is unwise for a young, risk tolerant person to have such a large chunk of their portfolio getting zero or below zero real returns even with rebalancing bonus when stocks tank next. As previously stated, I think equities look like the much better value. Investing in large baskets of equities or high equity allocations are never speculation IMO. Individual stocks, gold, sector plays, etc.. would be considered speculative.
Dr. Market wrote:Yes, 30 year treasury yields are low, but be careful using single year PE. Even if the market value of a treasury bought today goes down, you are still receiving a (near) risk-less return of 3.2% if bought today. The implied 6% return from a stock index investment based on this year's earnings is NOT guaranteed. Further, using an inflation-adjusted 10 year PE would imply closer to a 4.3% return. I don't place much of a premium on a risky 4.3% return over a risk-free 3.2% return.
While I think we can both agree these are simplistic measures, I think they do give evidence to my point that it will be difficult to get real returns with either stocks or bonds at current prices. That is why I think TIPs and short-term corporate bonds (where you get about 0 real interest) are good defensive plays for the average investor. The value of capital is just so low right now.
Also, a large basket of stocks can most certainly be speculative depending on the fair values of the underlying stocks. The expected returns from a stock are directly related to the price you pay. Averaging across many stocks does not change this fact.
bigred77 wrote:Dr. Market wrote:Yes, 30 year treasury yields are low, but be careful using single year PE. Even if the market value of a treasury bought today goes down, you are still receiving a (near) risk-less return of 3.2% if bought today. The implied 6% return from a stock index investment based on this year's earnings is NOT guaranteed. Further, using an inflation-adjusted 10 year PE would imply closer to a 4.3% return. I don't place much of a premium on a risky 4.3% return over a risk-free 3.2% return.
While I think we can both agree these are simplistic measures, I think they do give evidence to my point that it will be difficult to get real returns with either stocks or bonds at current prices. That is why I think TIPs and short-term corporate bonds (where you get about 0 real interest) are good defensive plays for the average investor. The value of capital is just so low right now.
Also, a large basket of stocks can most certainly be speculative depending on the fair values of the underlying stocks. The expected returns from a stock are directly related to the price you pay. Averaging across many stocks does not change this fact.
Your comparing a 4.3% real return with a 3.2% nominal return. Nominal to nominal would be around 7.5 to 3.2.
If your going over 30 years my opinion is your low on the equity risk premium (both our opinions are valid, who knows who will be right)
Return to Personal Finance (Not Investing)
Users browsing this forum: Tortoise Banker and 14 guests