passive101 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:18 pm
It looks like the Dave Ramsey portfolio even with fees is diversified, easy, and has solid performance.
I listen to the Ramsey shows and that's where my journey started from. People like to put down his very simplistic investment approach. It seems like many would be very happy with the performance of his strategy.
Easy in the sense that Ramsey and the fund managers are making some easy money at the expense of your portfolio returns.
You can also do it on your own. They recommend personal advisors for their core audience because most of them have emotional issues with money and budgets. Dave even said so talking to the Money Guy show guys where they agreed that both of their core audience was different.
His portfolio recommendations are non-sense. When you hear things like “growth and income” in one fund that could be literally anything. He doesn’t have any secret sauce - he just uses expensive active funds with opaque strategies. Few can handle a 100% stock position even in accumulation even if they have no debt and are financially literate.
A 3-funder in low cost passive funds as talked about here is a perfectly sound and reasonable strategy for a DIYer. If you want a little more juice on your potential equity returns (which comes with more risk), you can look at factor investing and tilt a portion of your portfolio, for example.
passive101 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:18 pm
It looks like the Dave Ramsey portfolio even with fees is diversified, easy, and has solid performance.
I listen to the Ramsey shows and that's where my journey started from. People like to put down his very simplistic investment approach. It seems like many would be very happy with the performance of his strategy.
Easy in the sense that Ramsey and the fund managers are making some easy money at the expense of your portfolio returns.
You can also do it on your own. They recommend personal advisors for their core audience because most of them have emotional issues with money and budgets. Dave even said so talking to the Money Guy show guys where they agreed that both of their core audience was different.
His portfolio recommendations are non-sense. When you hear things like “growth and income” in one fund that could be literally anything. He doesn’t have any secret sauce - he just uses expensive active funds with opaque strategies. Few can handle a 100% stock position even in accumulation even if they have no debt and are financially literate.
A 3-funder in low cost passive funds as talked about here is a perfectly sound and reasonable strategy for a DIYer. If you want a little more juice on your potential equity returns (which comes with more risk), you can look at factor investing and tilt a portion of your portfolio, for example.
Dave hasn't changed his terminology that he uses. He's also not against using index funds for it. Most of his audience won't do it themselves and can't.
George is younger and has said more often that they're not against DIY or index funds if people can handle the markets. If you listen to the show every day for a month you'll understand why they recommend an advisor for most people and know those advisors will probably still choose mutual funds.
passive101 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:18 pm
It looks like the Dave Ramsey portfolio even with fees is diversified, easy, and has solid performance.
I listen to the Ramsey shows and that's where my journey started from. People like to put down his very simplistic investment approach. It seems like many would be very happy with the performance of his strategy.
Easy in the sense that Ramsey and the fund managers are making some easy money at the expense of your portfolio returns.
You can also do it on your own. They recommend personal advisors for their core audience because most of them have emotional issues with money and budgets. Dave even said so talking to the Money Guy show guys where they agreed that both of their core audience was different.
His portfolio recommendations are non-sense. When you hear things like “growth and income” in one fund that could be literally anything. He doesn’t have any secret sauce - he just uses expensive active funds with opaque strategies. Few can handle a 100% stock position even in accumulation even if they have no debt and are financially literate.
A 3-funder in low cost passive funds as talked about here is a perfectly sound and reasonable strategy for a DIYer. If you want a little more juice on your potential equity returns (which comes with more risk), you can look at factor investing and tilt a portion of your portfolio, for example.
Dave hasn't changed his terminology that he uses. He's also not against using index funds for it. Most of his audience won't do it themselves and can't.
George is younger and has said more often that they're not against DIY or index funds if people can handle the markets. If you listen to the show every day for a month you'll understand why they recommend an advisor for most people and know those advisors will probably still choose mutual funds.
Ramsey’s “terminology” is meaningless - you can try to fit it into certain buckets of what you think it means but that’s a pointless exercise. He isn’t some financial genius - the stuff he says about investing is often ludicrous and borderline deceptive.
burritoLover wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:48 am
Easy in the sense that Ramsey and the fund managers are making some easy money at the expense of your portfolio returns.
You can also do it on your own. They recommend personal advisors for their core audience because most of them have emotional issues with money and budgets. Dave even said so talking to the Money Guy show guys where they agreed that both of their core audience was different.
His portfolio recommendations are non-sense. When you hear things like “growth and income” in one fund that could be literally anything. He doesn’t have any secret sauce - he just uses expensive active funds with opaque strategies. Few can handle a 100% stock position even in accumulation even if they have no debt and are financially literate.
A 3-funder in low cost passive funds as talked about here is a perfectly sound and reasonable strategy for a DIYer. If you want a little more juice on your potential equity returns (which comes with more risk), you can look at factor investing and tilt a portion of your portfolio, for example.
Dave hasn't changed his terminology that he uses. He's also not against using index funds for it. Most of his audience won't do it themselves and can't.
George is younger and has said more often that they're not against DIY or index funds if people can handle the markets. If you listen to the show every day for a month you'll understand why they recommend an advisor for most people and know those advisors will probably still choose mutual funds.
Ramsey’s “terminology” is meaningless - you can try to fit it into certain buckets of what you think it means but that’s a pointless exercise. He isn’t some financial genius - the stuff he says about investing is often ludicrous and borderline deceptive.
I don't think Dave thinks his investment strategy is the best. It's very basic and tilts to US and small and he knows the AA has done well for him. He has also switched to recommending advisors for legal reasons (possibly referral money to). It also performed well over the long term like many other ones. He sometimes even tells people that there are many strategies that are good and can work. He is very against individual stocks for almost everyone.
You can use a 1, 2, 3, or 10 fund portfolio to achieve similar results, but that isn't what Dave uses. Even looking back historically with his 4 funds his AA often beats the 3 fund Bogle portfolio (even with the ER).
He even says he uses a simple S&P 500 fund when saving up to buy real estate.
I'm just saying his portfolio gets a bad rap sometimes. There are millionaire influencers that openly use his strategy as well and use it with advisors. Pepper Princess on YouTube just recently started a series showing her advisor and talking about the reasons she chose a Ramsey trusted advisor.
passive101 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:18 pm
It looks like the Dave Ramsey portfolio even with fees is diversified, easy, and has solid performance.
I listen to the Ramsey shows and that's where my journey started from. People like to put down his very simplistic investment approach. It seems like many would be very happy with the performance of his strategy.
Easy in the sense that Ramsey and the fund managers are making some easy money at the expense of your portfolio returns.
You can also do it on your own. They recommend personal advisors for their core audience because most of them have emotional issues with money and budgets. Dave even said so talking to the Money Guy show guys where they agreed that both of their core audience was different.
His portfolio recommendations are non-sense. When you hear things like “growth and income” in one fund that could be literally anything. He doesn’t have any secret sauce - he just uses expensive active funds with opaque strategies. Few can handle a 100% stock position even in accumulation even if they have no debt and are financially literate.
A 3-funder in low cost passive funds as talked about here is a perfectly sound and reasonable strategy for a DIYer. If you want a little more juice on your potential equity returns (which comes with more risk), you can look at factor investing and tilt a portion of your portfolio, for example.
See my earlier post in this thread after we distilled the Ramsey portfolio down into being the same as the low cost Vanguard version being 75% VTI and 25% VXUS...
So are you going to take the next step and let them (Bogleheads) know they pretty much own the Ramsey Lazy Portfolio?
Aggressive vs. moderate or more conservative being the issue with regard to no bonds, but it's hard to argue with the similar performance of either the lazy portfolio of the four fund Ramsey or the two fund VTI/VXUS Vanguard version.
CyclingDuo
"Save like a pessimist, invest like an optimist." - Morgan Housel |
"Pick a bushel, save a peck!" - Grandpa
