The Money Mustache Community
Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Investor Alley => Topic started by: LAJPP on June 01, 2018, 01:00:03 PM
-
I'm still fairly new to saving at a good clip and am in the 'wealth building' stage. After about 2 years, it still feels like I'm just putting money away and it's sitting there. There doesn't feel like the investments have any meaningful momentum of their own. I have faith in the strategy, but sometimes it's a bummer stashing away such a large portion of each check.
When did you first start to feel as though it was starting to get easier? Was there some kind of psychological crossover point for you?
-
I’ll bite; I’ve had three milestones so far where I’ve really experienced the “crossover” point that my money was truly working for me:
1) the first $100 grand. I made it there at a pretty young age (~24) and for some reason that number had a big impact on my continued desire to invest.
2) $500k - my wife and I are comfortably above this now, but it is very comforting knowing that you could invest your whole nut in tax-free munis and combined with contributions to taxable and tax deferred accounts each year still grow your net worth by $60-70k.
3) $~50k in a 10% take in an LLC formed with some college friends. We’ve kicked between $100-300 a month each of us since 2008 into our LLC that has invested in breweries, a commercial building, and now an event center in San Francisco that is now spitting out almost $5k/year in distributions. Having some side income that isn’t correlated to my personal job performance or stock market performance is a really neat feeling.
If you’re saving and investing and remain diligent, you’ll get there in no time; doubly so if you have an SO who also shares the vision of deferred gratification.
-
That's kind of a subjective thing. If you look at your account balance on a day when the market has a big rally and you say "Wow I'm up that much! Or conversely you say "Holy Bugezers I'm down that much!
Or if you have some good dividend holdings and you look at your statements estimated yearly income and you say "I'm making that much doing nothing :) ".
-
The first time my portfolio went up $1K in a day was a Pretty Big Deal for me.
Same for seeing it loose that much the first time too.
The truly amazing, holy-cow-this-passive-investing-shit-is-real feeling?
When my portfolio made more in a year than I did.
It may seem like you're just slogging away and not seeing much activity in the early days, but just remember the old saying:
Mighty oaks from little acorns grow
It will happen. Two years seems like a long time now, but that's a blink of an eye in the investing (and tree) world. It won't be overnight, but you're gaining momentum and every little bit socked away just increases the growth over time. Hang in there and keep on keeping on. :)
-
What would you do with the money if you weren't stashing it? What do you do now to make your life fulfilling?
-
No matter how much you put in, you can look at when your investment gains start outpacing your deposits.
At 5%, it takes 13 years.
At 7%, you'll get there in ~10 years.
At 9%, it takes about 8 years.
These all assume constant returns on constant deposit amounts, but it captures the idea.
-
When did you first start to feel as though it was starting to get easier? Was there some kind of psychological crossover point for you?
When I started saving 100% of employment income it felt like I had achieved a significant milestone. Before that time, it felt like I had a lot of money but not nearly enough for retirement.
-
3) $~50k in a 10% take in an LLC formed with some college friends. We’ve kicked between $100-300 a month each of us since 2008 into our LLC that has invested in breweries, a commercial building, and now an event center in San Francisco that is now spitting out almost $5k/year in distributions. Having some side income that isn’t correlated to my personal job performance or stock market performance is a really neat feeling.
Woah that is really cool. How do you invest in individual small businesses like that?!
-
3) $~50k in a 10% take in an LLC formed with some college friends. We’ve kicked between $100-300 a month each of us since 2008 into our LLC that has invested in breweries, a commercial building, and now an event center in San Francisco that is now spitting out almost $5k/year in distributions. Having some side income that isn’t correlated to my personal job performance or stock market performance is a really neat feeling.
Woah that is really cool. How do you invest in individual small businesses like that?!
Get a group of friends together with some disposable income that are willing to sacrifice some money each mo th into a joint account. Between 2008-2010 we just built up our funds through the stock market. Our first brewery investment came along in 2010 - $10k in equity and $15k promissory note @ 10% over 5 years. Our second brewery came along in 2013 - $75k promissory note at 8% over 5 years and $15k equity. Brewery nearly went under and was sold at a roughly 50% equity haircut. We made out positive on the promissory note that more than compensated for the equity loss. The commercial space is occupied by a know business - we own 20% of the building and it’s worked out great. We also still get income from the stock markets and are in the hunt for some SFRs right now. The event space in SF came through a friend and just completed renovation and opened for business - we already got a share of the talent prepayment fee from LiveNation that recouped about 10% of our initial investment. It’s been really neat seeing how many opportunists come along when you’ve got some committed people to risking a small amount of money individually but a decent amount of money collectively.
-
I had the opposite mental problem. When I first got started, I saw my portfolio grow 100% from year 1 to year 2 by strength of contributions. Next year it was only 50% and a third after that. It seemed to me that progress was slowing. When the portfolio gains started becoming material, it kind of demotivated me to continue stockpiling 70% or so of take home pay. Fortunately, I have a stubborn streak that led me to stay the course. Went FIRE 5OCT2012 at age 40. It has been worth it.
-
No matter how much you put in, you can look at when your investment gains start outpacing your deposits.
At 5%, it takes 13 years.
At 7%, you'll get there in ~10 years.
At 9%, it takes about 8 years.
These all assume constant returns on constant deposit amounts, but it captures the idea.
I think that "when our investments gains start outpacing our deposits" is a natural metric I would use, too.
Except most people's income and savings don't stay constant over the years, so I'd choose to state it in terms of present-day stash and present-day income.
If we assume:
* 10% annual return on investments (note that this is intentionally not adjusted for inflation)
* 50% savings rate (we're reasonably decent mustachians)
* Income of $x.
* Stash of $s.
... then every year we'll be depositing 0.5x.
... and every year our stash will grow by 0.1s.
... and "when our investments gains start outpacing our deposits" is when 0.1s = 0.5x ... or ... s = 5x
In other words:
When our stash is 5 times our annual income.
Feel free to adjust the assumption percentages for your own savings and investment-return rates.
-
My brain seems to respond to round numbers, so our first 100K seemed significant (b/c it was more than we owed on our mortgage); and a few years ago, it was fun when we passed the 500K mark. Apart from those...meh? I assume I'll get a lot of satisfaction when (presumably soon) we hit 800K b/c that number is our designated 'absolute minimum asset goal'). After that, any gains are frosting on top of the original goal.
-
When invested assets increase annually more than your gross annual income. The last three quarters were 35%, 22% and 42% increase of my gross income Q to Q. June to June, my investments increased by roughly my annual salary
18Q1 I contributed 15% gross, 18Q2 I contributed 32% of gross with a bonus.
-
Probably starting in March 2009, and basically ever since then.
http://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart (http://www.macrotrends.net/2488/sp500-10-year-daily-chart)
-
Used to think about this a lot when I was just starting out -- seemed like it was just me putting money in without real visible investment gains that people spoke of; didn't help that 2008-09 happened within 3 yrs of me graduating law school and starting a 401k, as it made the dollar amounts even smaller. I'd say the 2 major milestones for me were when the 401k hit 100k and then 300k (still awaiting higher milestones now). IDK why but I just think growth becomes more visible then. Suddenly at those levels if the market goes up 0.5% on the day, you're up $500 or $1500, which to me seem like "real" dollar amounts; when I went up $150 on a 0.5% day with a 30k balance it was like, eh that's nice.
A few years into 401k investing, I opened a separate brokerage account -- not for retirement. When that brokerage account + 401k together exceeded 500k, it was pretty wild to see a 1% day making/losing $5000 in a single day.
Haven't yet reached a year where investment returns > gross salary, though I wonder what that'll feel like. As of last yr, the accounts together were up 140k and even with the flat market this yr, they're up like 60k and I find myself thinking -- while not my salary, each is a decent gross salary.
-
I used to get my statements monthly via snail mail. Never looked at my balances but once a month. It thrilled me when my investments started earning more than I did every 30 days. I used to love opening statements. Now I'm FIRE, I get my statements on line. I can check my balances any time I want. The thrill is gone, but hey, I haven't had to get up and go to work for over five years, so you could say I just have different thrills now. And no boss, lol!
As the Master of the House sings in Les Miserables, "It's amazing how it grows!"
-
Once our portfolio started to earn as much as a full time, entry-level professional. It's like having a third adult in the family, who invisibly goes to work every day and throws their entire paycheque onto our NW. Having that invisible "helper" made things feel a lot easier.
-
Ours is about 250k and I don't feel that way yet.
I agree with the above poster who said "when it makes as much as a third adult in the family". So I'd want to see 50k/year increases. Maybe at 500k?
-
No matter how much you put in, you can look at when your investment gains start outpacing your deposits.
At 5%, it takes 13 years.
At 7%, you'll get there in ~10 years.
At 9%, it takes about 8 years.
These all assume constant returns on constant deposit amounts, but it captures the idea.
I think that "when our investments gains start outpacing our deposits" is a natural metric I would use, too.
Except most people's income and savings don't stay constant over the years, so I'd choose to state it in terms of present-day stash and present-day income.
If we assume:
* 10% annual return on investments (note that this is intentionally not adjusted for inflation)
* 50% savings rate (we're reasonably decent mustachians)
* Income of $x.
* Stash of $s.
... then every year we'll be depositing 0.5x.
... and every year our stash will grow by 0.1s.
... and "when our investments gains start outpacing our deposits" is when 0.1s = 0.5x ... or ... s = 5x
In other words:
When our stash is 5 times our annual income.
Feel free to adjust the assumption percentages for your own savings and investment-return rates.
This is really great analysis that almost exactly predicts my experience. My savings rate isn't as high, but I started to truly feel destined for wealth at around 5X annual income.
-
The $100,000 increments were fun for me. Also $250k, $500k, $750k, and $1,000k.
At some point I noticed that our yearly investment earnings were outpacing our yearly contributions. But when our investment earnings eclipsed our 9-5 income, that was actually a bit demotivating! As we approach FI and realize that additional savings isn't going to make much difference, it becomes tempting to take the foot off the gas a bit.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
-
At some point I noticed that our yearly investment earnings were outpacing our yearly contributions. But when our investment earnings eclipsed our 9-5 income, that was actually a bit demotivating! As we approach FI and realize that additional savings isn't going to make much difference, it becomes tempting to take the foot off the gas a bit.
I can see how this would be from one perspective, but from another perspective, remember that the fastest way to go from FI to not FI (or from almost FI to not almost FI) is going to be to start spending more than your portfolio can support. Sure how much you save might not matter that much anymore, but how much you spend sure does matter.
-
When I lost 6 months of living expenses in a week.
-
When I lost 6 months of living expenses in a week.
But you stayed the course and it's all back and then some, right?
-
When I lost 6 months of living expenses in a week.
But you stayed the course and it's all back and then some, right?
You bet :)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
-
When I lost 6 months of living expenses in a week.
But you stayed the course and it's all back and then some, right?
You bet :)
Haha, given the source, that was a rhetorical question. Just wanted to show those newb investors how the veterans get it done!
-
When I first did an annual review and saw the investment account grew more than a paycheck. Imagine, an entire paycheck and I did nothing.
-
Ours is about 250k and I don't feel that way yet.
I agree with the above poster who said "when it makes as much as a third adult in the family". So I'd want to see 50k/year increases. Maybe at 500k?
The third contributing member is when it became real - I think around ~300k I started to notice the portfolio helping and ~500k it was throwing off a teacher's salary at ~1MM it's got a life of its own and our paychecks are dwarfed by daily ups and downs.
-
For me personally, it was $100k. I think this is because going from $100k to $120k was a lot more exciting than going from $1,000 to $1,200 or $10k to $12k.
When I lost 6 months of living expenses in a week.
But you stayed the course and it's all back and then some, right?
You bet :)
Haha, given the source, that was a rhetorical question. Just wanted to show those newb investors how the veterans get it done!
I get more excited to invest when the market goes down.
-
Sometimes it still doesn't feel like we're getting anywhere, but it helps to go back and look at archived spreadsheets and see how far we've come in just the past year. The logical side of my brain knows we are moving along pretty fast.
If your investment returns outpace your income then you should have retired years ago. Short term market moves aren't returns, but very long term averages are. One thing that helps me is to realize that the companies in our mutual funds are earning about $40k a year in profit for us. There are plenty of people who don't make that much working, less yet not working. It's mind boggling when I really stop to think about it.
-
When I first did an annual review and saw the investment account grew more than a paycheck. Imagine, an entire paycheck and I did nothing.
Oh, but you did a lot! You lived below your income and invested your savings.
Seems so simple but many don't do it.
-
i've been investing money from my first post college job since 2010 really felt like they were making me crazy money in 2013 b/c they were - every year after that minus 2015 its been great.
-
I started 5 years ago with about negative $40k net worth (crippling student loans). A couple months ago I checked my net worth and found I was at a net worth of $108k. The last year or so it's felt like my net worth has started increasing faster and faster. While it used to be I'd struggle to increase NW by $2k/month, I'm now pretty consistently hitting $2,500, $3,000, or $4,000 a month. Part of that is a higher salary, but a lot is due to compound interest working for me rather than against me.
Another big thing is getting your finances automated and turning expenses into savings. We bought a house a year ago, so about half of what we used to pay in rent goes to paying down mortgage principal. That sort of thing helps. Between automatic 401k and HSA contributions and automatic student loan and mortgage payments, my net worth goes up $2k/month even if I spend 100% of my take home pay that month. So lots of months I'll feel like I barely saved anything because I had to struggle to put another $500 or $1k into my IRA, then I'll check my NW and realize that I automatically saved 2-4 times that just based on what was already set up.
So depending on your net worth when you started, you should start noticing a difference in a couple years or so.
-
500K is when it really starts moving noticeably.
-
At some point I noticed that our yearly investment earnings were outpacing our yearly contributions. But when our investment earnings eclipsed our 9-5 income, that was actually a bit demotivating! As we approach FI and realize that additional savings isn't going to make much difference, it becomes tempting to take the foot off the gas a bit.
I can see how this would be from one perspective, but from another perspective, remember that the fastest way to go from FI to not FI (or from almost FI to not almost FI) is going to be to start spending more than your portfolio can support. Sure how much you save might not matter that much anymore, but how much you spend sure does matter.
Ah, when I referred to taking the foot off the gas, I wasn't thinking of making a spending increase to offset a reduction in savings rate. I was actually thinking of working less (part time), leaving just enough $$ for expenses, but no more for savings.
-
I'm still fairly new to saving at a good clip and am in the 'wealth building' stage. After about 2 years, it still feels like I'm just putting money away and it's sitting there. There doesn't feel like the investments have any meaningful momentum of their own. I have faith in the strategy, but sometimes it's a bummer stashing away such a large portion of each check.
When did you first start to feel as though it was starting to get easier? Was there some kind of psychological crossover point for you?
I'm now 10 years into having a "real" job. I'd say that around year 5-7 my perception changed from "nothing is happening" to "the money I'm adding is inconsequential." Repeatedly seeing my monthly addition go *poof* with a small downturn, or lost in the noise of an upturn, made that change. Psychologically, "nothing is happening" was probably a tad easier, but the later option comes with 10 years of routine to help balance things out.
-
Sometimes it still doesn't feel like we're getting anywhere, but it helps to go back and look at archived spreadsheets and see how far we've come in just the past year. The logical side of my brain knows we are moving along pretty fast.
This. I just recently had a moment where I was disappointed that it didn't feel like were going anywhere fast. We just started in September 2017... so, I know, I know, cry me a river. BUT I looked at a spreadsheet I've been keeping and realized that between market gains and deposits, our accounts have grown over 30k since March. SINCE MARCH. That put things into perspective for me. We are still about 7-8 years out, but it was a nice reminder that something IS happening.
I do tend to think the magic number is around 500k where things really start snowballing and picking up momentum. I've read a few times the first million is the hardest and then it just kind of takes off. I think for us it feels like it's slow because we have so many accounts. So, while we have a large total amount, our largest individual account is only $115k.
-
Getting to the round numbers used to help me think that I'm making progress towards the FIRE goal. I was so excited when the 401k hit $250K. Prior to that it was just auto-pilot and didn't really register to me. Kept contributions up, even after a major 2008 wipeout. Starting maxing out annual 401K contributions and the recovery was faster. Maxed out IRA starting in 2008 and started to see a lot of combined growth quickly. Added HSA to savings opportunities in 2011 and that became another nice boost. Kept reinvesting dividends, got cash back credit card that automatically deposits into investment accounts and growth was no longer subtle. When investment accounts were brining in more than monthly paycheck, realized I had hit an inflection point. When I was certain that it wasn't accidental and continued more than a year, the idea of FIRE became a real possibility.
-
My most recent experience was January and February of this year. For the first time since I got a real job, my investment gains exceeded my income, and it wasn't even close. Then, in February I lost more in the market than I made at my job. It's a double-edged sword!
-
I had the opposite mental problem. When I first got started, I saw my portfolio grow 100% from year 1 to year 2 by strength of contributions. Next year it was only 50% and a third after that. It seemed to me that progress was slowing. When the portfolio gains started becoming material, it kind of demotivated me to continue stockpiling 70% or so of take home pay. Fortunately, I have a stubborn streak that led me to stay the course. Went FIRE 5OCT2012 at age 40. It has been worth it.
Yup I'm getting there now. Over $500k in assets I feel out contributions don't make much of a difference anymore. So why continue pushing so hard..? Having $10k more to spend a year would allow us to do dumb stuff like travel more, or buy a boat.. But still have $2m by 50. I'm still too stubborn to do it, but it's tempting.. (maybe I need a frugal intervention/facepunch). I now have a "whatif" tab in my spreasheet to see effect of lowering contributions :) Warning sign!
I checked and assets are 10x annual contributions. Maybe that's a magic number..
-
For me it was the speed between milestones.
100k passed and it was cool. Getting to 200k felt like it took a while. Then 300k came up much faster than I was expecting...then 400k..and now nearing 500k.
Granted much of this is due to the crazy bull market the last 5 years, but it's also due to keeping lifestyle at a similar level while our salaries have increased quite a bit.
-
Last year when our net work increased almost 100k over the year while DH was unemployed. We were overspending every month but you wouldn't know by our accounts. This was on around 350k invested. I know it can still go down, but it was the first time I felt comfortable and fine not having two incomes. It really enforced the flexibility we worked so hard for.
-
Yup I'm getting there now. Over $500k in assets I feel out contributions don't make much of a difference anymore. So why continue pushing so hard..? Having $10k more to spend a year would allow us to do dumb stuff like travel more, or buy a boat.. But still have $2m by 50. I'm still too stubborn to do it, but it's tempting.. (maybe I need a frugal intervention/facepunch). I now have a "whatif" tab in my spreasheet to see effect of lowering contributions :) Warning sign!
I definitely understand the "what if we dial back retirement savings" thoughts. I think about that often, especially in the context of going PT and earning just enough to cover expenses while letting the stash grow.
However, IMO it's too risky to be having these thoughts with a ~$500k portfolio. Especially since you likely built that portfolio with the help of the stupid good bull market over the last ~9 years. With another 2001-2002 or 2008 type of situation, you could be down in the ~$350k range in the blink of an eye.
Pedal to the metal my friend!
-
We just hit the $400k mark. And I feel like that came on comparatively quickly. You all are getting me really excited for $500k!!
-
Our invested networth.
November 2015 250k
April 2017 500k
June 2018 750k.
It really does come fast. We're investing about 100k a year and the investments are growing at around 150k a year now give or take. We'll have 1MM total NW by Dec. And 1MM invested by April of next year.
-
Used to think about this a lot when I was just starting out -- seemed like it was just me putting money in without real visible investment gains that people spoke of; didn't help that 2008-09 happened within 3 yrs of me graduating law school and starting a 401k, as it made the dollar amounts even smaller.
Whereas I look at that situation and think, "What a lucky SOB to start investing when prices were really, REALLY low!"
-
1) When i paid off my mortgage in 2003 and I had 40 to 50% more take home pay.. that i re invested.
2) When I added up my savings for the first time 10 years later.. I had $1.035 million!... Holy F!.. Seriously I had never added it up befor.
3) hitting $2M last year felt pretty good too..:)
-
Used to think about this a lot when I was just starting out -- seemed like it was just me putting money in without real visible investment gains that people spoke of; didn't help that 2008-09 happened within 3 yrs of me graduating law school and starting a 401k, as it made the dollar amounts even smaller.
Whereas I look at that situation and think, "What a lucky SOB to start investing when prices were really, REALLY low!"
Agree with you -- I did end up putting a LOT into my 401k early on at low prices due to the 08-09 market. It's just that I didn't really get it back then -- so as a younger person just starting out when you keep putting $$ in each pay period and you only have like 30k or 50k in your 401k and each week it goes down, you wonder if you're doing the right then. In retrospect, so thankful that I didn't think so hard about it and kept maxing out to 18k or whatever the IRS max was then.
-
I think about it this way. When you hit $100K, every time the market makes a 1% jump, your investments go up by $1,000 (assuming a 100% index allocation)... that's pretty impressive, but to say that is taking off, not really (about a weeks worth of take home pay at work). With a half a million invested a 1% jump is $5,000 that's a months worth of take home pay at work and that, to me, feels like it's starting to "take off" being a month's worth of work gained in a single day in the market.
-
I think about it this way. When you hit $100K, every time the market makes a 1% jump, your investments go up by $1,000 (assuming a 100% index allocation)... that's pretty impressive, but to say that is taking off, not really (about a weeks worth of take home pay at work). With a half a million invested a 1% jump is $5,000 that's a months worth of take home pay at work and that, to me, feels like it's starting to "take off" being a month's worth of work gained in a single day in the market.
yeah at the beginning of 2017 when the market was jumping and i had around 500k invested and we earned more in the first 1/3 of the year than we spent that felt pretty good.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
This was a really good read.
-
thats a cool article.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
This was a really good read.
On a little more pessimistic note (if you can be a pessimist while saving $50k/year), I found the chart showing years to increase net worth an additional $100k at different savings levels interesting. While the main example in the article (saving $10k per year) is able to increase net worth twice as fast once they reach $300k net worth as compared to when they started, a person saving $50k/year won't double their net worth increase speed until they reach more like $900k. We save more than that a year, so it would take even longer before the stash is generating as much as we save.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
This was a really good read.
On a little more pessimistic note (if you can be a pessimist while saving $50k/year), I found the chart showing years to increase net worth an additional $100k at different savings levels interesting. While the main example in the article (saving $10k per year) is able to increase net worth twice as fast once they reach $300k net worth as compared to when they started, a person saving $50k/year won't double their net worth increase speed until they reach more like $900k. We save more than that a year, so it would take even longer before the stash is generating as much as we save.
That is an incredibly "pessimistic" way to look at it indeed. The time it takes to reach either "doubling point" is the same either way.
More money growing faster (in an absolute sense) in the same amount of time shouldn't leave room for anything to be "pessimistic" about. Don't go looking for things to be pessimistic about.
-
On a little more pessimistic note (if you can be a pessimist while saving $50k/year), I found the chart showing years to increase net worth an additional $100k at different savings levels interesting. While the main example in the article (saving $10k per year) is able to increase net worth twice as fast once they reach $300k net worth as compared to when they started, a person saving $50k/year won't double their net worth increase speed until they reach more like $900k. We save more than that a year, so it would take even longer before the stash is generating as much as we save.
Interestingly, when Charlie Munger made his first $100,000 it was worth about $900k in today's dollars.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
This was a really good read.
On a little more pessimistic note (if you can be a pessimist while saving $50k/year), I found the chart showing years to increase net worth an additional $100k at different savings levels interesting. While the main example in the article (saving $10k per year) is able to increase net worth twice as fast once they reach $300k net worth as compared to when they started, a person saving $50k/year won't double their net worth increase speed until they reach more like $900k. We save more than that a year, so it would take even longer before the stash is generating as much as we save.
That is an incredibly "pessimistic" - if not delusional - way to look at it indeed. It takes you far fewer years to hit the doubling rate if you're saving $50k a year (1.94 + 1.71 + 1.53 + 1.39 + 1.27 + 1.17 + 1.08 + 1.01 + .95 = 12.05) instead of $10k a year (7.84 + 5.10 + 3.78 = 16.72).
More money growing faster in less time shouldn't leave room for anything to be "pessimistic" about. Don't go looking for things to be pessimistic about.
Intuitively, this doesn't make sense. Your rates of increase relative to your contribution amounts should be the same assuming you continue contributing the same amount each year and your return remains fixed. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'doubling rate', would it be possible to explain in more detail what you're getting at?
I think your mistake is that you're looking at the rows in the final table as if they're comparable between $10k/year and $50k/year, but the rows themselves are in increments of $100k. At $10k/year, you're going from $200k to $300k in about 3.78 years (according to the corresponding cell). At $50k/year (5x more), you're going from $1M to $1.5M in 0.84+0.79+0.75+0.72+0.68 = 3.78 years. Looks the same to me.
-
http://www.fourpillarfreedom.com/the-math-behind-why-net-worth-goes-crazy-after-the-first-100k/
This was a really good read.
On a little more pessimistic note (if you can be a pessimist while saving $50k/year), I found the chart showing years to increase net worth an additional $100k at different savings levels interesting. While the main example in the article (saving $10k per year) is able to increase net worth twice as fast once they reach $300k net worth as compared to when they started, a person saving $50k/year won't double their net worth increase speed until they reach more like $900k. We save more than that a year, so it would take even longer before the stash is generating as much as we save.
That is an incredibly "pessimistic" - if not delusional - way to look at it indeed. It takes you far fewer years to hit the doubling rate if you're saving $50k a year (1.94 + 1.71 + 1.53 + 1.39 + 1.27 + 1.17 + 1.08 + 1.01 + .95 = 12.05) instead of $10k a year (7.84 + 5.10 + 3.78 = 16.72).
More money growing faster in less time shouldn't leave room for anything to be "pessimistic" about. Don't go looking for things to be pessimistic about.
Intuitively, this doesn't make sense. Your rates of increase relative to your contribution amounts should be the same assuming you continue contributing the same amount each year and your return remains fixed. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'doubling rate', would it be possible to explain in more detail what you're getting at?
I think your mistake is that you're looking at the rows in the final table as if they're comparable between $10k/year and $50k/year, but the rows themselves are in increments of $100k. At $10k/year, you're going from $200k to $300k in about 3.78 years (according to the corresponding cell). At $50k/year (5x more), you're going from $1M to $1.5M in 0.84+0.79+0.75+0.72+0.68 = 3.78 years. Looks the same to me.
You're right, the time it takes to until your investments appreciation equals your contribution is constant for a given interest rate. The point remains though that it's not worse if you're contributing more; so there's still nothing to be pessimistic about. I'll delete my dumb adding.