General advice for investment and way forwards.

[1973PS4]

I'm a 46 year old medical consultant with no debts and mortgage down to £65k.
I plan to pay this off in another 3 years with maximum 10% contributions and a lump sum at the end.
The rate is poor at 4.14% fixed - a bad choice as I thought interest rates were going to rise a while back.
Due to clearing all debts and pushing large sums into mortgage I have cashed in any investments that I had and have no significant savings of any kind.
I always keep over £10k in my current account and have both critical illness and life cover for large amounts to cover wages whatever happens to me.
My NHS pension pot is roughly £700k and I will be caught in pensions taxation trap so will have to start withdrawing for periods of time.
Live in an area where private school fees are not required.
Starting to think ahead about investing for children's university fees and the future.
Live reasonably frugally now had the stupid cars and unlikely to go down that route again.
My take home pay is now higher than its ever been at £6.5k monthly.

I will need to start to build up funds for the kids to be accessed in roughly 8 years.
Any tips on what to invest in which won't be taxed or considered a pension?
I had planned to wait until Brexit finished one way or another before more forwards.
Thanks for any advice.

[vand]

700k pension is a very nice pot indeed. You are probably on-target to exceed the £1.03m lifetime allowance, so there may be very little point in contributing much more in there for now, unless the LTA is changed.

I think J-ISAs for the kids to get them through higher education should be a priority, and possible J-SIPPs if you really want to give them a leg up in latter life.

I also think the mortgage is also work tackling head on. While 65k isn't a big amount outstanding given you income, expected returns for other investments are probably not high enough to warrant the additional risk-premium attached to them over the gauranteed 4.14% implied return on overpaying the mortgage, and you probably already have plenty of risk-bearing assets in your pension.

You should also get yourself an ISA if you don't already have one and do the rest of your investing within that tax shield. With £78k take-home a year and a frugal liefstyle I'm guessing that you should be able to max that out.  What to invest in is a much broader topic and also depends greatly upon your own sphere of competence.

I personally like the idea of the Permanent Portfolio as an all-weather wealth-building solution, and one of the advantages of this for UK investors is that the "gold" portion of this portfolio can held in physical gold which is CGT-exempt in the UK, which frees up the ISA allowance for the Stock/Bond portions.  You may want to check out the "Golden Butterfly" thread in the investing section which is similar to the permanent portfolio solution: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/portfolio-charts-the-golden-butterfly/

[Manchester]

There's a UK-based investment plan on here somewhere.  I'll try and find it. 

- How many children do you have (under 18)?

- What do you currently spend annually (does the £700k pension cover that)?

- When do you plan to retire?


Assuming you want to retire at 55 (9 years) and you want to avoid the lifetime allowance on your pension, I would invest the minimum amount capable of gaining an employer match.

Because you're a higher rate tax payer I would invest in an S&S ISA primarily.  With any spare money, invest in your children's Junior ISAs.  Whatever is left over I would pay down the mortgage. 


After that you're going to get hit with high tax on whatever you do.  You could invest into stocks and shares, you could buy a second property etc.

I would also consider using the junior ISAs you're giving your kids for something other than University fees.  Student loans are so cheap in the UK that it's not 'bad debt' IMO.  They would benefit more from using the money for a house purchase or even just to give them a foot up in their FIRE journey? 

[frugledoc]

Is your pension issue due to exceeding annual allowance or tapering or both?

I’m in a similar position and rather than withdrawing from the pension am taking 1.5EPA as time off in lieu = 4 weeks extra per year and have stopped doing any other additional work.  My work life balance has massively swung to the life side as a result

[1973PS4]

Thanks for all of the above something to start to think about.
I'm part of the NHS pension scheme which is defined benefits and I pay just over 16% into this - have a few added years.
Due to the pension taper I'm about to take at least a few months out of this to avoid a large tax bill.
I also have a 5 yearly pay increment late next year so need to calculate more time out of pension.
All of the above assuming that the taper is not sorted.
I will also hit the pension limit around 54 if I continue to contribute at current rate.
I've two kids 10 and 8 hence plan to access funds in about 8 years for university fees.
With maximum overpayments of mortgage and a final lump sum of around £25k should be gone in 3 years.

[Manchester]

You're in such a good position whatever you do.  Worse problems to have! :P

[1973PS4]

Thanks for all of the above advice.
I'm still a little confused as to where is best to invest for a relatively short term - roughly 8 years once mortgage finished.
Looking online a Vanguard product would seem to be ideal and no tax implications that I am aware of?

[vand]

Firstly, you are probably investing for up to 14-15 years rather than 8, if you consider that your 8yo might not leave higher education until they're 22-23 with possibility of gap years, PhDs etc.

But regardless of the timeline involved investing is always about balancing risk with reward. The reward is your expected return for tying up your capital, and the risk is the possibility of your portfolio losing value at a point where you will need to access the money.  If you are willing to take on more risk for higher expected return then your portfolio becomes more volatile, and longer time horizons become your ally. However, sometimes even very very long time horizons have delivered mediocre below expectation returns even if you had the stomach to hold on for the duration.

IMO in the current environment after a record bull market there are too many people overweight stocks, taking on too much risk for too little expected return.  A better approach is to build a conservative portfolio, then you can ramp up your exposure to more risk if you feel the need, rather than doing it the other way around like most people do. Ask yourself "how much can I lose in a worst case scenario?" rather than "how much expected return am I willing to forego?"

Here is an interesting article from one of my fav personal finance sites/blogs: https://portfoliocharts.com/2019/08/20/the-top-4-portfolios-to-recession-proof-your-investments/

[frugledoc]

Firstly, you are probably investing for up to 14-15 years rather than 8, if you consider that your 8yo might not leave higher education until they're 22-23 with possibility of gap years, PhDs etc.

But regardless of the timeline involved investing is always about balancing risk with reward. The reward is your expected return for tying up your capital, and the risk is the possibility of your portfolio losing value at a point where you will need to access the money.  If you are willing to take on more risk for higher expected return then your portfolio becomes more volatile, and longer time horizons become your ally. However, sometimes even very very long time horizons have delivered mediocre below expectation returns even if you had the stomach to hold on for the duration.

IMO in the current environment after a record bull market there are too many people overweight stocks, taking on too much risk for too little expected return.  A better approach is to build a conservative portfolio, then you can ramp up your exposure to more risk if you feel the need, rather than doing it the other way around like most people do. Ask yourself "how much can I lose in a worst case scenario?" rather than "how much expected return am I willing to forego?"

Here is an interesting article from one of my fav personal finance sites/blogs: https://portfoliocharts.com/2019/08/20/the-top-4-portfolios-to-recession-proof-your-investments/

Not many people are overweight stocks.  Most people I know who could invest either don’t because it’s “too risky” or because they want to buy luxuries with it instead.  I think when you hang around MMM and bogleheads it’s easy to get the impression that lots of people are overweight but we’re a self selecting group who are mostly optimistic.

[vand]

Firstly, you are probably investing for up to 14-15 years rather than 8, if you consider that your 8yo might not leave higher education until they're 22-23 with possibility of gap years, PhDs etc.

But regardless of the timeline involved investing is always about balancing risk with reward. The reward is your expected return for tying up your capital, and the risk is the possibility of your portfolio losing value at a point where you will need to access the money.  If you are willing to take on more risk for higher expected return then your portfolio becomes more volatile, and longer time horizons become your ally. However, sometimes even very very long time horizons have delivered mediocre below expectation returns even if you had the stomach to hold on for the duration.

IMO in the current environment after a record bull market there are too many people overweight stocks, taking on too much risk for too little expected return.  A better approach is to build a conservative portfolio, then you can ramp up your exposure to more risk if you feel the need, rather than doing it the other way around like most people do. Ask yourself "how much can I lose in a worst case scenario?" rather than "how much expected return am I willing to forego?"

Here is an interesting article from one of my fav personal finance sites/blogs: https://portfoliocharts.com/2019/08/20/the-top-4-portfolios-to-recession-proof-your-investments/

Not many people are overweight stocks.  Most people I know who could invest either don’t because it’s “too risky” or because they want to buy luxuries with it instead.  I think when you hang around MMM and bogleheads it’s easy to get the impression that lots of people are overweight but we’re a self selecting group who are mostly optimistic.

I can't vouch for people who don't invest.. there will always be large sections of the general population who refrain from doing so, but I disagree with you in principle.

Of the people who do invest, 60/40 stocks/bonds is now considered a very conservative portfolio, yet that is one where 80% of your risk is still in stocks due to the volatility in stocks.  Everyone is chasing the mythical 7% real return with very little plan or consideration for managing downside, with their idea of risk-management is to hold on until the market goes back up (of course also assuming a "V" recovery that we've had the past 2 bear markets will always be the case).

[frugledoc]

Firstly, you are probably investing for up to 14-15 years rather than 8, if you consider that your 8yo might not leave higher education until they're 22-23 with possibility of gap years, PhDs etc.

But regardless of the timeline involved investing is always about balancing risk with reward. The reward is your expected return for tying up your capital, and the risk is the possibility of your portfolio losing value at a point where you will need to access the money.  If you are willing to take on more risk for higher expected return then your portfolio becomes more volatile, and longer time horizons become your ally. However, sometimes even very very long time horizons have delivered mediocre below expectation returns even if you had the stomach to hold on for the duration.

IMO in the current environment after a record bull market there are too many people overweight stocks, taking on too much risk for too little expected return.  A better approach is to build a conservative portfolio, then you can ramp up your exposure to more risk if you feel the need, rather than doing it the other way around like most people do. Ask yourself "how much can I lose in a worst case scenario?" rather than "how much expected return am I willing to forego?"

Here is an interesting article from one of my fav personal finance sites/blogs: https://portfoliocharts.com/2019/08/20/the-top-4-portfolios-to-recession-proof-your-investments/

Not many people are overweight stocks.  Most people I know who could invest either don’t because it’s “too risky” or because they want to buy luxuries with it instead.  I think when you hang around MMM and bogleheads it’s easy to get the impression that lots of people are overweight but we’re a self selecting group who are mostly optimistic.

I can't vouch for people who don't invest.. there will always be large sections of the general population who refrain from doing so, but I disagree with you in principle.

Of the people who do invest, 60/40 stocks/bonds is now considered a very conservative portfolio, yet that is one where 80% of your risk is still in stocks due to the volatility in stocks.  Everyone is chasing the mythical 7% real return with very little plan or consideration for managing downside, with their idea of risk-management is to hold on until the market goes back up (of course also assuming a "V" recovery that we've had the past 2 bear markets will always be the case).

That’s just your opinion.  My anecdotal opinion is that a lot of people seem anxious about a crash and are adjusting their investments out of fear. 

If there is a crash, most mustachians would prefer a prolonged slump so they can accumulate more shares at cheaper prices.  V shaped recoveries are irritating like a fly.

[vand]

Firstly, you are probably investing for up to 14-15 years rather than 8, if you consider that your 8yo might not leave higher education until they're 22-23 with possibility of gap years, PhDs etc.

But regardless of the timeline involved investing is always about balancing risk with reward. The reward is your expected return for tying up your capital, and the risk is the possibility of your portfolio losing value at a point where you will need to access the money.  If you are willing to take on more risk for higher expected return then your portfolio becomes more volatile, and longer time horizons become your ally. However, sometimes even very very long time horizons have delivered mediocre below expectation returns even if you had the stomach to hold on for the duration.

IMO in the current environment after a record bull market there are too many people overweight stocks, taking on too much risk for too little expected return.  A better approach is to build a conservative portfolio, then you can ramp up your exposure to more risk if you feel the need, rather than doing it the other way around like most people do. Ask yourself "how much can I lose in a worst case scenario?" rather than "how much expected return am I willing to forego?"

Here is an interesting article from one of my fav personal finance sites/blogs: https://portfoliocharts.com/2019/08/20/the-top-4-portfolios-to-recession-proof-your-investments/

Not many people are overweight stocks.  Most people I know who could invest either don’t because it’s “too risky” or because they want to buy luxuries with it instead.  I think when you hang around MMM and bogleheads it’s easy to get the impression that lots of people are overweight but we’re a self selecting group who are mostly optimistic.

I can't vouch for people who don't invest.. there will always be large sections of the general population who refrain from doing so, but I disagree with you in principle.

Of the people who do invest, 60/40 stocks/bonds is now considered a very conservative portfolio, yet that is one where 80% of your risk is still in stocks due to the volatility in stocks.  Everyone is chasing the mythical 7% real return with very little plan or consideration for managing downside, with their idea of risk-management is to hold on until the market goes back up (of course also assuming a "V" recovery that we've had the past 2 bear markets will always be the case).

That’s just your opinion.  My anecdotal opinion is that a lot of people seem anxious about a crash and are adjusting their investments out of fear. 

If there is a crash, most mustachians would prefer a prolonged slump so they can accumulate more shares at cheaper prices.  V shaped recoveries are irritating like a fly.

Humans are not machines. It's a universal truism that most people suck at investing not because they can't do maths but because they invest according to their emotions, buying when it is popular and easy to do so after prices have risen a long way, and selling after their "investments" have disappointed. Why do you suppose mustachians are any better at investing than anyone else? Most mustachians as evidenced on these forums "level 1" thinkers. Yes, they invest, but they invest with the herd. They buy when the herd is buying and they'll sell when then the herd is selling. There are plenty of markets around the world ARE beaten down and where the risk/reward is much better than VTSAX, but I don't see a rush of enthusiam on MMM into those markets... quite the opposite. Everyone's a genius in a rising market. Reading Jim Collins does not mean you know everything there is to know about investing, and anyone who thinks they can unflinchingly maintain their Plan-A withdrawal rate when the market has halved has never done so through a real bear market, guaranteed.

[never give up]

I would say Mustachians (or anyone active on any passive investing personal finance site) are better investors than most because they have read more than the average person and are more likely to not attempt to actively time the market when they don’t know what they are doing. (The ones that do know what they are doing may not fare much better either). That’s enough to be better than average because so many are scared of investing or dance in and out. There is no evidence to suggest that Mustachians are worse than average. It will be interesting how the boards change during a downturn I agree. These forums have only been open during a major bull run, although there have been some bumps along the way.

This thread is on the UK board so there is no one here 100% VTSAX. I bet there is no one here (UK) that is 100% stocks either. Most people may say they are 100% stocks but may only be referring to a particular pot. They may have a rental or a larger than normal emergency fund or a DB pension etc alongside their ‘100% stocks’ pot. It’s easy to be gung-ho with stocks when there is the security of other income streams.

The majority of the UK board are not doing what you are saying here. They are not buying with the herd and selling with the herd. Where has this opinion come from? From what I have read they are investing what they can when they have it, usually monthly in funds such as the LifeStrategy series. These invest no more than 35% or so in the US and do have exposure to emerging markets etc giving greater geographical diversification than 100% VTSAX would.

There is nothing wrong with 100% VTSAX if you live in the US and that’s the way you want to go but many US based people invest internationally too. There are loads of US members on these boards that speak of their international allocation. I don’t live there so it’s not something I even think about. I’m not going to invest 100% in the US and I’m certainly not going to invest 100% in the UK either.

I would hope during a downturn that our UK board especially, will be a very supportive and encouraging little community that helps everyone to not panic and sell, but to stick with the plan. Asset allocation and attitude to risk is of course vital but that’s what people learn here and on sites like Monevator.

The fact of the matter is that investing prowess is only really 5% of the message here. The value I have gained is in reducing my impact on the environment, simplifying my life and minimising my expenses permanently I.e. reducing future expenditure as well as current. I now have the ability to live comfortably on a minimum wage job. If a downturn hits and I lost my job, any job I am willing to do is now good enough, where before maybe I needed to score a job paying a salary in the top 20%. There’s some tough competition there. Having control of ones expenses is the crucial point. The security level here, the confidence and attitude that this brings is worth far more to me than being able to eke out an additional 1% returns through investing. Ensure tax efficiency yes, think about asset allocation, invest in low cost funds, make sure the stocks element is global, but other than that if you’ve no interest in investing don’t worry about it. Spend more time on your expenses, learning new skills and family/friends.

For the OP as others have said ISA’s, Junior ISA’s/SIPP’s are your friend. Also a useful link:
https://monevator.com/asset-allocation-construct/

[vand]

I would say Mustachians (or anyone active on any passive investing personal finance site) are better investors than most -- <snip>

see, let me just stop you right there. This is level 1 thinking.

You think that because "indexing beats the majority of active funds" then if you are an indexer you are an above average investor. This is the Dunning-Kruger effect; you're too blinded by your own lack of knowledge to recognise the competency of others.

Most MMMers are at the "peak of stupid" - they think they know everything because they've skipped to the summary. By contrast most wise and chastened investors have been through the valley of despair and are somewhere along the slope of enlightenment.



Todd Tressider pretty much said this in one of the most infamous episodes of ChooseFI, challenging many of the cornerstones of FIRE as "too simplistic", and if you want to be an expert you have to recognise that there are no universal truths. Indexing in not "better". It doesn't make you smarter, or more successful. But there is a place for it.
I pretty much agree with everything Todd says on this, but he got a lot of heat from overly simple MMM-level thinkers because they couldn't recognise the nuance in the message that he delivers.

https://www.choosefi.com/052-todd-tresidder-risk-management/

[never give up]

Crumbs Vand. You must be on different boards than I’m on. I’ve never read anyone on the UK board saying they are smarter than anyone. I’ve never read anyone claiming to know everything either. Although tell a lie I have recently read a post where the author was claiming they were well on the way to becoming a guru. So I suppose I now have.

I’m not sure how the bit you have quoted could be argued with. A lot of people (not on MMM) are too scared to invest or just don’t. I believe cash ISA’s normally account for 70-80% of all ISA investing for example. A lot of people that do invest, invest in active funds and get hit with fees. Indexing will beat both of these approaches and therefore is better than the average person. I completely accept that some people will be good at stock picking, or investing by sector or other strategies that will give them higher returns than indexing, but they will be a minority. No one here says indexing is better than any other strategy, but it does suit the majority of people. Are you saying the proportion of people with debt, no savings at all or only savings in cash would not have been better off saving money and indexing over the course of their lives? Of course it’s better than average.

If like me you don’t have much knowledge on investing, don’t have much interest to learn loads about investing, don’t have the time to learn about investing, then the low cost indexing route is a great way to proceed rather than doing nothing, sitting in cash, or just getting stressed by it all and getting bogged down by indecision.

If you have a strategy of investing that works for you and gives you better returns than indexing would then yay, that’s great.

[frugledoc]

I am contributing to a DB pension scheme but otherwise I’m 90 - 100% equities and am closing in on 7 figures. 

Yes, I buy high, because I’m always buying, but I will never sell low. Come what come may I’m in it for the long term.

[TacheTastic]

I would say Mustachians (or anyone active on any passive investing personal finance site) are better investors than most -- <snip>

Most MMMers are at the "peak of stupid" - they think they know everything because they've skipped to the summary.

Not having researched the level of education about investing in the population, I would still suggest that NGU isn't incorrect. Yes there may be a proportion of MMMers at the "peak of stupid", but I would think that in the general population, the majority are further behind in the knowledge curve. There will be a very high concentration at the know nothing stage, and very few at the guru stage. However, just by bothering to invest rather than blow it all on TVs and cars, they are advancing their knowledge. I would even say that by trusting balanced fund to do the managing rather than picking their own stocks without the time/understanding to do due diligence on each one, they are making a wiser decision than the person who picks their own stocks around their full-time job in something else.

My point is that the "peak of stupid" is still better than no knowledge at all.

[frugledoc]

In investing I would argue that peak of stupid = enlightenment.

I understand Vands thinking because I used to be like that .  I think many indexers are past market timers / stock pickers / strategic allocators before they arrive at and stay permanently with indexing.

So I wear vand’s badge of peak stupid with pride.

[shelivesthedream]

Yo. 100% stocks here. Genuinely. 95% is in VGLS100 (in an assortment of ISA wrappers between me and my husband) and 5% in a SIPP. One month's expenses in a separate current account. And I think of myself as risk-averse! Don't make sweeping statements like that.

As for the OP:
1. Don't invest for university fees, invest to give them a starter portfolio/house deposit. Student loans may change, but my parents gave me a cash equivalent and then I took the loans out and it was so much better than "no debt". I went to a great university but have paid back around £200 in the past seven years, and it meant I had the cash for a vocational postgtad. It gave me choices that " no debt" wouldn't have. One of those choices will be to pay off the whole loan immediately on graduating, but whether that is a good idea or not depends on their plans at the time.
2. I'd go for a Vanguard target date fund, targeting the date they might graduate from their BA, or Vanguard LS 60. You can always change your mind later - the important thing is to get the money in there. You want to put this in a JISA. If you fill it up, you can either do an ISA in your name but meant for them, or a pension in their name.

For tax you need to distinguish between the product and the wrapper. Moneysavingexpert's article on ISAs can explain this for you.

[shelivesthedream]

I also don't think you've said what your current spending is vs your expected pension income.

[shelivesthedream]

Also read this: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/uk-tax-discussion/basic-investment-advice-for-uk-beginners/

[1973PS4]

Thanks for all of the advice "shelivesthedream".
My spending minus mortgage is currently around the £3.5k to £4k mark.
With regards to my pension who know.
The problem with the NHS pension is that your contribution rates are fixed according to pay.
You then run the risk of exceeding the £40k increase per year in value.
I have a pay increment in a couple of years and will have to withdraw from the scheme for a period of time.
I will start an investment ISA with any spare cash I have from overpaying mortgage to maximum and go from there.

[frugledoc]

Thanks for all of the advice "shelivesthedream".
My spending minus mortgage is currently around the £3.5k to £4k mark.
With regards to my pension who know.
The problem with the NHS pension is that your contribution rates are fixed according to pay.
You then run the risk of exceeding the £40k increase per year in value.
I have a pay increment in a couple of years and will have to withdraw from the scheme for a period of time.
I will start an investment ISA with any spare cash I have from overpaying mortgage to maximum and go from there.

Just keep your taxable income below 110k then the worst case is you pay tax on your pension uplift - 40k.  Tax rules will probably have changed by then anyway.  Any tax that encourages in demand professionals to work less is just stupid.

[shelivesthedream]

Thanks for all of the advice "shelivesthedream".
My spending minus mortgage is currently around the £3.5k to £4k mark.
With regards to my pension who know.
The problem with the NHS pension is that your contribution rates are fixed according to pay.
You then run the risk of exceeding the £40k increase per year in value.
I have a pay increment in a couple of years and will have to withdraw from the scheme for a period of time.
I will start an investment ISA with any spare cash I have from overpaying mortgage to maximum and go from there.

Sorry, am I misunderstanding here? Your expected retirement spending (based on current levels) is £4k/month and you have absolutely no idea what your NHS pension is going to pay you per month once you start receiving it? That seems unlikely to me, but then I don't have any experience with occupational pension schemes. Do you not get a sort of annual report with an estimated value at retirement age?

What I was trying to get at is, if your spending is £4k/month and your pension will pay you £4k/month, you're fine. If it will pay £5k/month, you're laughing. If it will pay £2k/month, you need to think seriously about other long-term saving vehicles to cover the shortfall for the rest of your life.

[frugledoc]

The NHS pension will tell you what you are entitled to but it is difficult to predict the future due to the current issue with taper tax causing unexpected huge tax bills which can be borrowed from your pension at very high rates.  Some are opting out of the scheme altogether.

OP I take it you have put your figures into Goldstones calculator?

[1973PS4]

Yes it is relatively impossible to calculate how much you will receive from your pension as there are too many variables.
Unless they ease off on the pension taper from now until I retire I am likely to have to withdraw from the scheme on multiple occasions to avoid tax bills.
And no "frugledoc" I haven't yet used the calculator.
I plan to do this some quiet weekend with a bottle of wine to see how screwed I am.

[1973PS4]

Thought I would update this thread.
Due to Covid and being unable to spend anything I have now completely paid off the mortgage a lot earlier than planned.
Plan to start investing within the next few months via the Stocks and Shares ISA route.
Thinking of keeping it simple as before and initially invest in Vanguard LS 60.
Any updated advice from anyone?

[Howdotheyriseup?]

Bit surprised you can't calculate your pension amount? I calculated for my mum (retired NHS consultant) and it was pretty accurate with how it turned out. She was closer to retirement when I made the calculation though.

BMA also offers advice/calculator: https://www.bma.org.uk/pay-and-contracts/pensions/calculating-your-pension/calculate-your-nhs-pension

On the saving for kids -> you can also do a junior ISA (depending on their age) also.
That might help if you are already running up against 20k ISA limit but be aware to read terms and conditions.

[vand]

Hmm. While 4.14% wasn't a great rate (a terrible rate actually), you could have refinanced to a much lower rate and then invested the money instead. It's that age old pay off mortgage vs invest debate, however the balance between risk/reward took a dramatic shift towards favouring investing thanks to Covid which temporarily whacked risked assets to increase future returns while at the same time pushing borrowing costs right down to effectively push down the risk free discount rate too.

I understand that everyone has their own investment order preference, however I think if you sat out in the last 14 months you probably missed out on a once in a generation period of returns.

[helloyou]

100% stock here as well. I'm still renting as well.

Technically, it's 95% stock and 4% gold and 1% crypto but it's reslly more or less the same.