Nov 19, 2019
30
9
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
I wanted to ask about what everyone's experience is with having a more diversified portfolio (real estate, stocks, bonds, etc.). Do you recommend it? If you do have a diversified portfolio, how'd you start? Would love to hear more from the community about this.
 

Mman

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Mar 22, 2005
5,200
3,050
Status
Attending Physician
I wanted to ask about what everyone's experience is with having a more diversified portfolio (real estate, stocks, bonds, etc.). Do you recommend it? If you do have a diversified portfolio, how'd you start? Would love to hear more from the community about this.
there is almost no argument for not having diversification in your overall portfolio which can easily be achieved via low cost ETFs and mutual funds to get exposure to whatever you want (stocks, bonds, REITs, domestic vs international, etc).
 
OP
D
Nov 19, 2019
30
9
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
there is almost no argument for not having diversification in your overall portfolio which can easily be achieved via low cost ETFs and mutual funds to get exposure to whatever you want (stocks, bonds, REITs, domestic vs international, etc).
Would startups and more technical ventures be considered risky?
 
About the Ads

Mman

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Mar 22, 2005
5,200
3,050
Status
Attending Physician
Would startups and more technical ventures be considered risky?
I will say yes, but please provide more examples as to what exactly you mean. I mean startups? Are you planning on being an angel investor? Seed stage? Series A or B? Other than investing in your directly family or what not, those are not things for amateurs to get involved in and are usually only done by people who do nothing but that sort of investing for a living.

Basically if someone has to ask about it they should not be doing it.
 

sliceofbread136

7+ Year Member
Nov 5, 2011
4,887
2,776
70% vtsax, 10% vxus, 10% vdigx, 10% vbtlx is what I’m shooting for.

honestly I would probably have been better with 100% vtsax but whatever
 
OP
D
Nov 19, 2019
30
9
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
70% vtsax, 10% vxus, 10% vdigx, 10% vbtlx is what I’m shooting for.

honestly I would probably have been better with 100% vtsax but whatever
I feel these are ideal for more passive investors. I'm trying to be a more active investor (not trading and checking my stocks every hour) and build a diversified portfolio at my own discretion.

Anyone know anything more about fractional ownership investments? The high regulatory oversight appeals me in the sense that I would be less likely to be buying into something semi-fraudulent.
 

ThoracicGuy

5+ Year Member
Jun 11, 2013
9,770
23,964
Status
Attending Physician
I feel these are ideal for more passive investors. I'm trying to be a more active investor (not trading and checking my stocks every hour) and build a diversified portfolio at my own discretion.

Anyone know anything more about fractional ownership investments? The high regulatory oversight appeals me in the sense that I would be less likely to be buying into something semi-fraudulent.
It's unlikely that you'll beat passive indices over time.
 

Mman

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Mar 22, 2005
5,200
3,050
Status
Attending Physician
Is it rare for people to beat passive indices?
exceptionally rare for professional money managers to beat passive indexes over any 10+ year period
 

sliceofbread136

7+ Year Member
Nov 5, 2011
4,887
2,776
Some the active vanguard managed funds look pretty good, since inception vgidx and vseqx seem to have beaten vfaix and vtsax over the past 20 years and still have low fees (around 0.2). I’m planning to include them in my portfolio when I scrounge up the 3k min for each. Over the next 30 years they may not beat my index investments but atleast the fees are low.

I wouldn’t encourage you to devote a large portion of your portfolio to single stocks personally unless you are serious expert. Even just going for blue chip stocks seems risky. I would stick to mutual funds or etfs
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThoracicGuy
OP
D
Nov 19, 2019
30
9
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
I wouldn’t encourage you to devote a large portion of your portfolio to single stocks personally unless you are serious expert. Even just going for blue chip stocks seems risky. I would stick to mutual funds or etfs
Loving all of this advice. Thank you so much to everyone. So is real estate off the table to most people? Do you all feel its too risky?
 

Slavic Scot

2+ Year Member
Jul 21, 2017
55
147
Status
Pre-Medical
Diversification if you want to get wealthy slowly, non-diversified if you want to get wealthy quickly.

Momentum investing actually consistently beats the market by ~1%. Buy when stocks are going up and sell when they go down, but that takes effort that might not be worth the trouble.
 

sliceofbread136

7+ Year Member
Nov 5, 2011
4,887
2,776
Diversification if you want to get wealthy slowly, non-diversified if you want to get wealthy quickly.

Momentum investing actually consistently beats the market by ~1%. Buy when stocks are going up and sell when they go down, but that takes effort that might not be worth the trouble.
pretty sure momentum is a hard factor for even active fund managers to capture let alone a laymen
 

Stroganoff

Never. Give. Up.
15+ Year Member
Nov 6, 2003
43,275
26,331
Diversification if you want to get wealthy slowly, non-diversified if you want to get wealthy quickly.
This is dangerous advice. The way to get wealthy quickly is to simply much more aggressively contribute to the same appropriately diversified portfolio. I cannot in good conscience find a rational reason to eschew diversification and basic investment principles.
 

dpmd

Relaxing
10+ Year Member
Sep 14, 2006
21,383
32,887
Lazytown
Status
Attending Physician
This is dangerous advice. The way to get wealthy quickly is to simply much more aggressively contribute to the same appropriately diversified portfolio. I cannot in good conscience find a rational reason to eschew diversification and basic investment principles.
I am going to hope they meant a more aggressive type of asset allocation not total lack of diversification.
 
About the Ads