Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by et2o 2935 days ago
No, you are wrong.

If you put all of your money into the S&P500 only at the absolute, single worst possible day (the market top on May 16th, 2008 at $1,425) you would still be up about 100% today, 10 years later at $2,779 (So about 2X, just checked).

If you put money in "after the plummet," as you suggest, which is the best case scenario, (buying at the low of $735 in January of 2009) would put you up approximately 300% (4X).

The average investor would get somewhere between these two just by ignoring the market and investing biweekly.

I'm not even advising to go 100% for the S&P500 Index Funds. However that's an infinitely better idea than a portfolio that is 75% of Gold (Dumb), T Bills + Cash (Losing money everyday), and Bonds (Which are paying at near-historic lows). It's just bad advice.

1 comments

No, you are wrong.

Do you think the quantitive easing had no affect then?

Quite a non-sequitor
Read the original post, you will see the word 'and' in it.
I'm quite aware.

How does that have anything to do with my comments about portfolio selection and results?