[nightski]

While it's true the market has given guaranteed returns well north of 2.2% average for 30 years or more (the single worst 30 year period would of been higher than 2.2% average). However, when you cut that down to a decade it changes the picture significantly. There are decades where you could of actually seen a loss.

So without giving financial advice, I'd say it's more complicated than throwing it in an index fund if your time-frame is a decade.

[icedchai]

Don't overthink this stuff. Most of the decades you wouldn't see a loss, so you're better off investing a good chunk. Keep 10 to 20% of your holdings in cash getting 2% interest if it helps you sleep at night.

[nightski]

I wasn't trying to overthink. But the market is volatile at the moment and the next decade is rather uncertain. Thinking you can just throw your money in and get 7% over the next decade and get to $1M may not be the best strategy.

We aren't talking about losing sleep over volatility here. We are talking about a situation where someone specifically wants to hit $1M in a decade.

[icedchai]

The past decade was also quite volatile. So was the previous. Volatility is normal and timing the market doesn't work, so DCA in and forget about it.

[nightski]

I'm not suggesting one time the market. We've been in a huge bull run in the last decade volatile or not. But if you are shooting for $1M in a decade you might want to think about asset allocation more carefully than 100% in the market. That's all I am suggesting. I agree for the portion you are allocating to stocks, DCA in and don't try to time the market.

For example, I put several thousand in a Vanguard TR Fund in January of last year. It's still down 2% overall. Now on a 30 year horizon, no big deal. But for a decade that will significantly impact the compounding returns. Stocks are very volatile and may not be real desirable for a 10 year time frame.

[cerberusss]

I'm all for buy-and-hold, but you do realize that there's a group of people for which this is very hard? Psychologically, they'll have trouble staying the course when seas are rough.

[hopler]

It's figurative language. "1Million" in "currency unspecified" for 10 years isn't the exact price or time cost of a good life.

[brudgers]

With ongoing contribution plans like retirement accounts, the thirty year average returns are relevant to a sixty year contribution cycle: Assuming no back loading (later contributions larger than early contributions). With a back loaded cycle, dollar by dollar thirty year averages require a greater than sixty year investment cycle.

Even a ten year average returns is typically going to require more -- a cycle longer than twenty years. Financial services are sold: caveat emptor.