[ZephyrBlu]

Comparing net worth when you're young makes no sense. It only makes sense in 20 years after things have had time to play out, and even then you still have a lot of time left.

Even if you have a far superior strategy and an equal amount of starting capital you might not be that far ahead of your peers after only a few years, and even if you are there is no guarantee your strategy will continue working.

In reality the amount of starting capital, income and investment strategy will vary wildly among your peers so almost any comparison is a wild extrapolation.

FWIW I'm younger than you and still have negative net worth (Loans), but growth rate > net worth. I have many years left to earn money, invest it and let it compound.

[rejectedandsad]

I don't know about that, there are lots of people around my age like OP that aren't well represented in personal finance advice columns. My net worth is only around $300k as of today, which I'd imagine is on the lower end of most of these kinds of people (Dartmouth grads, ubermensch, Google engineers etc).

[ZephyrBlu]

Mate, this is delusional.

You're taking the top 0.1% of people your age that everything went right for and comparing yourself to them.

The only purpose to this is to throw a pity party for yourself.

Again, it doesn't make sense to compare net worth when you're young. Even if they have more money right now, if you are compounding better you will win in the long term.

[rejectedandsad]

I don’t know if that’s true - I’m very skeptical of the idea $300k is anything but the very low end of Dartmouth grads.