I thought that the HSA funds can only go towards health related care. If they are not used for healthcare, do they offer any tax advantage?
Like I said, in hindsight while we are at market peaks it's easier to say that. However can I see a backtest of investing near the end of 1990 in Japan and 2008 with 401k? That's 18 years of dismal performance if I believe?
A stupid question. You could also get hit by a bus in the morning. If you're generally a fearful person - and it sounds like you are - then investing just isn't going to fit with your personality. Buy T-Bills, or stick your money under the mattress.
As long it is used for any medical related expenses, it has triple tax advantages. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p502.pdf Expenses can be Medical, Dental or Eye, Prescriptions even some Medicare premiums. As long you keep detailed record, you could reimburse for those expenses down the road 20-30 years later. Just pay out of pocket now and let it go grow tax-free. Entire family medical expenses can be deducted. It is almost like ROTH IRA. My account is set-up at Fidelity (just moved from other provider) and is invested in total stock market. There is no income restrictions to contribute, contributions reduces Gross Income, grows tax-free and withdrawal tax free when used for medical purposes.
Well, if you had a lump sum to invest, it MIGHT make sense to spread out the contributions to a retirement vehicle. But if you are periodically making contributions, the best thing to happen would be a market crash where you were buying greater quantities on the way down. The thing is, you don't know if or when that is going to happen.
Thank you all for making me aware of DCA as well as the fact that I will be investing few $ a month instead of a lump sum at one specific point of time. I think that in hindsight with US markets and the perpetual bull market that we have been on.....it's easier to say to invest in 401k because long term that has been proven to be true. But what if something shifts in terms of the world reserve currency changing, US loses it's dominance in terms of currency status, and say a long bear market happens?? We will probably print in the end, but you never "truly know". Let's say you were investing at the top in 2000 and markets never bottomed in 2009, and it was a similar case of Japan in the 1990...would that still be good? Or would have saving 60-70% of your money every payroll, near the peak of the market and slowly building your own capital been a lot better? Then when there was a high probability of a bottom, to get in with that capital? I understand timing the market is very hard. But over the past 10 years, I have started to understand what causes markets to start declining as well as bottom. It's never an exact science, but sometimes art too. Similar to the 2018 top, I could easily see it and yes I did think that was the top. I also saw the bottom in Dec 2018, but what I did not see was that we would take out a key resistance level and be where we are now. And I do see us taking out the current highs and blasting higher until 1-2 years down the line. Anyways, I'm just wondering if building your own reserves would be better for someone adequately skilled in market timing. The present value of having money NOW and the freedom to do what I would like with it NOW? Sure I might have more money in the future and tax advantage with 401k, but considering I save most of my salary anyway and reinvest towards the future....I'm wondering how one would calculate the trade off? Or is strictly 401k and Roth IRA the answer, in which 1+1=2?
Buy and hold is great as long as you don't lose your job during the inevitable bear market and have to tap into your retirement savings to stay afloat. Make sure you have emergency savings funds and this will help you sleep tight at night.
%% I agree; I've seen the[IBD] charts that BUY HI , exactly 52 week HI, for 40 years.LOL Still a millionaire, not a great deal of difference 40 years, with 52 week HI/low.[As far as me doing that; SEPT selloffs are so common, no way would i put 52 weeks ROTH/whatever, in first week APR.]4 months dollar cost average would be more logical for APR.Sold some QQQ related to day; but that was a trade+ its still gong up a bit ,last i looked. And while a retest of 52 week lows are quite common;+ weak summer sessions; that last 20% /200dma down move we had , is a bear market; so i would not call this bull market 10 years old; more like 4 months old.
You keep saying Japan from 1990. Did you look at my link earlier? As a young investor, it is better for you to market to go down during the accumulation. Let's use the same Japan example. EWJ (japan etf) started in early 1996. Here is the chart. What do you think? It has gone no where since 23 years. Let us say, if you started with $100 in Mar 1996 and invest regularly $100/ month there after. Check this portfolio growth https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com...tDividends=true&symbol1=EWJ&allocation1_1=100 Still unconvinced?