Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You went 100% Stocks after August? 50% before that?
Leverage in 401K?
Used leveraged ETFs on the S&P500 at times.. especially after the decline. Did try shorting a few time but was too early (like around march and april) and lost a few % there.
Used leveraged ETFs on the S&P500 at times.. especially after the decline. Did try shorting a few time but was too early (like around march and april) and lost a few % there.
why just a 401k? a good plan only uses a 401k for the income generating stuff, everything else should be in vehicles they do best in . equities do better outside the 401k where you get taxed at only a max of 15% and can write off loses.
if anything it should be the return you got overall on all your money .
i like how people buy 1 or 2 stocks or funds and then they go up and they are proud of their 10% return but it represents only a tiny part of their total money . even if they were the next peter lynch it wouldnt have an effect overall on their total assets.
when taken as a whole these folks who raved about their 10% return made like 1% overall.
a plan like mine encompasses every penny and runs by design about 1/4 to 1/3 cash at this stage of my life. the funds i have did well but the overall return will be much lower so what good does it do to compare with others.
sorry but i dont see much use in comparing 401k returns . its like comparing salaries without considering expenses to determine how someone is doing financially.
Last edited by mathjak107; 01-04-2012 at 03:37 AM..
why just a 401k? a good plan only uses a 401k for the income generating stuff, everything else should be in vehicles they do best in . equities do better outside the 401k where you get taxed at only a max of 15% and can write off loses.
if anything it should be the return you got overall on all your money .
i like how people buy 1 or 2 stocks or funds and then they go up and they are proud of their 10% return but it represents only a tiny part of their total money . even if they were the next peter lynch it wouldnt have an effect overall on their total assets.
when taken as a whole these folks who raved about their 10% return made like 1% overall.
a plan like mine encompasses every penny and runs by design about 1/4 to 1/3 cash at this stage of my life. the funds i have did well but the overall return will be much lower so what good does it do to compare with others.
sorry but i dont see much use in comparing 401k returns . its like comparing salaries without considering expenses to determine how someone is doing financially.
I had some of the same thoughts. I actually proposed a thread for comparing aggregate returns, but like my savings, it didn't get much interest.
In 2011 my aggregate return on all my holdings was -4%. My 401k, which comprises slightly less than 50% of my assets, produced a -3.1% return.
Anyway, I don't really consider ROR alone to be an good gauge of my performance, so I calculate my portfolio's performance relative to a relevant benchmark. In 2011, I underperformed my benchmark by 4.7%. The underperformance is mainly due to some outstanding unrealized losses, mostly in financial and energy stocks.
My allocations are 70% equities, 18% fixed income, and 12% cash as of January 1, 2011.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.