Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Investing
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-24-2016, 01:44 PM
 
7,590 posts, read 8,638,498 times
Reputation: 4449

Advertisements

Do those target year funds really accomplish their goals? Opinions? Why/why not do you own them? (I don't)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-24-2016, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,420 posts, read 10,797,035 times
Reputation: 7801
They are best for a set and forget... no touch... type approach...returns on many are fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2016, 01:49 PM
 
106,203 posts, read 108,168,628 times
Reputation: 79732
i think they drop the ball in a number of ways .

first is because they do not consider one's own appetite for volatility , the 2nd reason is because they disregard what is happening in the world around it as to major changes . just wait until bonds get hammered and the glide path loaded retirees up with bonds .


they can also be the worst way to dollar cost average in . as markets go higher over time you are buying less and less shares at the same time the funds scale back on equity's as time goes on .

there is also no standard between what constitutes a given allocation for any retirement date .

the same 2010 target date fund from wells fargo in 2008-2009 lost 11.5% while the t.rowe price 2010 target fund lost 26.5%. that is a target fund that had 2 years to go before retirement. in fact the t.rowe target date fund didn't fall to below 45% equities until 5 years after the target date.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2016, 04:57 PM
 
Location: SoCal
20,160 posts, read 12,704,359 times
Reputation: 16993
I sold my t Rowe price target 2030. It has done well, up 50% from the peak of 2008.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2016, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,044 posts, read 13,820,863 times
Reputation: 15839
Target date funds as a class have received a bad rep. For good reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 02:49 AM
 
106,203 posts, read 108,168,628 times
Reputation: 79732
think about something else they do . after the plunge in 2008 instead of buying stock at cheap prices like conventional funds , depending on your target fund glide path they may be reducing stock and so take little advantage of low prices .

anytime you try to discard what is happening around you and go strictly by age or retirement date results are not likely to be what you expect . i rather see someone just buy a balanced fund rather than a target date fund if they are gun shy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 06:53 AM
 
7,898 posts, read 7,090,816 times
Reputation: 18587
I will take an alternate position. These can be a good approach for someone who has no idea what they are doing and no interest in following their investments. Just put the money into a fund and leave it. The allocation will gradually become more conservative with time. As with other funds, it is important to look for one with low fees. Also most of them seem to be excessively conservative. You can adjust that by picking different funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 06:55 AM
 
1,767 posts, read 1,736,069 times
Reputation: 1439
The thing about target date funds is they generally are too conservative for the dates most individual pick as most individuals pick a date based on retirement instead of life expectancy. Just because you retire does not mean you should be out of the market especially with many living into their 90's. Now I guess the flip side is maybe the younger generations will have to work well into their 70's or even 80's before retirement so maybe the target date funds allocation would be appropriate.


Overall setting up a properly asset allocated portfolio based on risk, time horizon and goals a set it, add to it and don't continually look at is the best. Many here are talking about market timing which rarely works and although many here claim are not truly that bright or all knowing to get it right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 06:58 AM
 
1,767 posts, read 1,736,069 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I sold my t Rowe price target 2030. It has done well, up 50% from the peak of 2008.
A simple index as the Vanguard total market is up over 100%. VTI
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 08:10 AM
 
4,399 posts, read 10,647,367 times
Reputation: 2383
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
i think they drop the ball in a number of ways .

first is because they do not consider one's own appetite for volatility , the 2nd reason is because they disregard what is happening in the world around it as to major changes . just wait until bonds get hammered and the glide path loaded retirees up with bonds .


they can also be the worst way to dollar cost average in . as markets go higher over time you are buying less and less shares at the same time the funds scale back on equity's as time goes on .

there is also no standard between what constitutes a given allocation for any retirement date .

the same 2010 target date fund from wells fargo in 2008-2009 lost 11.5% while the t.rowe price 2010 target fund lost 26.5%. that is a target fund that had 2 years to go before retirement. in fact the t.rowe target date fund didn't fall to below 45% equities until 5 years after the target date.
Im 30 years old so looking for a fund to match the 90 10 mix of the vanguard 2060 fund. Any recomondations. Most of the balanced vanguard funds I see are more conservative.
Im rolling over 2 old 401ks so overall less than 13k. So funds with super high minimums wont work esp if I need a couple funds

Last edited by jdm2008; 09-25-2016 at 08:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Investing

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top