-
Net Worth of Radiologists
-
Yay SBE! Kyle Bass tweeted that sucker out, bought that day, got a clean triple out of it so far.
-
If you are actually interested in learning about stocks or investing, check out bogleheads. Wide range of people out there from noobs who know nothing to pro’s who know a lot more than you or anyone else on the aunt minnie forums.
-
Quote from docholliday126
Yay SBE! Kyle Bass tweeted that sucker out, bought that day, got a clean triple out of it so far.
Wow. Buys stocks immediately based on “tips.” I see heartache in your future.
-
Im sad to say it but This stuff works lately. I cant catch up properly, but I wish I could.
300% gains in weeks if not days is phenomenal.
-
-
-
Bitcoin is only one type of cryptocurrency and Tesla is only one stock. If you pick the right stock, you make millions easy. If you pick the right cryptocurrency, you can make millions easy. You could have easily picked the wrong stock or cryptocurrency and ended up being a big loser. People like to pick the best thing in one category and then just say, if i simply bought x then I would have been set for life. You could also pick a lotto ticket too.
I have seen cryptocurrency as the future a long time ago but never invested in bitcoin and missed the boat. I still wont put money into it, it could go to 1 million as easily it can go to 0. If banks said hey we are going to be using bitcoin, then I would consider going into…but when I looked into it a couple years ago, banks were anti bitcoin. Whatever cryptocurrency the banks use in the future, is the one you want to invest in. IF anyone knew that, they would be easy multi millionaries.
This conversation though is useless in these forums, rads know every little on these topics. Try bogleheads if you want a useful discussion.-
If you think banks will determine which crypto will be successful, then I suggest you do more reading on the topic.
-
striker79, I think you are right in saying we don’t really know which cryptocurrency will prevail in the end. We don’t know a few years ago. I think we still don’t know now, but there are reasons I think it will be bitcoin. Chuckl, I did read quite a bit on the topic. Actually, to the point I’m afraid I’m too sucked in into the bitcoin fever. Right now though, I do think banks will decide which crypto will be successful. Banks and cryptocurrency are intricately associated. Whichever banks end up using will be “the crypto$” of the future.
One of the main reasons I think bitcoin will be important is ironically its main flaw, hard limit on block size. There’s a lot of controversy regarding this. However, bitcoin’s creator made a rare forum post expressing his/her/its dismay when there were proposals to increase the block size. Given the problems, the post was very puzzling to many miners and developers, although it is actually starting to make sense now. He/her/it never wanted bitcoin to be the day-to-day currency for us to use for daily expenses like buying coffee or groceries. In fact, blockchain technology is too costly for that. Unsustainable. All computers on earth have to be mining bitcoin to support that level of use. Bitcoin as common currency was marketed only so that the idea of cryptocurrency reaches many people. Right from the getgo, Bitcoin is meant to be a medium of exchange for large amount of currency between banknotes printing nations or large banking organizations- to be the new gold standard. To keep countries and large banks honest, to stabilize international finance by decentralizing, that’s all. This was implied in the encrypted message embedded in the bitcoin first transaction, “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” Keeping bitcoin transaction costs high ensure its security and importance. Bitcoin is to be used in big money, big transactions. Let other cryptocurrencies and government issued banknotes be the medium of exchange for daily use.-
Coinage clause is a provision of the U.S. Constitution granting Congress the power to coin money. Article I, section 8, Clause 5 of the Constitution says that Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures.
lol -
Actually, if you read the Bitcoin white paper, it is titled: “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.” The original cypherpunks who developed the underpinnings that led to bitcoin, all were trying to create a cash system for daily purchases of small items. That was the whole point. However, even Satoshi pondered that it may one day become valuable. The use case transitioned from peer to peer cash to digital gold over time. This debate led to the hard fork, with the digital gold/small block size/high fee group winning out. Roger Ver & co. came up with Bitcoin Cash, with the larger block size for cheaper transactions but it appears this has failed (if not completely yet).
What post are you referring to by Satoshi about block size? His last verified post was saying that he is not Dorian Nakamoto. There was another post later on but not verified and likely from a hacked, expired email.
I fully agree that BTC will be a settlement layer. However, I don’t think the banks choose it. It will be chosen for the banks. The banks can and will create a digital dollar but it won’t be scarce, which is the exact opposite of the bitcoin. If you are implying that there could be another crypto that is better than bitcoin that has not yet emerged, it is wholly possible. But the only true decentralized crypto is btc and it has the network effect — hard to see it being displaced any time soon.
Quote from MRItech
striker79, I think you are right in saying we don’t really know which cryptocurrency will prevail in the end. We don’t know a few years ago. I think we still don’t know now, but there are reasons I think it will be bitcoin. Chuckl, I did read quite a bit on the topic. Actually, to the point I’m afraid I’m too sucked in into the bitcoin fever. Right now though, I do think banks will decide which crypto will be successful. Banks and cryptocurrency are intricately associated. Whichever banks end up using will be “the crypto$” of the future.
One of the main reasons I think bitcoin will be important is ironically its main flaw, hard limit on block size. There’s a lot of controversy regarding this. However, bitcoin’s creator made a rare forum post expressing his/her/its dismay when there were proposals to increase the block size. Given the problems, the post was very puzzling to many miners and developers, although it is actually starting to make sense now. He/her/it never wanted bitcoin to be the day-to-day currency for us to use for daily expenses like buying coffee or groceries. In fact, blockchain technology is too costly for that. Unsustainable. All computers on earth have to be mining bitcoin to support that level of use. Bitcoin as common currency was marketed only so that the idea of cryptocurrency reaches many people. Right from the getgo, Bitcoin is meant to be a medium of exchange for large amount of currency between banknotes printing nations or large banking organizations- to be the new gold standard. To keep countries and large banks honest, to stabilize international finance by decentralizing, that’s all. This was implied in the encrypted message embedded in the bitcoin first transaction, “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” Keeping bitcoin transaction costs high ensure its security and importance. Bitcoin is to be used in big money, big transactions. Let other cryptocurrencies and government issued banknotes be the medium of exchange for daily use.
-
I got it from here [link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.0][PATCH] increase block size limit (bitcointalk.org)[/link]… and a bunch of amazon prime documentaries. Now reading the whole thread, I guess you can read Satoshi’s intentions both ways.
We digressed from the original topic… We should start a new thread in the off-topic section. This is an area I want to learn more about.
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from docholliday126
As a total aside, but it may be relevant to net worth.
I’ve been reading to a lot of research in the AI space. Not as it pertains to radiology but other industries, namely why NVIDIA purchased ARM a couple years ago. So we all know Moore’s law as it relates to computational power (CPU) of microchips doubling every two years. But when researchers looked at AI, they found out it’s graphics processing (GPU) outpaces Moore’s law doubling. The prediction is that AI will go from clunky to like god mode really quick. In 2015 AI surpassed the brainpower of a mouse, predicted to surpass a human brain in 2023, and by 2045 surpass the brain power of all the humans on earth. If true kind of scary.. That’s why I believe tech will continue to be a great investment because they will be the ones that can integrate, utilize and scale this technology.
And no, I’m not saying radiologists will be replaced by AI, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it goes from clunky to holy sh$t good quicker than people think.
Good insights. We the radiologists are in a good place to recognize AI solutions that work. When I browse through the vendor exhibits, most of them are nonsense… but occasionally, I paused and thought to myself- “that’s kinda neat!”-
Nvda purchased arm in 2020
-
[link=https://ritholtz.com/2013/11/the-wyatt-earp-effect/].[/link]
-
-
-
Quote from ChuckI
I fully agree that BTC will be a settlement layer. However, I don’t think the banks choose it. It will be chosen for the banks. The banks can and will create a digital dollar but it won’t be scarce, which is the exact opposite of the bitcoin. If you are implying that there could be another crypto that is better than bitcoin that has not yet emerged, it is wholly possible. But the only true decentralized crypto is btc and it has the network effect — hard to see it being displaced any time soon.
Here is someone who understands. And none of us believers in BTC think it is anything else than the asset or innovation of a lifetime or even centuries. A lot of believers double as “it is the hardest money of all time” [[b]and by the way, it is[/b]] but I don’t believe even in their heart of hearts do they think it will ever be allowed to be a real currency, and for obvious reasons.
All other altcoins are like stocks = major speculation. They may be valuable eventually, good luck guessing which and for what exact reasons, but not as a pure asset valuation/hedge play. Bitcoin can’t be touched for many reasons and can’t even be messed with as a security since it isn’t one, unlike the SEC who will get revolving shysters (like Gensler) to classify the others as something even if questionable. -
Quote from RADD2010
On the contrary…..Who will ultimately put their signature on these reports ? Yep..a mammographer and he or she will be reading a lot more a lot faster than us rads. So the net worth will go up and not down.
For the short term profitable for some; without the need for more mammographers in the future.
Plus payments will equilibrate quickly enough.
So long term, mammography will be more a procedure specialty; which strictly from an RVU standpoint will limit it financially.
In mammography, our RVU gold mine are screeners. You take that away, we are in deep sheet. -
Buy and hold is boring but effective.
-
Ok… so “hedging” might not be the perfect term for what TE is doing.
What he seems to have done is a reasonable internal assessment of “risk tolerance” and created a less aggressive portfolio to reflect that.
Some people simply cant sleep well at night knowing that a market crash could bring about a 50% decrease in the value of their portfolio. So, even when they have a longer time horizon they keep an asset allocation that lower risk. … And that’s OK.
Looking at historical performance, an investor with a long time horizon performs best by being fully invested in equities, accepting both the ups and the downs. But some people simply can’t tolerate that.
I feel lucky to have a high risk tolerance. My personal retirement portfolio dropped around 50% in 2008/9 . Did I like the feeling? No. Did I feel like a genius putting in 40% of my salary each month even as it was plummeting through early 2009? No. Do I *now* feel awesome that I never stopped dollar-cost-averaging through the low and was able to buy the S&P 500 when then index was at ~700? Yes!-
Good discussion dergon. I should note that this what I am doing now that my portfolio is larger than I ever thought it would be when I started. In the beginning I knew the best plan would be fully invested in equities and I stayed that way through 08, 09. In fact I was happy about that time because I knew I could buy stocks cheaper and I wanted to be able to buy more in the accumulation phase. As Buffet says, when we are in the buying phase we want prices to be going down. Luckily I was able to do that and continued 100% equities until the last few years. Its only recently that I started looking at other asset classes with the idea of using some as a hedge against things like inflation and market downturns. Also having some dry powder was valuable in March of this year.
My point was despite feeling like Im more active in my investing I am merely passively moving things around slowly based on asset allocation and rebalancing. However, I am not kidding myself that in doing so I am beating the market. I am merely deceasing volatility and still participating very well while the market goes up. Perhaps not quite as much as a true buy and hold of SPY, but close enough to grow an already big pile pile with the power of compounding, and not fretting the downturns. In fact I am even more excited about the downturns because I finally have the ability to buy a lot. Back in 09 I wished I had a lot more than the 50k a year I eagerly bought stocks with.-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Good discussion dergon. I should note that this what I am doing now that my portfolio is larger than I ever thought it would be when I started. In the beginning I knew the best plan would be fully invested in equities and I stayed that way through 08, 09. In fact I was happy about that time because I knew I could buy stocks cheaper and I wanted to be able to buy more in the accumulation phase. As Buffet says, when we are in the buying phase we want prices to be going down. Luckily I was able to do that and continued 100% equities until the last few years. Its only recently that I started looking at other asset classes with the idea of using some as a hedge against things like inflation and market downturns. Also having some dry powder was valuable in March of this year.
My point was despite feeling like Im more active in my investing I am merely passively moving things around slowly based on asset allocation and rebalancing. However, I am not kidding myself that in doing so I am beating the market. I am merely deceasing volatility and still participating very well while the market goes up. Perhaps not quite as much as a true buy and hold of SPY, but close enough to grow an already big pile pile with the power of compounding, and not fretting the downturns. In fact I am even more excited about the downturns because I finally have the ability to buy a lot. Back in 09 I wished I had a lot more than the 50k a year I eagerly bought stocks with.
100% equity doesn’t sound like a good portfolio for someone who has trouble sleeping at night because of volatility.
-
Quote from drad123
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Good discussion dergon. I should note that this what I am doing now that my portfolio is larger than I ever thought it would be when I started. In the beginning I knew the best plan would be fully invested in equities and I stayed that way through 08, 09. In fact I was happy about that time because I knew I could buy stocks cheaper and I wanted to be able to buy more in the accumulation phase. As Buffet says, when we are in the buying phase we want prices to be going down. Luckily I was able to do that and continued 100% equities until the last few years. Its only recently that I started looking at other asset classes with the idea of using some as a hedge against things like inflation and market downturns. Also having some dry powder was valuable in March of this year.
My point was despite feeling like Im more active in my investing I am merely passively moving things around slowly based on asset allocation and rebalancing. However, I am not kidding myself that in doing so I am beating the market. I am merely deceasing volatility and still participating very well while the market goes up. Perhaps not quite as much as a true buy and hold of SPY, but close enough to grow an already big pile pile with the power of compounding, and not fretting the downturns. In fact I am even more excited about the downturns because I finally have the ability to buy a lot. Back in 09 I wished I had a lot more than the 50k a year I eagerly bought stocks with.
100% equity doesn’t sound like a good portfolio for someone who has trouble sleeping at night because of volatility.
There you go again drad. Youre really winning the argument. No 100% equities is not good for someone that worried about volatility. I used that figure of speech because its well know in the investing world. I sleep fine no matter how my portfolio is set up. The point I wanted make here is for me it made a difference which phase of my timeline I was in how I set things up. In the accumulation phase it was automatic to be 100%. I hoped for more downturns to take advantage of cheaper prices. In fact I would worry more about prices continuing to increase because I hadnt bought enough yet.
Now that the run continued for so long and I continued to buy along the way, I have a portfolio that is larger than I thought it would be at this point. I realize statistically it would be smartest to stay fully invested with my 5-6 years to retirement. Instead I have found a way to lower volatility and still participate in most of the upside. Still sleeping great.-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Now that the run continued for so long and I continued to buy along the way, I have a portfolio that is larger than I thought it would be at this point. I realize statistically it would be smartest to stay fully invested with my 5-6 years to retirement. Instead I have found a way to lower volatility and still participate in most of the upside. Still sleeping great.
It would be smartest to stay 100% in equities just before retirement? This is not conventional wisdom.
-
Quote from drad123
It would be smartest to stay 100% in equities just before retirement? This is not conventional wisdom.
The only time you need to get out of equities inside of your tax-deferred investments is when you get close to the age for substantial RMDs.-
Quote from fw
Quote from drad123
It would be smartest to stay 100% in equities just before retirement? This is not conventional wisdom.
The only time you need to get out of equities inside of your tax-deferred investments is when you get close to the age for substantial RMDs.
How close? 1 day? 1 year?
-
-
Quote from drad123
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Now that the run continued for so long and I continued to buy along the way, I have a portfolio that is larger than I thought it would be at this point. I realize statistically it would be smartest to stay fully invested with my 5-6 years to retirement. Instead I have found a way to lower volatility and still participate in most of the upside. Still sleeping great.
It would be smartest to stay 100% in equities just before retirement? This is not conventional wisdom.
Not sure what you are up to drad. You seem intent on finding bits to criticize about every post. Realize 5-6 years until my planned “early retirement” is still short of typical retirement age and my timeline fits well to take advantage of all of the charts you pasted above. That’s why I said “statistically”. The chance of a bear market that lasts long enough to have me lose money over my investment horizon is pretty low. It’s just not zero.
To follow a bit closer to “conventional wisdom” I am partially taking advantage of Modern Portfolio Theory. Someone said before what I was doing was not hedging and was more in line with diversification. I can’t disagree with that. For diversification to work best in the MPT model, ideally the individual asset classes should move in different directions so you can take advantage of rebalancing.
Any way, there is a darn good chance I would do better just buying and holding an ETF. However, I’m pretty sure my downside is less and my upside is in enough to get me to the place I want to go. I have no need or great desire to have over $10M.
-
No buried rhodium bars in the backyard eh?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Well that is true
-
Im pretty sure my data holds up for ANY 30 year period since the beginning of the stock market. This includes several massive crashes. Every real investor knows this – some people keep it boring and enjoy the results, others like to try and outsmart the market, usually end up losers. It’s fun to try and beat the market, but realize it’s usually a losers game. These pearls have been shown time and time again to be true by researchers. This kind of talk really doesnt generate much discussion amongst investors, they already know it. For everyone else, it generates a lot of discussion.
A lot of people have a hard time grasping concepts without experience. I recommend playing some stock market games to appreciate the concept of buy and hold. There are several of them and they simulate real market time periods, here is one
example.
[link=https://www.personalfinanceclub.com/time-the-market-game/]https://www.personalfinan…/time-the-market-game/[/link]
-
Quote from striker79
Im pretty sure my data holds up for ANY 30 year period since the beginning of the stock market. This includes several massive crashes. Every real investor knows this – some people keep it boring and enjoy the results, others like to try and outsmart the market, usually end up losers. It’s fun to try and beat the market, but realize it’s usually a losers game. These pearls have been shown time and time again to be true by researchers. This kind of talk really doesnt generate much discussion amongst investors, they already know it. For everyone else, it generates a lot of discussion.
A lot of people have a hard time grasping concepts without experience. I recommend playing some stock market games to appreciate the concept of buy and hold. There are several of them and they simulate real market time periods, here is one
example.[link=https://www.personalfinanceclub.com/time-the-market-game/]https://www.personalfinan…/time-the-market-game/[/link]
hey that was pretty interesting for me. I’ve always been convinced that trying to time the market is a fool’s errand but never really tried something like that.
I figured when it looks like it’s “overvalued” (basically has had a big increase) I’ll sell, and when it looks oversold I’ll buy. And the first 2 times I beat it pretty handily, because both runs had big bear markets that I largely sat out.
Then the next 3 runs I missed long bull markets (including what turned out to be the entire 1990s) and got crushed.
Will stick with conventional approach.
What I have learned, rightly or wrongly (and I’m absolutely no expert on financial matters; but I’m increasingly convinced few are)– if you want to increase your income beyond what you can make as a physician + Warren Buffett investing advice, don’t take huge risks in the financial markets where you are going to be at a disadvantage vs the pros/big money. You’re better off investing in (i.e. owning part or all of) local businesses where you have real input and oversight (you’re smarter than the average bear hopefully– so your input/decision making can be a major asset in these endeavors even if you aren’t the one on the ground running the show on a daily basis [and you generally can’t be that as a physician, so you need a partner who also owns part of the business and treats it like their life depends on its success]). Those opportunities don’t come along every day of course, but can be very lucrative. Also, success with one tends to lead to more opportunities (not all of them good), although competition as well.
-
-
-
Id only use an advisor if you cant control your behavior and stick with your plan.
Youd do much better using a 3 fund portfolio covering the worlds stocks and US investment grade bonds or a single life strategy fund from Vanguard.
Its bad enough that we can no longer keep whats ours reading cases but then to have an advisor taking 1-2% of your portfolio. That will compound over decades and youll be much less rich in the end for little benefit.
-
Dont need an advisor. Read WCI book and that will help get started
-
Quote from Drrad123
Id only use an advisor if you cant control your behavior and stick with your plan.
Yeah. If you’re the kind of investor who is going to say “market [i]feels[/i] really high right now. I better ‘take some money off the table’ ” or if you decide to sell when the market goes down 15% because “you don’t want to lose any more money as the crash worsens” or you decide that radiology is boring so you think you want be a day-trader or, god forbid, you’re the kind of guy who might put up $400,000 of retirement funds in the penny stock your dentist told you about or the night club the hot tech’s brother-in-law is opening, then maybe an advisor can prevent self-harm.
But there is a price to be paid for that.-
I love paying my guy a 1% account fee to beat the market by 10% and don’t even mind paying him 20% on qualified trades that make 250/500k a year…but oh well, I can we can all agree to disagree. Wanna become a a millionaire, sure do the no cost etf thing for 30 years until you’re in a wheelchair. Wanna become a deca-millionaire while you can still run a mile, gotta think/act above the crowd and be creative.
-
Quote from docholliday126
I love paying my guy a 1% account fee to beat the market by 10% and don’t even mind paying him 20% on qualified trades that make 250/500k a year…but oh well, I can we can all agree to disagree. Wanna become a a millionaire, sure do the no cost etf thing for 30 years until you’re in a wheelchair. Wanna become a deca-millionaire while you can still run a mile, gotta think/act above the crowd and be creative.
IF they consistently beat the market by 10 % in the long run they would have trillions of dollars of funds under management. Whatever you have to tell yourself though
-
-
Appreciate the advice. I had the same line of thinking until about a year ago and that’s why I asked for opinions. I have found a lot of value in an advisor’s ability to navigate federal/state/local laws to lower my taxes, local areas of investment (real estate, etc.), and an overall ability to keep a portion of the portfolio nimble to maximize earnings. These are things that would have taken me a ton of time on my own, if I could have even done them, especially nice tax reductions I’ve gotten.
I’m not being charged 1% but I was just using that as an example because it’s common.
Certainly if you’re just doing 90% stocks in ETFs and 10% bonds or 85 stocks/5 cash/10 bonds, I agree you don’t need an advisor for that. It’s a safe efficient route, but I’m wondering if it really maximizes everything. I’ve been surprised at the increase they have seemed to bring me by their frequent calls and advice, such as “switch this 100k from large cap to small cap, large caps are nothing in 2020.” “Hey theres this local guy that needs 20k for a restaurant, are you interested?” etc.
I don’t invest in restaurants though 😛
-
Quote from Cubsfan10
Appreciate the advice. I had the same line of thinking until about a year ago and that’s why I asked for opinions. I have found a lot of value in an advisor’s ability to navigate federal/state/local laws to lower my taxes, local areas of investment (real estate, etc.), and an overall ability to keep a portion of the portfolio nimble to maximize earnings. These are things that would have taken me a ton of time on my own, if I could have even done them, especially nice tax reductions I’ve gotten.
I’m not being charged 1% but I was just using that as an example because it’s common.
Certainly if you’re just doing 90% stocks in ETFs and 10% bonds or 85 stocks/5 cash/10 bonds, I agree you don’t need an advisor for that. It’s a safe efficient route, but I’m wondering if it really maximizes everything. I’ve been surprised at the increase they have seemed to bring me by their frequent calls and advice, such as “switch this 100k from large cap to small cap, large caps are nothing in 2020.” “Hey theres this local guy that needs 20k for a restaurant, are you interested?” etc.
I don’t invest in restaurants though 😛
Dont agree at all and your taxes aren’t that complicated where there are magical gains to be found that you couldn’t figure out on your own. It’s pretty simple really.
Again, check out WCI.
There’s a reason active dollars under management continue to decrease and passive investing increases.
What does maximize mean, is your goal to have billions? An american radiologist who saves and invests appropriately is going to be worth mid 7 figures at retirement at absolute minimum and likely more if in lower cost of living areas. Lots of people have lost a ton of money trying to maximize return. Enemy of a good plan is the thought of a perfect one.-
I don’t need to “check out WCI.” I blew past that 10 years ago and it’s ad-riddled drivel at this point.
I’m not going into details of my “situation” but I have complexities outside of radiology that needed tax advice/help. If you want to judge me and you think your financial genius is unlimited then that’s fine. I wanted all opinions and so I value your opinion as well. Heck, I would have posted the same thing and called myself an idiot even 3 years ago. Things change though.
-
LOL beat the market by 10% for 1% fee!? I call total BS on that. Anyone doing that is going to be doing it for themselves and making billions of dollars, not managing money for some Rad on am.com.
-
How do the advisors make their clients think theyre getting 10% above market returns?
Do they use bonds as a benchmark? Trade highly risky Stock and compare returns to stock indexes? Hide the losers from unsophisticated clients?
Study after study has shown there is NO long term skill out there with few exceptions.
-
-
-
Quote from Cubsfan10
I have found a lot of value in an advisor’s ability to navigate federal/state/local laws to lower my taxes, local areas of investment (real estate, etc.), and an overall ability to keep a portion of the portfolio nimble to maximize earnings. These are things that would have taken me a ton of time on my own, if I could have even done them, especially nice tax reductions I’ve gotten.
I’m not being charged 1% but I was just using that as an example because it’s common.
Care to quantify how much you have saved in taxes and why?
How does one keep a portfolio nimble? Do you mean buying and selling every year?
How do you know you maximize earnings?-
I can’t tell you the exact number but I moved to a different state when I started my job so I was unfamiliar with how that state operated. The advisors were able to help me maximize tax shelters and utilize some options available in this state to reduce taxes. I could have done this myself but it certainly wouldn’t have been straightforward and would have taken me some time.
Nimble is just the word I use for always being able to take advantage of market trends by the way my assets are allocated. For example, being able to easily shift assets around to dump a ton of money into the market last March since everyone knew it was going to go rapidly back up.
I can’t tell you exactly if I’m “maximizing” earnings but I can compare my return to what would have happened if I had just left money into ETFs of various types (S&P, large cap, small cap, etc.). The return I got this year was higher than all comparisons (some by a lot and some by a little) but admittedly this was a unique year because of rapid rise in stock prices throughout the market outside of the “blue-chip”/large caps.
I’m willing to pay some fees to see if I can continue to do well with them but if not, I’m happy to move on. I think it was prudent to get some advice starting a new job in a new state. As I mentioned before, they were able to hook me into the local environment too which is something I wanted. 10 years from now when things are more auto-pilot, who knows?
-
-
-
Quote from dergon
Quote from Drrad123
Id only use an advisor if you cant control your behavior and stick with your plan.
Yeah. If you’re the kind of investor who is going to say “market [i]feels[/i] really high right now. I better ‘take some money off the table’ ” or if you decide to sell when the market goes down 15% because “you don’t want to lose any more money as the crash worsens” or you decide that radiology is boring so you think you want be a day-trader or, god forbid, you’re the kind of guy who might put up $400,000 of retirement funds in the penny stock your dentist told you about or the night club the hot tech’s brother-in-law is opening, then maybe an advisor can prevent self-harm.
But there is a price to be paid for that.
Can an advisor really change an investors behavior? Particularly bad behaviors?
-
-
-
I think the issue here is that I’m talking about a financial advisor for all components of my life and not just for stocks/investments. If it was just about stocks then I agree, ETFs are the way to go.
-
Would rather talk to an accountant than an advisor about tax stuff.
-
and if the restaurant for 20k was such a hot idea, why wouldn’t the advisor do it themselves? Sounds like lighting money on fire
-
They have an accountant in their group that’s part of the same fee. Same with lawyer.
Also I didnt take that investment. My point was that they are in tune with the community and present options to me. I find it more fun and interesting to be nimble and dynamic.
I can appreciate the “put away and do nothing” approach though. I was doing that before.
-
-
-
Seriously, I’ve wasted enough time trying to educate someone on another way of investing. It’s simply just another view.
I do find it hilarious that no cost etf people get so upset that their might be an alternative investment strategy that makes more sense, have higher returns. Most think its THE only way to invest and I hate to tell you, there is never only one way (you were sold on diversification right?). They just think they’re geniuses because its “free”, period. Just like my grandma who has a bunch of vanguard funds.
I hate to tell you but there’s a ton of professional traders that used to be at the big banks, got sick of it, decided to downshift to do their own thing from home and focus on family but kept all their network and have access to data and investment vehicles that will blow away indexing returns. The problem is most people cant find these guys because you have to get off your ass and network. And most of these guys only want a handful of high networth guys that dont bitch, so they are hard to find.
I know guys who specialize in biotech that if the dont double money in 5 years get run out of the business. So my advice is to do the passive free etf thing but also network with money guys and start alternative investing strategies and then see what gets you on the trajectory to you goal in the quickest time.
-
ya they apparently can print money but they only want a handful of high net worth clients, makes sense.
this is like saying you are the best basketball player in the world but you only want to play in 10 games a year
If someone is good enough to significantly beat the market year on year, they will amass a gigantic amount of assets under management immeadiately.
there are definitely strategies that can yield more than indexing. However IMO it maximizes the return/effort ratio. You can spend 30 min a year on your investments and get acceptable results, a ton more than lots of people who do it for a living and spend hours upon hours of their life on analysis of these things. A physician doesn’t need to beat the market. If they save 20 % of their income in the market for 20+ years they’re going to be in really really good shape. There is more to life than having the biggest number possible-
That’s a good outlook.
I actually find it fun and interesting to be dynamic and involved. I enjoy talking with them about strategies, new possibilities, etc. Perhaps I’ll just chalk it up to entertainment time. Much better than blowing it at the casino 😉-
^^ except youll blow a third of your terminal wealth since fees compound just like gains.
If you want pm me, I know a few things, Ill talk to you about strategies, new possibilities for 1/2 the cost.
I WILL beat the market, only I get to choose which market I beat every year
-
Everytime I see rads posting on here about investing, I’m reminded by how bad physicians are at investing and how they are lacking the same golden pearls all other investors live by. I used to wonder why I saw older rads who should be retired by now, still working full time and taking call…I later came to realize that yearly salary doesnt make you rich, you can lose lots of wealth through divorce or financial blunders.
I would say almost all rads who are new to investing would benefit from a financial advisor. I personally never used one, would have benefitted if I used one when I first started, but now have the knowledge to not need one. They are needed to fully understand not just how to invest, but how to navigate the tax laws fully to your advantage, and how to maximize growing your wealth as well as assett protection. That being said, paying a % fee is definitely for people who dont know any better. The way to do this is you pay the financial advisor a fee per hour, he sets you up for the year and teaches you how to do things – You learn that strategy and use it for the rest of your life, at the end its the best $500 you ever spent. Never pay a % fee, always pay an hourly fee. All the guys who take the % fee, also take hourly fees and if you bring it up, they will admit to it and take the hourly fee.
An analogy for the way some of you guys play the market based on your knowledge and expertise compared to others in the game would be, you guys are 1st year internal medicine resident reading imaging studies compared to radiologists with 5+ years experience. Just index fund it, you will be much better off, and do better than most of those with all the experience.
I’ve repeated this several times, if you want to learn to grow your wealth, get off these forums. Lots of wrong information on here. Stick to these forums for radiology info ONLY.
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from Cubsfan10
I think the issue here is that I’m talking about a financial advisor for all components of my life and not just for stocks/investments. If it was just about stocks then I agree, ETFs are the way to go.
What do you mean? They tell you not to buy a Tesla or million dollar McMansion? Put wife on allowance?
-
Quote from drad123
Quote from Cubsfan10
I think the issue here is that I’m talking about a financial advisor for all components of my life and not just for stocks/investments. If it was just about stocks then I agree, ETFs are the way to go.
What do you mean? They tell you not to buy a Tesla or million dollar McMansion? Put wife on allowance?
Local community “hook-ups.” Got discounted rates from a realtor and bank. They got my SO a job at a local charity. They have found multiple local investments for me that I can be a part of physically. More broadly, taxes, accounting, insurance, trusts, etc.-
Cubs move on, unless you’re selling a no cost ETF these guys just don’t get it. Not worth trying to help them.
-
Funny, in my experience the docs trading their hot stock picks are 70 year old surgeons who still work.
-
Ugh…I’m not talking about trading yourself….
-
-
-
Quote from Cubsfan10
Quote from drad123
Quote from Cubsfan10
I think the issue here is that I’m talking about a financial advisor for all components of my life and not just for stocks/investments. If it was just about stocks then I agree, ETFs are the way to go.
What do you mean? They tell you not to buy a Tesla or million dollar McMansion? Put wife on allowance?
Local community “hook-ups.” Got discounted rates from a realtor and bank. They got my SO a job at a local charity. They have found multiple local investments for me that I can be a part of physically. More broadly, taxes, accounting, insurance, trusts, etc.
How much are you making on your local investments?
That is a special financial advisor you have.
I see the beginnings of a family offcice- oh wait you need 100 million.
-
-
-
-
Quote from IR27
Lol no positive real return for 10-15 years . Okie doke
[attachment=0][link=https://www.thebalance.com/rolling-index-returns-4061795]https://www.thebalance.co…-index-returns-4061795[/link]
-
[attachment=0]
15 Year Stock and Bond Rolling Index Returns This bar chart shows the fifteen year rolling returns from 1973 – mid 2009 for several stock and bond indexes. Dana Anspach
The next 10 years could be 0, 15 years highly unlikely.
-
-
Quote from drad123
Quote from fw
The only time you need to get out of equities inside of your tax-deferred investments is when you get close to the age for substantial RMDs.
How close? 1 day? 1 year?
You have to start taking them at 70 1/2. Most stock market slumps have fixed themselves in 1-3 years, a few have taken up to 6. For every million you have, your RMD is about 38k. So your risk is having to sell something at a loss to cover the RMD. Once you hit your late 60s, you probably want to have 4-8% or so in something that doesn’t take a bath along with the genral stock market, for every year that you get closer to RMD, you would want to increase that number by 4%. As you age, your RMDs go up, by 81 you need to liquidate 55k, so as you move past 70 1/5 you probably would want to shift further towards bonds or cash. If you are not that risk averse and you can live with the risk of having to sell something at a loss, then of course you could stay fully in equities and take your chances.-
Quote from fw
Quote from drad123
Quote from fw
The only time you need to get out of equities inside of your tax-deferred investments is when you get close to the age for substantial RMDs.
How close? 1 day? 1 year?
You have to start taking them at 70 1/2. Most stock market slumps have fixed themselves in 1-3 years, a few have taken up to 6. For every million you have, your RMD is about 38k. So your risk is having to sell something at a loss to cover the RMD. Once you hit your late 60s, you probably want to have 4-8% or so in something that doesn’t take a bath along with the genral stock market, for every year that you get closer to RMD, you would want to increase that number by 4%. As you age, your RMDs go up, by 81 you need to liquidate 55k, so as you move past 70 1/5 you probably would want to shift further towards bonds or cash. If you are not that risk averse and you can live with the risk of having to sell something at a loss, then of course you could stay fully in equities and take your chances.
Sounds reasonable.
If you can live solely on dividend income. i.e. 10 million plus in market- I could see staying in equity until the end is near. Most of my assets are outside of retirement vehicles.
Selling lots that have appreciated the least is another strategy.
SpecID vs average cost basis accounting method.
-
[attachment=0]
[h3]Changes in valuations contributed the most to U.S. outperformance over the 10 years ended December 31, 2019[/h3]-
Backdoor Roth is a bit tricky for me as I have a substantial ($1M+) traditional IRA account. This was unavoidable due to rollover of a prior 401K account. If you do a backdoor Roth you basically cant have any other traditional IRA accounts otherwise IRS will come after you. One option would be to roll over the traditional IRA into my current 401k plan, this is somewhat unusual (usually goes the opposite direction) but would then allow me to do backdoor Roths. Other would be to convert the entire amount at once and pay a massive tax bill (no thanks). Overall, its a lot of trouble to put 6k a year into a Roth. I do have access to a Roth 401k (13k per year) and so I do that and I do backdoor Roth for my spouse IRA account.
What I have learned is that if one want to do backdoor Roths, start as early as possible (in residency) and keep 401k money in 401k accounts and dont roll them over to traditional IRA accounts when you change employers.
-
THE IRS WILL COME AFTER ME — this is NOT TRUE
What happens is that only the 6k/ #total in IRA accounts is considered a non taxable “roll over”
for instance, if you did a 6k rollover and had 60k in rollover IRA funds, only the 6/66k would be non taxable, which basically defeats the purpose. similarly, the traditional (rolloever) IRA also becomes non taxable by that same percentage. one would also need to keep track of the cost basis going forward. Basically, A MESS and not worth it when the rollover amount is >>>> than the backdoor amount.
-
Waduh, how do you do spouse Roth? Are you filing separately from your spouse? I thought you can’t do spouse Roth IRA if you are filing jointly because I am assuming your Radiology joint filing income > Roth maximum allowable.
-
You cant do direct Roth but can do backdoor Roth for spouse.
-
Quote from Waduh Dong
You cant do direct Roth but can do backdoor Roth for spouse.
This makes sense, thanks.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Quote from drad123
Quote from Thread Enhancer
Now that the run continued for so long and I continued to buy along the way, I have a portfolio that is larger than I thought it would be at this point. I realize statistically it would be smartest to stay fully invested with my 5-6 years to retirement. Instead I have found a way to lower volatility and still participate in most of the upside. Still sleeping great.
It would be smartest to stay 100% in equities just before retirement? This is not conventional wisdom.
Not sure what you are up to drad. You seem intent on finding bits to criticize about every post. Realize 5-6 years until my planned “early retirement” is still short of typical retirement age and my timeline fits well to take advantage of all of the charts you pasted above. That’s why I said “statistically”. The chance of a bear market that lasts long enough to have me lose money over my investment horizon is pretty low. It’s just not zero.
To follow a bit closer to “conventional wisdom” I am partially taking advantage of Modern Portfolio Theory. Someone said before what I was doing was not hedging and was more in line with diversification. I can’t disagree with that. For diversification to work best in the MPT model, ideally the individual asset classes should move in different directions so you can take advantage of rebalancing.
Any way, there is a darn good chance I would do better just buying and holding an ETF. However, I’m pretty sure my downside is less and my upside is in enough to get me to the place I want to go. I have no need or great desire to have over $10M.
I apologize. Don’t take offense. Just questioning ideas and assumptions.
Many follow the 4% withdrawal rule. This would require selling at low prices in a bear market.-
Quote from drad123
I apologize. Don’t take offense. Just questioning ideas and assumptions.
Many follow the 4% withdrawal rule. This would require selling at low prices in a bear market.
Thanks, none taken. I’m a natural skeptic so I love questioning ideas and assumptions.
I’m not a big believer of the 4% rule. “Low” prices might mean 50% of what they were at the top but 10% more than what they were when one started started selling. Being out of the market would have not helped. However, having some cash or even better an non corelative asset to buy into the depressed equities market can lesson the blow.
-
