What does an anon need to know about index funds and companies that provide this service?
From someone that doesn't know shit at the stock market and wants to put their savings where they could at least get a 4% yield is there any viable solutions? My bank's best savings plan is now only 2.75% pa interest, went down from 4.75% a few years back.
Robinhood and VOO
>2% yield, but you aren't going to get 4% in an index fund
>>1257496
Interesting, thank you for the information
>>1257496
>you aren't going to get 4% in an index fund
Huh? Equities have averaged 11% annually over the last 90-110 years, give or take. Obviously there are good years and bad years, but that's why we play the long game.
Telling someone that equity indexes return less than 4% shows either a shocking stupidity and ignorance, or a malicious intent. Either way, die in a fire.
>>1257708
>Either way, die in a fire.
Before you sentence me to death maybe you should read and see they want a 4% dividend.
>>1257713
Dividends are horrible for tax reasons.
>>1257713
No, the OP said yield, not income. While yield can indeed refer to to dividends, interest, and other distributions, it's pretty evident he's looking for something to grow his money in the best way possible.
Moreover, even a 100% bond index portfolio has returned 5.4% annually from 1926–2015. So even IF he was actually interested in income alone, your original statement was still shockingly false.
So the fire is still looking like the best option for you.
>>1257708
>Equities have averaged 11% annually over the last 90-110 years, give or take.
>Telling someone that equity indexes return less than 4% shows either a shocking stupidity and ignorance
PFFFFFFFFHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>1257723
>So the fire is still looking like the best option for you.
Yield in the stock market always refers to dividends. Why the fuck do you think I even said VOO if I wouldn't have wanted them to also have a good capital gain?
>>1257724
Dumbass, the data is pretty easy to find. All your fake chart proves is that making short-term moves can be a losing game.
>>1257727
>the stock market
OP asked about index funds, not stocks. That could mean stocks, bonds, REITs, or any of the dozens of other forms of index funds out there.
You keep making dumb assumptions and then giving wrong advice about your dumb assumption. Just stop.
>>1257733
>fake chart
lol, is that the only argument you have? "waaaa it's fake, ner ner" That is literally 5 year old thinking. Do not ever pretend that you are mature of intelligent ever again, your objective retardation has now been exposed and confirmed in this thread.
Also...
> making short-term moves
Confirmed for absolutely not fucking understanding the chart. Did you notice that if you had invested for TWENTY FUCKING YEARS in the 1960s that you would have had a NEGATIVE RETURN?
So how about that guaranteed 11%, motherfucker? You have no understanding as to what inflation is. You have Reddit-tier knowledge of investing. Your investment strategy is based entirely on hope.
Go right ahead and plow it all into that index fund you big dumb baby.
>>1257496
FTSE 100 is currently 3.7% senpai.
>>1257724
this doesn't take into account dollar cost averaging though does it?
I always assumed the whole point of index funds is dollar cost averaging over 30-40 years which provides you with a 7-10% return. Not just investing once and taking it out at a later date.
>>1257756
Fascinating. UK does seem to have higher yields than the US overall. Now to find a local index that matches the ftse 100.
>>1257492
All you need to do is listen to the FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR WOMAN JANET YELLEN
'tis all you need to do.
>>1257751
>guaranteed
What a child. All investing has risk. Even savings accounts have risk. Without risk, there is no reward.
If you're too scared to take any risk with your investments, just stick you money in the mattress like an old cat lady. You'll get poorer over time due to inflation, but in your case I'm quite sure it won't matter. Poorfag is poor.
>>1257764
Dollar cost averaging is OK, but not the best way to invest. Time-in-market is the most correlated factor to positive gains, so you want to get the most money invested at the earliest point possible and leave it in for the most time possible (lump sum investing), Lump sum investing beats dollar cost averaging 66% of the time, all other things being equal.
>>1257751
>1960s
The modern equity market didn't start until after Paul Volcker saved us from stagflation in the 80s. Using trends from pre-80s stock is pretty useless in trying to make any sort of predictions about the current market. The fundamental aspects of the stock market were different then.This was all long before 401(k) when employers tended to give pensions (they don't anymore). Now your best bet is to index the stock, unless as anon said you want to lose money due to inflation.
>guaranteed 11%
Anon simply pointed out the overall average. Nobody would guarantee anything from the market, and a much safer assumption would be 6-8% returns given the current market, maybe even as low as 5% if we've entered a new market structure as some economists are saying.
>You have Reddit-tier knowledge of investing
Ah yes. Those economists and their Reddit-tier knowledge of investing, putting their money in index funds. If only they were as wise and enlightened as you.
>Your investment strategy is based entirely on hope
That would only be true if it was based on, say, the growth of the S&P in the last 8 years. If you base it on averages over the past 40 years, you're making one of the safest investing decisions yielding decent returns the market has to offer.
>>1258462
>Putting money in mattress is risk free
that's probably higher rick than a savings account tbqh
>>1257492
Liquidity is huge. Bookmark the following link for later:
>http://www.nanex.net/NxResearch/NxLiquidity/
