That's exactly my question though.For it to be the sensible option, you'd really want your equity fund returning +5% before tax and expenses over the long term.
That's exactly my question though.
Assuming you can fund mortgage, long term, and an effective rate of 2% (which itself is a massive assumption), you need an investment return of 5% + per annum to break even. To keep an effective mortgage rate of 2%, risk free rates need to stay around 0%, long term. Do you really believe over 20+ years you can achieve a 5% return over risk free rates? Given that the market has already priced in rates staying below Zero for the next 10 years.
but I've always thought it odd why people would want to tie up most of their net worth in a dwelling when they could happily live in a smaller one and free up money to invest into actual productive assets.
You're missing a major point though. You're looking at total return, which is almost irrelevant. You need to look at that return, adjusted for interest rates.I've no idea! Is there any time over the past 40/50 years where investing in an equity index fund over a period of 25 years would not have yielded returns greater than 5% YOY before tax / expenses?
You're missing a major point though. You're looking at total return, which is almost irrelevant. You need to look at that return, adjusted for interest rates.
There's no point looking at historical data from the 80's when stocks were returning 10%+ per annum while ignoring that mortgage interest rates were over 10%.
You'll easily find charts showing the real rate of return, adjusted for inflation which isn't a bad starting point, and there have been extended periods with a real return.
Not really, since we're talking about a 25+ year time frame.Haven't interest rates been low for a good while now while the stock market has been producing good returns?
I've no idea! Is there any time over the past 40/50 years where investing in an equity index fund over a period of 25 years would not have yielded returns greater than 5% YOY before tax / expenses?
Eh, no. You get the full benefit from day 1 of overpaying your mortgage. You pay less mortgage interest immediately.
Brendan
"dollar cost averaging" and "euro cost averaging" sounds like some clever investment technique which maximises gains and minimises risk. But it's nothing of the sort.
.5 Myths About Dollar-Cost Averaging (DCA) - Stash Learn
There are misconceptions about dollar-cost averaging. We took a look at some myths to help you understand how to implement it and what it’s intended to achieve.learn.stash.com
Do you not understand the equity risk premium and that basing equity return expectations in the current zero-rate environment to the last 40/50 years when the risk-free rate was far higher is totally inappropriate?
That's a massive assumption.- It wouldn't seem to be a huge stretch of the imagination to assume that the equity market might return greater than 4% returns after tax.
No. Not 1%, or 1.5%. At least double.For it to be an option worth entertaining, you'd want to be fairly sure it was going to be 1% to 1.5% higher
All other things being equal, as soon as there's an expectation that interest rates will go up, then asset values will go down, since asset values should be the present value of future cash flows. So you're hit with a fall in the value of your investment, and an increase cost of servicing your mortgage at the same time.- Is it stupid to think that I might be able to liquidate my assets invested in equities in the event that interest rates do start going up? What time period would interest rates have to remain low for this to be a "safe" option?
That's a massive assumption.
No. Not 1%, or 1.5%. At least double.
So if interest rates are 5%, you need an investment return of 10%, etc.
All other things being equal, as soon as there's an expectation that interest rates will go up, then asset values will go down, since asset values should be the present value of future cash flows. So you're hit with a fall in the value of your investment, and an increase cost of servicing your mortgage at the same time.
Think about it logically. Very clever people 'invest' to lend the money for your mortgage. They're currently happy to lend that money to the bank at 0%, or less. In turn the bank is happy to lend it to you for 2%. Do you think if there was an 'almost certain' 5% available in equities they wouldn't be investing there instead? There's a risk in equities, which is why the returns should be higher.
Not just cashflow wise. It's a double whammy. Full stop.So cashflow wise if everything went to pot it would likely be a double whammy.
Past performance, etc. etc...OK - could you illustrate this for me? From what I understood the market generally returns 8% PA.
What were average interest rates over the period that the market returned 8%? The question you have ignored is how much has the market returned over risk free interest over any extended time period?
No, I haven't got to that YouTube video yet.I presume you already know the answer
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?