Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Personal financial management, V2

views
     
TakoC
post Jul 5 2013, 12:08 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,081 posts

Joined: Mar 2012
A quick question. We all know it's best to spread our investment to obtain passive income.

How many % should be allocate between FD:UT:Stock (100% in total) to generate a comfortable level of passive income. We all know MOST people opt for their UT distributions to be reinvested which means there are no passive income technically, unlike stocks which gives dividends and FD giving interest.

Do enlighten me here.
TakoC
post Jul 5 2013, 12:28 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,081 posts

Joined: Mar 2012
QUOTE(gark @ Jul 5 2013, 12:23 PM)
The percentage is depending on your risk tolerance. The more risk you can take without emotionally troubled then you can invest in higher portion of your money in higher risk elements.

Basically the best advice is ... sell down your risky instruments and convert to FD until you can have a good night's sleep without thinking of your investment. Then you know you are at the right risk tolerance.
*
Yes, bro gark. I understand the risk tolerance element.

But referring to my earlier post, even if you fall under the higher risk tolerance (UT) bracket, most people opt for their UT distributions to be reinvested. This will not generate passive income. I'm not talking about passive income for 40-60 years old people. I'm referring to 25-40 to the very least. I believe passive income should start young if possible. In order to generate passive income from your UT investment, the person will have to cash out their distributions. For 25-40 years old, I personally feel they should opt for redistribution. So UT does not generate passive income, which means we're only left with stock and FD.

Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from, but you only answered partial of my question.

I'm holding stocks, FD and UT. But my UT holds around 40% of my total portfolio (FD + UT + stocks), and they are not generating me passive income. Only my stocks and FD. Hence, the question.

This post has been edited by TakoC: Jul 5 2013, 12:30 PM
TakoC
post Jul 5 2013, 02:56 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,081 posts

Joined: Mar 2012
QUOTE(gark @ Jul 5 2013, 12:46 PM)
You got it all wrong about passive income.

There are two stages for investment, accumulation and  distribution.

During the accumulation, you are to take the passive income and capital gains to be reinvested FULLY for it to compound. Compound interest as Einstein said it is the 8th wonder of the world. This means all passive income and other gains from selling should be used as opportunity fund to purchase more investment to raise your total accumulated wealth. These passive income is not for spending otherwise you will not be able to compound your gains. Typically during this period depending on your investment horizon you would be in more risky investments. Typical ratio will be 50% to 80% stocks/UT, the rest in fixed income.

During the distribution, you are to convert your accumulated wealth generated during the accumulation stage and convert to yield investments, where you will be now time to enjoy your hard work and draw down your investments as cost of living. At these time your passive income will be most useful to you to spend and not for accumulate more wealth. Typically at these time you would want to be invested in safer securities with lower fluctuations. Typical ratio will be 0%-30% stocks/UT and majority in fixed income.

For most people, once the accumulation stage enable them to go to the distribution stage, they they can finally retire and stop working and enjoy their passive income. This is what we call financial freedom. Of course all of it depends on the risk profile as I have mentioned above.
*
So it is not advisable to go after passive income during your 'young' age is it? I'm now not referring to UT investment. So accumulation stage should start from your 20s to 50s?

Because by investing in stock, you get dividends. That would be passive income for the investors. Once again, I know it depend on risk appetite. But be aware that high dividend stocks tend to have lower risk. I would say that investing in a scale 8-9 UT funds (HSAO, HSAQ etc etc) are riskier than investing in high dividend stocks. And one can always start investing in dividends stocks (start distribution stage) rather than investing in UT (accumulation stage). Lots of assumption we can make here. i.e: dividends received can be reinvested back to the stock. But take note that usually 1 year of dividends received for the same stock can never be sufficient to be reinvested to even buy 1 lot of stock. Hence, accumulation stage is not valid.
TakoC
post Jul 5 2013, 03:19 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,081 posts

Joined: Mar 2012
So back to my initial question, passive income stage comes after your retirement? Accumulate stage is during your working life?

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0669sec    0.74    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 14th December 2025 - 11:07 AM