…where/in what would you do so?
This is age related.
As I am in my mid-50s I would go heavy into Index funds and solid dividend stocks. I would take about 25% for higher risk high dividend stocks.
If I was in my 20s I go maybe 33% Index funds and solid dividend stocks.
33% into high growth funds, I’m thinking Pot stocks for some of these.
33% into REITs. {Real Estate Investment Trusts}
If I was over 63, it would be all conservative investments. Index Funds, Blue Chips dividend funds. When Bond prices return, I would start moving some money into bonds.
As this is asking for opinions, I moved the thread from GQ to IMHO
What are your circumstances? Do you have any savings and investments currently? How close is retirement? Do you own a house?
Right now, everything (stocks and real estate) is crazy high, so I don’t know of any bargains to be had.
I’d give it all to Amnesty International and hope the dividend would be a slightly less torturous world for my kid to grow up in.
To make things simple, let’s say someone who has this kind of cash could afford to lose it without effecting retirement.
The old rule was that you subtracted your age from 100, which gave the percentage of your investments that should be in stocks, with the rest in bonds or other conservative allocations. Then someone noticed we are generally living longer, so a suggested new formula is subtracting your age from 110 or 120 to get the percentage of investments that need to be in stocks/equities.
I prefer putting all my eggs in one can’t-miss basket, like Consolidated Fuzz or Amalgamated Lint.
I’m already retired, so I’d do some home improvements and buy a Porsche 911 Targa 4S. My husband can do whatever he pleases with the rest.
At this point in my life, I would use a million dollars to buy a nice house in a nice area for maybe 600,000 to 700,000 cash. The rest would go into a stable fund that would be used to pay for taxes and upkeep on said house over the years.
Thus, with housing taken care of for the rest of our lives, my wife and I could afford to retire to a life of leisure tomorrow.
Maybe not an “investment” as far as a financial return for the money, but a stable retirement would be a worthwhile payout as far as I’m concerned.
Vegas - put it all on Red.
It depends on how old you are, what your current financial situation is, and what you want out of investing. The only real investments I have right now are index funds, which have performed nicely over the past 10 years, but I am expecting another correction and possibly even a crash sometime in the next 5-10 years.
If I had more disposable money to do it, I would probably be investing more of it in quality property in a part of the country/world where property isn’t yet overpriced.
I’m retired and just turned 69, so I’d probably “invest” a chunk of it upgrading my housing to a place large enough for myself and a friend, if possible at a retirement community. Whatever is left over would go into something secure with moderate growth to finance the life I’d like to become accustomed to.
Though it seems ridiculous, a mere million isn’t enough money to have a range of meaningful investments. Housing is a good choice if that’s your need.
Outside of that, a million doesn’t offer much more than, say, $50,000. The high-end funds and business opportunities that offer the biggest returns probably require multi-millions, maybe tens of millions, to buy in. You can gamble on an individual stock but I wouldn’t trust anybody online to recommend one. True, realistically everything is a gamble, but a minimal fee diversified portfolio has the least risk. Everything else is hot air.
I’d tell you what I’d do, man. Two chicks at the same time.
Depends strongly upon your age. At 30 or 40 I’d put a good bit into index funds but still diversify. I’m 70. I’ve never lost a minute of sleep worrying about if we had enough money to live on. For us, good solid dividend stocks (not all blue chip) have worked very well. They are less volatile than an index fund and, most importantly, generate cash. After you are retired if you have enough cash to live on from investments (and Social Security) you don’t have to worry what the market does.
You still need a good mix of investments of course, since you want to get some growth. If I got another million bucks today I don’t think I’d change my investment directions at all.
Not what I found. While having $10 million no doubt gives you more options, having a million gives you a greater range of investment opportunities than $50K, and access to a financial advisor who can tune a portfolio in accordance with your needs. It has worked very well for us
Of course with $10 million you can generate more than enough cash every year.
After the bubble I swore off individual stocks. Way too much of a crap shoot, and funds are always going to react faster than you can. Investing as an alternative to playing poker, maybe, but that’s not really investing.
To repeat, the one thing I learned after retiring is that cash flow is everything, and is far more important than your current investment balance.
I’m 72 and have enough permanent income from various sources to live on modestly (no kids, no family, no dependents). (As said above, “cash flow” is everything.) I’ve owned homes, don’t want to do that again-- I’m a carefree renter now. I have a nice car that I plan to drive for the rest of my life.
With $1 million that I don’t need to live on, I’d set up a private foundation or an advised trust (probably with a community foundation) and make some significant gifts to carefully vetted local organizations that have direct impact on people’s and animals’ lives. Having been on the asking side for almost 40 years, I understand how a cash gift can strengthen a small service organization.
I saw something like this happen here about 20 years ago. A wealthy philanthropist, a widow, died childless and left her niece in charge of the money. That heir made community betterment her life’s work and by thoughtful, judicious gifts, she has worked wonders. I can think of a couple of other people who have done something similar. I don’t care about “being remembered” or anything-- I want to give the $$ away when I’m alive. Hell, no one is even going to notice when I croak off.
OK, $50,000 may be too small, but not extremely so. Merrill Lynch, e.g., to pick a name off the internet, doesn’t have a minimum except for some accounts, but you probably won’t get a personal financial advisor with less than $250,000. Still, while a million is nice, I don’t think they could do much different for you than the standard diversified portfolio.
I pretty much agree with you on the rest.
I think the stock market is going to be shakier and shakier as time goes on. The right real estate - and right amount of real estate - gives you some options, ranging from cash flow to investment.
I might buy some art.
A Picasso or a Garfunkel.
I’d drop it all into the Rivian IPO. I think they are poised to kick tesla’s ass which should be at least a 10x over IPO in the next 10 years.