Skip to main content

Why I Find the Statement "Invest Only What You Can Afford to Lose" to be Very SELF-DEFEATING

Back then, I remembered being told to invest only money I can afford to lose. I would confess that's really very bad advice. I decided to dig out an old article from The Philippine Star by Rose Fres Fausto who had written these words of wisdom:

I cringe whenever I hear this advice. Why? Because it is a bad advice! Imagine if Uncle Warren Buffet followed that advice. He wouldn’t have become the world’s best investor. Okay, let’s get more real. Imagine if the regular Juan and Juana would follow that advice. Both would never get to say, “I am ready to have a decent retirement.” And that is even after they have set aside savings religiously from the time they started working! Inflation would have eaten up the purchasing power of their savings leaving them feeling kawawa despite being conscientious in following the first basic law of money, “Pay yourself first.”

It should be remembered that yes, all investments have risks but to invest only the money you are willing to lose? Come on. That is like saying “do not invest!” I am not willing to lose the money I invest. I am willing to take calculated risks

If we're talking about investing only what you can lose--it's just like gambling. This reminds me that I previously wrote a post on the irony of gambling but not investing. The big difference between gambling and investing is this. Gambling is all about getting ready to lose that money should you lose the bet. Investing is all about getting ready to receive more returns even if there will be losses. Some may lose money to a bad customer (it happened to me) or make a bad deal with direct stock trading. In stocks, there's the index fund alternative which Warren Buffett also recommends. I prefer to use the index fund than direct stock trading due to having low risks. Sure, I'm willing to have an aggressive portfolio but being moderately aggressive--I'd probably prefer to put PHP 1,000.00-PHP 5,000.00 depending on the NAVPU rates. 

If the issue is about stocks--there's always the problem of jumping into it without knowing it. Direct stock trading has its risks. The general rule for traders is to buy low and sell high. Another rule is to do research on the companies you're investing into. Are these blue-chip companies or companies that have stocks but aren't doing well? Some people experience losses in stocks by not following the stock guidelines than because of the stock market. It's like you drive a well-functioning car but you fueled it with impure gasoline or you microwaved your smartphone. 

With that, that's why I felt a better way to say it (and others before me and after me) would say, "Invest only what you don't need right now!" In short, set aside a budget for investing. It's like you get your paycheck. For entrepreneurs, it's their profit sharing or monthly allowance as agreed among business owners. Business owners may agree to receive their monthly allowance for personal expenses while the rest of the profits are kept in a joint account. Regardless, we know there are bills to pay and families to feed in the process. We would need to understand that there's money set aside for necessities. So investing the money set aside for necessities is absolutely not recommended. 

Any sensible person always expects temporary losses such as paying utility bills (phone, electricity, water), tuition fees, any loans they may have needed, and the like. Now, everything's settled and if one's not spending too much--one still has some generous amount of money left. Maybe, the family may want to order Mang Inasal because it's cheap and delicious plus it's a Sunday. Some of the best foods aren't expensive either. However, one may think about setting aside money for investment. It's like how AXA's Chinese Tycoon Fund requires PHP 3,000.02 per month to keep the investment going. This PHP 3,000.02 per month is not set aside for Axie Infinity where returns have a very low guarantee. It's because if I bet PHP 3,000.00 per month--I expect to lose more than to gain more of it. It's set aside for AXA which is there to help with insurance policies. Take note that insurance is more on emergency funding and not for future personal enjoyment. The Variable Universal Life insurance is to protect your loved ones and not for personal enjoyment. Money set in Axie Infinity is expected to be lost when you lose a match. It's no different from a fraudulent insurance company that promises things too good to be true. AXA is registered, monitored, and any temporary losses are spent on the insurance side and are dependent on the stock market performance for some investments. 

Another new piece of advice is to get an index fund. With ATRAM, Seedbox, and the ever-convenient GCash, I think about GInvest. Some think investment requires huge amounts of money. However, some investments may require only a minimum of PHP 5,000.00 to PHP 10.000.00. Maybe, any sensible person who lives paycheck to paycheck may be surprised at how much money they've saved. The children may be wanting to go to Mang Inasal or Jollibee. However, the breadwinner says, "No, not this time. We're going to invest for your future." Maybe, he thinks the monthly PHP 3,000.02 to AXA is too heavy so he decides to start with UITFs that start off with only PHP 1,000.00. What he does is to start a UITF account of his choice (maybe lower risk) then he starts to set aside PHP 1,000.00 per month or invest more than usual if the market is at a low. What the person is doing is, "This money isn't needed now but I'm investing it for money I need later." Eventually, if the family all develops better habits--they may start to invest PHP 2,000.00 per month if the market is high and PHP 4,000 if the market is low.

One thing I felt like saying to myself is, "Do I need this or not?" especially if I've had money saved for it. I remembered wanting to buy this and that with my money but I kept saving up the money. What I did was replace money for wants with investments. Two years of savings for a specific want were transferred to investments. I find I want to buy this and that but I decided to invest some money in the index funds. My target was to reach a specific amount for the Philippine Equity Smart Index Fund. Now, I reached my target goal (for now). I find myself wanting to buy this and that and I realized, "Do I even have time to enjoy it? Nah!" then I decide to set that money aside to be placed in that index fund. I may decide to put money in the feeder funds (for now) since I reached my momentary target--but only if the feeder fund's NAVPUs are lower. Though, I might sell off some investments when they're high while focusing on adding PHP 1,000.00 per month to the Philippine Equity Smart Index Fund.

What I'm investing is not money I can afford to lose. Instead, it's to be invested with valid financial groups like Seedbox and ATRAM. GInvest is using these platforms to power it. Of course, it'd be crazy to invest all my savings at once. It's because some of my savings are meant for emergencies. I can't just sell my index funds to pay hospital bills. Instead, I should claim my Healthmax should ever, God forbid, I get hospitalized. That's why it's all about a diversified portfolio. Have insurance? Check! Have investments? Check! I'm expecting some maturity a few years from now. While at it, I might plan on how to reinvestment any maturities. It's not because I can afford to lose it. Rather, it's because I set aside money for investments to curb my spendthrift tendencies. I also set aside that money for future returns as a form of security.

References

Popular posts from this blog

Venezuela as a Cautionary Tale on #SahodItaasPresyoIbaba, Nationalistic Pride, Welfare State Economics

The Sunday Guardian Years ago, I wrote about Venezuela's pride and protectionism , under a more "formal" style of writing compared to my latest posts. I decided to use an even "less formal" and "less academic" tone since I'm not writing a term paper. Instead, it's like how a professor and a student discuss the thesis using first person over third person, using contractions, etc., while the thesis doesn't use such tones. Back on track, I thought about the arrest of Venezuelan President Maduro can spark debate. Was it a violation of sovereignty? I'm no expert on international law. However, Venezuelans can be seen celebrating Maduro's arrest. Right now, I'm using Gemini AI and Google search to help me find some sources for this blog. It's because I don't want my blog to become another gossip central, but a place to discuss facts with my own personal opinions (making sure they don't  derail the facts).  I used Venezuela ...

Venezuela's Pride and Protectionism

The Telegraph Venezuela is an oil-rich country yet it's a very poor country. Somebody could go ahead and give every unthinkable reason such as "foreign investments caused it" (a blatant lie) and "It's because America had economic sanctions in Venezuela". Yet, the answer can be found in several causes such as corruption. Yet, China and Vietnam, which can be seen to still have a good amount of corruption, are far more successful. The answer also lies in one policy--economic protectionism . The very idea that a country that first world countries used "protectionism" to succeed is a lie as proven by Venezuela's ongoing crisis. A common-sense examination of one root cause of Venezuela's continuing crisis Forbes magazine mentions this in "What Do Investors Need To Understand About Venezuela's Economic Crisis?" by Nathaniel Parish Flannery on December 21, 2016: Venezuela is far and away the worst-managed economy in the Americas . Ad...

Davide vs. Mahathir: Which Lolo Should Filipinos Take Economic Advice From?

The real issue isn't that something is old or new. Instead, if something old or new still works, or doesn't work! Many modern laws are built on some ancient principles, while adjusting to the current times!  The Constitution of Japan is actually older than the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, it's more effective for the reasons that (1) their constitution is silent when it comes to regulating economic activities (ex., protectionist measures), and (2) it's a parliamentary system. Honestly, it's a pretty straightforward constitution compared to ours! As Mahatir Mohamad turned 100 today, I would like to raise up Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. once again. The problem isn't Davide's age but his unwillingness to embrace change when needed (read here ). This time, it's time to bring up a contrast between wise old people and unwise old people. A young person can be right where the old person is wrong. A young person can be wiser because he or she lea...

Filipino Manufacturing's Golden Age ENDED Because of the Filipino First Policy

Here's a picture from the Dose of Disbelief Page on Facebook. Here's something that it wrote: Filipinos once trusted locally made products more than imports. Before World War II, the label "Made in the Philippines" carried prestige, not stigma, reflecting a strong sense of national confidence in domestic production. Local products such as shoes, cigars, textiles, furniture, and food were often preferred over imports. This preference was rooted in the belief that local goods were better adapted to local conditions, tastes, and were often of comparable, if not superior, quality. This period showcases a strong historical era of consumer nationalism and thriving local industries. We need to look into the context of Filipino history  If we look at the Philippine history timeline , we must account for 1935-1940, during which the Philippines was under the Commonwealth government. Independence was declared from Spain on June 12, 1898. However, there was a transition period w...

Confusing Foreign Direct Investment for Foreign Imperialism for the Bajillionth Time

I guess those fools of the Philippine Anti-Fascist League (and many of its deluded supporters) either refuse to get it or are blatantly lying. Almost every rally held by what many believe are CPP-NPA legal fronts also confuses foreign investors for foreign invasion or even foreign imperialism . Once again, do I need to say that 100% FDI ownership is all about the shares and not land ownership ? What makes it even more hypocritical is that they are actually recording these things on imported media . They're sharing their anti-FDI rants using imported devices, imported platforms, and imported social media (read here ). When I do ask them on Facebook, they say how can they take them seriously and that they're "simply forced to participate in capitalism". Did anybody (especially those they call "evil capitalists") force them to buy the expensive Apple equipment when they could've settled for Xiaomi or Huawei?  A simple research on the dictionary will tell us...