Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, I commend you, OP. I think AI should be one part of your planning strategy. Not the only part, of course.

I do this for complex medical issues that I, or my relatives, have had. And then I double-check with my husband, who is an internist, or other doctors who are treating us. ChatGPT has complemented human medical advice very nicely, and my husband was quite impressed.

The only thing I would caution you on is that Chat GPT and other AI models can only give you information they find that's available to them. This means that they will present you with the solutions that are most likely to have been repeated millions of times on the internet. If you want a different strategy than the one most commonly used, for reasons of your own, then AI will not steer you in that direction. It will steer you down the common path. Sometimes that's not what you want.

For example, I am 100% in high tech stocks. Barring Act of God, I am not planning on changing my strategy for retirement, since my aim is to hand down my high-growth, high-risk stock portfolio to my kids. I don't want to redistribute to "safer" investments as I age, not at all. So the common advice wouldn't work for me.

AI cannot do the thinking for you. It's not actually intelligent, it only regurgitates what it has identified as relevant from its database. It can only present you with commonly used options. As long as you remember this, you're all good.

This is a horrible strategy.

Hate to say it, but you should have listened to AI on this one. Sector bets are stupid bets.

PP you replied to. Ha. I've made 20 millions so far with my strategy, poor dear. I don't know why you spew nonsense confidently without knowing anything about investing. I am NOT advising OP or you or anyone else to do what I do... I am just telling OP that AI models cannot think for themselves. They can only spit out what their database contains, which means the more frequently suggested and commonly used financial methods. And for many, that's all they want, so it's fine.

Anonymous wrote:you should keep in mind ai is bad at math. Good at language and coding. So it isn’t running the numbers for you, just imitating aggregated advice. If I were you I would give your plan to another llm than the one you used, and ask it to find the biggest holes and concerns in your plan because you are concerned about the financial planner who wrote it. Then I would seek out a one time consult with a great fee only financial planner and go without your husband to finalize it or decide you still need a human planner. Good luck!

AI hasn't used its language model to solve math problems for a very long time. It makes calls to calculators like any investment advisor would. It's excellent at math now. Aside, I guarantee investment advisors are using AI to help their clients in the first place. It'd be horribly inefficient of them to do otherwise. However, that is absolutely a best practice to move results from one model to the next to continue to refine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

It's a tool, and most people under 30, including those in finance, rely on it heavily. If you're not using it, you're inefficient.

That makes sense because the only people who seem to be impressed with chatgpt are people who don't seem to know anything.

There's a lot more AI than ChatGPT out there, and the people who seem impressed by AI are those who are too lazy to learn how to use it well. It's getting better every few months at doing parts of my job and has probably improved my efficiency by at least 25% net of the ways it sometimes slows me down.

I'm sure it depends on the application. It sucks for investing/personal finance type stuff. What is the point if you have to verify the results or use another AI to verify lol. People are getting horrible results that are just unreliable. It's not because they don't know how to use it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

It's a tool, and most people under 30, including those in finance, rely on it heavily. If you're not using it, you're inefficient.

That makes sense because the only people who seem to be impressed with chatgpt are people who don't seem to know anything.

There's a lot more AI than ChatGPT out there, and the people who seem impressed by AI are those who are too lazy to learn how to use it well. It's getting better every few months at doing parts of my job and has probably improved my efficiency by at least 25% net of the ways it sometimes slows me down.

*unimpressed

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

It's a tool, and most people under 30, including those in finance, rely on it heavily. If you're not using it, you're inefficient.

That makes sense because the only people who seem to be impressed with chatgpt are people who don't seem to know anything.

There's a lot more AI than ChatGPT out there, and the people who seem impressed by AI are those who are too lazy to learn how to use it well. It's getting better every few months at doing parts of my job and has probably improved my efficiency by at least 25% net of the ways it sometimes slows me down.

Anonymous wrote:you should keep in mind ai is bad at math. Good at language and coding. So it isn’t running the numbers for you, just imitating aggregated advice. If I were you I would give your plan to another llm than the one you used, and ask it to find the biggest holes and concerns in your plan because you are concerned about the financial planner who wrote it. Then I would seek out a one time consult with a great fee only financial planner and go without your husband to finalize it or decide you still need a human planner. Good luck!

False. Newer versions of AI are very good at math. As with all things AI, you need enough background knowledge to write good prompts and proof the responses, but it's getting to be very good at computing and other things it previously struggled with.

you should keep in mind ai is bad at math. Good at language and coding. So it isn’t running the numbers for you, just imitating aggregated advice. If I were you I would give your plan to another llm than the one you used, and ask it to find the biggest holes and concerns in your plan because you are concerned about the financial planner who wrote it. Then I would seek out a one time consult with a great fee only financial planner and go without your husband to finalize it or decide you still need a human planner. Good luck!

AI can't tell you your withdrawal rate. There is a lot to it. It's not complicated, but it's not something that AI is equipped to tackle. Same thing for Roth conversions. And order of withdrawals is usually taxable, IRA, then Roth. There are so many variables and different scenarios that using AI is just a waste of time. What you need is knowledge and perspective, not AI.

OP here. Just to be clear, I am not using AI to guide investments, as at least one PP seems to think.

This is about withdrawals to minimize taxes in retirement. I know from past experience that, to get as far I've gotten, I would have had to meet with a planner multiple times. And the ones I've worked with will decide to throw in jargon and act like it's all so complicated as a way of getting me to stop asking questions.

I don't think AI is making errors in how it's prioritizing draws from our various accounts, how much, at what points. Because it shares the reasoning and tax code, which is easily verifiable.

We used a TIAA advisor once. He simply didn't take into account things like the different start time for RMDS (because of big difference in my spouse's age and mine), the different times we're planning to stop working, the different ages we're going to take social security, the fact that we're going to be able to recast our mortgage with an expected influx of money in a year. He advised Roth conversions while we were still in a high income bracket, and didn't (as Chatgbt) advise mega backdoor Roth conversions.

I know that he was just lazy. But we've talked to two more of them. Same thing. They plug the data in, hand us what's spitted out. I can do that myself, and just did. In a nuanced way that respects all the ways our plan will need to evolve over time.

Anonymous wrote:No, I commend you, OP. I think AI should be one part of your planning strategy. Not the only part, of course.

I do this for complex medical issues that I, or my relatives, have had. And then I double-check with my husband, who is an internist, or other doctors who are treating us. ChatGPT has complemented human medical advice very nicely, and my husband was quite impressed.

The only thing I would caution you on is that Chat GPT and other AI models can only give you information they find that's available to them. This means that they will present you with the solutions that are most likely to have been repeated millions of times on the internet. If you want a different strategy than the one most commonly used, for reasons of your own, then AI will not steer you in that direction. It will steer you down the common path. Sometimes that's not what you want.

For example, I am 100% in high tech stocks. Barring Act of God, I am not planning on changing my strategy for retirement, since my aim is to hand down my high-growth, high-risk stock portfolio to my kids. I don't want to redistribute to "safer" investments as I age, not at all. So the common advice wouldn't work for me.

AI cannot do the thinking for you. It's not actually intelligent, it only regurgitates what it has identified as relevant from its database. It can only present you with commonly used options. As long as you remember this, you're all good.

This is a horrible strategy.

Hate to say it, but you should have listened to AI on this one. Sector bets are stupid bets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

It's a tool, and most people under 30, including those in finance, rely on it heavily. If you're not using it, you're inefficient.

That makes sense because the only people who seem to be impressed with chatgpt are people who don't seem to know anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

It's a tool, and most people under 30, including those in finance, rely on it heavily. If you're not using it, you're inefficient.

Anonymous wrote: 8% withdrawal rate? Awesome advice if your plan is to live fast and die young!

It's fun to play around with an assumption like an 8% withdrawal rate, based on anywhere from -10% to 12% real portfolio growth, and see how quickly you'll run out of money in each scenario. An 8% withdrawal rate is the kind of outlandish thing my overspending spouse would propose, and now I can respond with data within 20 minutes without doing much mental labor to tell them how silly they are and back it up with data.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

Disagree. AI is an incredible tool for asset planning. I play around with multiple different assumptions to understand how I'll fare in various scenarios. I do all the other work, too, but AI is so much more efficient than creating my own spreadsheets. Definitely don't need a financial planner, though I still find a tax adviser helpful.

I guess it's ok to assist with particular tasks or to get a good laugh, but nobody who knows anything about investing is relying on AI for much, at least at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI is a joke when it comes to financial planning. If you don't know your shit and you don't want to invest time in learning about the different aspects of investing, seek out a fee only financial planner.

You know what a joke is? Financial planners, I get calls from them all the time and later look them up, they literally are gym bros that have history or some other odd major that got their financial planner cert after being unmployed for a year our of college and now want to manage my money

I guess I should have specified that you shouldn't hire a dipshit. OP could also read and/or post on Bogleheads. There are lots of highly qualified people on that site