Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We hit 1M at around 38. Keep saving!

It’s hard to make the math work on this brag.

Disagree. It’s definitely possible to hit $1M at 38. If they each contributed the max yearly to their 401Ks and invested wisely or were lucky or both then I’d say they actually are not doing that well.

You can disagree all you want, but even maxing out and a generous company match for 16 years straight you’d need to outperform the S&P for each of those years with a 10% per year gain to the S&P’s 6% per year over that period. That sort of performance is exceedingly unlikely which is why it’s hard to make the math work. Outperforming the gains of the S&P by 67% (10% vs 6%) on average in your 401k for 16 years straight would really be something.

DH and I are both 34 and we have each been maxing out for only ten years and have a combined $1.8M in our 401k plans even with a minimal company match. By 40, I’m sure we’ll have close to $7M and by 45 we’ll plan to retire. You’re just investing too conservatively most likely.

10<16 and years 11-16 the average annual return on the S&P was flat. C Fund isn’t intended to mirror the S&P. And, the assumption also included maxing the year after graduating college and every year thereafter and a very generous match, too. 1M in 401k for someone from ages 22-38 is still hard to make the math work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We hit 1M at around 38. Keep saving!

It’s hard to make the math work on this brag.

Disagree. It’s definitely possible to hit $1M at 38. If they each contributed the max yearly to their 401Ks and invested wisely or were lucky or both then I’d say they actually are not doing that well.

You can disagree all you want, but even maxing out and a generous company match for 16 years straight you’d need to outperform the S&P for each of those years with a 10% per year gain to the S&P’s 6% per year over that period. That sort of performance is exceedingly unlikely which is why it’s hard to make the math work. Outperforming the gains of the S&P by 67% (10% vs 6%) on average in your 401k for 16 years straight would really be something.

I’m a fed so I have a tsp versus 401 k but I had a similar rapid upward investment trajectory with a basic portfolio (fully invested in stocks) in recent years and I’m pretty sure the returns potential for a 401k were comparable, with just a fraction of a percentage higher in fees.

The 1 year return on the Tsp’s most popular “C fund” (which mirrors the S&P) was 29.7%, the 5 year average return 14.6 and the 10 year average 12.63…all clearly documented on the tsp website. So given the actual data from the last 10 years (exponentially beyond the average gains you are citing) it definitely is feasible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We hit 1M at around 38. Keep saving!

It’s hard to make the math work on this brag.

Disagree. It’s definitely possible to hit $1M at 38. If they each contributed the max yearly to their 401Ks and invested wisely or were lucky or both then I’d say they actually are not doing that well.

You can disagree all you want, but even maxing out and a generous company match for 16 years straight you’d need to outperform the S&P for each of those years with a 10% per year gain to the S&P’s 6% per year over that period. That sort of performance is exceedingly unlikely which is why it’s hard to make the math work. Outperforming the gains of the S&P by 67% (10% vs 6%) on average in your 401k for 16 years straight would really be something.

Maybe they did QQQ or tech ETFs. QQQ has averaged 15% annually if you did DCA.

I'm 39 and have $200k. Just started making over $100k the last five years and maxed out contributions just last year for the first time.

I'll try to max out from here on out but I don't feel behind or stressed out about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We hit 1M at around 38. Keep saving!

It’s hard to make the math work on this brag.

Disagree. It’s definitely possible to hit $1M at 38. If they each contributed the max yearly to their 401Ks and invested wisely or were lucky or both then I’d say they actually are not doing that well.

You can disagree all you want, but even maxing out and a generous company match for 16 years straight you’d need to outperform the S&P for each of those years with a 10% per year gain to the S&P’s 6% per year over that period. That sort of performance is exceedingly unlikely which is why it’s hard to make the math work. Outperforming the gains of the S&P by 67% (10% vs 6%) on average in your 401k for 16 years straight would really be something.

I'm 48 and started at the age of 30, now have $ 750,000 in 401k and Roth. I don't count my spouse ( age 58) who has about $950,000 in TSP.

My husband has just over $500K and I have close to $360K. Neither of us contributed the max until our 30s.

Anonymous wrote:Millionaire next door says (age x annual income)/10. Ie: ($150,000x 40)/10 = $600,000.

lol.

What if your income has increased significantly during your working life? That worked at 30 for us but not 40 due to income increases.

We have to use a taxable account now in addition to tax advantaged retirement accounts to reach our retirement savings goals.

Don’t let these math rules of thumb deter you from saving and investing. Do the best that you can, avoid lifestyle inflation, invest in good mutual funds and etfs and don’t worry about keeping up with the Jones’s.

$2.5M combined in my and spouse’s 401Ks at age 53 and 54. One of the accounts is a Roth 401K with a balance of about $1M.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We hit 1M at around 38. Keep saving!

It’s hard to make the math work on this brag.

Disagree. It’s definitely possible to hit $1M at 38. If they each contributed the max yearly to their 401Ks and invested wisely or were lucky or both then I’d say they actually are not doing that well.

Probably had about $500-600k at that age. Now it’s at $1.5m at 50. Not including spouse or other retirement funds. Employer contributes a 6% total match and an extra 3% annually

Anonymous wrote:43 and 460k. Feeling behind.

Don’t, you are doing great. I had about this at 43 and now have over $2.5M at 58.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m 37 and have 150k.

+1

I’m so glad I’m not the only one. 36 and $150k. I was feeling good about it but every tune I read about how much you “should” have I get depressed. I have a paltry match and it’s such a slog.