Wish me luck.
I am throwing as much as I can in the next three years into the Stock Market…
I am 47 and am determined to get as much money invested in the market. All of it will be invested in individual stocks. The 457 will be maxed, the Roth IRA will be maxed, anything leftover will be invested in the brokerage account.
No bonds, No index funds…Not until I leave my employer
Hope to have a clean double from today by 55…
If he double comes earlier, so will my Retirement… 
I hope you noticed that Trump announced major tariff increases this afternoon after the close. There was a major shift downward in after hours trading by abt 3% so far.
Investors will worry about possible recession and response by other nations. Could be an excellent time to buy stocks if you pick the right ones. But risky. Might take months to learn which stocks will be ok or do well and which will get hurt for earnings.
Don’t worry Chuck,
I loaded up on cases of Top Ramen when they were on sale for 0.10 cents a pack.
I always enjoy your feedback.
Hah. I misread your post as looking for a double by age 50, not 55. Big difference between looking to double in three years vs. eight…
So my post needed deleting because it was based on a misread number.
That said, I still wish you luck and success.
Regards,
-Chuck
If you are loaded only on US stocks lost decade will be your enemy. There is a possibility of current administration and its tariffs for another 4 years or 50% of the time.
The point is you need to diversified, to expect average returns. If you are all in on US stocks, wishing you and I good luck
Which stock markets (or which asset class) do you expect to outperform the US stock markets over the next decade?
The point of diversification is not guessing.
Update.
I moved up my retirement date up. Goal is now at 50.
Strong markets + compounding = closer to my financial goals.
A double for you by age 55 should be reasonable, given that you’ve got 8 years to get there, and the Rule of 72 suggests that a return of 9% will do it.
Glad to hear that, my friend. If you’re truly planning to leave the workforce at age 50, it’s important to have a plan for how you will access your money between then and age 59 1/2.
There are ways to do so, but they generally involve tradeoffs. A 72(t) plan, for instance, must last the longer of 5-years or until you reach age 59 1/2. That will allow you to tap your retirement accounts early without penalty, but you must keep taking the withdrawals until the timer pops, even if you later decide you want to go back to work.
Also, unless your employer offers you access to retiree health insurance, you’ll get the joy of navigating the Affordable Care Act and the interaction between your income and your health insurance premiums, between your retirement at age 50 and Medicare eligibility at age 65.
With a decent enough nest egg and advanced planning, it’s feasible, but it can also become something of a part time job.
I don’t know if you’re still 47 or if you’ve turned 48 yet, but that gives you somewhere around 2 or 3 years or so to get your full plan in place.
It sounds like you have a decent nest egg in place, and that’s half the battle. The other half is a plan for a combination of things like health insurance, asset location, and sequence of returns risks.
If you’re serious about retiring in around 2-3 years, now is the time to start engaging on those other factors. This is especially true since we’re in late December, and the window is about to shut on many of the moves you might want to make in calendar year 2025 to support that goal.
Regards,
-Chuck
Hey Chuck,
Taxes: All withdrawals from a 457(b) are taxed as ordinary income, but you avoid the 10% early withdrawal penalty that applies to 401(k)s before 59½.
No 10% Penalty (Usually): The 10% penalty doesn’t apply to governmental 457(b)s after you leave your job, a significant benefit.
My employer will cover my insurance for life starting at retirement 50
I can take a pension paying $5000 a month at age 50 or defer the pension to 55 and get $6250 a month
Currently have 6 years of living expenses in a high yield savings account. I could pay off my 2.25 % mortgage, keep it in cash, or put it to work if the Market gives me great buying opportunities…..
Very cool. I didn’t realize you were a public sector employee. Those very generous provisions make an age 50 retirement much less logistically complex than it would be for most of us private sector folks.
Regards,
-Chuck
Hi @darrellquock,
Congrats on getting to a point that you are setting a Goal Post!
However,
The primary reason I keep our expense cash cushion COMPLETELY SEPARATE from our portfolio is:
I specifically set aside cash for one purpose and one purpose only:
If I turn around and invest it in some “opportunity” and it goes wrong, I expose both of us to “living in a refrigerator box, looking in dumpsters for scraps to eat.”
Ok, over-dramatic, but I trust you get the idea.
That cash is your safety net.
The safety net is no good to you when you fall from the trapeze and the net is flat on the ground!
NOTE:
If that is “Full Living Expenses”, it may be overkill.
The standard target is 3 to 5 years of “Needed Cash” which is:
Expenses - Guaranteed Income (SS, pension) = Needed Cash (from your portfolio)
Non-guaranteed income like dividends, interest, royalties, rents, etc should be discounted by 50% for planning.
Initially, you may be funding 100% from your portfolio, depending what you decide on that pension. And it will change again at SS time.
Anyway, CONGRATS!
Does that help you?
Gene
All holdings and some statistics on my Fool profile page
Profile - gdett2 - Motley Fool Community (Click Expand)
My congratulations and well done on finding a job when you did with those extremely rare levels of benefits. Your pension is more than twice my not-common private sector one earned after 27 years of credited service. The insurance coverage for life is now non-existent in the private sector. Retiring partly, early at 62 my single insurance (healthy male) just crossed $700 a month for an HDHP with a $6000 deductible. I’m gonna have to try to find a state job for a few years.
Gene,
I do have a quick question.
If I took Social Security early (i don’t need the income) and just dollar cost averaged into an Total Market Index Fund, would I have more money than waiting until 70?
Hi @darrellquock,
In this case, it purely relies on the adjusted gains.
Sounds simple, but …
You need to determine the “real” return you can count on going forward. That will reasonably be the past return rate minus a factor.
I would knock 20% to 25% off the historical rate for safety.
Since this will be in the taxable world, you need to look at the full cost of ownership.
There will be annual taxes due on the various distributions which may be taxable as income, long/short term capital gains or they may be a return of capital.
Depending on your income, some of the SS may be taxable.
This is quite different from my scenario.
You are adding unneeded, possibly taxable income vs reducing withdrawals from an IRA at income tax rates while gaining largely un-taxed income.
Does that help you?
Gene
All holdings and some statistics on my Fool profile page
Profile - gdett2 - Motley Fool Community (Click Expand)
Gene,
Why choose a dividend portfolio over a 60/40 portfolio that can generate 4% + inflation every year? Does your dividend portfolio produce 4% yield as a whole?
A 60/40 portfolio with a 4% withdrawal rate offers balanced growth and volatility control, ideal for moderate-risk retirees seeking consistent, inflation-adjusted income. A dividend portfolio focuses on high-yield stocks for income, potentially offering higher, growing payouts but with higher volatility and lower total return potential than a 60/40 mix.
60/40 Portfolio (4% Withdrawal Rule)
Pros: Provides a stable, predictable income stream adjusted for inflation, which historically sustains portfolio longevity for 30+ years. Bonds provide a cushion during stock market downturns, lowering overall portfolio volatility.
Cons: The “4% rule” may be too rigid for volatile markets. Bonds can underperform, and in 2022, both stocks and bonds fell simultaneously, weakening the traditional diversification benefit.
Pros: Often generates higher immediate cash flow, allowing income to be taken without selling shares. High-quality dividend-paying companies can offer better stability and long-term capital appreciation.
Cons: Dividend cuts are possible during economic downturns, impacting income consistency. They tend to have higher exposure to market downturns (higher volatility) than a 60/40, and may lag in high-growth, non-dividend stock market rallies.
Which to Choose?
Choose 60/40 if: You prioritize safety, need consistent, reliable income, and have a moderate risk tolerance.
Choose Dividend if: You are searching for higher income generation, are comfortable with greater volatility, and want to avoid selling assets during downturns.
Hi @darrellquock,
No, it doesn’t.
Portfolio Yield as of 01/23/26 10:23:50: Dividend Core 4.54% Other Dividend 1.07% Bond ETFs 5.96% Combined Yld 3.82% Portfolio Yld 2.63%
Portfolio Yield is not an important factor.
The “study” you are citing uses ‘broad market’ data. It uses things like the SP500, index funds, etc to make those data points.
Understanding that IS important!
During the 2007-2010 recession, the dividend output for “the Market” dropped, by some measurements, as much as 50%. Of course, the actual calcs behind those numbers was in ‘fine print.’
But our portfolio had No Drop! Our portfolio has increased dividends EVERY Year since I started tracking dividends from our stock in 2005. This is calculated on a “level shares” basis. Read that as no sales, purchases or reinvested shares from Jan 1 through Dec 31 and no “influence” from new additions or position drops during that year.
The annual increases varied from as little as 3% to over 8%. No reductions.
One thing and one thing ONLY!
Right now, our portfolio produces 303% of the cash that we need from it.
Yes, it is overkill.
During a market downturn, some dividends may be reduced or disappear. As interest rates vary, some of that bond interest may drop.
But, the main coverage from our core dividend payers should remain/increase through it. Look at the events of the last 30 to 70 years. Many of these companies have increased dividend every year you through it.
Portfolio Cash Flow vs Income Shortfall: 303%
Dividend Core 236.22%
Other Dividend 21.21%
ETFs 45.78%
Our Core is primarily based on the long-term dividend raisers. Of that 303%, it comprises 236%.
The other two groups are where I expect most of the dividend reductions/cuts during a recession. If both of these groups get eliminated, not very likely, we are still well covered.
A 60/40 portfolio will normally require sales and purchases. It would need to be balanced, maybe once per year.
My approach requires no sales. No re-balancing. No asset allocation.
It is not risk-free. If a company gets bought out for cash, the cash will lay in the accounts. For our Core, buyouts are a rather remote possibility, particularly for cash.
More likely is some of our non-Core assets will initiate/increase their dividends. A couple of our Growth companies, like PayCom (PAYC) in 2023, started paying a small dividend.
One of our Other Dividend group of small dividend payers, Goldman Sachs (GS), raised from $3.00/shr to $4.00/shr on 9/29/25 and again 6 months later to 4.50/shr on 3/30/26. That is a 50% increase in basically 9 months.
My primary goal for our portfolio is to provide reliable, sufficient cash to my bride with no required intervention. No managers. No need for selling to get cash.
All she will need to do is transfer from a Roth IRA to the checking/savings accounts.
So, what do you think?
Does that help you?
Gene
All holdings and some statistics on my Fool profile page
Profile - gdett2 - Motley Fool Community (Click Expand)
If you put all of the funds intended for cash flow into FBALX and set an auto withdrawal every quarter or every year, there would be minimal intervention?
Do you see the point I am making?
Hi @darrellquock,
FBALX yields 1.74% right now. Our entire portfolio, including non-paying Growth companies, pays 2.63%
If I replace the cash flow companies, our Dividend Core and Bond ETF’s only, the portfolio yield would be lower than 1.74%.
Portfolio Yield as of 01/23/26 10:23:50: Dividend Core 4.54% Other Dividend 1.07% Bond ETFs 5.96% Combined Yld 3.82% Portfolio Yld 2.63%
I do understand what you are saying but in our case, I just can’t see anything that gets improved.
The normal quarterly distributions are unreliable, from .01/shr to 2.46/shr with the Dec distributions swinging wildly also.
This is how our dividends were paid in 2025:
| Jan | 9.49% |
|---|---|
| Feb | 8.88% |
| Mar | 9.08% |
| Apr | 7.92% |
| May | 12.10% |
| Jun | 7.84% |
| Jul | 8.35% |
| Aug | 9.57% |
| Sep | 7.08% |
| Oct | 8.98% |
| Nov | 6.05% |
| Dec | 4.67% |
By Quarter:
| Q1 | 27.45% |
|---|---|
| Q2 | 27.86% |
| Q3 | 25.00% |
| Q4 | 19.70% |
The Nov/Dec numbers are lighter because a few companies push them to Jan/Feb to capture their 4th quarter results.
No sales, just cash delivered. No muss. No fuss.
No concern about selling shares in a down market since nothing gets sold.
That would be a concern with FBALX since the yield is lower, on average, and might become quite low during “economic problems”, requiring sales.
Does that help you?
Gene
All holdings and some statistics on my Fool profile page
Profile - gdett2 - Motley Fool Community (Click Expand)