Newsletter Subject

Do rich people have access to better investments?

From

iwillteachyoutoberich.com

Email Address

ramit.sethi@iwillteachyoutoberich.com

Sent On

Sat, Jul 29, 2023 04:35 PM

Email Preheader Text

Some of you really believe that rich people have access to “secret” investments To view th

Some of you really believe that rich people have access to “secret” investments To view this email as a web page, [click here]() {NAME}, Some of you really believe that rich people have access to “secret” investments that get incredible returns. Look! 81.7% of people believe that. [Ramit Tweet] Well, I’m rich, and I have access to those investments, and unfortunately 81.7% of people are wrong. Read on to learn why rich people DON’T have access to some secret investment that consistently beats the market -- and why they often choose WORSE investments. --------------------------------------------------------------- Today’s newsletter is sponsored by [Facet]() [Facet]() You know that I never want you to pay a financial advisor who takes a percentage of your assets. With Facet, you get your own CFP Professional to work with you and a team of financial experts—all through a flat fee membership. For a limited time, the $250 enrollment fee will be waived for anyone who signs up using my at [facet.com/ramit](). Sponsored by Facet. Facet Wealth, Inc. (“Facet”) is an SEC registered investment adviser headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland. This is not an offer to sell securities or investment, financial, legal, or tax advice. Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance. Terms and conditions apply. For special deals with all of our sponsors, check out [iwt.com/sponsors](). --------------------------------------------------------------- Why rich people don’t have access to better investments, continued… In most of life, the more money you have, the better things you can buy. For example, if I spend $200 on sushi, the fish is going to be fresher and better than $5 sushi from a gas station. Pay more, get better food, better housing, better travel experiences. We all intuitively understand this. But in personal finance—with rare exceptions—this is not true. Let me show you why. There’s a whole industry set up to exploit rich investors who want better returns. The rich find it impossible to believe their money can’t beat what ordinary investors get. So a massive industry has sprung up to deliver this fantasy via private equity, venture capital, and alternative investments. There are 1% wealth management fees (remember, 1% means you’ll pay 28% of your returns to fees), 2-&-20 (meaning you pay 2% AND 20% of returns -- lol), 10-year lockups where your money is illiquid, obfuscated fees (IRR is not your return), etc. These investments look glamorous—and frequently underperform. [Here’s one example](), where “Pershing Square kept approximately 72 percent of the fund’s gains for itself, leaving investors with the measly remains.” The alternative investment game is fantastic for the people running it. Not so great for the actual investors, who can often get better returns in a Vanguard index fund. I wouldn’t expect the average Ma and Pa investor to understand these complexities—and indeed, there are some minor rules such as “accredited investor” rules—but what’s remarkable is that even highly sophisticated investors like pension funds often also underperform against a basic index fund. What about hedge funds? You’ve probably heard how the ultra-wealthy have access to these secret hedge funds, which outperform the market when it’s going up, but then they also outperform when the market is down. They’re magic! Yeah, I watch Billions too. The truth: most hedge funds underperform a simple S&P 500 fund. And despite underperforming for over a decade, [extremely wealthy people keep pouring money in](). [How do they get away with it?]() My favorite is [the hedge fund that went bust in 31 minutes](). In general, [hedge funds are for suckers](). You may remember that in 2008, Warren Buffett bet that “an S&P 500[index fund]() would outperform a hand-picked portfolio of hedge funds over 10 years.” [Predictably, the hedge fund lost](). Not just lost a little, but lost in an absolute bloodbath. This was like the Superbowl for me. What about venture capital? Yes, [the venture capital asset class also underperforms the market](). Hedge funds underperform. VC underperforms. PE underperforms. Keep in mind, there are different reasons to own these funds, so it’s a little bit like me saying that a “Ferrari underperformed a minivan”—well, they both have different purposes. But we all know that you buy a Ferrari for fun and luxury. Most of the people who buy into sophisticated investments like VC/PE actually believe they’re going to get outsized returns. They don’t. So while different and theoretically uncorrelated, the vast majority of alternative investments....still lose compared to a simple index fund. Now, if you really want to get into these funds and you’re wealthy, they’ll happily take your money and happily charge you insane fees. They’ll bamboozle you with fancy offices and beautiful reports filled with arcane terms and hockey-stick charts. In the end, many people—and I’m talking about highly sophisticated investors—don’t even realize their returns are below what a guy working at Best Buy can get by investing 7% of his paycheck in an index fund. Same with private equity. Private equity [frequently misleads even sophisticated investors with their IRR numbers]() (not clarifying that IRR isn’t what investors make). Preston McSwain [has been outspoken about this](). “What about Sequoia? It beats the market. What about Renaissance?” Yes, in certain cases, there are firms with extremely impressive results. They actually do beat the market, often for decades. So what’s the catch? First, it’s hard to identify the best players ahead of time (in VC, ~5% of funds = the total industry’s returns.) Second, the best funds won't take your money. Nope, not even if you can write them a $25,000,000 check. Being wealthy isn't enough to get you in the door. They’re perennially “oversubscribed” (meaning they have more investors beating down their door than they want to let in, because size is the enemy of returns), so they won’t take your money. It’s like calling French Laundry and telling them you’ll pay $50,000 if they can slide you in for a reservation tonight. Thank you, but we don’t do that. Again, hard to believe. But it's true. Personal finance is one of the rare areas of life where someone earning $35,000 and someone earning $1 million have access to the same winning strategies. Pick a low-cost index fund, automate, and move on with life. My favorite part of this is the reactions when I tell people about this. The idea that the wealthy don’t have access to some super-secret investment that’s actually responsible for all their wealth is EXTREMELY hard for people to believe. I posted this and [got extremely angry, borderline apoplectic responses](). Like this one: [Tweet Response] Yes, Gigamesh, I am. You may believe that because something is hard to get into, it’s automatically better, but that’s not true -- especially for investments, where Wall Street has invented dozens of different ways to charge investors hefty fees. Or this: [Tweet Response] This is true, and totally irrelevant. Of course if you have more money, you can make more money. If Person A invests $1,000/month and Person B invests $100,000/month, Person B will have more. Nobody is arguing that. Or this rage-filled response: [Tweet Response] Notice the rage here. Deep down, many of us believe that one of the reasons the ultra-rich are rich is that they have access to some secret network and investments. Well, I grew up middle class, I went to Stanford, and I have access to some of the investments I’ve mentioned here (VC, PE, etc) and I can tell you—along with the research I shared above —it’s not true. Now, this person does have some legitimate critiques of the ultra wealthy, who get massive tax advantages (why does Buffett pay a higher tax rate than his assistant?), as well as structural advantages based on race, housing, and many other factors. If you’re born poor in America, the deck is stacked against you. Race matters. Family wealth matters. Education matters. I’ve always said that you can simultaneously acknowledge the need for systemic reform and take personal responsibility for what we can control. But I want us to focus on what’s real. Wealthy people have access to a LOT of advantages and they—we—should be fairly critiqued for it. [This is why I constantly advocate for raising my taxes!]() I should pay more! But wealthy people, as a rule, do not have access to better investments. [Tweet Response] This response made me laugh. The idea that being an “accredited investor” is some magical pass to get free money is hilarious. That’s like saying, “Uh yeah, I’m RICH...I have an AMEX Gold.” [Accredited investors are not especially impressive](). We’re talking about investments that are beyond the reach of the majority of accredited investors, and even those investments fail to beat the market on average. Also, what happened to those “stupid easy gains?” Oh yeah, many pre-IPO companies completely tanked. It’s called risk management, SaasWiz (whose account is now private). [Tweet Response] David worked under the legendary David Swensen at Yale, working alongside some of the world's best investors with access to the best information and world-class managers. He agrees this is true! If you’re going to listen to anyone, ignore the guys with the icon of a shoebox and listen to David, who actually knows what he’s talking about. I loved writing this email. If you want to read even more belligerent, hilarious comments, check out [this thread]() and [this followup thread](). Write me back with what you think. Btw, if you’re wondering what the solution is, set your money up to automatically invest in index funds, focus on earning more, and get on with your life. [You can set this up in less than a month]()and it will provide wealth for the rest of your life. [Signature] P.S. This week on the podcast: “Why did we spend $40,000 on vacations we can’t afford?” Check out this fascinating conversation on breaking generational patterns [here](): ["We spent $40k on vacations we can't afford"]()   You may be new to IWT. Here's all the stuff we offer [Programs]() [Podcast]() [Netflix show]() [Books]() [Check out our website for more]() Follow Ramit [ig]() [fb]() [tw]() [yt]() [pc]() Was this forwarded to you? Sign up [here](). This email was sent to [{EMAIL}](). If you no longer wish to receive these emails you may [unsubscribe]( at any time. 548 Market St #89946 San Francisco, CA 94104-5401

Marketing emails from iwillteachyoutoberich.com

View More
Sent On

10/10/2024

Sent On

24/06/2024

Sent On

22/06/2024

Sent On

21/06/2024

Sent On

19/06/2024

Sent On

17/06/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.