I'm still in the accumulation phase so keep things very simple with my bond holdings with a total bond market index fund as my single bond investment. In retirement I will add short-term bond index funds. I never intend on owning an actively managed fund, even in the bond space.
Through my wife's Solo 401k retirement plan administrator, she makes Roth 401k contributions. In Quickbooks, when categorizing these contributions, it gives the option of "after-tax Roth 401k" for these contributions. This is where the confusion enters, because you correctly point out that "after-tax" and "Roth" 401k types are different. In fact, Quickbooks doesn't even have a standard entry for the "after-tax 401k" you describe. They have after-tax Roth 401k, after-tax Roth 401k catch-up, after-tax Roth 401k catch-up (60-63), and after-tax Roth 403(b). However this strategy is supposed to be implemented, it seems highly inaccessible.
Regarding Rule 72(t), I've also read that you can break up a large Traditional IRA so that you have more control over the Traditional balance you choose to utilize for the Rule 72(t). For example, if you have a Traditional IRA balance of $500K but only want to Rule 72(t) half of it, you could split the account into two separate $250K IRA's, leaving one alone and setting up the Rule 72(t) on the other.I have a tentative plan to retire at some point in my 50's, with the exact age very much determined by how the market cooperates between now and then. I'll use Roth contributions (regular ones I've made and Traditional to Roth conversions I plan to make in the few years leading up to retirement), as well as taxable investments. If there's a shortfall to cover my expenses, I'll partition some of my Traditional IRA funds and set up a Rule 72(t) to generate enough income to cover the shortfall.
It's an important reminder that even for index investors, economic forecasters can be extremely dangerous. I can't imagine how much wealth is destroyed for those that continually adjust their asset allocation based on these forecasts.
The worst thing that could happen to one of these kids is winning the contest and thinking they could apply their luck throughout life to generate market beating returns.
If they retire at 50 and a 3.5% withdrawal rate is enough to afford a comfortable lifestyle for them, this person is in extremely good shape. As Bogdan points out, they are looking at 100% success rate based on all historical 30-year periods. If you bump this up to a 50-year retirement, they still maintain a 94.3% success rate based on all historical 50-year periods. This is before inputting social security benefits into their future income sources. To me, this is not leaving too much to chance as others suggest. This is simply the case of someone having enough to retire far earlier than the norm and people being spooked by it. I appreciate the mention of FIRECalc. It's by far my favorite basic retirement calculator.
Exactly. People think that investing in the SP500 means they're missing out on huge swaths of the market and that this actually matters. A quick look at long-term returns, volatility, etc. of SP500 vs Total Market and you'll see there is no meaningful difference.
The article states 14.5% of investment-grade corporate bonds are tied to AI. It also states that 40% of the S&P500 is tied to AI. I think the premise of the article is not to move away from corporates altogether, but to think about diversifying your corporate exposure, much like you did when you diversified away from the S&P500 in your stock exposure. I would not let talk of AI sway your decision. If you have been contemplating moving away from corporates for reasons others have stated in the comments (i.e. "playing it safe with my bonds) then that is another matter.
In a 1976 interview, shortly before his death, Graham expressed the view that the situation for security analysis had "changed a great deal" since his textbook Graham and Dodd was first published. He noted that due to the enormous amount of research being done, he doubted most extensive efforts to find undervalued issues would generate sufficiently superior selections to justify their cost. His final recommendation for the "defensive" investor (someone without the time, inclination, or expertise to perform in-depth analysis) was a simplified approach, which he essentially described as owning a broad cross-section of high-quality, established domestic stocks, akin to an index fund. In that interview, he stated: "In effect that would mean that the stock market experts as a whole could beat themselves—a logical contradiction... I see no reason why they should be content with results inferior to those of an indexed fund or pay standard fees for such inferior results".
Thanks for this. The part I learned today: "The taxable income part is important because it means that the amount is after the standard deduction was applied, which means that your gross income can be ~$64,100 ($15,750 standard deduction for single in 2025) or $128,200 ($31,500 standard deduction for married in 2025)." It's interesting that capital gains tax rates are based on income after the standard deduction is applied, yet other things like income limits for the Affordable Care Act use income before taking the standard deduction. Hard to keep track of all these rules.
Comments
I'm still in the accumulation phase so keep things very simple with my bond holdings with a total bond market index fund as my single bond investment. In retirement I will add short-term bond index funds. I never intend on owning an actively managed fund, even in the bond space.
Post: Can one “core” total bond ETF replace the complexity of your bond holdings?
Link to comment from June 16, 2026
Through my wife's Solo 401k retirement plan administrator, she makes Roth 401k contributions. In Quickbooks, when categorizing these contributions, it gives the option of "after-tax Roth 401k" for these contributions. This is where the confusion enters, because you correctly point out that "after-tax" and "Roth" 401k types are different. In fact, Quickbooks doesn't even have a standard entry for the "after-tax 401k" you describe. They have after-tax Roth 401k, after-tax Roth 401k catch-up, after-tax Roth 401k catch-up (60-63), and after-tax Roth 403(b). However this strategy is supposed to be implemented, it seems highly inaccessible.
Post: Mega Backdoor Roth
Link to comment from June 6, 2026
Regarding Rule 72(t), I've also read that you can break up a large Traditional IRA so that you have more control over the Traditional balance you choose to utilize for the Rule 72(t). For example, if you have a Traditional IRA balance of $500K but only want to Rule 72(t) half of it, you could split the account into two separate $250K IRA's, leaving one alone and setting up the Rule 72(t) on the other. I have a tentative plan to retire at some point in my 50's, with the exact age very much determined by how the market cooperates between now and then. I'll use Roth contributions (regular ones I've made and Traditional to Roth conversions I plan to make in the few years leading up to retirement), as well as taxable investments. If there's a shortfall to cover my expenses, I'll partition some of my Traditional IRA funds and set up a Rule 72(t) to generate enough income to cover the shortfall.
Post: Retirement Accounts
Link to comment from May 16, 2026
It's an important reminder that even for index investors, economic forecasters can be extremely dangerous. I can't imagine how much wealth is destroyed for those that continually adjust their asset allocation based on these forecasts.
Post: Wall Street Trap
Link to comment from May 2, 2026
The worst thing that could happen to one of these kids is winning the contest and thinking they could apply their luck throughout life to generate market beating returns.
Post: Stock Market Contest
Link to comment from April 4, 2026
If they retire at 50 and a 3.5% withdrawal rate is enough to afford a comfortable lifestyle for them, this person is in extremely good shape. As Bogdan points out, they are looking at 100% success rate based on all historical 30-year periods. If you bump this up to a 50-year retirement, they still maintain a 94.3% success rate based on all historical 50-year periods. This is before inputting social security benefits into their future income sources. To me, this is not leaving too much to chance as others suggest. This is simply the case of someone having enough to retire far earlier than the norm and people being spooked by it. I appreciate the mention of FIRECalc. It's by far my favorite basic retirement calculator.
Post: Early Retirement
Link to comment from January 17, 2026
Exactly. People think that investing in the SP500 means they're missing out on huge swaths of the market and that this actually matters. A quick look at long-term returns, volatility, etc. of SP500 vs Total Market and you'll see there is no meaningful difference.
Post: Real vs. Imaginary Returns – Part I
Link to comment from January 14, 2026
The article states 14.5% of investment-grade corporate bonds are tied to AI. It also states that 40% of the S&P500 is tied to AI. I think the premise of the article is not to move away from corporates altogether, but to think about diversifying your corporate exposure, much like you did when you diversified away from the S&P500 in your stock exposure. I would not let talk of AI sway your decision. If you have been contemplating moving away from corporates for reasons others have stated in the comments (i.e. "playing it safe with my bonds) then that is another matter.
Post: Which bond fund?
Link to comment from December 1, 2025
In a 1976 interview, shortly before his death, Graham expressed the view that the situation for security analysis had "changed a great deal" since his textbook Graham and Dodd was first published. He noted that due to the enormous amount of research being done, he doubted most extensive efforts to find undervalued issues would generate sufficiently superior selections to justify their cost. His final recommendation for the "defensive" investor (someone without the time, inclination, or expertise to perform in-depth analysis) was a simplified approach, which he essentially described as owning a broad cross-section of high-quality, established domestic stocks, akin to an index fund. In that interview, he stated: "In effect that would mean that the stock market experts as a whole could beat themselves—a logical contradiction... I see no reason why they should be content with results inferior to those of an indexed fund or pay standard fees for such inferior results".
Post: Why would index investing be different?
Link to comment from November 17, 2025
Thanks for this. The part I learned today: "The taxable income part is important because it means that the amount is after the standard deduction was applied, which means that your gross income can be ~$64,100 ($15,750 standard deduction for single in 2025) or $128,200 ($31,500 standard deduction for married in 2025)." It's interesting that capital gains tax rates are based on income after the standard deduction is applied, yet other things like income limits for the Affordable Care Act use income before taking the standard deduction. Hard to keep track of all these rules.
Post: Tax Gain Harvesting
Link to comment from November 8, 2025