Read on Twitter
Developing a theory that allocating a retirement portfolio 100% to $O is better than the industry standard "4% withdrawal rule" from a mix of stocks and bonds
Key reasons
Key reasons
At a 5% dividend, $O automatically means you need 20% less money in the portfolio
If you planned on a $1M portfolio to retire with 4% withdrawals, only $800k is needed now for the same income.
Just shaved years off your retirement date
If you planned on a $1M portfolio to retire with 4% withdrawals, only $800k is needed now for the same income.
Just shaved years off your retirement date
$O has never suspended or reduced the dividend, and has actually grown it consistently over time to out pace inflation.
It's unlikely this trend will reverse anytime soon because the business so fortified. So you can bank on your income at least keeping pace with inflation
It's unlikely this trend will reverse anytime soon because the business so fortified. So you can bank on your income at least keeping pace with inflation
Unlike with the 4% withdrawals from stocks, you don't have a sequence of return risk.
The quoted value of the stock has zero effect on your income, so you get the peace of mind of never stressing about market selloffs.
The quoted value of the stock has zero effect on your income, so you get the peace of mind of never stressing about market selloffs.
The monthly payment is super convenient if it's the main source of income.
Makes budgeting way easier
Makes budgeting way easier
$O diversification is similar to that of an index fund
They have thousands of properties all over the world, and a variety of high quality tenants across many industries.
A global pandemic barely fazed them, hard to imagine what really could.
They have thousands of properties all over the world, and a variety of high quality tenants across many industries.
A global pandemic barely fazed them, hard to imagine what really could.
Since the strategy solely relies on the dividend, any capital appreciation over time is an added bonus.
$O has never been down over any 5+ year period.
It likely never will
With 4% from stocks it is possible that the portfolio value gets at least partially depleted over time
$O has never been down over any 5+ year period.
It likely never will
With 4% from stocks it is possible that the portfolio value gets at least partially depleted over time
When you weigh the risk/reward on the whole, this could be a way more well rounded retirement strategy than most involving stocks and bonds.
