I honestly think the “6 months of salary in an emergency fund”-advice is a bit overblown and certainly not universally applicable.
An emergency fund must per definition be very liquid in order to fulfill its purpose, hence you can only really place the money in a simple savings account with a not-so-spectacular interest rate. This means that the opportunity cost of having 6 months of salary in an emergency fund is the delta of expected return on investment in a higher-yield method of savings, such as placing the money in index funds. This can be quite significant, in particular since saving up 6 months of salary is not an easy task for the average person.
If you had the money placed in investments, the money would be less liquid, and there’s the chance that you may have to liquidate it during a downturn, which would of course suck a little. Consider carefully under which scenarios you would have to liquidate, though:
Lost your job? I have unemployment insurance to cover this scenario for me, meaning that I will get 80% of my current salary for close to a year, a period during which I would have to liquidate nothing.
Disaster strikes my home? My home insurance policy covers this more than enough for me.
Medical emergency? I’m lucky enough to live in a country where health care is free, but I have additional health insurance on top of that as well.
Emergency while traveling? I have great travel insurance. They cover all medical expenses and would even fly me back home post-haste in disaster scenarios.
Other accidents where I hurt myself? You guessed it, I have insurance for that too.
Now, there’s an argument to be made that these insurance policies might be a bit slow to pay out, and that I might need to be a bit more liquid to cover the expenses temporarily. I have a solution for that too - credit cards. With credit cards I can make a short-term loan that should bridge over most issues until I can either get money from any of my insurance policies, or worst case have time to liquidate some of my higher-yield investments.
So yeah, that’s my plan. It does not involve 6 months of salary being invested in a low-yield savings account, because that’d lose me a lot of money. I dislike the fact that the 6 months emergency fund is basically parroted as religious gospel, and it feels like people who repeat it have not thought about the issue thoroughly.
You seem to be in a very unique situation. And to have a pretty good understanding of personal finance and of your risk appetite.
What you say works for you and a few people that happen to have access to universal healthcare, what looks like four separate insurance policies, and that can manage not to fuck it up with credit cards.
6 months liquid emergency fund remains the best strategy for most people out there.
Would certainly suck if those six months worth of emergency fund had temporarily gone down to four months because of a downturn in the stock market though.
Accidentally there might also be some correlation with stock markets going down, and an emergency happening. Eg large company laying staff off.
That said you can do the math and see how much that money would return on average on etfs compared to a bank account, and decide if that’s worth the risk to you.
Experts say no, I agree with them but I see your point, and it’s definitely worth to challenge these suggestions.
The only way you can have your emergency fund invested is if you have a very good credit card which can cover all your expenses for a month or two. You can then reduce your emergency fund to one month’s worth so you can have cash if needed.
I had an 18 month 0% card last year. I floated a bunch of expenses on it and paid it off a few days before interest kicked in. I also earned rewards points from the card, so double win I guess.
Some say a good rule of thumb is 3–6 months of mandatory expenses depending on personal situations and it looks like you’re safe with the lesser amount.
I usually hover around 3–4,5 months but have decided to increase a bit because of the current instability of everything
You could also consider a ladder of cds as an example, but then you either have to continually re-up 6 month cds or go for a year of them, each for about your monthly expenses.
I just take the 4% interest (or whatever rapidly changing amount ally bank offers me on savings since they update a lot) and roll with it. For now it’s a similar ROI to renting a property without all the fuss of… Buying a property and doing the work lol.
Man, where do you live where unemployment is nearly a year at 80% of your salary? When I was unemployed here in Washington, it was six months and more like 50% of my salary. And from what I understand, Washington is a lot more generous than most states.
Sweden. You pay around $12 for the basic coverage which covers 80% of your salary up to a cap of around $2500 a month, for 250 working days. My union membership, which costs approximately $25 per month, then includes an additional coverage for if you go over the cap of $2500 a month for the basic coverage. These combined then cover you for income up to around $4500 a month. It’s also possible to get additional coverage on top of that to cover incomes above this amount through the union, again for around $12 a month.
I’ve simplified the terms greatly, so in practice they are a bit worse - in particular, the compensation amounts get lower after a certain amount of days spent unemployed - but the general idea holds. To qualify, you need to have been employed already for a year, and you are required to look for work as a condition to get payouts on the insurance. You lose the right to payouts if you decline an appropriate job offer.
I honestly think the “6 months of salary in an emergency fund”-advice is a bit overblown and certainly not universally applicable.
An emergency fund must per definition be very liquid in order to fulfill its purpose, hence you can only really place the money in a simple savings account with a not-so-spectacular interest rate. This means that the opportunity cost of having 6 months of salary in an emergency fund is the delta of expected return on investment in a higher-yield method of savings, such as placing the money in index funds. This can be quite significant, in particular since saving up 6 months of salary is not an easy task for the average person.
If you had the money placed in investments, the money would be less liquid, and there’s the chance that you may have to liquidate it during a downturn, which would of course suck a little. Consider carefully under which scenarios you would have to liquidate, though:
Now, there’s an argument to be made that these insurance policies might be a bit slow to pay out, and that I might need to be a bit more liquid to cover the expenses temporarily. I have a solution for that too - credit cards. With credit cards I can make a short-term loan that should bridge over most issues until I can either get money from any of my insurance policies, or worst case have time to liquidate some of my higher-yield investments.
So yeah, that’s my plan. It does not involve 6 months of salary being invested in a low-yield savings account, because that’d lose me a lot of money. I dislike the fact that the 6 months emergency fund is basically parroted as religious gospel, and it feels like people who repeat it have not thought about the issue thoroughly.
You seem to be in a very unique situation. And to have a pretty good understanding of personal finance and of your risk appetite. What you say works for you and a few people that happen to have access to universal healthcare, what looks like four separate insurance policies, and that can manage not to fuck it up with credit cards.
6 months liquid emergency fund remains the best strategy for most people out there.
Not a unique situation. It’s pretty much the average for millions of adult to middle aged people in several countries.
Not nearly the norm globally but calling it unique is pretty ridiculous.
It’s a generalized thing that is healthy advice for most people, especially Americans who have very little of a social safety net.
Stocks and mutual funds are liquid enough to act as an emergency fund; you don’t need to rely on a savings account only to hold your emergency fund.
Would certainly suck if those six months worth of emergency fund had temporarily gone down to four months because of a downturn in the stock market though.
Accidentally there might also be some correlation with stock markets going down, and an emergency happening. Eg large company laying staff off.
That said you can do the math and see how much that money would return on average on etfs compared to a bank account, and decide if that’s worth the risk to you.
Experts say no, I agree with them but I see your point, and it’s definitely worth to challenge these suggestions.
The only way you can have your emergency fund invested is if you have a very good credit card which can cover all your expenses for a month or two. You can then reduce your emergency fund to one month’s worth so you can have cash if needed.
I had an 18 month 0% card last year. I floated a bunch of expenses on it and paid it off a few days before interest kicked in. I also earned rewards points from the card, so double win I guess.
Some say a good rule of thumb is 3–6 months of mandatory expenses depending on personal situations and it looks like you’re safe with the lesser amount.
I usually hover around 3–4,5 months but have decided to increase a bit because of the current instability of everything
It’s not 6 months salary, it’s 6 months of expenses, although those numbers are likely close for most people now.
You could also consider a ladder of cds as an example, but then you either have to continually re-up 6 month cds or go for a year of them, each for about your monthly expenses.
I just take the 4% interest (or whatever rapidly changing amount ally bank offers me on savings since they update a lot) and roll with it. For now it’s a similar ROI to renting a property without all the fuss of… Buying a property and doing the work lol.
Man, where do you live where unemployment is nearly a year at 80% of your salary? When I was unemployed here in Washington, it was six months and more like 50% of my salary. And from what I understand, Washington is a lot more generous than most states.
Sweden. You pay around $12 for the basic coverage which covers 80% of your salary up to a cap of around $2500 a month, for 250 working days. My union membership, which costs approximately $25 per month, then includes an additional coverage for if you go over the cap of $2500 a month for the basic coverage. These combined then cover you for income up to around $4500 a month. It’s also possible to get additional coverage on top of that to cover incomes above this amount through the union, again for around $12 a month.
I’ve simplified the terms greatly, so in practice they are a bit worse - in particular, the compensation amounts get lower after a certain amount of days spent unemployed - but the general idea holds. To qualify, you need to have been employed already for a year, and you are required to look for work as a condition to get payouts on the insurance. You lose the right to payouts if you decline an appropriate job offer.