# [Net Worth Thread] April 2009



## The_Number

I noticed that many of the financial bloggers are showing their net worth and its breakdown on their blogs, and I thought about doing a monthly thread here to motivate us to calculate our net worths. I do feel a little bit like an exhibitionist for doing this, but enough vagueness and net pseudonymity help.

As I said in the intro thread elsewhere, I'm in my late 20s and this is my first year on a "real job." I still have a long way to go to achieve many of my financial goals, but it is a start.

As you can see, my asset is a mix of CAD and USD. Instead of calculating the exchange rate for my USD investment, I simply treated 1 USD = 1 CAD for the purpose of calculating my total net worth (which makes it a conservative estimate.) 
_________________________________
April 25, 2009

*Net Worth: 28498.76*

*Assets: $28509.85*
Cash (Cash, Chequing Acct, Saving Acct)
CAD: $7976.14
USD: $557.51

Investments
Individual Stocks: USD$1580.36
RRSP: CAD$3870.38
Defined Contribution Plan: CAD$4973.78
TIFSA: CAD$1095.12
Roth IRA: USD$8456.56

*Liabilities: $11.09*
Credit Card: CAD$11.09
_________________________________

My net worth will probably go down next month because I'm planning to make a major purchase I've been saving money for.


----------



## FrugalTrader

Great idea! Keep up the good work, you may find that the updates will help you towards your goals, I know they do for me!


----------



## CJB

Here's mine. I use Networth IQ to track my progress.

https://www.networthiq.com/people/KrisKross


----------



## Ben

I've never felt the need to be accountable to others in tracking my net worth, but the simple act of tracking it for my own interest is enough motivation to want it to increase. I use a simple spreadsheet.

If the major purpose you speak of is one that could easily be sold in future at a depreciated/appreciated price, then you may be able to claim the equity in the asset toward your net worth. Furniture I would not personally include, but certainly cars, dirtbikes, etc (having a hard time thinking of examples) would be fair game.


----------



## FinancialJungle

Like Ben, I track my net worth in a private Excel spreadsheet, although I never place much emphasis on net worth. Reason is that I'm a buy & hold type of guy, so ultimately my plan is to live off the income and utility of my assets rather than their current market valuation.

For example, imagine 2 brothers. The younger brother, who is 30 today, has an $800k portfolio in S&P500. The older brother, who was 30 at the peak of the Internet bubble, had a $1 million portfolio at the time. 

Today, $800k can buy you 9231 SPY shares earning $20,000 of dividend a year. In 2000, $1 million could buy 6666 shares of SPY earning $10,000 of dividend a year.

So, which brother is richer at 30-year old?

The dollar value of my assets is at the mercy of the market, therefore if it's not within my control, it's not worth setting goals on. What is somewhat within my control (short of a market wide dividend cut) is income. As long as I stick to a strict saving regimen, my passive income will grow incrementally each month.


----------



## Bullseye

Ben said:


> Furniture I would not personally include, but certainly cars, dirtbikes, etc (having a hard time thinking of examples) would be fair game.


I include a very conservative number for household contents, including furniture. Basically valued at fire sale prices, but it's still a decent enough number to count. I mainly do this because I'm sometimes tempted to sell everything, pack up the family, and travel the world again for the long term. 

I also include depreciating assets like vehicles, at conservative current market value. In my net worth projections, I reduce the values, of course.


----------



## CanadianCapitalist

I used to track net worth fairly regularly but not anymore. The reason is that it was easy to see how savings were driving net worth increases but we're at a stage now where a bad year in the market can "wipe out" many years of savings. Still, I track net worth once a year taking conservative values for home and auto.


----------



## steve41

Instead of tracking your net worth, why not track something eminently more useful.... your BQ (beer quotient)?

This number has much more significance to your financial health because it relates to how you live&enjoy your life. (BQ is a euphemism for discretionary spending... the amount we get to spend on groceries, beer, travel/gas, clothes, entertainment)

Every year or so, you take stock....

-"my job grosses $x.... do I see it continuing to a certain age?"
-"my portfolio is worth $y (include loans as well)"
-"what is a reasonabLe estimate of rates going forward?"
-"do I have an expectation of a future windfall or capital gain?"

The above simple factors will deliver you your BQ... that magic number which tells you what you should budget going forward such that your lifestyle will take you out to some optimum age (95, say) at which point your capital will just run out.

If you are living beyond your BQ, you may end up sucking air at 75, or if you are living far below your BQ, your rotten kids will inherit a gazillion bucks.

Tracking and adjusting your BQ (adhering to a spending&saving budget) is infinitely more useful an exercise than tracking your net worth.


----------



## Rickson9

Grats The Number! A great looking net worth statement!


----------



## moneygardener

Great post Financial Jungle, and it is great to see you around again!

I track net worth on my blog but I've decided to concentrate more on ratios and movements rather than the hard value. I also like to emphasize income from investments over portfolio value. As CC and FJ have alluded to, once a long term investor builds up significant portfolio net worth tends to move in tandem with the market. Savings and income become less influential. That being said it is not enought of a driver to de-motivate me from saving and paying down debt. We'll all be affected by the market and it is out of our control. Part of tracking net worth is pure enjoyment for me rather than a measuring stick. One has to take some of the fluctuations with a grain of salt with a view to the long term.


----------



## DrStan

moneygardener said:


> Great post Financial Jungle, and it is great to see you around again!
> 
> I track net worth on my blog but I've decided to concentrate more on ratios and movements rather than the hard value. I also like to emphasize income from investments over portfolio value. As CC and FJ have alluded to, once a long term investor builds up significant portfolio net worth tends to move in tandem with the market. Savings and income become less influential. That being said it is not enought of a driver to de-motivate me from saving and paying down debt. We'll all be affected by the market and it is out of our control. Part of tracking net worth is pure enjoyment for me rather than a measuring stick. One has to take some of the fluctuations with a grain of salt with a view to the long term.


Agreed. Income from investments is very important. My wife and I have spent the last 6 years paying off our house, which means that most of our net worth is tied up in it (about 75% of our net worth, in fact). We are now diversifying into equity investments to build up passive income from dividends. 

I'm interested in how much our investments can provide as income, because that is less work we will have to do in the future. It currently stands at $1700 in annual dividends. I think that number is more important than the actual "net worth". Our pensions will provide good cashflow in retirement, so that's not a huge concern. 

Roughly, saving $1000 will provide $50 lifetime income at 5% return. We hope to increase our passive income by $1,000 every year, which requires $20K in annual savings (10K in the TFSA and the rest split between RRSP and non-registered). That's the real number we care about!


----------



## Ben

When our investments get so large that a good/bad month on the market is several times our monthly savings rate, then I can definitely see how tracking net worth monthly would lose its value to me. Like CC said, right now it really is about seeing how our savings are driving the net worth. Once the market begins to drive net worth, the sense of personal accomplishment will be lost, and likely, the desire to track net worth monthly.

Also becoming interested in the concept of how investments can provide income and gradually replace/supplement employment income. Powerful principle, especially with the view to reach financial independence in our 50's and bridge the time before CPP/OAS kick in (which will probably have an age eligibility of 70 by the time I reach that point).


----------



## The_Number

Thanks for the replies. And especially thank you, CJB, for sharing your networth. Anyone else who is willing to share your networth with the group?

@ Ben: I also have intrinsic motivation for tracking my networth (I have been for more than a year). I started the thread because I thought it would be a nice little "community" event.

@ Jungle & Bullseye: When I do mine for myself, I started the habit of adding $500 for personal belongings (of course, I can probably get more if I sell them all). But I excluded it from my original post because the market value of such items are difficult to determine. Also for depreciating assets, I know that IRS has the Internal Revenue Code that makes a conservative estimate on depreciation. Isn't there something similar in Canada?


----------



## moneygardener

In November of 2007 MoneySense magazine ran an article that pulled Stats Canada net worth numbers. 

http://themoneygardener.com/2007/11/are-we-rich-yet.html

If you are under 35 years old to be in the 'weathiest 20%' of Canadians you needed a net worth over $89,700. I'm not sure if they mentioned whether this was household net worth or individual, however I always assumed it was household.


----------



## Ben

The Number: Full credit to you for posting your net worth. Indeed, it does make for a nice "community event". 

There are too many readers on this forum who know my true identity for me to divulge my net worth. I'm a little sensitive about those who know me knowing my financial asset picture, and I suspect I'm not alone. There are precious few people who will openly disclose their salary to those they know (especially not those they work with), and fewer still willing to discuss their net worth in public. 

Money remains a sensitive subject for many people in our society, for socially complicated reasons.


----------



## mfd

I track it on my blog but here is March. Like others have mention I'm sure April will see a significant increase because of the upswing in the market :


----------



## michika

mfd, how do you calculate the % of change, is it from month to month?


----------



## mfd

michika said:


> mfd, how do you calculate the % of change, is it from month to month?


right now its just month to month. At the end of the year I'll do a full year check


----------



## FrugalTrader

mfd said:


> I track it on my blog but here is March. Like others have mention I'm sure April will see a significant increase because of the upswing in the market :


Great looking net worth statement MFD!


----------



## mfd

Thanks FT.


----------



## Mockingbird

The_Number said:


> I noticed that many of the financial bloggers are showing their net worth and its breakdown on their blogs, and I thought about doing a monthly thread here to motivate us to calculate our net worths. I do feel a little bit like an exhibitionist for doing this, but enough vagueness and net pseudonymity help.
> 
> As I said in the intro thread elsewhere, I'm in my late 20s and this is my first year on a "real job." I still have a long way to go to achieve many of my financial goals, but it is a start.
> 
> As you can see, my asset is a mix of CAD and USD. Instead of calculating the exchange rate for my USD investment, I simply treated 1 USD = 1 CAD for the purpose of calculating my total net worth (which makes it a conservative estimate.)
> _________________________________
> April 25, 2009
> 
> *Net Worth: 28498.76*
> 
> *Assets: $28509.85*
> Cash (Cash, Chequing Acct, Saving Acct)
> CAD: $7976.14
> USD: $557.51
> 
> Investments
> Individual Stocks: USD$1580.36
> RRSP: CAD$3870.38
> Defined Contribution Plan: CAD$4973.78
> TIFSA: CAD$1095.12
> Roth IRA: USD$8456.56
> 
> *Liabilities: $11.09*
> Credit Card: CAD$11.09
> _________________________________
> 
> My net worth will probably go down next month because I'm planning to make a major purchase I've been saving money for.


Great start, "The_Number"!!
Best of wishes in meeting your future goals/targets.


----------



## The_Number

Ben: I agree. I wouldn't be posting mine if somebody in this board knew me IRL.

MFD: Thank you for sharing yours. I find it helpful to see what other people are doing to get out of the "rat race" (-> financial independence) while enjoying the process.

Rickson & Mockingbird: Thank you for your kind comments.


----------



## Retired at 31

Interesting thread. The web provides a fair bit of anonymity. Here's my situation. Everything is rounded off to nearest 10K.

House - 430,000
Vehicles & Toys - 100,000
Cash, Savings, Shareholder loans, Receivables, & Non-reg. Invest. - 900,000
Savings for kids - resp and non-reg - 100,000
Registered Savings - rsp and tfsa - 180,000

Liabilities - mortgage, loan, line of credit, credit card, etc. - 0

Net Worth - 1,700,000

Does not include value of equity in privately held corporations. My goal by the time I turn 40ish is to have divested of the privately held corps and have 2MM in an income producing portfolio.


----------



## Rickson9

Primary Residence: $300,000 (no mortgage)
Real estate: $500,000
Vehicles & Toys: $100,000
Cash, Savings, & Non-reg. Invest.: $400,000
Registered Savings - rsp and tfsa: $250,000

Liabilities - mortgages: $250,000

Net Worth - $1,300,000

Our goal is to either buy more real estate or stock, whatever the market decides to gives us first.


----------



## steve41

This net worth stuff is meaningless. For goodness sake, unless you indicate how old you are and what your gross salary is, then there is no way anyone can determine whether you are a hero or a zero.


----------



## Rickson9

steve41 said:


> This net worth stuff is meaningless. For goodness sake, unless you indicate how old you are and what your gross salary is, then there is no way anyone can determine whether you are a hero or a zero.


I'm not sure how age and gross income are important?

Our modest expectation is to double our net worth every decade. Since we are in our early to mid 30s we hope to have a few doubles ahead of us.

With regards to gross income, we could be sitting at home jobless all day and it wouldn't change our situation much?


----------



## steve41

The reason it is so important is that the size of the nest egg only makes sense when you indicate how many years you will be adding to the nest egg, and when you will start living off it. 

If someone said they had a nest egg of $100K and they were 30, we could applaud. If he said he was 59, we could commiserate. The same goes for salary... if the 59 year old grossed 50K, we could understand that he would probably be able to sustain his current modest lifestyle. The context is important.


----------



## mfd

steve41 said:


> The reason it is so important is that the size of the nest egg only makes sense when you indicate how many years you will be adding to the nest egg, and when you will start living off it.
> 
> If someone said they had a nest egg of $100K and they were 30, we could applaud. If he said he was 59, we could commiserate. The same goes for salary... if the 59 year old grossed 50K, we could understand that he would probably be able to sustain his current modest lifestyle. The context is important.


 I don't disagree with that but tracking net worth serves other purpose. What I post on my site is a summary of my overall net worth. My personal spreadsheet is far more granular and allows me to focus on increases/decreases from month to month (or lack of thereof).


----------



## CanadianCapitalist

steve41 said:


> This net worth stuff is meaningless. For goodness sake, unless you indicate how old you are and what your gross salary is, then there is no way anyone can determine whether you are a hero or a zero.


I do think tracking networth is important. It allows one to see progress towards achieving financial goals. 

That said, I think Steve's point is that a person's networth is his business and nobody else's. Everyone's networth will differ based on their individual circumstances. A two-income household can accumulate assets much faster than a single income household. If you have young children in day care, your savings rate will quite understandably lower. If you don't have prescription drug coverage, your household may be spending a lot on health care.


----------



## steve41

What brings this home is the "how much do you need" controversy that continues to rage. Jon's 2.2 million is rebutted by many individuals who contend (thru experience) that $250K is more than enough to sustain them in retirement.

This is a perfect example of confusing financial planning with investment planning. Investment planning focuses on investments in a vacuum. It concentrates on the size of your investment nut irrespective of all the other non-investment elements in your life...

-salary&pension
-age
-retirement age
-cpp/oas expectation
-loans
-future windfalls (selling the cottage, an inheritance...)
-inflation
-estimated future rate trajectory


----------



## Ben

steve41 said:


> This net worth stuff is meaningless. For goodness sake, unless you indicate how old you are and what your gross salary is, then there is no way anyone can determine whether you are a hero or a zero.
> 
> The reason it is so important is that the size of the nest egg only makes sense when you indicate how many years you will be adding to the nest egg, and when you will start living off it.
> 
> If someone said they had a nest egg of $100K and they were 30, we could applaud. If he said he was 59, we could commiserate. The same goes for salary... if the 59 year old grossed 50K, we could understand that he would probably be able to sustain his current modest lifestyle. The context is important.


I agree with the point I think Steve is making here (correct me if I'm wrong Steve). 

This thread has contained several posts on individual net worth, and some congratulary comments on the net worth. To state net worth alone, in the absence of other qualifying facts, does not tell us whether the individual has achieved an above/below average result as might reasonably be expected for their particular situation. 

If someone age 25 with $35k/year salary were to claim a 100k net worth, and that source of wealth was not from other source such as inheritance, then we can safely congratulate them, for clearly they are doing something right - therefore "hero", in Steve's words.

If someone age 55 with a $100k salary were to claim a 100k net worth, then it would be questionable to post a congratulatory message - therefore "zero".

I do not believe Steve has indicated any particular issue with posting net worth on this thread, nor any opposition to tracking it in general. Rather, he is stating that if you do post net worth, provision of additional details allows readers to form a more accurate assessment of your achievement, and lends more credibility to congratulatory comments.


----------



## Rickson9

steve41 said:


> The reason it is so important is that the size of the nest egg only makes sense when you indicate how many years you will be adding to the nest egg, and when you will start living off it.
> 
> If someone said they had a nest egg of $100K and they were 30, we could applaud. If he said he was 59, we could commiserate. The same goes for salary... if the 59 year old grossed 50K, we could understand that he would probably be able to sustain his current modest lifestyle. The context is important.


Ok I understand where you're coming from now. Thanks for clarifying!

With regards to an individual's gross income, what do you think about modifying it to take into account how much of the gross income is actually used to sustain the individual's lifestyle? 

For example, a person could gross $200K, net $130K but only use $40K to live, leaving them with $90K. Another person could gross $200K, net $130K but use $120K to live. Both individuals would gross/net the same amount, but one person has a more costly standard of living.


----------



## Ben

Rickson9 said:


> With regards to an individual's gross income, what do you think about modifying it to take into account how much of the gross income is actually used to sustain the individual's lifestyle?


Certainly. Age and salary would be only the bare minimum additional information required to begin to form an assessment of achievement level. Any additional information, and certainly cost of sustaining desired lifestyle is a good example, only makes the situation clearer.


----------



## steve41

For example, a thirty year old grossing 200K just starting to invest, should look to invest roughly $35K for an optimum plan. (he will have to invest some outside his rsp, BTW) 

By 'optimum', I mean one in which he doesn't have to drastically reduce his lifestyle in retirement nor have his rotten kids inherit a gazillion dollars when he dies. In other words, a plan with a reasonable balance of spending and saving.

35k on 200k is around 18%.

This number (% saving/spending) varies with age, salary, savings to date, retirement age and rate estimates going forward. (as well as future lump sums:- both in and out) 

We are living in a world where every home has access to an unimaginable array of tools (computer power) and all we can do is add up our net worth? Come on... our distant ancestors used an abacus to count their wealth. Surely we can do better.


----------



## Rickson9

steve41 said:


> We are living in a world where every home has access to an unimaginable array of tools (computer power) and all we can do is add up our net worth? Come on... our distant ancestors used an abacus to count their wealth. Surely we can do better.


Personally I feel that net worth is an adaquate indicator. And return on equity adjusted for debt is fine for measuring growth. Simple is best for my level of brain power.


----------



## steve41

> Simple is best for my level of brain power.


Yabbut. Surely this is one of the crucial determinations of your life! _(Unless you are currently on the brink of discovering a cure for cancer)_
I read somewhere that only 14% of all working Canadians had a written-projected financial plan. This is so wrong-headed!


----------



## Mockingbird

steve41 said:


> This net worth stuff is meaningless. For goodness sake, unless you indicate how old you are and what your gross salary is, then there is no way anyone can determine whether you are a hero or a zero.





steve41 said:


> The reason it is so important is that the size of the nest egg only makes sense when you indicate how many years you will be adding to the nest egg, and when you will start living off it.
> 
> If someone said they had a nest egg of $100K and they were 30, we could applaud. If he said he was 59, we could commiserate. The same goes for salary... if the 59 year old grossed 50K, we could understand that he would probably be able to sustain his current modest lifestyle. The context is important.


I congratulated people for..
1) Able to assess their CURRENT financial picture (regardless of how much they earn or what age)
2) Having no debt or came out of debt (regardless of how much they earn or what age)
3) Having a financial plan (regardless of how much they earn or what age)

Many Canadians cannot seem to accomplish above 3 regardless of their income and age. Perhaps net worth without age, income, or circumstances is worthless to some, but it is a vital tool for many in meeting their tangible goals. My congratulation is nothing to do with their current net worth, but more to do with seeing them setting up and achieving their own personal financial challenges. It's not for me to say 50% savers are working much harder than those who save 10%. Kudos to anyone who has financial goals (despite how small they are) and is able to meet the challenges.

Steve41, I hear what you are saying, but who is to decide the context of net worth? Someone who went through the messy divorce and other financial hardship by age 50 might have 100k in net worth despite he is making $100k. I would be still impressed if he has a plan to achieve $500k by 65. Would I be impressed with 30yr old who has $100k (but through inheritance)? I would be if he has concrete plans to increase his net worth. The "size of nest egg" is nothing to do with retirement. The retirement is a personal goal. No right or wrong amount nor right age. You will only know once you retire. 

Finally, net worth is just a snapshot of person's finance. And this might be a big first step for many. All we are interested in is the personal sacrifices they intend to make in order to achieve the newer set of numbers (net worth).


----------



## steve41

> Having a financial plan (regardless of how much they earn or what age)


How on earth can one have a financial plan without a salary and age being included? A financial plan is a projection over time which shows all cash flows... salary, pension, loan pmts, investment (savings&withdrawals), taxes and lifestyle spending. 

Once again... this is the most important mathematical determination of your lifetime. Period. tabulating your net worth is a part of that, but composing a full financial plan (cash flow planning) has far more meaning.


----------



## Ben

Reading all of the above, I see more agreement than disagreement between the points posted. Really just differing ways of saying some of the same things. I think the root issue here is a confusion/mixing together of the benefit of posting, to the author of the post, and the readers of the forum themselves.

Mockingbird says: "_Perhaps net worth without age, income, or circumstances is worthless to some, but it is a vital tool for many in meeting their tangible goals_."

The first part of the sentence refers to the posting of net worth on the forum. The posting has little value to the readers in assessing their situation, in the absence of additional qualifying facts. On the other hand, posting does have value to the author of the post, for it proves they are able to assess their financial picture. And for that, indeed some measure of congratulations is due.

The second part of the sentence speaks entirely of the value to the poster. As Mockingbird says, this might be an important first step for many. It allows them to assess their debt situation, etc. However, knowing net worth doesn't, in and of itself, mean that they have a plan. Both Mockingbird and Steve41 agree on the importance of having a financial plan, and the interest of readers in hearing about those plans.


----------



## Mockingbird

steve41 said:


> How on earth can one have a financial plan without a salary and age being included? A financial plan is a projection over time which shows all cash flows... salary, pension, loan pmts, investment (savings&withdrawals), taxes and lifestyle spending.
> 
> Once again... this is the most important mathematical determination of your lifetime. Period. tabulating your net worth is a part of that, but composing a full financial plan (cash flow planning) has far more meaning.


Steve41, my apologies if I wasn't clear. What I meant was "regardless of age and income disclosure" from the poster. All I'm interested is the progress from "point A" to "point B" and have plans to get there. By outlining the starting point, OP made his first step. Here's how he posted.



The_Number said:


> I still have a long way to go to achieve many of my financial goals, but it is a start.


Ben, thank you for clarifying the value to the "poster" vs "reader". There will always be struggles between them in any public forum; however, because I don't get the value in a statement, it doesn't mean it is less of value.

**Agree that "knowing net worth doesn't, in and of itself, mean that they have a plan". Just one of the puzzle piece in a full picture.


----------



## Rickson9

steve41 said:


> How on earth can one have a financial plan without a salary and age being included? A financial plan is a projection over time which shows all cash flows... salary, pension, loan pmts, investment (savings&withdrawals), taxes and lifestyle spending.
> 
> Once again... this is the most important mathematical determination of your lifetime. Period. tabulating your net worth is a part of that, but composing a full financial plan (cash flow planning) has far more meaning.


It may have more meaning, but for my wife and I, it really isn't important.


----------



## Sampson

I wonder if this thread hasn't gotten a little off topic.

The discussion is great, don't get me wrong, but I thought the OP's intention was to start a thread where people could 'publicize' some financial objectives (net worth targets) to make themselves more 'accountable'.


----------



## Retired at 31

Age and income certainly play a role. If I'm Sidney Crosby and have a net worth of 5M that might sound impressive, but if I make 8.7M a year, then not so much...

If you want to compare net worth taking age and income into account, the millionaire next door uses age x income (gross as I recall) / 10. More than this is considered a prodigious accumulator of wealth or something to that effect.

I don't recall if it's supposed to be last year's income or average income over your life or what.

I agree with Rickson - a financial plan isn't that important. Make *significantly* more than you spend and things take care of themselves!


----------



## steve41

> a financial plan isn't that important


Sigh. Well, you certainly are in good company, given that 'only 14% of all Canadians have a financial plan' statistic. So... here's my net worth (digging out the monthly statement from my broker, adding the latest property tax assements from my real estate holdings and subtracting my loan liabilities (0 as it turns out) and I come up with 2 million dollars. Boy, that was easy.

I think we can safely say that financial planning is for wusses.


----------



## Retired at 31

steve41 said:


> I think we can safely say that financial planning is for wusses.


Let me guess you're a planner? Or an engineer. Probably a planner though. Do I qualify for the portfolio review?


----------



## steve41

I'm not a planner, so no portfolio review. Sorry.


----------



## Rickson9

Retired at 31 said:


> If you want to compare net worth taking age and income into account, the millionaire next door uses age x income (gross as I recall) / 10. More than this is considered a prodigious accumulator of wealth or something to that effect.


Cool formula.


----------



## Ben

Sampson said:


> I wonder if this thread hasn't gotten a little off topic.
> 
> The discussion is great, don't get me wrong, but I thought the OP's intention was to start a thread where people could 'publicize' some financial objectives (net worth targets) to make themselves more 'accountable'.


Agree. This should move back to publication of net worth, and away from debate on the value of such publication. 

Questions such as "How did you do it?" and "What are your future financial goals, and how do you intend to get there?" would be fair game in response to the net worth posts.


----------



## Alexandra

There is a link on CNNMoney that allows you to see how your net worth compared to other people of the same age and income. The link is below for those of you who are interested in taking a peek:

http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/networth_ageincome/index.html

This really tells you how you stack up, as opposed to just listing some figures without any context. So in that sense I agree with Steve...


----------



## Rickson9

Alexandra said:


> There is a link on CNNMoney that allows you to see how your net worth compared to other people of the same age and income. The link is below for those of you who are interested in taking a peek:
> 
> http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/networth_ageincome/index.html
> 
> This really tells you how you stack up, as opposed to just listing some figures without any context. So in that sense I agree with Steve...


Cool link.

It says that for our income the median net worth should be a little north of $1.1M. Quite close!


----------



## The_Number

I agree with Steve's point that personal net worth is made meaningful in the context of one's personal financial planning, but as Ben pointed out in another thread (most likely in response to this thread), I'm not comfortable with disclosing my salary. So I provided some contexts (age, education/work history) but omitted others. I have a complete portfolio (with things like goals, timeline, risk management, investment planning, estate planning), and I know where my net worth fits in that picture.

When I started this thread, I thought about creating a monthly thread for people to update their net worth. Is there enough interest in doing this? (Of course anyone can create a net worth thread for May now.) As many people have noted, the conversation in this thread has been certainly quite different from what I imagined, but it is, nonetheless, interesting and worthwhile.


----------



## Mockingbird

Sampson said:


> I wonder if this thread hasn't gotten a little off topic.
> 
> The discussion is great, don't get me wrong, but I thought the OP's intention was to start a thread where people could 'publicize' some financial objectives (net worth targets) to make themselves more 'accountable'.





The_Number said:


> When I started this thread, I thought about creating a monthly thread for people to update their net worth. Is there enough interest in doing this? (Of course anyone can create a net worth thread for May now.) As many people have noted, the conversation in this thread has been certainly quite different from what I imagined, but it is, nonetheless, interesting and worthwhile.


Sorry, this thread has deviated from your original intention. Nobody is arguing that the context is not important when comes to net worth; however, it is your thread and you can diverge as much or as little as your want. Most do get the context as we discover more about each other in this growing forum.



Ben said:


> Questions such as "How did you do it?" and "What are your future financial goals, and how do you intend to get there?" would be fair game in response to the net worth posts.


Agree..


Edit: Did I just graduate from a "Junior Member" status with this comment?? Where's my diploma?


----------

