image de profil
Epi
@Epi
21H·

Maximum security?

Dear Qiners,


I need to tap into your collective wisdom. My parents recently sold their business and now have about €1 million sitting in their accounts (in addition to the €100,000 each covered by deposit insurance). They know nothing about investing (they’ve been scammed a few times by bank advisors and insurance agents). Now they’re asking me for advice on investment options for the coming decades.


Their very first requirement is: Maximum security! (no capital market fluctuations, no currency risk, no loss due to inflation, no risk of theft, no risk of bank insolvency) Second requirement: Maximum liquidity! (Liquidation and transfer to a checking account possible at any time) Third condition: Minimal costs! (no custody fees, no transaction costs, max. 0.1% TER) Nothing else matters. As you can imagine, this aspect of investing isn’t my specialty. That’s why I’m asking you: How would you invest the money?


My initial idea is to allocate 25% each to the following ETFs, spread across three brokers (IngDiba, Zero Finanzen, SNeo):


1. Amundi Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-EUR (money market ETF; the riskiest due to unfunded swaps, but offers the highest yield, approx. 2.48% per annum) $CSH2 (+0 %)

2. Shares € Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (short-term EU corporate bonds, physically replicated, second-highest yield, approx. 2.23% per annum) $ERNX (+0,01 %)

3. Xtrackers II Germany Government Bond 0-1 UCITS ETF (Acc) (short-term German government bonds, physically replicated, likely the gold standard for safety in Germany, 1.96% per annum) $XG01 (+0,01 %)

4. Amundi Prime Euro Government Bond 0-1Y UCITS ETF Acc (short-term EU government bonds, physically replicated; in terms of interest rates, these are currently even safer than German short-term bonds, 1.95% per annum) $PRAB (+0,01 %)


The total return on this portfolio would be approximately 2.16%. That’s more than enough for my parents—they don’t need the money, but they don’t want to spend it either. It’s simply meant to sit there safely, protected from inflation, until the end of their lives, so they can sleep soundly.


Mind you, we’re in a realm here where a money market ETF is pure gambling. But what else is even safer for the next 10–30 years—that is, protected against currency crises, sovereign crises, bank failures, money market collapses, pandemics, nuclear strikes, and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse?


And no: cash won’t work—it loses value to inflation and can be stolen. Gold isn’t the answer either—its value fluctuates too much and it can also be stolen. Real estate isn’t either—its value fluctuates and it can be expropriated. The well-known “3xGTAA” safety net is somehow out of the question too—though I can’t quite recall the reasons right now.


Of course, I could tell them: “Dear parents, the only certainties in life are death and taxes.” ” But they’re not up for that kind of joke. Besides, that saying doesn’t solve their problem.


So: Do you have any ideas for maximum security? Then please share them! I’m feeling a bit incompetent in this area right now.


Yours, Epi

22
70 Commentaires
image de profil
Aspirin A.@AspirinAndi
17H
I don't think the combination of 100% security across the board, constant liquidation, and no fluctuations really goes together. You're probably already on the right track with your idea.
However, if you say your parents don’t need or want to spend the money for the next 10–30 years, would it be an option to familiarize them with stocks and ETFs? There would definitely be plenty of time to ride out any fluctuations.
If the money won’t be needed even during retirement, have you ever considered an early inheritance to take advantage of the tax exemption?
•
15
•
image de profil
Yoshika 🦋.@Yoshika
15H
@Epi, admit it. Aspirin is your cover identity.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
14H
@AspirinAndi Thanks for your take on this.

Why do you think these requirements don’t align? It doesn’t sound that far-fetched, since the return doesn’t matter.

As for stocks, I’ve already explained to them that, in the long run, there’s nothing safer than a stake in productive capital. Unfortunately, because of their bad experiences with bank advisors when it comes to stocks, they immediately dismiss the idea. At least my dad is very clear on that point. Otherwise, I’ve also had some ideas involving HighDivLowVola ETFs. But I haven’t gotten that far yet. 🤷

The next step, of course, would be the question of an early inheritance. But my mom is blocking that. 😅 I don’t care—I don’t need the money.
••
image de profil
Yoshika 🦋.@Yoshika
9H
@Epi
Your mother has known you since you were born. I'd be careful about coming up with counterarguments.
••
image de profil
Epi@Epi
8H
@Yoshika Yeah, my mom is a bit like $BRK.B —she’s spent her whole life running businesses, is now sitting on a pile of cash, and doesn’t know what to do with it.
It would be irrational to put all that cash into the initial public offering.
••
image de profil
Yoshika 🦋.@Yoshika
8H
@Epi
At my parent company, capital increases are regularly rejected at the annual shareholders' meeting. Just a tip.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
8H
@Yoshika Yeah, yeah—the same old topic at the annual shareholders' meeting at the turn of the year. All the things that fall through there. Not just the capital increase; often, the board doesn't even get a vote of approval. 🫣
•
1
•
image de profil
Yoshika 🦋.@Yoshika
7H
@Epi
Unfortunately, my parent company has incriminating material from my childhood. I must therefore request that the charges against me be dismissed without a hearing.
•
1
•
Solitair@Solitair
21H
10 overnight deposit accounts at ten different banks.
•
8
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
21H
@Solitair Thanks, but that’s been thought through and deemed too risky.

1. Legally speaking, a money market account is a loan to the bank. If the bank goes bankrupt, your deposit is gone for the time being, and no one knows what happens next.

2. As far as I know, deposit insurance applies per person, not per account. At the very least, that’s unclear, and in a full-blown banking crisis, the system will simply switch to a per-person basis. Then everything over 100k is gone, just like in Cyprus a few years ago. And in our society, in the event of a crisis, no one gives a damn about people who’ve lost everything over 100k.

There needs to be more security here—significantly more security!
•
3
•
Solitair@Solitair
21H
@Epi Second: Deposit insurance applies per bank. That means if you have three accounts at the same bank, you’re only protected up to a total of €100,000; however, if you have accounts at three different banks, you’re protected up to three times that amount—€300,000.
I don’t see what’s controversial about that—it’s regulated by the Deposit Guarantee Act.
First: what happens then is second.
You could also spread your money across savings banks and cooperative banks; as far as I know, they have their own separate guarantee systems that provide additional protection.

I don’t think you’ll find “much more” security than that.
Maybe use some of it to buy canned food in case the Russians invade or something like that.
•
2
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
20H
@Solitair Let’s assume the law isn’t amended on an ad hoc basis—which I think is likely—and that the deposit insurance remains per bank, not per person.
How much money is actually in the deposit insurance fund? €6 billion? That would barely be enough to compensate maybe 1% of all Commerzbank customers. And then what? Then the chaos begins.

So: why do you think the deposit insurance is safer than a short-term German government bond? I think that in the event of a crisis, the bonds will be paid off first, and then any bank accounts will be compensated.
••
image de profil
yieldhunter@randomdude
20H
@Epi I consider this sequence to be speculative. In the event of a full-blown crisis, there will be a haircut, and it is unclear how it will be weighted.
•
3
•
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
17H
@Epi I also think I read somewhere that, in case of doubt, the limit is 100k per person.
••
image de profil
Jannes@Applesplit
17H
But seriously. Do your parents expect society to completely collapse in the next 5–10 years? If so, I'm afraid even money invested safely won't do them any good.
•
1
•
image de profil
yieldhunter@randomdude
16H
@Wealth-Accelerator Kommer points out that it applies per person—or could apply, I think.
•
1
•
image de profil
yieldhunter@randomdude
16H
@Applesplit I don't think this is a matter of personal expectations. Rather, it's about weighing all the relevant factors as objectively as possible.
••
image de profil
Fallon@Carrington
17H
In the banking world, you learn about the so-called “return triangle”: flexibility (desired here), security (desired here), and return. You’re supposed to tell the customer: you can’t have all three—and the banks aren’t entirely wrong. If your parents want it that way, there’s absolutely no return. But that’s actually what they want, too—after all, they want to keep up with inflation. It doesn’t work that way. Anyway: Talk them into using Scalable and have them sign up for the premium plan there. That’s recouped through interest: why? Because with Scalable’s Premium plan, funds are distributed across 5 banks, meaning 500k in deposit insurance—it’s the easiest way. The remaining 500k goes into a money market ETF (though, of course, the premise of “zero risk” doesn’t actually hold true). Regardless, I think you’re more likely to impress people who prioritize security with the big red bank (sNeo) than with some broker in “dark mode.” Still, SC offers you a real advantage here. Maybe you can also convince them to put a small portion—100k or so—into a mixed product. BlackRock offers ready-made defensive strategies (also tradable on SC). It somehow combines 80% bonds and 20% stocks or something like that.
•
8
•
image de profil
Fallon@Carrington
17H
Sorry about the missing paragraphs… I’m typing this on my phone in the browser 😂 $MODR That one, for example, is part of the series. I can’t find the defensive one right now, because all these war ETFs keep popping up
•
1
•
image de profil
Sineqz@flyingsquirrel
17H
@Carrington @Epi Good ideas. I see it the same way—with your parents’ criteria, you won’t even be able to meet the minimum requirement for inflation protection. You could try explaining to your parents that it’s not feasible this way, show them that current inflation is over 3%, and point out that bonds won’t cut it. It’s going to be tough. Basically, I think your idea is really good. In the end, it might come down to a combination. Safe, liquid government/corporate bonds with maturities under 1 year, money market ETFs, some fixed-term deposits or overnight money, and maybe a small portion in iBonds—which you can explain to your parents aren’t 100% liquid but offer more secure interest rates and better performance (if I’ve understood iBonds correctly)(after all, they’ll still have access to the other 800k until the 200k in iBonds becomes available again in 4 years), scalable overnight money as @Carrington suggests, and maybe you can somehow convince your parents to include a small portion of Euwax2+ MSCI ACWI (10%/10%)—or, as the icing on the cake, 5% in 3xGTAA :D—or something like an 80% bond/20% stock mix.
•
1
•
image de profil
Sineqz@flyingsquirrel
17H
@Epi You could try to argue whether that million really needs to be 100% liquid at all times, and whether the 100% figure should never fluctuate. Of course, I don’t know your parents, and it’s not up to you how they decide, but with my parents, I managed to convince them to include at least a 10–20% allocation to the B&H ETF. They’ve been in the market for four years now, and after taking a look at their portfolio, they want to add a little more to that portion. :D But I can well imagine that my parents’ situation is different from yours.
•
2
•
image de profil
KevinE@KevinE
17H
@flyingsquirrel A gradual approach makes sense to me. My parents also slowly shifted more and more of a similar amount into the stock market over the course of 3–4 years.
•
2
•
image de profil
Sineqz@flyingsquirrel
17H
@Epi And regarding @Carrington 's idea: I'd take a look at it in terms of early inheritance and the inheritance tax exemption (depending on how many children you have).
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
14H
@flyingsquirrel @Carrington @KevinE Thanks for your ideas!
I had actually thought about a sort of “risk ladder” before, but then discarded the idea because of the absolute need for security. But it’s true—in the long run, short-term bonds are guaranteed losses. So I could ask how much should be immediately available at any given time, how much in 5 years, and how much only in 20 years. That way, I can maximize the return and security for each of those time frames. I’ll give it a try.

But there’s one thing I won’t do anymore: try to convince them of anything. I’ve done that before, and I regretted it. Honestly, I don’t really care—I don’t need the money, and I don’t want any trouble with my parents if there’s a banking or stock market crash.
•
2
•
image de profil
Chris@Psychedelic_Sunflower
17H
Unfortunately, I've never really looked into that. But that's really risk aversion taken to the extreme.
The idea of a 2.16% return combined with protection against inflation sounds more like the ECB’s pipe dream than monetary policy reality.
I’m afraid what your parents are looking for simply doesn’t exist.
•
7
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Psychedelic_Sunflower Basically, I agree with you. That’s what I told my parents, too. But right now—and for the past few decades—they’ve just let their money sit idle in their checking accounts. Now they’re getting cold feet about the million because they don’t trust the deposit insurance.
You can’t imagine how happy their eyes lit up when I showed them the returns from the money market ETF. Then I mentioned a few risks associated with it. And just like that, the fun was over. 😅
If there were a safe hiding spot somewhere, they’d hide that million there in small bills. Protecting against inflation isn’t their top priority. 🫣
••
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
17H
It’s just as you say. Security and protection against inflation cannot be guaranteed in an absolute sense.
I think your choice is sound, and I don’t know of a better one.
Alternatively, they could offer you a loan at 2.16% if they have more confidence in you as a “safe bet.”
But if I were in your situation, would I want 1 million at 2.16%? … I don’t think so.

So I’d also view short-term bonds as the main vehicle and mix in a bit of a money market ETF.
Leave the rest in the account and, if necessary, park a small portion in gold (but only because it might give your parents a sense of security. In reality, it’s just as volatile as everything else).
•
6
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Wealth-Accelerator Thanks. I agree.
They’d probably go along with the loan. After all, they really want me to buy a property. But I don’t want to be financially entangled with my parents. There’s some unpleasant history with my sister (my parents used to show up at her house unannounced every week—because, after all, it “basically” belongs to them).
Basically, I do want to help my parents solve the problem. But I really don’t want to have anything to do with the money. It’s a constant source of conflict.
•
1
•
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
13H
@Epi Words of wisdom 👍🏼
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Wealth-Accelerator Or rather: Once bitten, twice shy. 😅

The luxury of feeling financially free is that I couldn't care less about my parents' money. 🧘
•
1
•
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
12H
@Epi My parents don't have any money… That was my main motivation to build a life for myself so I wouldn't have to whine at the dinner table in front of my kids.
Everyone has their own story 😅
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
12H
@Wealth-Accelerator Well, my parents never really had any money either. They had to save everything for their old age. Now that they're old, all that seems to be left is the fear of losing those very savings.

Watch and learn...
•
1
•
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
12H
@Epi Unfortunately, that's typical, too. Everything is for the future, which doesn't turn out to be what you hoped it would be.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
12H
@Wealth-Accelerator Personally, I find the whole thing quite fascinating from a psychological perspective. My parents’ problems have made me rethink retirement planning and financial freedom in a whole new way.
After all, there’s no point in saving like crazy today just to suddenly become a multimillionaire at 65 who can’t do anything but save like crazy. 😬
So: take as many vacations as possible, set up a foundation, invite friends over, go to concerts, go out, and enjoy life with your loved one. My parents didn’t do any of that. Now they have a pile of money and a pile of anxiety.
•
1
•
image de profil
Wealth-Accelerator@Wealth-Accelerator
11H
@Epi Yeah, I totally get it.
Three years ago, I started subconsciously thinking about this every now and then: When is enough?!
Because my goal is to have the best life possible, not the biggest headstone. Then, a few weeks ago, I read the book *Die with Zero*. It offered a radically different perspective than how I used to think in my late twenties and aligns very strongly with the direction you described.

In the end, though, I can also understand your parents’ situation from a psychological perspective.
Personally, I assume I’m done with saving and investing for my own life. I’m not earning as much anymore because of my current focus on family and having fun. When you realize that you’re only bringing in as much as you need for a good life, it feels like you have to protect your assets from risks, because it would be very difficult to recover from a total loss or something similar on your own.
I also catch myself having thoughts that aren’t so much about fear of volatility, but rather about the possibility that a hacking incident or something similar could wipe out a significant portion of my assets.
Then you start looking for diversification across strategies, assets, banks, and products, and in the end, the whole mess becomes confusing and not entirely pleasant. It’s simply beyond one’s control.

Let’s keep it short:

Anyone who develops a certain money mindset out of whatever fears (which can apparently be very healthy) will most likely never experience complete financial serenity.
The original fear will usually shift to other aspects.
(Exceptions prove the rule. And nobody said it was easy 😅)
•
1
•
image de profil
Olli@Olli68
17H
If I were aiming for the highest possible level of security, I would eliminate the swap-based money market ETF and the corporate bonds entirely.
Alternatively, you could go with a money market or short-term ETF backed or collateralized by government bonds, or physically hold the good old 2-year German government bond, divided into 3-month increments. Just like in the old days, you’d go to the bank every 3 months and roll it over accordingly.
Or a 50/50 split, so that you could at least have 50% paid out every day (with the remaining 50% paid out every 3 months over 2 years).
The performance should be roughly on par with your suggestion.
•
3
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Olli68 Hmm, you’re probably right about the money market ETF and the corporate bond ETF. I guess I was blinded by the crazy excess returns. 🫣

The bond ladder would be an idea, in principle. But who’s going to go to the bank every three months? Not me, that’s for sure! And my parents don’t even know what bonds are. They already got queasy when I explained that it’s a loan to the government. 😅

So, with those short-term, physically-backed German government bond ETFs in a newly opened brokerage account at an unknown bank, I’m already asking quite a lot of them! It’s hardly going to get any more complicated than that.
••
image de profil
Olli@Olli68
13H
@Epi Maybe you can convince them if you try explaining federal treasury notes. They should still be familiar with those, and they still have a very good reputation among older people who wanted nothing to do with the stock market.
There’s also a successor to federal treasury notes, but I’ve never looked into it since I haven’t worked in Germany since 2009.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
12H
@Olli68 I've also noticed the federal treasury bonds. I could look into them. However, I'm not sure if the difference in yield compared to short-term ETFs is worth the extra effort...
••
image de profil
Olli@Olli68
12H
@Epi Then make it easy on yourself and recommend (at least for now) $XG01. These are physically backed and are still better and safer than keeping your money in a checking account. The TER should be 0.07.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
12H
@Olli68 Yeah, I've already thought of that simplest option. Then the issue would be settled for now, and I'd still have time to explain to my parents that there are more sensible things to do. And if they don't want to hear anything about investing, then we'll just stick with the ETF, and my parents and I can have some peace.
I like that solution. 😬
•
1
•
image de profil
NichtRelevant@NichtRelevant
12H
It’s pretty ironic that, as Mr. 3xGTAA, you have parents who have such high standards for security. 😅

It sounds like your parents just want to find reasons to shoot down every possible investment option (though in this case, it’s clearly more about saving money than making it grow). I think you should try—very, very gently—to steer them away a little from their “zero-risk” stance.

- You’re their son, not a greedy financial advisor. You have a genuine interest in seeing your parents’ wealth grow. Your advice is “genuine.”
- They didn’t have security before either, with their own business. Simply by diversifying their investments, their security will improve compared to before.
- Investing in the stock market or across various asset classes is much more in line with their entrepreneurial nature than hoarding cash.

The safest approach is actually a broad diversification across securities, cash or fixed-income deposits, and alternatives (gold/real estate). The likelihood that, all at the same time (!), real estate would be expropriated, physically hidden cash or gold would be found and stolen, the bank would go bankrupt, and all securities would become worthless is truly far-fetched. If you assume such a catastrophic scenario, then even government bonds or time deposits won’t help you, since you can equally assume the risk of a currency crash in those cases. At that point, the only way to prepare for the absolute apocalypse would be with canned goods, alcohol, cigarettes, and ammunition.

Back to the actual problem: I’d talk to the parents about the issue of security and try to alleviate some of their apparent fears. I’d ask what they consider safe and how they themselves would invest. Feel free to ask what would happen if that million were suddenly gone. Would their livelihood be gone? Could your parents still survive financially (e.g., through a pension and a home they own and live in)? Would you be able and willing to support them (perhaps you have siblings as well)? I think it’s incredibly satisfying for parents when their children assure them of their unconditional support in old age—for that stage of life when one’s peak productivity is behind them and they can (hopefully) accept help themselves. A statement like, “You don’t need to worry because, as a family, we always have each other’s backs,” helps immensely and brings the family closer together. Perhaps this will help alleviate some of the anxiety regarding the management of their money.

I would divide the assets into different asset classes and time horizons. After all, the likelihood of needing 1 million in cash on a single day is rather low. For example, you could set aside a quarter as a liquidity reserve and invest the rest more profitably. In principle, I think it’s almost dangerous to have all your money immediately available (keywords: old age, the “grandchild scam,” scammers—“Heeello, this is the savings bank”). It’s better to divide it up and equip it with different safeguards (that, too, is a form of security).

In my opinion, however, the more important issue here isn’t the allocation itself, but rather strategically helping your parents understand what security actually means from their perspective. I wish you the best of luck—dealing with your own parents isn’t always easy. ;)
•
3
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
12H
@NichtRelevant Thanks for your thoughts. You might be right that I need to start by sorting things out in my parents’ minds, not in their investment portfolio. I probably need to start by sorting things out in my own mind first.
I don’t think I really know what I actually want. On the one hand, I don’t want anything to do with my parents’ money (a constant source of conflict); on the other hand, I see my parents’ worry and lack of a plan, which I’d like to take off their shoulders.
All those government bond ETFs are probably more for my peace of mind than for theirs. 😅
•
1
•
image de profil
NichtRelevant@NichtRelevant
12H
@Epi I can totally understand that (it’s a source of conflict), but you don’t want to just stand by and watch either. Unfortunately, you often won’t get any recognition—I know this from personal experience. I had recommended that my mother buy a piece of land, and she did (for a bargain price). For the rest of her life, she was convinced that it was a bad investment and that it was “…surely worth less by now. We fell for it again… etc.” Of course, that was nonsense; the market value has risen steadily, and even the (publicly available) standard land value has skyrocketed. Still, no one believed me 🤦‍♂️. She then passed away and, sadly, didn’t live to see me sell it for six times the original price after holding it for a total of 11 years. It’s not easy with your own parents, because even as an adult, you’re still “the child” to them.
•
1
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
11H
@NichtRelevant What a wild story! Yeah, those dear parents. Once you’re an adult and on your own, they’re usually a bit clueless and out of touch. That doesn’t make it any easier. Your story is yet another warning to me!

A 5-minute online identity verification process for a brokerage account with my mom—the adventure of the day! 😅 She only did it because it doesn’t cost anything and she “trusts” me. 😅
•
1
•
image de profil
Donkey Diktator@DonkeyInvestor
17H
I'd definitely be all in on some shitcoin 👍
•
2
•
image de profil
TotallyLost@TotallyLost
16H
I would try to question the premise of security.

A fixed-term deposit account is no guarantee of security, since it doesn’t fully offset inflation. It’s a slow drain…

Do your parents have any other assets?

On the other hand, if it gives them peace of mind and they have other assets, it’s fine for them to set aside 1 million for their retirement.
•
2
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@TotallyLost Who am I to question her assumptions? It was quite a feat just to ask her about them in the first place. 😅 Apparently, there’s sheer fear about this new windfall. They’ve never had this much money in their accounts before.

And in my opinion, a time deposit isn’t as safe as people think. What if the bank goes bankrupt? A fixed-term deposit is really just a loan to the bank with a fixed term. They don’t want to bear that risk. They’d rather take out a short-term loan from the government.

In the background, there are other assets (real estate, company shares). In total, maybe another 2 million, but illiquid. I’m currently pushing them a bit to liquidate all of this now, while they can still handle it. I have better things to do.

So there’s more to come in the foreseeable future. But the problem remains: finding an investment option for people who are obsessed with security.
•
1
•
image de profil
Chris@Multibagger
16H
Contrary to what you’re suggesting, you’ll probably only be able to make this work if not the entire million needs to be liquid at all times.
Alternatively, you could choose the five banks per parent that offer the highest overnight deposit rates for new customers and are covered by the German deposit insurance system, and then switch banks after 3 or 6 months, depending on how long the new-customer offer is valid.
•
2
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Multibagger Basically a good idea. But as I’ve already mentioned, it was voted down. Too much trouble, too risky. They just want the money to sit there safely and lose value over time. A theft-proof hole in the ground filled with small bills would be their ideal solution.
The fact that the money will only be worth half as much in 20 years bothers them a bit, but they seem to be able to live with that better than with a 0.2% daily fluctuation. 🤷

I’m slowly realizing why I developed my own “stability anchor” as an investment strategy. 🤔
•
1
•
image de profil
Part_Time_Joe@Part_Time_Joe
14H
What's the downside to putting money in time deposits with your parents? You could spread it out over different terms (6, 12, and 18 months). That way, you’ll earn a return closer to 3% (if not higher), you’ll have some flexibility, and if you spread it across 3–4 banks, it’ll be fully covered by deposit insurance, right?
•
2
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Part_Time_Joe My parents don't trust the banks; they could go bankrupt. They don't believe in deposit insurance—and neither do I, for that matter. And a "fixed-income ladder" is too much of a hassle. Someone would have to do it. They can't do it, and I don't want to.
•
1
•
image de profil
Part_Time_Joe@Part_Time_Joe
13H
@Epi I don't believe in deposit insurance either 😅. If Deutsche Bank or Commerzbank ever had to resort to it, we'd have other problems to worry about anyway. By then, we'd probably be paying with cigarettes and gold coins anyway 😉
•
2
•
image de profil
Epi@Epi
13H
@Part_Time_Joe If my research is correct, there are just 6 billion euros in the deposit insurance fund. That’s enough to cover 1% of Commerzbank’s deposits.
My reasoning was: the government will first honor its short-term obligations and then bail out the banks.
••
Musikerie@Musikerie
15H
Use the gift amount immediately and distribute it to the children
•
1
•
Voir toutes les 7 autres réponses
image de profil
🏊🏻‍♂️ • 🚴• 🏃‍♂️ Endurance Life@MozartsGeist
14H
In your post, you outlined the potential, individual opportunities. Higher returns inevitably come with increased risk. Who would have thought!?
Without wanting to rely even in the slightest on the “luck” factor, the optimal approach would probably be: simply preserving the value of one’s assets—that is, maximizing protection against inflation.
Anything more than that also means taking on additional risk.
The ideal solution would be the “jack-of-all-trades.” ☺️
•
1
•
Afficher la réponse
gorehammer@gorehammer
11H
Hi @Epi, I’ll be asking myself that very question soon, too. Even though we completely avoid dividend ETFs in our portfolios ;), I’ve been wondering whether it might be better to start with a small allocation—for example, $TDIV —of about 5%, more as a “placebo” (kudos to you, because they can help).

1. Limited risk of loss relative to total capital

2. A small boost to returns in a positive market environment

3. Dividends (even if they’re small) as a positive catalyst for adding another ETF

Whether it’s less volatile in stressful scenarios than, say, the MSCI World, I’ll leave that aside for now.

Cheers and have a great weekend
•
1
•
Afficher la réponse
Wow@Wow
1H
Divide your money among demand deposits, time deposits, and money market ETFs. All are in Risk Class 1.

Bank safe deposit box—but insured!
•
1
•
Afficher la réponse
image de profil
Johnny B.@JBatelli
1H
Wow, I thought my parents were averse to the stock market, but this is really crazy.

So, at first glance, these really seem to be psychological and philosophical questions.
Anyone who calls for “maximum security” in every conceivable dimension (no volatility, no inflation-related losses, no banking risk, no sovereign crisis, no nuclear strike) isn’t really looking for an investment—they’re looking for a psychological shield against the fear of loss.

Then, to me, this “they don’t need the money” and “full liquidity” stuff is also contradictory. If the system collapses (which is what their fears suggest), that digital “full liquidity” in the account is absolutely useless to you.


So, as others have already said: If you don’t need the money, you don’t need to have it readily available.

Maybe you can win them over with a well-known company, like Coca-Cola or Colgate-Palmolive.
They’ve survived two world wars, the Great Depression, hyperinflation, countless stock market crashes, and everything else they’re afraid of—and yet they’ve been paying out even more money to their shareholders every year for over 60 years. That’s the truest form of stability there is on this planet. Cola and Colgate were around 100 years before them and will still be around 100 years after them.

It’s a tough one. I wish you the best of luck.
•
1
•
Afficher la réponse
Participez à la conversation
S'inscrireConnexion