Investing advice that Reddit got very wrong — or very right
Sure, Reddit can be a great place to learn new recipe hacks, ask embarrassing questions and receive some validation from other people experiencing the same thing you're going through. But when it comes to investing, don't take Redditors' word for it — check out what they're saying for yourself.
Here's a look at some of the best and worst investing advice on Reddit, why some of it is just downright wrong and what to do instead.
After scrolling through hundreds of investing subreddits, here are some of the worst investing suggestions and recommendations.
'I'm very lazy and I don't want to put any effort into investing. How important is rebalancing? Is there a way I could set up a portfolio where I only rebalanced every 10 years or maybe even never? Do I have to do it across all my accounts?' —Mysterious_Mix_6660
Here were some of the responses to this user's question:
'No; it's not super important. It can squeeeeeeze a tiny bit more out of your portfolio over the long haul, but not enough to make me excited.' — buffinita
'I've been at it for roughly 30 years and had rebalancing set for one investment for a couple of years. I stopped that a long time ago. No, I don't think it's worthwhile to rebalance. If you are indexing, the market forces are deciding in part how you should be invested (split between US and international; I don't own bonds). I've ended up 79% US/20% international just by drifting there.' — Sagelllini
Why this isn't helpful: It's tempting not to rebalance, especially if you don't have a financial advisor to help and have to figure it out yourself. However, it's crucial to rebalance.
'If you never rebalance your portfolio by selling stocks and buying more bonds, you will open yourself up to a much bigger impact from market swings than your risk tolerance may allow,' says Crystal McKeon, a certified financial planner and chief compliance officer of TSA Wealth Management in Houston. 'This could lead to panic selling in choppy markets like we are experiencing now. If you have a diversified allocation where you are comfortable with the range your portfolio can swing, then you are more likely to keep your long-term positions instead of panic fire selling.'
When you rebalance your portfolio, you reassess how your risk tolerance lines up with your long-term financial goals and how your asset allocation fits into that picture.
There is a 'lazy' way to rebalance though: You can invest with a robo-advisor. The best robo-advisors will automatically rebalance your portfolio for you.
Get started: Match with an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals
'So, I've been reading a lot, and most places predict Nvidia will have a $20 trillion market cap by 2030. SP [Stock price] of $134 currently, they say it could soar to 800 by then. Is it too late to go in, given the current price? Would it be worth it to start going heavy on Nvidia?' — humanityIsL0st
Why this isn't helpful: While the question is a valid one, the short answer is that going all in on one stock, or heavily tilting your portfolio toward one stock, isn't a great idea.
If you're invested heavily in just one stock and it performs poorly, you have nothing else in your portfolio to offset the loss and stabilize your returns. It's important to have multiple assets in your portfolio — think a combination of stocks, bonds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), mutual funds and other assets — so that you reduce the concentration risk of owning a single stock.
'A diversified portfolio has been a solid strategy for decades now because it will allow you to ride out ups and downs in the markets with some investment losses balancing out other investments' gains,' says McKeon.
'I sold a coin at 3.5k profit that would've been 80k at the peak. Made a post about it a few days ago [about] how it randomly started getting volume again after being dead for ten months. Total investment was around 50 bucks.' — Single_Offshore_Dad
'So my plan is to go all in on meme coins. Why? Because once BTC takes out its previous highs (like on Oct 20th, 2021), every meme coin shot up for the next 2-7 days. I'm predicting that meme coins will start to climb and tank once news about BTC is being pushed mainstream to the general public within the next 6–12 months. I'm planning on cashing out on all my meme coins within 48hours after BTC breaks its previous high.' — Redditor
Why this isn't helpful: For starters, cryptocurrencies (especially memecoins) have no intrinsic value. Their prices are based on what others are willing to pay for the coin. In other words, their prices are based on 'vibes,' or how people feel about the coin, not cash flow or business performance. This makes it impossible to tell how the coins are actually going to perform. If you invest in crypto or a memecoin, you should only invest what you're OK with losing.
On top of that, investing in memecoins is somewhat glamorized on social media. There are stories of people who have gotten lucky and went all in on a coin and made a ton of money — and even more stories about people who've lost every dollar of their investment. The first Redditor above claims they could've made an $80,000 profit at the coin's peak, but even their strategy fell short. The reality is, most people who invest in these coins and do profit from them simply get lucky.
'Speculation is when you buy something hoping it will rise quickly, like crypto or 'hot' stocks,' says Jamie Bosse, CFP, and senior advisor at CGN Advisors. 'There is usually a lot of hype and not a lot of history or data. Investing, on the other hand, is about the value of assets growing over time to build wealth. One is chasing returns and trying to get rich quick, and the other is building a solid financial foundation.'
If you just can't resist, most financial pros say that if you are going to invest in crypto, don't put in more than 5 percent of your overall portfolio.
For all the bad investing suggestions on Reddit, there was plenty of good advice, too. From advocating for diversification, to explaining why maxing out your 401(k) should be a priority, these Redditors got it right.
'Stay in it for the long haul. Continuously add money. Ignore it when times are tough.' — Saul_T_C_Man
Why this is helpful: This is some of the best investing advice, period. A buy-and-hold strategy, or staying invested for the long haul, is typically the way to go for long-term investors. But how do you continuously add money to your investments and not touch it when times are tough?
One of the easiest ways is to use a strategy called dollar-cost averaging, which is where you gradually invest a fixed amount of money at intervals over time. By making regular and consistent contributions, you invest whether the market is up or down, average your purchase price over time and increase your share count.
'If you happen to be successful in timing the market, then you will do better. The recommendation is based on the fact that very few are successful in doing so.' — YoungestDonkey
Why this is helpful: There's a theory in economics called the 'efficient market hypothesis,' which basically means that markets are efficient and already factor in all available information. Because of this, consistently timing the market in your favor is nearly impossible because prices already reflect what investors know.
To time the market, you'd have to essentially predict the future. Unless you're somehow a wizard, this can be very difficult to do. What matters more is your total time invested in the market, allowing compound returns to do their thing.
Let's break it down. On average, the S&P 500 returns roughly 10 percent each year. This means if you had invested $10,000 in 1974, you'd have $2.5 million now, according to officialdata.org.
Legendary investor Warren Buffett is a proponent of this long-term approach to investing, often emphasizing the importance of buying and holding, rather than selling for a profit.
'I was telling my father that if we continued investing at our current rate, we should theoretically be able to retire with a good chunk of change (hopefully). And he said, 'Yeah, I thought that too when I was your age. I calculated and thought I'd retire a millionaire, but that didn't pan out.' So I asked him what he invested in, and he looked me dead in the eyes and said it was just one stock he invested in. So, folks, diversify, diversify, diversify.' — Illustrious-Nose3100
Why this is helpful: Investors diversify to protect against the unknown. If we knew what was going to happen, there would be no reason to diversify. We would all buy Nvidia (NVDA) for pennies a share in 1997, watch the 388,344 percent returns roll in and retire millionaires. Or we'd buy Netflix (NFLX), not Blockbuster.
Because we can't know, a solid investing plan should include diversification — and remember to diversify across companies, industries, countries and time frames.
You can make diversification easier by investing in ETFs or other funds that hold a broad range of assets, such as an index fund. You may also want to consider robo-advisors or target-date funds that automate diversification based on your goals and timeline.
'Max [out] your 401k and other tax-advantaged accounts before you start investing in a taxable account.' — JustMeerkats
Why this is helpful: Tax-advantaged accounts, such as an IRA or 401(k), offer tax breaks, either now or later. That's why maxing out your contributions to those accounts first can be a good move.
This strategy boosts your investment growth through tax-free compounding, and may include an employer match on your 401(k). Compounding explains how $10,000 becomes $2.5 million over 50 years. You might only get a 10 percent return each year, but that adds up over time. If you give your invested money enough time to grow, it acts as a snowball, picking up more cash on its way down the hill.
Also, these retirement accounts have annual contribution limits — $23,500 for a 401(k) and $7,000 for an IRA, so you can't exactly catch up later. You can make catch-up contributions after certain ages, but those amounts are lower and only available once you're closer to retirement. For example, the extra $1,000 in your IRA from 50 to 67 adds up to $18,000, less than three years of maxed-out contributions that you have missed out on in your 20s.
If you're not able to max out your tax-advantaged accounts, contributing whatever you can as early as you can is better than contributing nothing.
Get matched: Find a financial advisor who can help you maximize your investments
'You don't invest to make as much money as possible, but to meet your financial goals. This means that you should limit the amount of risk you take while investing and that you don't gamble with your savings. Take as much risk as needed, but also as little risk as possible.' — Redditor
Why this is helpful: At the end of the day, you can listen to and read all the investing advice you want. Some of it will be good, other ideas will be bad. The most important thing that you can do as an investor is begin by establishing what goals you're trying to achieve. Maybe it's saving for retirement, maybe it's buying a home or maybe it's sending a kid to college.
The point is, reaching those goals will look different for everyone. Don't take on unnecessary risks. Instead, prioritize decisions that will safeguard your financial future.
Editorial Disclaimer: All investors are advised to conduct their own independent research into investment strategies before making an investment decision. In addition, investors are advised that past investment product performance is no guarantee of future price appreciation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
26 minutes ago
- Forbes
Tips And Overtime Deductions In Big Beautiful Bill Create Odd Marriage Incentives
TOPSHOT - US President Donald Trump (C) shows his signature on the "Big Beautiful Bill Act" at the ... More White House in Washington, DC, on July 4, 2025. US President Donald Trump signed his flagship tax and spending bill on July 4 in a pomp-laden Independence Day ceremony featuring fireworks and a flypast by the type of stealth bomber that bombed Iran. Trump pushed Republican lawmakers to get his unpopular "One Big Beautiful Bill" through a reluctant Congress in time for him to sign it into law on the US national holiday — and they did so with a day to spare Thursday. (Photo by Brendan SMIALOWSKI / POOL / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)When President Trump came out for "No tax on tips" during the election campaign, I analyzed two legislative proposals towards that end that were in Congress. So when it came time for me to read the tax provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that is where I focused a lot of attention. You can find it on page 247 at the head of Chapter 2 (Delivering On Presidential Priorities To Provide New Middle-Class Tax Relief) - Bill Section 70201 - No Tax On Tips, if you want to follow along. In general, I find the provision very well thought out, except for one very odd thing. There appears to be a marriage penalty for well tipped servers tying the knot with one another and a marriage bonus for well tipped servers marrying industrious blue collar workers. It Is A Deduction The provision adds Section 224 to the Internal Revenue Code which allows a deduction for "qualified tips". The deduction is limited to $25,000. The deduction is phased out starting at $150,000 of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI), $300,000 in the case of joint returns. The phase-out rate is $100 per $1,000 of MAGI. The "modifications" that are added are for income excluded because it was earned by working abroad, in US possessions or Puerto Rico. The deduction is not an itemized deduction. You will be able to claim the standard deduction on top of it. If married you have to file a joint return to claim the deduction. Section 225 adds a deduction for qualified overtime compensation. That deduction is $12,500 or $25,000 in the case of a joint return. The phase-out is the same as for the tip deduction. As with the tip deduction married people have to file jointly in order to claim it. Why is the tip deduction limit $25,000 while the overtime deduction limit is either $12,500 or $25,000 depending on whether it is a joint return? I don't know and as a planner I follow Reilly's First Law of Tax Planning - It is what it is. Deal with it. A Get Together There are five high school friends who get together. They are not married but are thinking about it. They each make about $100,000 per year, Robin and Terry are servers in a pricey restaurant. Most of their income is from tips. Blynn and Ashley are electricians who work a lot of overtime, well above the average. Jesse is an enrolled agent. They get together to celebrate the Big Beautiful Bill. Robin and Terry want to know how much no tax on tips is going to save them and Blynn and Ashley are of course interested in the effect of no tax on overtime. It is up to Jesse to explain to them that that is not how it worked out in the Senate. It was converted to a deduction and there is a limitation. Remember they are all single. Jesse makes a big point of that, because Jesse is a bit on the pedantic side. Robin and Terry will each get a $25,000 deduction. Blynn and Ashley will each get a $12,500 deduction. Jesse, of course, gets nothing other than a lot of aggravation. Not that anybody would care about this, but the whole crew will be getting $75,000 in deductions. Since Jesse made such a big deal about them being single, the question of what happens if they get married comes up. And this is where it gets weird. If Robin and Terry get married their deduction drops to $25,000. If Blynn and Ashley marry they get $25,000 on their joint return. So the whole crew now gets $50,000 in deductions - a marriage penalty. But what if Robin marries Blynn and Terry marries Ashley. Now both couples get $50,000 in deductions or $100,000 for the whole crew - a marriage bonus. There Is More A lot of thought seems to have gone into the tips deduction and I think the details of that are worthy of a separate post. For now I will refer you to Reilly's Third Law of Tax Planning - Any clever idea that pops into your probably has (or will have) a corresponding rule that makes it not work. The statute seems to address many of the ways people might try to game the system. The difference in the limit on tips and overtime for single people, but not married people strikes me as possibly unintentional particularly since the phase-our language is identical. The original House bill did not include any limit at all, so that language was dropped in by the Senate. It reminds me a bit of the "grain glitch" in the Tax Cuts And Jobs Act of 2017. You probably need to be a real tax nerd or a grain farmer to remember that. That was fixed, but this, if it is not what was intended, may be harder to fix. By the way, there was a reason that I have waited to read the Big Beautiful Bill. Starting in 1984, I deeply studied the proposals which ultimately resulted in the Tax Reform Act of 1986. That one was really big, which is why we still call it the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. TRA 1986 made my career. There was, however, a downside to all that study. In the years after enactment, I would often have ideas pop into my head based on provisions that were not enacted. So now I don't read them till they are signed.

Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon appeals potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash
An attorney for Illinois Senate President Don Harmon's political operation says state election authorities reached an 'absurd' conclusion earlier this year in issuing nearly $10 million in penalties against Harmon's campaign fund after determining he violated campaign fundraising limits. In an 11-page appeal filed late last week with the Illinois State Board of Elections, attorney Michael Kasper also laid out what amounted to a legal justification for Harmon's unsuccessful attempt in the closing hours of this spring's legislative session to pass a measure that could have negated the case and the $9.8 million potential penalty. At issue is whether Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park, improperly accepted $4 million more in campaign contributions after the March 2024 primary than permitted under limits established in a state law he co-sponsored. The elections board leveled the charges this spring after a Chicago Tribune inquiry about the fundraising activities of his Friends of Don Harmon for State Senate campaign fund. Using a frequently used loophole in a law purportedly designed to help candidates compete with wealthy opponents, Harmon contributed $100,001 to his own campaign in January 2023. It was precisely one dollar over the contribution limit threshold that allowed him or anyone else running for his Senate seat to accept unlimited funds for that race. In campaign paperwork, Harmon indicated he thought the move allowed him to collect unlimited cash through the November 2024 election cycle. But board officials informed him that the loophole would only be open through the March 2024 primary, meaning they viewed the campaign cash Harmon collected above campaign restrictions between the March primary and the end of the year was not allowed. Responding to a June 5 letter in which elections board staff notified Harmon's campaign of the impending fine, his attorney argued that the January 2023 contribution should have lifted the contribution limits at least through the end of 2024, if not through the March 2026 primary, when Harmon's seat will next appear on the ballot. 'The staff's analysis would create an absurd system that unfairly benefits self-funding candidates and also turns campaign finance compliance into simple accounting gimmicks,' Kasper wrote. The state elections board had no comment on Harmon's appeal, spokesperson Matt Dietrich said Monday. Harmon campaign spokespersonTom Bowen said the appeal 'speaks for itself.' The next step is for a hearing officer to hold a hearing with both sides and make a recommendation to be reviewed by the board's general counsel before the board issues a final ruling, possibly as soon as its August meeting. In the filing, Harmon's campaign argued the elections board's interpretation would allow a candidate in his position to accept unlimited contributions during a period well before an election when no opponent has entered the race and then have limits put back in place closer to when voting begins. Conversely, a candidate in Harmon's position could also simply lift the limits again by refunding his own cap-busting contribution the day after a primary and depositing it back into the campaign fund 'on the same day — the same hour — the same minute,' the campaign said in its appeal. 'Does the money even have to move accounts, or can it just be an accounting entry?' Kasper wrote. 'According to the Board's staff, (due to) the fact that Mr. Harmon did not go through this, frankly, silly exercise, he now faces almost $10,000,000 in fines and penalties. 'The General Assembly did not enact the thorough and time-tested campaign finance regime that we have today by requiring candidates to jump through accounting hoops simply for the purpose of jumping through the hoop.' In arguing that the contribution cap should have been off through at least the end of 2024, Harmon's filing also calls attention to how the board's determination treated his situation differently than it would a member of the Illinois House, where each seat is up for election every two years. Senate seats, by contrast, have two four-year terms and one two-year term each decade. This issue was at the heart of Harmon's controversial attempt to add language into elections legislation on the final day of the spring session that would have declared it 'existing law' that senators halfway through a four-year term 'shall be deemed to have been nominated at the next general primary election, regardless of whether the candidate's name appeared on the general primary election ballot.' Defending the move to the Tribune days after backlash to the provision tanked the broader elections bill, Harmon said: 'A fundamental notion of campaign finance law is that House candidates and Senate candidates be treated the same. The state board staff's interpretation treats House candidates and Senate candidates fundamentally differently.' In the recent filing, Harmon's attorney points out that a section on contribution limits in the board's own campaign disclosure guide notes, 'Candidates seeking office in the General Assembly have their election cycle reset every general election regardless of participation.' 'It makes little sense that the Board would treat Senate and House candidates the same for purposes of applying contribution limitations, but differently for removing contribution limitations after a primary election,' Kasper wrote. 'Instead, the General Assembly structured election cycles so that all legislative candidates are treated the same.' Calling the board's penalty — a payment to the state's general fund equal to the more than $4 million it says Harmon raised in excess of the limits, plus a nearly $5.8 million fine calculated based on 150% of that same amount — 'excessive' and 'unconstitutional,' Harmon's campaign asked for the matter to be dismissed.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Amazon is offering three months of Audible for just $3 during Prime Day
Amazon Prime Day officially runs from July 8-11, 2025, but at least one Prime Day deal starts early and runs through the end of the month — and if you're a bookworm who's short on time, it's not one to miss. For just three bucks, you can get three full months of access to one of the best one-stop shops for our favorite audiobooks, podcasts and more. Starting now, Amazon Prime members can grab three whole months of Audible Premium Plus, which offers access to thousands of bestselling books and the hottest new releases, and an extensive library of other titles, including literary classics, children's books, travel, how-to books and so much more. Here's everything you need to know to grab this amazing Prime Day deal on Audible. Amazon Prime Day runs from July 8-11 this year. But if you're interested in getting this Audible deal, it's available now and runs through July 31. The short answer is no, you don't need to be a member to access great Prime Day deals, but if you have Amazon Prime, you'll get free shipping and you'll get access to some deals, like this extended discount subscription to Audible, that non-members won't. Don't want to commit? You can sign up for a free 30-day trial to take advantage of Prime Day. Membership costs $14.99 per month or $139 annually, and includes free shipping, exclusive deals, access to Prime Video and more. This deal for three months of Audible is available now for new subscribers. If you're not a Prime member, you can still get a 30-day Audible Premium Plus subscription, but if you have Prime, you can get three full months for $3, and when the trial is over, you can extend your subscription is over at a rate of $14.95/month. Don't want to be billed? Just make sure you cancel before your trial expires. A subscription to Audible includes access to more than 1 million audiobooks – with unlimited rewinds so you can listen and re-listen as often as you like – plus podcasts, original content and more. An Audible Premium Plus subscription, which costs $14.95/month, includes access to the Audible Plus Catalog, and comes with one credit per month that can be redeemed for any title from Audible's Premium selection tier. That includes all of the bestsellers and new releases Audible carries. Want to listen more often? You can tailor your Audible subscription by increasing to two book credits per month for $22.99, or get an annual subscription starting at $149.50/year. It's available right now and runs through July 31.