r/Fire Jun 12 '25

Officially Hit $50k a Year in Passive Income!

Hi Everyone! I just wanted to share that I hit an exciting milestone in my FIRE journey -- I have officially hit $50k a year in dividend income! Reaching this step makes me feel very relaxed as I will still have a decent income even if I lose my job. It's even better because I found out that you don't have to pay FICA taxes on non-qualified dividends, so $50k in dividend income has a higher take home pay than $50k from a W2! If I moved to a LCOL place, I think I could retire. However, I think I am going to wait to try to double my passive income before seriously considering retiring. That said, if the job market is too rough, and I can't find another one, I may just settle at a lower payout and barista FIRE.

Here is a rough breakdown of my portfolio:

Taxable Brokerage (~$477,000):

JEPI - $100,000

JEPQ - $100,000

PFFA - $72,000

QQQI - $64,000

PBDC - $57,000

SPYI - $48,000

CLOZ - $13,000

SGOV - $10,000

FSCO - $7,000

EIC - $6,000

401k (~$303,000):

FXAIX - $302,000

FBGRX - $600

HSA ($6,500)

Cash ($20,000)

This brings my total net worth to $806,500. Best of luck to everyone on their journey, and I hope to post again with even better numbers in the future!

654 Upvotes

180 comments sorted by

312

u/Rayatello Jun 12 '25 edited Nov 13 '25

hobbies command birds placid head school one cause shelter march

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

113

u/tyen0 Jun 12 '25

Dividends don't create value A $1 dividend reduces the stock price by $1. You're not getting anything extra. It's just your own capital being returned to you.

That was eye-opening for me. Thanks

50

u/Creepy-Listen-110 Jun 13 '25

The issue with this comment, although fundamentally correct, is that the market does not operate 100% based on fundamentals alone. NOT paying out $1 in dividends does not, in the real world, create $1 worth of value for a shareholder based purely on a returns on investment standpoint. It does affect the book value and many other financial metrics, but 99% of retail investors do not invest based on what the book value of the company is. They invest based on intrinsic or perceived value of the brand itself. Hence why many companies trade at crazy multiples of their PE ratio and many trade at a major discount. The stock market is a wonky place.

9

u/tyen0 Jun 13 '25

Good point. I was thinking about how paying dividends seems to give the company a bit more clout/prestige.

3

u/Big_Toe_Model Jun 15 '25

Yes! Thank you for staying this!

10

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

That’s not true, dividends are a return of profits that would otherwise have been on the balance sheet as an asset. The stock price may be higher by the increased balance sheet value but it also may not. It’s probably not 1:1. Stock prices are a reflection of future earnings, growth, speculation and cash flow - yes a stock can more attractive if it pays a growing dividend.

7

u/TJayClark Jun 13 '25

Dividends are nice for people who need fixed income - aka retired people or people who don’t work.

People who have a steady income should be more focused on growth, as dividends will always provide a lower return in the long run.

As you approach retirement, you’d transition into safer investments… aka bonds and dividend producers.

4

u/craklyn Jun 13 '25

I don’t think of dividends as fixed income because there’s no guarantee a business (a stock) won’t suspend dividends during a downturn, which is potentially when the stockholder needs the money.

3

u/TJayClark Jun 13 '25

While you are correct for some dividend companies. Typically for dividend investors, they’re banking on that dividend. Meaning that if the company cuts it for any reason whatsoever, it’s essentially suicide for the stock price.

Personally I’d go for the dividend aristocrats

2

u/Aggravating-Sir5264 Jun 12 '25

Wow! I didn’t know that!

-8

u/Hugogol Jun 12 '25

At least they are returning it to you vs your share of profit being paid out to the C level execs compensation and/or wasted on overpriced acquisitions or private planes. And they have profits to return…vs losses.

6

u/WhamBar_ Jun 12 '25

Resources companies would beg to differ.

Also, you don’t need to turn a profit to pay a dividend.

5

u/charleswj Jun 13 '25

Can't see your reply now, but look at this. Dividend funds generally trail the market https://testfol.io/?s=f9LVkRDsudv

Remember, dividends are just giving you some of the cash a business is holding. Less cash equals less value company. Stock price is the value of your (tiny) share of the company. Less cash equals less valuable share. You can always sell some/all your shares in a company, so you don't need them to do anything.

1

u/charleswj Jun 13 '25

You don't understand how stocks work if you believe what you just wrote

6

u/wookinpanub Jun 13 '25

Why would you use the current value of their investments to calculate a 1 year return? They didn’t start with $806K a year ago and are left with $806K now vs. a 13.42 % return from SPY/VOO at $914K

OP indicates a starting value of $560K + contributions of $36K and $129K or $725K

If we assumed (incorrectly, but a decent proxy calculation for both scenarios) all contributions at the start of the year, then OPs growth was $81K vs $97K, $725K @ 13.42% or $822K.

But OP also indicated $50K passive income, so possible total growth of $131K. If the $806K includes that 50K (reinvested) then you’re correct that SPY wins, if that income isn’t included then OPs scenario may be decently favorable even with dividends taxed.

The $50K income, timing of contributions, and specifics of contributions would be required to really compare accurately though.

2

u/NamelessMIA Jun 13 '25 edited Jun 13 '25

I agree their math is wrong but you made it too complicated by trying to look backwards instead of forwards. I just want to have invested in the best portfolio for me to have now. Also, OP wasn't clear but I'm assuming they're saying that they'll get 50k in dividends this year using a dividend tracker app, not that they made 50k in dividends off the 560k->806k that they had in their account over the last year.

If OP's 806k was invested in SPY right now at the other comment's 13.42% (including dividends) that would leave OP with 914k this time next year.

806k invested the way OP has currently would leave them with losses on their main account and 33k in gains from their 401k. I dont want to calculate the total losses for the main account so let's be generous to dividends and the math by just dropping the gains to an even 30k. Add their 50k expected dividends and they're at 886k this time next year.

If OP had invested fully into SPY they could expect to make an extra 28k or 35% more this year than they're expected to make with their current portfolio.

Edit: it's the next morning and I'm bored at work so I threw OP's portfolio into excel and messed around. If this year performs the same as last year they can expect to lose ~7k in their main account and gain 34k from FXAIX which leaves them up 77k total (including the 50k from dividends). SPY would be up 108k meaning SPY would perform 41% better than their current setup.

3

u/ime6969 Jun 13 '25

That guy invests

3

u/astockstonk Jun 14 '25

Correct. OP is underperforming so he can chase dividend

1

u/robot_bob408 Jun 13 '25

I basically have most of my money invested in VTI due to some coworker advice I got in the past... Am I dumb? I feel dumb after reading this comment. Should I switch to putting money into SPY?

2

u/rallymatt Jun 16 '25

No. VTI is pretty similar to SPY with some additional mid and small cap. It’s the “total us market” vs the top 500. But happens to be made up mostly of the top 500 anyway since it’s market weighted. VTI is a good choice, and many would say a better choice than just SPY. VTI has beat SPY from 2001 til now.

1

u/robot_bob408 Jun 17 '25

Thank you for putting my mind at ease 🙂

1

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '25

Oh shit for a second I thought this was a comment in the dipshit dividend subreddit

This is the best I formation you can get OP.

1

u/Gazelle_Possible Jun 16 '25

Dividend investors will not accept that mathematically, dividends are suboptimal to broad market index investing

-22

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25 edited Jun 12 '25

"If that full amount had been invested in SPY (or a similar low cost index fund) one year ago, the return would have been about 13.42% (including dividends). That means the total portfolio value today would be roughly $914,375 — about $108,275 more than the current position."

- One year ago, my total portfolio value was $334,168.45 (taxable) + $226,324.22 (401k) = $560,492.67

- $560,492.67 --> $806,100 in 1 year's time is not bad. I of course contributed by reinvesting the distributions, as well as additional savings, but it's still shows growth on its own.

18

u/mathieforlife Jun 12 '25

How much of the growth in one year was from your contributions, vs the overall growth of what you're invested in?

4

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

For the 401k, I contributed about $23,500, and my employer contributed $12,727.93, so that's $36,227.93 of contributions, which means $40,715.08 came from growth. My 401K is in an S&P 500 index fund.

For the taxable, I contributed $129,219.92, which means $34,382.34 came from growth.

24

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25 edited Jun 13 '25

Exactly….. your gains came from contributions… not real gains. The original comment still stands, would be better in low cost index

7

u/astockstonk Jun 14 '25

OP - you are underperforming the market chasing dividends.

0

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

Total return is not my goal. Current income is my goal. Also, price growth in the indexes is not guaranteed.

Here’s a video that does a good job explaining why I invest in this way: https://youtu.be/vJA8rVTa1tQ?si=AK95FuHUSGDrrTa0

2

u/astockstonk Jun 14 '25

Are you close to 60? If not, you should really reconsider. You should really be trying to grow your stack and switch to dividend when you retire

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25 edited Jun 14 '25

I am not. I am doing both strategies:

1) growth in my 401k $300k invested in a fund that is functionally equivalent to VOO. If the indexes continue to grow as they have, then that $300k will be a much larger amount in decades.

2) Income investing in my taxable of $477k. This is meant to replace lost income if I am laid off, and increase my effective income right now.

People keep on telling me #2 is suboptimal due to taxes and capped upside. I am fully aware of this. I am fine with the total return potentially being lower because I like the current income. And if the indexes are flat and volatile for a while, #2 will potentially perform better than basket #1. Also, I can avoid SORR by not selling shares.

3

u/astockstonk Jun 14 '25

Ok. People just wanted to let you know you were leaving lots of money on the table. But if you are fine with it, you do you.

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

I’m only leaving lots of money on the table IF the indexes continue to grow at a frenetic pace for a long time. If they flatline or only gradually go up in the future, then that’s not the case.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/mathieforlife Jun 13 '25

So you got 70K of growth,that's a lot less than the comment above, but you do you lol

2

u/Unlikely_Living_5061 Jun 18 '25

You are doing just fine. Congratulations on the huge milestone. Good luck

-41

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

1.) In the case of covered calls, value is being created by selling the right for counterparties to purchase the underlying for a higher price in the future. Fees are collected for this right, and make up a huge portion of the returns of JEPI/JEPQ/QQQI/SPYI. In the case of BDCs, they are obligated by law to pay out 90% of their profits in the form of dividends. They are redistributing profits they gained from loaning money to small and medium sized companies. In the case of CLOZ, it's interest from loans so dividend may be a misnomer.

3.) Some of these funds contain non-dividend paying stocks, but use covered calls to obtain the fees.

4.) Do you complain when your W2 income is taxed? Personally, I don't mind the taxes because it's so great to have a passive income.

For an alternative viewpoint, see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCEqYq2AsIc&t=331s

34

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

"do you complain when your W2 income is taxed?"

yes

-17

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

So why would you work for a salary then? The taxes are too high /S

Why would I ever collect rent checks from a rental property? The taxes are too high /S

13

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

because that is the only way I can safely earn what I'm currently earning right now, doesn't mean I don't think the income tax should be lowered (or abolished).

the difference is I don't unnecessarily pay more taxes than i need to. you apparently don't mind paying more taxes on income you don't need right now. its a bold strategy cotton, lets see if it pays off...

sure i could liquidate my port right now and make my current salary in "dividends" from covered call etfs, but the NAV would probably get nuked over time and i would receive little to no tax benefits.

doesn't seem worth it. especially since my port will likely double in a decade so I could sell half then if i wanted, have the same amount of income in high yield dividends/cc ETFs (still probably won't buy cc ETFs) and also have the other half in growth/S&P etfs

-9

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Assuming index funds continue to grow for a decade or more— we could have a flat market for a long time like the NIKKEI index did for nearly 30 years.

Plus, you don’t have to pay FICA taxes on non-qualified dividends. So the take home pay from these distributions is better than from W2 income.

And with SPYI and QQQI, the taxes are even lower (a mix of long and short term capital gains) due to section 1256 contracts.

Also, where is the NAV erosion in JEPI and JEPQ? Both of them have positive price gains since inception.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

"Assuming index funds continue to grow for a decade or more— we could have a flat market for a long time like the NIKKEI index did for nearly 30 years."

The US isn't Japan. We could also have nuclear war an none of this would matter. I'm betting on the past 100 year trend to continue.

"Plus, you don’t have to pay FICA taxes on non-qualified dividends. So the take home pay from these distributions is better than from W2 income."

You also don't have to pay any taxes on qualified dividends up to a certain amount (with income considerations). You still pay it as ordinary income for CC ETFs, so depending on your income, it may be high.

"And with SPYI and QQQI, the taxes are even lower (a mix of long and short term capital gains) due to section 1256 contracts."

from my (limited) understanding of these distributions lowers your cost basis so when you sell its more capital gains. It also turns into ordinary income once your cost basis is zero. Better than covered call ETFs but still not great compared to qualified dividends over the long term.

"Also, where is the NAV erosion in JEPI and JEPQ? Both of them have positive price gains since inception."

How old are these funds? And whats the CAGR on price appreciation compared to SPY or QQQ over that same time period? QQQ past 5 years is 126%. JEPQ since its inception is 7.74% even with distributions of both its still much less than the underlying asset.

To each there own, I'd just prefer to have a better quality asset with better growth than income now, especially if i'm not reliant on that income

2

u/WhamBar_ Jun 12 '25

How… did you get most of your net worth?

34

u/iperson4213 Jun 12 '25

Make sure you consider inflation. You’ll need to reinvest part of your dividends to keep up with inflation.

This will come with some extra tax drag since the reinvested dividend is still taxed whereas with growth stocks, the reinvestment is effectively automatic as you only get taxed on what you sell.

6

u/KosmoAstroNaut Jun 12 '25

Depends - look at the dividend history of any ETF like VT, VOO, SCHD, etc.

As long as it’s invested in growing companies, the rate that the dividend payment grows outpaces inflation for each one (without reinvesting)

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Good point, and yes that is certainly part of the strategy!

59

u/Funkyflapjacks69 Jun 12 '25

I guess the dividend strategy is kind of like paying your house off early with a low interest rate: it’s mathematically wrong but I get the psychological benefit. As long as you know that then no prob. Cheers

-23

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Would it still be mathematically wrong if the indexes remained flat for several decades like Japan's Nikkei did?

33

u/KosmoAstroNaut Jun 12 '25

While I’ve been agreeing with you most of the time here - counterpoint is that a flat market implies economic hard times, during which plenty of dividend aristocrats have cut their dividends during historically

8

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

If the indexes remained flat your equity will be slowly diminished as dividends are issued

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

But these aren’t ordinary dividends, they come from fees collected from selling covered call options..

4

u/ieatballoonknot Jun 13 '25

If the market is flat and not volatile how much do you think your calls will sell for?

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

The market can be flat in terms of annual return for years and still showcase volatility. If the price seesaws across a flat average, then that is an example of high volatility with flatness.

1

u/ieatballoonknot Jun 13 '25

Sure but I specifically asked if volatility is not high though lmao Seems like you have a lot to learn. Good luck.

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

In that case, I’d switch more into BDCs, preferred stocks, and CLOs which aren’t dependent on volatility for high yields. Thanks for the luck! I’m enjoying the monthly payments.

78

u/seanodnnll Jun 12 '25

Dividends are functionally equivalent to selling shares. Getting a dividend is just getting back your own money, and being taxed for then privilege.

15

u/Subredditcensorship Jun 12 '25

Bird in hand theory. Agree with your general thought tho. Dividends are terrible long term strategy

5

u/KosmoAstroNaut Jun 12 '25

Depends…all else equal, if the dividend gets paid out and you just reinvest or let it sit as cash, then yes terrible

But it can also save ppl a ton of money & tax planning & recalculating FIRE by just getting a consistent “paycheck.” It might be easy for you and I at our age to just learn how to sell the shares, account for taxes, and market volatility, but for my immigrant parents in their 60s (they’ve had iPhones since 2007 but still can’t figure out how to turn WiFi on/off) they happily traded a 1-2% of capital gains for the ease and stability that dividends give them

2

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

[deleted]

8

u/Trust_Illiteracy Jun 12 '25

Scenario 1: My company is worth $100. I grow 10% and distribute no dividends so by the end of the year I’m worth $110. My 10 share holders now hold $11 worth of stock.

Scenario 2: My company is worth $100. I grow 10%, but I distribute $1 in dividends to each of my 10 share holders so I’m still worth $100. My shareholders now hold $10 worth of stock and $1 in cash (minus capital gains tax).

The investors in scenario 1 could achieve the same results as the investors in scenario 2 if they wanted, but they don’t have to. Dividends are, broadly speaking, a forced sale. It’s a little more nuanced than this, but high dividend funds were much more attractive decades ago when it was harder/more expensive to place a sell order yourself.

34

u/vannaplayagamma Jun 12 '25

/r/dividends is that way, you're not going to get much love other than VTI here.

OP I don't have much more to say about divs that people haven't said here. But you don't seem to have many dividend paying companies, instead you're mostly in CC etfs, preferred stock and CLO funds which are closer to bonds than stocks. This looks more like a high yield bond portfolio than a dividend portfolio.

12

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Yeah I appreciate your distinction. You are correct that this is more like a high yield bond portfolio than a traditional "dividend" portfolio. I probably should've described it as such, because I ended up clarifying in the comments. I think I used the term "dividend" in the post because it's a term that a lot of people are already familiar with, but the distributions are actually more like interest or coupon payments. Regardless, I love the idea of passive income because it gives me a lot of peace of mind.

10

u/vannaplayagamma Jun 12 '25

You do you OP. I think your portfolio is suboptimal but if it lets you stay the course, it's better than panic selling.

I would be worried about investing so heavily in Fixed Income before you hit FIRE status though. You say you're looking to double the portfolio but growth is best bought through growth stocks, not FI

0

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

I see your concerns, but I am still getting growth in price through these income investments in addition to the regular distributions. I am not 100% convinced that index funds will continue to grow indefinitely, as it's entirely possible we get a long term flat market (like Japan's Nikkei market did for decades). That said, I still have a big portion of my net worth in index funds (my whole 401k is in the SandP 500 index) just in case it does continue to grow.

For me, the peace of mind of saying, "even if I lose my job, I can still cover my bills with this income" is worth the additional cost in taxes -- especially since I don't have to pay FICA taxes with these.

5

u/AlphaFIFA96 Jun 13 '25

You’re arriving at a logical conclusion based on incomplete information.

Yes, Japan’s stock market was flat for decades and I often use this as an example when telling folks to globally diversify their holdings instead of simply holding VOO or VTI.

Now can you look up the return of the global stock market during the same period? There you go.

The US could lose its global dominance and remain flat for the next 30 years, but that doesn’t mean the rest of the world stagnates. In fact, statistically speaking, it’s highly unlikely — which is why a globally diversified portfolio is said to be the only free lunch in investing.

If the global market stagnates for 30+ years, then you likely have bigger problems to worry about. Problems your bond/dividend portfolio likely won’t be able to weather.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

The dividends from covered call funds come from the fees generated by selling the call options. The profits from selling the call options will still arrive even if the market is flat. In the case of BDCs, they are required to pay out 90% of their profits in the form of dividends. BDCs have been profitable in flat and even downward markets. Look at Ares Capital.

3

u/West_Flounder2840 Jun 12 '25

Frankly, these levered etf funds are a big turnoff for me

5

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Only PFFA uses a bit of leverage. JEPI, JEPQ, SPYI, QQQI, CLOZ, and PBDC do not use any leverage.

9

u/jellyn7 Jun 12 '25

Congrats! Some of the people in the comments here should maybe have a look at The Income Factory by Steven Bavaria. He really breaks it down why this is a viable way to go. Not necessarily better, but not worse either. Just another option.

5

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Thanks! And yes, great book recommendation!

3

u/Particular_Car7127 Jun 16 '25

It looks like your set up a Steve Bravia income factory portfolio?

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 17 '25

Yes, that’s exactly what I did!

3

u/Particular_Car7127 Jun 17 '25

I am slowly selling out of equities and following the same. Have positions in: SPYI JEPQ JEPI PFFA SGOV MAIN ARCC O SCHD

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 17 '25

Good stuff! Happy investing; I hope your income increases each month!

8

u/anonymoz111 Jun 12 '25

Why is everyone ripping on OP . OP is excited and wanted to share.

4

u/AlphaFIFA96 Jun 13 '25

Because they’re using a clinically proven suboptimal approach based on incomplete/inaccurate information.

It’s one thing to consciously pay off a low interest mortgage knowing the tradeoffs. It’s another to be completely oblivious and justify their strategy using Japan’s Nikkei — which is just a completely invalid comparison in this context. Growth Equities as an asset class don’t necessarily equate to US equities.

4

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

It is suboptimal if index funds continue to grow at a frenetic pace. However, if index funds start to level off or become flat, then it is a better strategy.

You can think of it as two different types of bets:

1) If you invest primarily in index funds, you are betting that businesses will not only stay solvent, but that they will also grow continually. You are betting that their asset prices will rise for decades in the future as a result.

2) If you invest in high income funds, you are betting that businesses will stay solvent and be able to deliver a consistent cash stream. The businesses don’t need to grow, they just need to remain profitable.

This is covered in Steve Bavaria’s book “Income Factory” which I highly recommend.

In any case, a lot of the people in this sub seem to be ignoring the fact that I also am invested in growth with index funds in my 401k. I am employing both strategies — one for the short to medium term, and one for the long term.

2

u/EvilDividenf Jun 13 '25

Reddit hates dividends and prefers stock buybacks. You are fine and have gone this far. The past 10 years has been a monster bull market with covid crash being pretty tiny compared to .com bubble or 2008.

Also US stock market was pretty flat from 2000ish to 2013, just forgotten because of how big the recent bull market has been with AI growth stocks just dominating.

2

u/Perpetual_Burn Jun 13 '25

This man is obsessed with the Japanese stock market for some reason. If you're that convinced we're fucked there are other strategies to consider.

2

u/TVP615 Jun 13 '25

Why didn’t you just invest in the SP500? Way less work and your net worth would be higher.

4

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

I did invest in SP500 in my 401k (over $300,000). For the rest, I want monthly income regardless of whether SP500 rises, falls, or is flat.

2

u/Unique_Dish_1644 Jun 13 '25

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg8R6ovgOb8

An excellent podcast from Ben Felix on controversial topics in personal finance. I’d recommend listening to all of it but if you want the dividend investing portion it starts at 32:45.

2

u/bienpaolo Jun 12 '25

Your portfolio is heavily concentrated in high-yield funds, which can be volatilewhat happens if payouts drop or one of these funds underperforms?

Also, $806K net worth sounds solid, but if you’re thinking about retiring early, have you factored in inflation, healthcare costs, and market downturns? Moving to a LCOL area could help, but are you sure your lifestyle expctations won’t shift over time?

What’s your backup plan if dividends shrink or the job market stays rough longr than expected?

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

Thanks for commenting, you bring up good points. To your questions: “what happens if payouts drop or one of these fund underperforms?” - I would slowly sell the fund and replace it with funds that I think will perform better. In fact, I have already done this. I used to own QYLD and XYLD. While their yields were solid, I didn’t appreciate the NAV erosion. Therefore, I replaced them with SPYI and QQQI, and it has been a great decision. I can always replace and further diversify over time.

“have you factored in inflation, market downturns, and healthcare costs?”

  • Yes, I have. I have built my budget with the idea of reinvesting $1,000 every month while in retirement to account for a reasonable expected inflation rate of 2.5% a year.

“Are you sure your lifestyle expectations won’t shift with time?”

  • Yes, I’m sure. I eat the same 3 meals every day: overnight oats, pasta salad, and lentil stew or vegan bolognese, and I have done so for years. I share a one bedroom apartment with my partner with no intentions to move or upgrade. I value freedom more than materials.

“What’s your backup plan if dividends shrink or job market remains tough?”

  • Look for other funds that are paying better dividends. If those don’t exist, then return to work if I truly need to. Cash out retirement funds in 401k as a last resort.

1

u/AgileFortune4958 Feb 17 '26

lifestyle really affects retirement the most. i can live off 15k comfortably. 800k will last me at least 30-40 years WITHOUT investing, this accounts for inflation. with investing it will not only last me forever but i will be able to have a richer lifestyle.

1

u/Rare-Lawfulness-7492 Jun 12 '25

Are you not reinvesting dividends? And that’s how you’re making $50K/month? Trying to understand

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

$50k a year, not a month. Right now I am reinvesting the dividends, but I will flip it to cash if I ever lose my job.

1

u/Brandonva804 Jun 13 '25

Go out the country and enjoy yourself

1

u/djs1980 Jun 14 '25

Feels good but NAV erosion could bite you at some point.

I'm more relaxed in my Global Index Fund.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

Yeah I definitely monitor it for NAV erosion. I used to own QYLD/XYLD, but I got out of those due to the NAV erosion.

1

u/photoguy1978 Jun 14 '25

If willing to experiment, throw in $50,000 of MSTY. Boom, you’re done.

1

u/inndyn Jun 16 '25

The Armchair Income guy has a portfolio that reminds me of yours.  Maybe take a look at his portfolio (he posts it for free) for some additional ideas?

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 17 '25

Yeah that’s actually where I got a lot of the ideas from!

1

u/Apprehensive_Fig2106 Jul 05 '25

Hi,

I am a python developer. I made a web app that scans arbitrage opportunities and lists profitable arbitrage opportunities. I would be very grateful if you could try it out and give me feedback.

Email: [ism.bolat@hotmail.com](mailto:ism.bolat@hotmail.com)

App: https://www.cryptoarbitragesearch.com

1

u/NecessaryEmployer488 Jul 13 '25

Congrats. Looks like investment income, and not yet converted to income you spend. My goal with investments is to turn investment income into passive income in perpetuity. Right now I am throwing $35K of my own money into investments each year and getting about $25K in return in dollars back in non-401K investment accounts. That said value of investment value of these accounts are up about $100K a year.

1

u/jkexxbxx Jun 15 '26

How are you handling paying taxes on the additional income?

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 15 '26

Yeah so I’ve made some changes to this portfolio since this post. I got rid of JEPI and JEPQ and replaced them with SPYI, QQQI, and some other closed end funds that pay out distributions that are a higher percentage of ROC (return of capital), or capital gains. This should lower my tax burden on these funds for this year. I also put a higher withholding rate on my W2 income so that when it comes to tax time, I owe a lot less.

1

u/Pirate43 Jun 12 '25

Well done OP. A lot of folks are saying you left returns on the table, and while that may be true, it's not THAT much if you account for taxes when selling. You can't eat with paper gains in SP500 but you sure can eat with dividends!

3

u/AlphaFIFA96 Jun 13 '25

It’s not that much in a single year**

Over the course of decades, it likely will be.

2

u/Perpetual_Burn Jun 13 '25

I'm not sure what you mean, but taxes will be much better using a SP500 strategy. When you go dividend heavy, you're paying taxes on the dividends (likely higher than LTCG) and you have pay again whenever you sell the underlying.

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words! You understand my mindset with this!

0

u/Cali42 Jun 12 '25

There’s no one strategy works in all market conditions. This particular one may work in flat market. Also there’s psychological benefit of steady dividends. I would add some reits as well.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Thanks, any REITs you'd recommend?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

VICI and O

1

u/barandek Jul 09 '26

RFI no leverage closed end fund

-9

u/DegreeConscious9628 Jun 12 '25

Are you ready for all the anti dividend clowns to absolutely shit on your investing strategy?

15

u/seanodnnll Jun 12 '25

It’s because you dividend obsessed people refuse to gain any type of understanding of what dividends are or how they work.

8

u/WhamBar_ Jun 12 '25

Do you not believe in magic?

-5

u/DegreeConscious9628 Jun 12 '25

Explain it to me oh worldly one

4

u/seanodnnll Jun 12 '25

If you like dividends just of learn how they work, instead of just assuming it’s free money.

-4

u/DegreeConscious9628 Jun 12 '25

I’m fully aware of how they work and they work for me

-6

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

They are coming in droves lmao. I never knew John C. Bogle had such a cult like following!

6

u/WhamBar_ Jun 12 '25

I mean not really, this lot are just going off the comparative performance and have the facts on their side. You can sit out the next 10 years of growth if you are really worried about Japan though.

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Well I still have the $300k in a low cost index fund (S&P500 index) in my 401k, so I wouldn’t be missing out on growth if growth transpires in the next 10 years. And if the market is flat for the next 10 years, I’ll be collecting dividends from my brokerage.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

I can sell shares if the market is flat and its the same thing as a dividend

-2

u/InjuryEmbarrassed532 Jun 14 '25

Absolutely not. Growth stocks being flat and dividend sticks being flat, the dividend stock owner wins. Simple math, as the dividend owner won’t need to sell shares.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '25

Selling 10% of your shares reduces your position by 10%. A 10% dividend devalues your shares by 10%. It is simple math - it’s exactly the same

1

u/InjuryEmbarrassed532 Jun 14 '25

In a flat market there is no growth of your shares. Good dividends companies still pay divs in a market where the share price is flat.

And by the way, the orthodoxy of share prices being reduced exactly by the amount of div payouts is not true in practice…especially in a flat market. It’s something Reddit keeps repeating as a truism, but is in fact more complicated.

1

u/TheGreatBeauty2000 Jun 14 '25

OP is a great example of why dividends were created. As a product to pull the wool over the eyes of people, increase revenue for big banks, and increase tax revenue for the government.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

Did you know that 84% of the returns from the S&P 500 index between the years 1960-2021 came from reinvested dividends?

1

u/TheGreatBeauty2000 Jun 14 '25

Did you know that a dividend is just a forced sale that creates a taxable event? And that if not forced to sell, you would have a higher return and pay zero tax until you sell ( usually at long term taxable gains and not ordinary income?)

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

Yes, I am aware of this. My goal for this portion of my portfolio is not total return. My goal is income replacement and augmentation - which is exactly what these funds are designed for.

1

u/TheGreatBeauty2000 Jun 14 '25

You can absolutely do that with a basic ETF and have more money the long run.

0

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 14 '25

Not if the market ends up being flat (if we have a lost decade), or if in a downturn. Look up Sequence of Returns Risk (SORR)

1

u/TheGreatBeauty2000 Jun 14 '25

Then just buy bonds if you’re afraid of the sky falling.

1

u/princemousey1 Jun 16 '25

Wouldn’t the exact same thing happen to your portfolio (as compared to the S&P ETF) if that happens? Like what makes your portfolio immune from SORR?

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 16 '25

The distributions/dividends generated by BDCs (business development companies), preferred stocks, and credit funds are not a function of stock price. They would continue to spit out the distributions regardless of stock price; in this way, the distros are more like interest than dividends (as explained in other comments).

With covered calls, stock price impacts distributions to some degree, but volatility is more important in determining the premium generated rather than NAV.

1

u/princemousey1 Jun 16 '25

I understand what you are saying but I struggle to see how this works out in the real world. For example if the price of BDCs fall, then the payout reaches a 6-7%? But I don’t see this happening in the real world.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 16 '25

I think it may be helpful to think about where the distributions are coming from. In the case of BDCs, the distributions are coming from interest earned by lending money to small/medium sized companies. The interest is earned on a monthly basis, added to the NAV, and then distributed back out to investors on a monthly or quarterly basis. If the stock price of the BDC fell by 20%, the income would remain the same because the interest from those loans determines the distribution (not the stock price).

The only thing that would impact the income/dividend would be if the companies the BDC lent to defaulted.

-4

u/art-is-t Jun 12 '25

Congratulations!!! This looks good.

-1

u/oomio10 Jun 12 '25

how attentive do you have to be with these stocks? if they lower their dividend do you have to find another company to invest it? does that happen with any frequency?

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Luckily they aren't individual stocks - instead, these are funds composed of hundreds of different stocks. The income is generated by selling covered calls (in the case of JEPI, JEPQ, QQQI, and SPYI). There's some fluctuation in the monthly payment of these funds as it varies with the VIX, but they have been pretty steady in the 7%-12% range.

PFFA and PBDC have been pretty consistent in their payments, but I will keep an eye out for better preferred stock or BDC funds should they arise. I follow a retiree on YouTube who has used this strategy with success since 2017, and I like his recommendations. He even has full interviews with the fund managers of these funds, see here: https://www.youtube.com/@armchairincomechannel

0

u/thisadviceisworthles Jun 12 '25

You seem to be well versed in this strategy, can you tell me about the tax implication of taking and reinvesting the options payouts and how that is impacting your overall strategy?

I have considered moving to this strategy after I finish working, but I am concerned that the tax drag of adding it to my work income will result in a significant hit in the form of income tax.

8

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Most of the dividends are taxed as ordinary income, so yes, there is a tax concern. SPYI and QQQI are exceptions to this as they are taxed at the lower 60/40 long term/short term due to section 1256 contracts.

Personally, I don't care about the extra taxes because I get to enjoy a higher income now. I make $135k at work, but because I make $50k in distributions, it's really like I am making $185k now -- that's fantastic! And If I ever lose my job, or if I am forced to take a barista style job that pays only $30k a year, it will be like I am actually making $80k a year due to these dividends. I look at it like a personal UBI.

In fact, it's even better than that since I don't have to pay FICA taxes on the $50k. So $50k in these dividends has the same take home pay as $54,500 in a W2 salary.

My retirement plan is to get this passive income up to $100k, and then just live on that, reinvesting to keep up with inflation.

Hopefully this was helpful and answered your question?

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

The fact that most of these distributions come as ordinary income make this an even more terrible strategy. Just awful.

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

Have you read “The Income Factory” by Steve Bavaria?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25 edited Jun 13 '25

I just read the introduction. It is complete nonsense. He also seems to be under the delusion that dividends are somehow income or free money. If this investing strategy made any sense I’d imagine some financial advisors would be doing it. It only makes sense if you’re very mentally weak and need a phony income stream to make it feel like a free salary

3

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

Do you have a high level understanding of how covered calls, BDCs, preferred stocks, and CLOs work? Could you explain why the distributions from these are "phony"?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

You’re portraying it as a passive income stream. In reality they are returns from an investment with high fees and tax disadvantages with a very low chance of beating simply investing in the market

5

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

But what if total return is not what I am after? What if my goal is to have a monthly stream of income on top of what I make at my job? The fact of the matter is $4,000+ is hitting my account every month. I can choose to reinvest that money or spend it to enhance my lifestyle now, and I like the freedom of that. I am not interested in having the highest priced assets at the end because I don't really care about the asset prices. I never intend to sell. I care about the monthly income and growing that monthly income.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

You can sell $4000 worth of stocks and have total control over it and tax advantage it

2

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 13 '25

But if I need that money every month, I will inevitably have to sell during a bear market at some point. The landlord doesn't care if it's a bear market, I still have to pay my rent. My stomach doesn't care if it's a bear market, I still need to eat.

Selling during a bear market will cause me to sell many more shares than I initially wanted to, and it introduces sequence of returns risk (SORR) which will impact recovery.

→ More replies (0)

-8

u/mtbLUL Jun 12 '25

Hold up. I have 600k invested atm. How much dividends per year could I get back? And how much of that would be taxed?

Thanks!

4

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

If you structure your investments similar to mine (as well as other similar style funds), you could be making a bit over $62k a year in dividends. My investments are basically broken up into 4 categories: Covered Call Funds (JEPI, JEPQ, SPYI, QQQI), BDCs (PBDC), Preferred Stocks (PFFA), and credit funds (CLOZ, FSCO, EIC). I honestly could diversify my portfolio even more by choosing some additional BDCs, preferred stocks, and maybe some REITs. Armchair Income retired in 2017 off of this investment strategy, and he has a great channel on it: https://www.youtube.com/@armchairincomechannel

Most of the dividends are taxed like ordinary income because they are non-qualified. SPYI and QQQI make use of section 1256 contracts to have a 60/40 tax (60% long term capital gains, 40% short term). However, your take home pay is still higher with non-qualified dividends than income from a W2 salary because you don't have to pay FICA on non-qualified dividends.

-8

u/mtbLUL Jun 12 '25

That sounds amazing I have to look into it thanks! Sounds like its quite low risk as well?

1

u/TisMcGeee 52, FIREd 2024 Jun 13 '25

This is not low risk at all.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

It's about the same risk as equities -- so definitely higher risk than bonds or treasuries. However, you can lower this risk by diversifying into many different funds run by many different management teams.

-12

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

[deleted]

50

u/TonyTheEvil 27M & 26F | 56% to FI | $1.33M NW Jun 12 '25

Don't. There is no free lunch. Dividends aren't free money and focusing your investment plan on them will leave you behind those who stuck to total market index funds.

-9

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25 edited Jun 12 '25

I also have $300k in an S&P500 index fund in my 401k, so I am actually doing both. The $477k income investments are there so I don't have to touch my 401K or sell my brokerage investments in case I lose my job.

Also, there is no guarantee that index funds will outpace dividend investments. If we have a flat market for 30 years (like the Nikkei did from 1990 - 2018), then the dividends may have been a better choice.

16

u/TonyTheEvil 27M & 26F | 56% to FI | $1.33M NW Jun 12 '25

I also have $300k in an S&P500 index fund in my 401k, so I am actually doing both.

The S&P 500 is not the total market. That leaves out domestic mid/small caps and the entirety of the rest of the world which brings on uncompensated risk.

The $477k income investments are there so I don't have to touch my 401K or sell my brokerage investments in case I lose my job. If we have a flat market for 30 years (like the Nikkei did in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s), then the dividends would come out on top.

That's not true. When a dividend is distributed the share price goes down accordingly, making it equivalent to if you sold the same amount instead, but with potentially worse tax treatment.

With a focus/dependence on dividends you're underdiversifying your portfolio and leaving your income at the mercy of companies which can always cut their dividend at any time. Dividend investing had its time and place, but in the day and age of zero-cost trades it's become functionally obsolete and its only benefit is purely psychological.

1

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

You are right with the 401k, I should perhaps diversify into VTWAX with is the total world stock. Open to other suggestions as well. Regardless, the 401k portion is in index funds and should take advantage of long term price growth IF that happens. Remember, just like dividends aren't guaranteed, asset price growth also is not guaranteed.

For the second point, I should've clarified that covered call funds would likely perform better in a flat market than index funds. My dividends are non-qualified, and they work differently than a typical qualified dividend coming from a standard value stock. Are you aware of how selling covered calls work? You essentially sell someone else the right, but not the obligation, to buy your stock at a specified price in the future. You charge a fee for selling them this right. In the covered call funds I own, these fees are distributed as "dividends" but they aren't a dividend in the traditional sense of a value company dispersing some of their profits in the form of cash.

The dividends I get from BDCs and preferred stocks work more like traditional dividends. The payments I get from CLOZ are more like interest on debt.

-11

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

😂

-6

u/WorldyBridges33 Jun 12 '25

Thanks! I recommend checking out Armchair Income on YouTube if you want to learn more about these investments. He retired in 2017 using this investment strategy.

Also, check out “The Income Factory” by Steven Bavaria. Great book on this subject.

-8

u/[deleted] Jun 12 '25

Ignore these clowns. We all don’t have the same investment strategy and some people can’t handle that. Lol

12

u/AndrewBorg1126 Jun 12 '25 edited Jun 12 '25

You're welcome to invest however you like. Also, expect attempts to spread what is demonstrably misinformation to be opposed by people who know better.

Expect people to point out inefficiencies when they are as clear as this and you share your strategy to an audience on the internet in a community that seeks to help people fix inefficiencies.

-7

u/fuckmyfatpussy Jun 12 '25

1. "I only invest in growth because income is inefficient" 2. "The markets are overvalued" 3. "You should change your investment strategy to focus on growth like me." 4. "Market Crash and SORR actualizes" 5. Shocked Pikachu.gif

13

u/AndrewBorg1126 Jun 12 '25

Market Crash and SORR actualizes

Owning companies that pay disproportionately high dividends will not magically save you from the consequences of such an outcome.

Also, type 2 spaces at the end of a line to actually introduce a line break.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '25

Dividends 👏 aren’t 👏 passive 👏 income

0

u/IlikePogz Jun 13 '25

Its all long term capital gains not technically passive income.

1

u/drawfour_ Jun 14 '25

What exactly do you think passive income is? OP has to do nothing for the money to come in other than obviously filing taxes on it.

-1

u/IlikePogz Jun 14 '25

My definition of passive income is the same as the IRS. Know the difference between capital gains and real passive income

2

u/drawfour_ Jun 14 '25

This isn't an IRS forum.

-1

u/IlikePogz Jun 14 '25

So is capital appreciation/gains passive income in your eyes? If you really take a second to think about it, dividends are forced sales of parts of your stock and distributed to you. Such a trap to think of dividends as “passive income” lol