Over any 20 year period, the NASDAQ-100 outperforms the S&P 500. If you DCA, that period is significantly shorter. So, why is S&P more commonly suggested than the NASDAQ?
Decreased Volatility Argument - The S&P is Less Volatile
Ok, who cares? If you’re 20+ years from retirement (which I think most people on this sub and Reddit are), volatility, AKA “higher risk”, is irrelevant. People act like risk is the same for everyone even though it’s proportional to time. Less time in the market = more risk in volatile stocks. Once you’re 20 years out from retirement, then you can start worrying about crashes.
Greater Exposure Argument - The NASDAQ Only Covers Tech
Ok, also who cares? The tech industry isn’t too big to fail, but if it does, we’ve got way bigger problems than our stock portfolios.
Someone please make this make sense: for someone 18 years old, why would they even touch the S&P 500 until at least 45 if the NASDAQ 100 exists?