Idiot Money
Go to the bookTwitterSign up for updates
  • Hello.
  • Whole-Brain Personal Finance
  • #1: The correlation between having money, managing it well, and living a good life
  • #2: Don’t know where to begin sorting out your finances? It’s not where you think it is
  • #3: Your relationship with money is complex. But it needn't be complicated.
  • #4: Spending £450k on being bad parents
  • #5: Idiot Profile: Private-Jet Guy
  • #6: What the bloody hell is a ‘relationship with money’ anyway?
  • #7: What fund managers can teach us about what really matters
  • #8: “I want money so I don’t have to think about money”
  • #9: Idiot Profile: An oligarch with a gun
  • #10: If Kanye West were a financial adviser
  • #11: If all the world's a stage, then what does it matter where you stand?
  • #12: Financial Independence: An (Actual) Idiot’s Guide
  • #13: Let’s talk about money, baby
  • #14: New Year's Non-Idiotic Financial Resolutions
  • #15: New year, old message
  • #16: "Just tell me what to do"
  • #17: How to choose better investments
  • #18: You cannot count. This leads you to make idiotic financial decisions.
  • #19: What's your number?
  • #20: 7 magnificent money lessons that have nothing to do with money
  • #21: The merits of money are negative
  • #22: The psychoanalysis of money, or How to screw up your children’s financial worldview
  • #23: The ghosts of money... and how to bust them
  • #24: My favourite way to think about investing, part 1
  • #25: The ABC of money, part 1: the three self-deceptive poisons
  • #26: Consider the pineapple: the perfect symbol of idiot money
  • #27: The ABC of money, part 2: financial nobility, an overview
  • #28: My favourite way to think about investing, part 2
  • #29: The ABC of money, part 3: financial nobility, step 1
  • #30: My favourite way to think about investing, part 3
  • #31: The ABC of money, part 4: financial nobility, step 2
  • #32: The idiocy of ignoring impermanence (the ABC of money, part 5)
  • #33: The six financial stress responses: what's yours?
  • #34: My favourite way to think about investing, part 4: betting beyond the basics
  • #35: The ABC of money, part 6: financial nobility, step 3
  • #36: My favourite way to think about investing, part 5: cost-benefit investing
  • #37: The ABC of money, part 7: financial nobility, step 4
  • #38: The best diet advice and the best financial advice are the same
  • #39: The ABC of money, part 8: The Eightfold Path and interdependence
  • #40: The dance of becoming wiser with money
  • #41: Building a better money brain (the ABC of money, part 9: neuroplasticity)
  • #42: The dumbest damn thing I’ve ever read in personal finance (part 1)
  • #43: The dumbest damn thing I’ve ever read in personal finance (part 2)
  • #44: A story of lions and loss
  • #45: The ABC of money, part 10: what meditation isn’t
  • #46: The ABC of money, part 11: what meditation is
  • #47: Idiot Profiles: Lord and Lady Jewellery Addiction, Teenage Ozymandias, and me
  • #48: Living mindfully with money (the ABC of money, part 12)
  • #49: Give, give, give, me more, more, more
  • #50: Our most costly money problems are the ones we don't see
  • #51: Align what you care for with what you care about
  • #52: Do what only you can do
  • #53: Money for many means happily ever after… but after what?
  • #54: The ABC of money, part 13: financial enlightenment
  • #55: Identifying your hidden money addictions
  • #56: Treating your hidden money addictions
  • #57: Idiot Money Maths #1: How much does it cost to keep you happy?
  • #58: The ABC of money, part 14: the secret shackles of financial freedom
  • #59: The ABC of money, part 15: freedom to, freedom from, freedom for
  • #60: If you go there blindfolded, you probably won’t like where you end up
  • #61: Idiot Money Maths #2: What is your default unit of spending?
  • #62: Balance isn’t stillness
  • #63: A problem shared
  • #64: How to live well, even in a palace (the ABC of money, part 16)
  • #65: Denunciation is still attachment (the ABC of money, part 17)
  • #66: “What do Blackheath people do?” (a story about how not to do financial planning)
  • #67: The ABC of money, part 18: Addicted to a dream
  • #68: What hot new financial knowledge are you likely to find in 2022?
  • #69: Red Pill Financial Planning: Escaping the Money Matrix
  • #70: The nasty narrowness of number-governed living
  • #71: Getting into Financial Flow
  • #72: The ABC of money, part 19: Denunciation bad, renunciation good
  • #73: I, Robot? Money and the misleading mechanisation of life choices
  • #74: Kondo your credit-card statements
  • #75: The rule of 72 (and its oft-overlooked implications)
  • #76: Forget about improving your decisions. Focus on improving your decision-making skills
  • #77: Seeing your financial world more clearly (the ABC of money, part 20)
  • #78: How to lose 2 1/2 stone in 6 months: an intro to the best non-fiction book I've ever read
  • #79: Your money worldview is (literally) half-brained
  • #80: Cost-consciousness beats cost-cutting
  • #81: Financial change that doesn’t start from your financial worldview is selling you short
  • #82: The overlooked truth of reality that is messing up how you live with money
  • #83: How money hijacks your hierarchy of attention
  • #84: The value of (almost) everything to you is nothing
  • #85: Financial philosophy > Financial psychology > Hot investment tips
  • #86: Five regrets of the rich
  • #87: Sum malfunction: a sure-fire way to spot if you’re being a financial idiot
  • #88: The Micawber Fallacy, or what your Dickensian maths misses about spending wisely
  • #89: The tell-tale signs of a poor financial worldview
  • #90: Wanting wisdom, craving financial fortune cookies
  • #91: You don’t need a scammer to be scammed: your desperation for an ‘answer’ will do almost as well
  • #92: Are you reading the wine list the wrong way around?
  • #93: Some personal finance puzzles and how not to solve them
  • #94: The main reason your relationship with money is so messed up
  • #95: The tyranny of the takeaway
  • #96: Deep wealth v shallow wealth
  • #97: What seeing your financial life more clearly looks like
  • #98: Making more of your money isn’t a maths problem
  • #99: Is what you’re doing for and with money working?
  • #100: Where to start, where to go, what to do about what’s stopping you
  • #101: The life cycle of a financial idiot
  • #102: I can read your financial mind
  • #103: Don’t worry about playing a game better when there’s a better game to play
  • #104: Reflections on two years of this newsletter, and why I’m taking a six-month break
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  • Apples and apples
  • Extra credit

Was this helpful?

#75: The rule of 72 (and its oft-overlooked implications)

21st February, 2022

Previous#74: Kondo your credit-card statementsNext#76: Forget about improving your decisions. Focus on improving your decision-making skills

Last updated 3 years ago

Was this helpful?

Welcome to the Idiot Money newsletter. This week, becoming wiser with money by understanding the financial returns, far from being an unequivocal objective scorecard, are primed to mislead you… but one simple sum can help.

(And yes, this being Idiot Money #75, I obviously should’ve posted this three weeks ago)

The most useful number in personal finance is 72.

The ‘Rule of 72’ is an easy way of comparing investment returns over the only period that matters to investors looking for a greater life rather than a greater fool. One measured in decades, not time between Bitcoin peaks and troughs.

It’s also a good way of getting people who never shut up about house prices to shut up about house prices.

The Rule of 72 tells you how long it takes an investment to double, based on its growth rate (or the growth rate, based on how long it takes to double).

72 divided by annual growth rate = time taken to double.

72 divided by time taken to double = annual growth rate.

How long would an investment growing at 5% take to double? 72/5 = 14.4 years. Getting 20% growth? Now it takes only 3.6 years.

What return would you need for something to quadruple in value in 30 years? That’s doubling twice, so 72/15 = 4.8% per annum to quadruple in 30. Thus did a 30 year-old’s £250,000 house or retirement pot become a 60-year old’s £1,000,000 with a pretty mediocre return.

So far so mundane. But being able to quickly do such calculations has handy implications.

First, it’s a useful way to quickly link any question of arbitrary investment returns to something more meaningful. It’s easier to picture what difference something would have if it doubled in value (and maybe doubled again, and again) than if it ‘grew at 7%’.

Apples and apples

Say you heard someone brag about how they bought a property ten years ago that had since doubled in value. Sounds impressive, you may think. But how impressed should you be? Should you be impressed enough to let it affect your own investing strategy?

One of the (many) problems with property as an investment is that unlike other investments, which usually make the news only with reference to their daily movements, property is usually talked about over timeframes of at least a year.

This should be a good thing. All investments as they relate to people more interested in funding lifestyles than trading jpegs should ideally be talked about in multi-year terms. But because they’re not, it makes the fact that property is a source of many misleading ideas about investing.

A property that’s doubled in value in 10 years has grown at 7.2% a year. 72 divided by 10 years = 7.2% annual growth.

This isn’t to dunk on property. It may be relatively silly a lot of the time, but it’s still absolutely most people’s best investment precisely because they don’t bugger about with it. And while Daily Mail distribution is disappointingly endemic, most people are sane enough to think about things other than house prices at least some of the time.

Extra credit

And it’s definitely best to think about it as the average annualised ten-year return, not the average annual return, even though they’re in effect the same thing. Because stockmarket returns are rarely within an average range over a 12-month period (though you’re probably not investing for only 12 months anyway, so this is only a problem if you choose to set stupid expectations).

And second, assuming you’re not a member of the Liberal Democrats’ famous , if you’re going to compare things, you’re going to want them in a vaguely comparable format. Annualised growth is a fair-enough means of doing this.

Still not bad, though rather less viscerally engaging – and thus less prone to distorting vision – than ‘doubled!’ Especially when compared to typical long-term stockmarket returns. And especially if you capitalise your time and energy costs and knock them off the return, as of course .

It’s helpful, too, to be broadly aware of the average annualised ten-year return of the major global stockmarkets (which is about 11-12%, and which you can capture for essentially zero time and energy costs, ).

Bullshit Graphs Squad
you absolutely should
assuming you’ve grounded such capturing on a decent philosophy