엣지 기사

무료로 시도해 보세요

시장이 복잡하다고요? Edgen Search에 물어보세요.

즉각적인 답변, 무의미한 말은 제로, 그리고 미래의 당신이 감사할 거래 결정들.

지금 검색해 보세요

Edgen

추천합니다

What is a money person? The plain-English alternative to a financial advisor

The short version: a money person is a smart, warm friend who happens to be good with money and explains it like a person, not a bank. Practically, it's a second opinion on your whole financial picture — cash, debt, tax exposure, concentration, and the goals you're working toward — that tells you in plain language what to look at first. It's not a traditional advisor managing your portfolio for 1% a year, and it's not a coach cheering you on. It's the honest read a good advisor's first meeting would give you, without the fee or the asset minimum. It's the role Ed Wealth was built to play. Strip away the label and a money person does four concrete things: Just as important is what it doesn't do: it doesn't take custody of your money, it doesn't sell you products for commission, and it doesn't pretend a forecast is a promise. It's a second opinion: it shows you the structure and lets you decide. People reach for four different things when they say "I should talk to someone." They're not

Your RSUs Just Vested. Here's What a Money Tool Surfaces First.

You just had a big RSU grant vest. Congratulations — and now the awkward part: a six-figure pile of your own company's stock, a vague sense you should "do something," and no one actually telling you what. An advisor, a spreadsheet, and a piece of software each handle this moment differently. Here's what a modern money tool surfaces in a moment like this — using Ed as a worked example — so you can decide what kind of help actually fits. You connect your brokerage and bank through read-only aggregation, so the tool can read balances but can't move a dollar. Ed's framing is simple: precise about your money, blind to your identity. Instead of sorting your lattes into categories, Ed opens on a single Financial Reality Check — a read on whether your money could survive a bad month. For a lot of high earners, that one number lands harder than any budget, because it answers a question the other apps never ask. (If the Reality Check is the numbers side, your money type is the behavior behind th

Lump sum or dollar-cost averaging? What the math actually says

If you've got a pile of cash to invest and you're stuck between putting it all in today or feeding it in slowly over a few months, here's the short answer: the math says invest it now. Vanguard's research found that a lump sum beat dollar-cost averaging roughly two-thirds of the time. The reason is boring but powerful. Markets go up more often than they go down, so time out of the market usually costs you. But "the math" isn't the whole story, and anyone who tells you it is has never watched their own money drop 15% the week after they invested it. There's a real, rational case for spreading it out. It just isn't the case most people think. The logic is almost too simple. When you hold cash waiting to invest it "at a better time," you're betting the market will be lower later. Sometimes it is. But most of the time it isn't, because stocks and bonds have historically out-earned cash. Vanguard studied this directly in a 2023 paper. Looking at rolling one-year periods from 1976 to 2022, i

Is the 4% rule still safe? How long your money really lasts

Short answer: yes, for most people the 4% rule is still a sensible place to start. But it was never meant to be a set-and-forget autopilot. It is a starting dial. Understand what it actually promises and you will worry less, spend more comfortably, and avoid the trap most retirees fall into: dying with far more money than they ever needed. In 1994, a financial planner named William Bengen ran a simple experiment. He took every 30-year retirement window in U.S. history back to 1926 and asked: what is the highest starting withdrawal rate that would have survived all of them, including the worst? His answer, published in the Journal of Financial Planning, was about 4.15%. Rounded down, that became "the 4% rule." A few years later, three Trinity University professors ran a similar test and confirmed it. Their 1998 study found that a balanced stock-and-bond portfolio withdrawing 4% (adjusted for inflation) survived 30 years in 95% to 100% of historical periods. Push it to 5% and the success

Are you actually behind on retirement savings?

Probably not as behind as you think. If you're in your 30s or 40s, saving a little while you raise kids and pay a mortgage, that isn't a personal failure. It's the normal shape of a saving life. The math that scares people, the "you should have three times your salary saved by 40" kind, is a rule of thumb, not a law. And the years that do the heavy lifting for most people haven't even started yet. You've seen the benchmark: 1x your salary saved by 30, 3x by 40, 6x by 50, 8x by 60, and 10x by 67. That's Fidelity's set of savings milestones, and Fidelity itself calls them "aspirational" goalposts you likely won't hit on schedule. They're built on a tidy set of assumptions: you start saving 15% at 25, you invest heavily in stocks, you retire at 67. Change any one of those and the whole staircase shifts. So when someone at 42 with one salary's worth saved feels like a failure, they're comparing their real, messy life to a smooth line drawn for a person who doesn't exist. The honest read is

Why you feel broke on a good income (and how to fix it)

If you earn well but still feel broke, it's almost never the coffee. It's the two or three big fixed decisions eating your cash flow (housing, cars, and every raise you spent instead of banked) that leave nothing at the end of the month. The fix isn't tracking pennies. It's controlling the spending rate on the few categories that dominate your budget, then banking half of every raise. A high salary and a tight month are not a contradiction. In the LendingClub paycheck-to-paycheck survey, 44% of people earning more than $100,000 a year said they had little or nothing left after paying their bills. That's not a small unlucky group. That's nearly half of high earners. And it stacks up fast. The Federal Reserve's 2024 survey found that 37% of adults couldn't cover a surprise $400 expense with cash. Some of those people are on good incomes. A big paycheck doesn't automatically buy breathing room. How you spend it does. So if the number on your offer letter looks great and your bank balance

How Much Does a Financial Advisor Cost? (+ the Free Alternative)

The short version: most financial advisors charge about 1% of the money they manage per year — roughly $3,000 a year on a $300,000 portfolio, whether or not your situation changed. But "1%" hides four very different fee models, plus fund costs and commissions underneath. The number that actually matters isn't the percentage; it's the all-in cost in dollars, over years. Here's how to work that out — and what to do if you want clarity without paying 1% a year to get it. Almost every fee structure is a version of one of these: The 1% AUM model is the default you'll meet most often, and it's worth understanding exactly what it costs, because the percentage framing is designed to feel painless. One percent sounds like a rounding error. In dollars, it isn't. On a $300,000 portfolio, 1% is about $3,000 every year — a fixed cost that doesn't shrink in a year when nothing about your plan changed. Hold that account for 20 years and you've paid at least $60,000 in direct fees alone, before you ev

Is a financial advisor worth it? Advisor vs robo vs money person

The short version: a financial advisor is worth it when your money has real complexity — a business, concentrated stock, an estate, a divorce, or turning savings into retirement income. There, a fee pays for itself. But most people don't have a complexity problem; they have a clarity one, and paying 1% of your assets a year — about $3,000 on a $300,000 portfolio, every year — is a lot to pay for reassurance. You have three tiers to choose from: a human advisor (~1% of assets), a robo-advisor (~0.25%), and a money person — a flat-fee second opinion that doesn't grow as your savings do. Start with the honest case for paying. A good advisor earns their fee when your situation is genuinely complex: selling a business, a big block of company stock or options, an estate with kids, a divorce, a windfall, or building a retirement-income plan with real moving parts. In those moments, one right call can save you many times the fee, and the job becomes picking a good one (that's how to choose a f

Do You Actually Need a Financial Advisor? (An Honest Test)

The short version: you need a financial advisor when your money has genuine complexity — equity comp across several employers, a business sale, an estate with kids involved, a divorce, a sudden windfall, or a retirement-drawdown plan with real moving parts. If your situation is closer to "I earn well but somehow feel behind," that's a clarity problem, not a complexity one, and hiring someone to manage your money for about 1% a year is an expensive way to solve it. Here's how to tell which one you have. Almost everyone reaching for an advisor falls into one of two camps, and confusing them is where money gets wasted. A complexity problem is when there are real moving parts that interact: decisions where a wrong move costs far more than any fee. Selling a company, exercising stock options with a tax bill attached, splitting assets in a divorce, planning how to draw income across a 30-year retirement. Here, a good advisor earns their keep. A clarity problem looks different. Good income, a

How to Choose a Financial Advisor in 2026 (and Whether You Even Need One)

The short version: picking a financial advisor isn't about finding the "smartest" one. It comes down to three boring questions that actually predict whether you'll be treated well: are they legally a fiduciary, how do they get paid, and do you even need one yet. Get those right and the rest is noise. Here's how to run the check — and what to do if you want guidance but can't (or don't want to) meet a $250,000 minimum. Before you choose one, ask whether this is the right tool at all. A full-service advisor earns their fee when your situation is genuinely complex — a business sale, equity comp across several companies, estate planning, a divorce, a sudden windfall, or a retirement-income plan with real moving parts. But a lot of people reaching for an advisor don't have a complexity problem. They have a clarity problem: a good income, a few scattered accounts, and a nagging sense of being behind. That doesn't need someone to manage your money for 1% a year. It needs a clear read on where

투자, 드디어 혼자 안 해도 돼요.

Edgen 무료 체험. 신용카드 필요 없고, 약정도 없어요.

Edgen 무료 체험