Member Sign In

Warren Buffett spent more than six decades building one of the most successful investing records in history. So now that he has officially stepped away from the chairmanship of Berkshire Hathaway, it would be tempting to comb through that record looking for the secret — the brilliant stock picks, perfectly timed acquisitions or investing insight the rest of us somehow missed.

 

But Buffett has spent much of his career arguing that ordinary people don't need any of that.

 

On September 18, the 96-year-old officially became chairman emeritus of Berkshire Hathaway, completing a leadership transition that began when Greg Abel took over as CEO earlier this year. Buffett's son Howard, a Berkshire director since 1993, is now the company's non-executive chairman. Warren Buffett will remain on the board, but after leading Berkshire since 1965, the company he built is now formally in someone else's hands.

 

That's a pretty remarkable ending to a remarkable career. But as I was looking back through decades of Buffett's shareholder letters and annual-meeting answers, what struck me wasn't how complicated his financial philosophy was.

 

It was how uncomplicated it was.

 

Buffett talks about money using farms, baseball, bridges and one-foot hurdles. He tells people to spend a little less than they earn. He thinks high-interest credit card debt is ridiculous. He tells ordinary investors that a cheap index fund is perfectly good. He routinely admits he has no idea where the stock market is headed next.

 

This is a man who became extraordinarily wealthy making sophisticated capital-allocation decisions, yet much of his advice for the rest of us boils down to avoiding situations where we need to make sophisticated decisions in the first place.

 

And I think that's the real lesson worth taking from Buffett's career.

 

Good personal finance isn't necessarily about becoming brilliant at money. A lot of it is about building a financial life where patience can work — and avoiding the mistakes that interrupt it.

At Berkshire's 2023 annual meeting, Buffett offered perhaps the least glamorous financial advice ever uttered by a billionaire: "Spend a little bit less than you earn."

 

Obviously, he wasn't the first person to discover this concept. If you earn $10 and spend $9, eventually you accumulate money. Earn $10 and routinely spend $11, and eventually you accumulate debt.

 

But there's a more useful idea underneath the arithmetic.

 

Spending less than you earn creates margin, and financial margin gives you options.

 

Imagine two households that each earn $175,000 a year. One has gradually built its lifestyle around virtually all $175,000: a large mortgage, two expensive car payments, private school tuition, subscriptions, memberships and enough recurring expenses that most of every paycheck is already spoken for before it arrives.

 

The other household also lives comfortably but routinely keeps 10% or 15% of its income uncommitted.

 

On paper, these families make exactly the same amount of money. Financially, they're in very different positions.

 

The second household can absorb a surprise expense without immediately reaching for a credit card. It can increase retirement contributions after a raise. It can handle a temporary drop in income. It can take advantage of an investment opportunity, change careers or save for something big without first dismantling the rest of its life.

 

That's why lifestyle inflation can be so sneaky. A raise absolutely should improve your life — what's the point of making more money if you never get to enjoy any of it? But if every additional dollar of income automatically becomes another dollar of permanent spending, your financial flexibility never actually improves.

 

You just become more expensive to maintain.

 

Buffett's famously modest lifestyle is sometimes presented as proof that the secret to wealth is eating inexpensive breakfasts and living in the same house forever. I don't think that's the useful takeaway. You don't become Warren Buffett by switching to McDonald's.

 

The better lesson is to resist turning every increase in income into an increase in fixed obligations. When you get a raise, bonus or other jump in income, send some of it toward retirement, savings or debt before deciding how much of the remainder you want to use to upgrade your lifestyle.

 

The point isn't deprivation. It's making sure your financial success creates more freedom, not simply more bills.

Buffett's skepticism about debt, particularly credit card debt, fits into the same philosophy.

 

At that 2023 Berkshire meeting, he pointed out that someone carrying a credit card balance charging 12% or 14% is effectively betting that they can earn more than that elsewhere. His joke was that if you can reliably do that, Berkshire would like to hear from you.

 

Credit card rates today can be considerably higher than the rates in his example, which makes the math even less forgiving.

 

Say you have $10,000 available and also carry $10,000 on a credit card charging 24%. You could invest your cash and hope the market has an extraordinary year. Or you could eliminate a guaranteed 24% annual cost.

 

There's no stock-market prediction required for the second option.

 

But high-interest debt creates another problem that doesn't show up quite as neatly on a spreadsheet: It makes you financially fragile.

 

One of Buffett's greatest advantages as an investor has always been his ability to wait. Berkshire doesn't have to sell a good investment simply because its price drops next Tuesday. Buffett doesn't have to chase whatever stock is popular this month. He can sit on an enormous cash pile until an opportunity meets his standards.

 

Most of us aren't working with hundreds of billions of dollars, but the same principle applies to our households.

 

The fewer financial obligations you have, the more time you can give yourself when something goes wrong.

 

If you lose your job with six months of expenses in savings and relatively low monthly obligations, you have options. You can spend time looking for the right position instead of immediately taking the first offer available.

 

If your retirement account drops 20% while you're still employed and financially stable, you don't need the money, so you can leave your investments alone and give them time to recover.

 

If the air conditioner dies, you can fix it without turning a $7,000 repair into a much more expensive problem through years of credit card interest.

 

Debt — particularly expensive debt — does the opposite. It puts more of your future income under contract and reduces the number of choices available when life doesn't go according to plan.

 

That doesn't mean all borrowing is inherently bad. Buffett himself has distinguished reasonable mortgage debt from revolving credit card balances. A manageable mortgage can help you buy a home. Financing may make sense in other situations depending on the rate and your finances.

 

The question is whether your debt is helping you build something or quietly removing your ability to wait.

 

That's an important distinction because patience is only a useful financial strategy when you can afford to be patient.

Here's one of my favorite contradictions about Warren Buffett:

 

One of the greatest individual stock pickers in history has repeatedly told most ordinary investors that they don't need to pick individual stocks.

 

In his 2013 letter to Berkshire shareholders, Buffett revealed the instructions he had left for money that would benefit his wife after his death. He directed the trustee to put 10% into short-term government bonds and 90% into a low-cost S&P 500 index fund. He predicted that this exceedingly simple portfolio would outperform the results achieved by most investors using high-fee managers.

 

Think about how strange that is for a moment.

 

Buffett made his fortune by identifying businesses he believed were undervalued, analyzing their competitive advantages and making enormous investment decisions. Yet his recommendation for his own family's money was basically: Buy hundreds of America's largest companies at once, pay very little in fees and stop messing with it.

 

Why?

 

Because there's a huge difference between a strategy being possible and it being repeatable for you.

 

Yes, it is possible to beat the market by picking individual stocks. Buffett proved that rather spectacularly.

 

But most of us have jobs. We have families. We aren't reading annual reports all day. We don't have direct access to corporate management teams, decades of experience valuing businesses or Charlie Munger sitting in the office down the hall.

 

And even if we're reasonably good at investing, we still have emotions.

 

That's where simplicity becomes incredibly valuable.

 

A diversified, low-cost index fund doesn't guarantee the highest possible return. Instead, it removes a remarkable number of opportunities to make bad decisions. You don't have to figure out which company will dominate artificial intelligence. You don't have to decide whether today's hot stock is legitimately valuable or wildly overpriced. You don't have to constantly buy, sell, research and second-guess yourself.

 

You own the market.

 

Buffett wrote in 2004 that American businesses had produced terrific long-term results, yet many investors had experienced mediocre or disastrous ones. He blamed high costs, chasing investment fads and jumping in and out of the market at bad times. His wonderfully Buffett-ish summary was that "excitement and expenses are their enemies."

 

That's worth remembering whenever financial sophistication starts looking suspiciously like financial busyness.

 

Having seven brokerage accounts, 34 investments and a complicated spreadsheet doesn't automatically make your strategy better than owning a few broad, inexpensive funds.

 

Sometimes it just gives you 41 things to screw up.

Buffett has never claimed to know what stocks will do next.

 

In fact, he's been unusually explicit about the opposite.

 

Writing to Berkshire shareholders in 1986, Buffett said he had no idea whether the stock market would move "up, down, or sideways" over the near or intermediate term. What he did expect was that fear and greed would continue periodically taking over investors' decision-making. Berkshire's response wasn't to predict when those swings would happen but to avoid getting swept up in them.

 

That distinction is enormously important for ordinary investors because so much financial media encourages us to ask a question we probably can't answer: What's the market going to do?

 

Maybe a better question is:

 

 

Those are not the same problem.

 

You cannot control whether the S&P 500 falls 18% next year. You can control whether you panic and sell your retirement investments after it does.

 

You cannot control whether another speculative investment mania takes hold. You can control whether you throw your long-term plan away because everyone around you appears to be getting rich faster than you.

 

You cannot know precisely when the market will bottom. You can continue making automatic retirement contributions through the decline instead of waiting for some magical all-clear signal that usually becomes obvious only after prices have already recovered.

 

I've written before about how easy it is to damage a retirement account by trying to escape every downturn. Investors often sell because falling markets make them uncomfortable, then remain on the sidelines while waiting for things to "feel safe" again. By the time things feel safe, prices may have already climbed significantly. That's how people end up repeatedly selling low and buying back higher.

 

Buffett's strategy doesn't require pretending market declines aren't scary. It requires recognizing that fear doesn't necessarily contain useful information.

 

This is also where one of his most famous lines — being fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful — is frequently misunderstood. It doesn't mean automatically buying whatever asset is crashing. A terrible business doesn't become wonderful simply because its stock dropped 60%.

 

The principle is about separating price movements from your own emotional response to them.

 

When everyone is euphoric, don't assume rising prices have eliminated risk. When everyone is terrified, don't automatically assume falling prices have destroyed long-term value. Buffett's actual advantage is less "do the opposite of everyone" and more "don't let everyone else decide what you do."

 

For retirement investors, that may mean something far less dramatic than buying stocks during a crash. It might simply mean continuing to contribute to the same diversified portfolio every paycheck while the financial world collectively loses its mind.

 

Sometimes doing nothing is a financial decision.

 

And sometimes it's a very good one.

Buffett has another wonderfully simple investing concept: your "circle of competence."

 

In his 1996 shareholder letter, he explained that successful investors don't need to understand every company or industry. They need to be able to evaluate the businesses they choose to invest in and, perhaps more importantly, understand the boundaries of their own knowledge.

 

I think that lesson has become even more useful in the age of social media.

 

At any given moment, someone is getting rich from something you don't own.

 

Crypto. Options. AI stocks. Real estate. Private credit. Biotech. Some company you've never heard of whose ticker symbol suddenly appears everywhere.

 

And when everyone else seems to understand an opportunity, saying "I don't know enough about this to put my money into it" can make you feel financially unsophisticated.

 

Buffett would argue almost exactly the opposite.

 

Knowing what you don't know is a form of risk management.

 

Missing an investment that doubles can be frustrating, but it doesn't make you poorer. Putting a large portion of your savings into an investment you don't understand because you were afraid of missing out absolutely can.

 

Buffett has applied the same idea to business problems. In 1989, he wrote that Berkshire's success didn't come from learning to clear increasingly difficult obstacles. Instead, Buffett and Munger tried to identify "one-foot hurdles" they could easily step over rather than developing the ability to clear seven-foot ones.

 

That idea translates beautifully to personal finance.

 

You don't need to find the hardest possible way to become wealthy. In fact, you probably shouldn't.

 

You can take advantage of an employer match instead of searching for an investment guaranteed to double your money.

 

You can automate savings rather than relying on monthly willpower.

 

You can invest regularly in diversified funds instead of trying to predict the next market winner.

 

You can pay off a credit card charging 25% before worrying whether your investment portfolio could earn another percentage point.

 

And when you do want to make a concentrated investment, you can stick with things you actually understand.

 

There's one final place Buffett thinks you should be willing to invest aggressively, though: yourself.

 

When asked at Berkshire's 2022 meeting what investment would hold up particularly well against inflation, Buffett didn't name a stock. He said the best thing you can do is become exceptionally good at something. Skills can't be inflated away, he explained, which is why he considers anything that develops your abilities "the best investment by far."

 

That's more than folksy career advice. Your income is the engine powering almost every other financial goal you have.

 

Consider how much attention investors will devote to squeezing an additional percentage point from a $100,000 portfolio. A 1% improvement is worth $1,000 in the first year.

 

Now imagine improving your professional skills enough to increase your income by $10,000 a year.

 

If that earning advantage lasts 20 years, you're not talking about a one-time $10,000 return. You're potentially talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional lifetime income — some of which can then be saved and invested itself.

 

Your investments compound.

 

Your earning power can, too.

Buffett's career will be studied for generations, and plenty of investors will try to reverse-engineer his stock picks, valuation methods and business decisions.

 

Most of us probably don't need to.

 

The more useful legacy is the collection of simple financial principles sitting underneath all of that investing brilliance.

 

Spend less than you earn so you maintain financial flexibility. Avoid expensive debt that forces future decisions upon you. Keep investing simple enough that fees and mistakes don't swallow your returns. Don't let the market's emotions become your emotions. Understand the limits of your knowledge. Keep improving the one asset you'll own for your entire life: yourself.

 

None of this sounds particularly revolutionary.

 

That's exactly what makes it interesting.

 

Personal finance has an optimization problem. We're constantly looking for the perfect investment, perfect account, perfect budget, perfect credit card or perfect financial move, even though enormous amounts of wealth can be built through a handful of fairly ordinary decisions repeated consistently for decades.

 

Buffett understood that better than almost anyone.

 

In the letter announcing his transition to chairman emeritus last week, he wrote that he and Charlie Munger had always looked for Berkshire shareholders who "thought in decades rather than quarters." That may be as good a summary of his financial philosophy as anything else he has said.

 

Time does an extraordinary amount of the heavy lifting in personal finance. It lets investments compound, allows careers and incomes to grow, gives markets time to recover and turns relatively modest savings into meaningful wealth.

 

The trick is staying in a position where time can keep working for you.

 

Maybe that's Buffett's most useful lesson.

 

You don't have to be brilliant with money.

 

You just have to avoid doing too many things that stop the boring stuff from working.