As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
If you search for “best investment ETFs,” you will be bombarded with the same tired debate: S&P 500 versus Nasdaq 100. It is the classic “Growth vs. Stability” argument that has raged on for decades. But as I approach my retirement at age 67, I have stopped looking at these tickers as mere bets. I look at them as business assets—a production line for my future income.
Over the last three years, I have achieved a 40% return on my portfolio. While the market has been favorable, I credit this performance to something more fundamental than luck: I stopped “playing” the market and started “managing” it. As a business owner, I don’t look for quick wins; I look for systems. I want an allocation strategy that works when I am 50, and one that matures alongside me until I am 67.
Today, I want to share how I balance the “Big Three”—the S&P 500, the Nasdaq 100, and SCHD—using the “Rule of 110” and a CEO’s mindset.
The Trinity: Why These Three?
In my business, I don’t try to offer a thousand different products. I focus on the few that deliver the most value. My portfolio is no different. I have distilled my core strategy into a “Trinity” of ETFs, each serving a specific business function.
- S&P 500 (The Backbone): This is the foundation. It provides broad exposure to the largest 500 companies in the U.S. It is the “steady hand” of the portfolio. If the U.S. economy grows, the S&P 500 grows. It is the bedrock upon which everything else is built.
- Nasdaq 100 (The Accelerator): This is where I capture the growth of the technology sector and innovation. It is more volatile, yes, but in my 50s, I still need growth to outpace inflation. It is the engine that drives my wealth accumulation.
- SCHD (The Anchor): This is the most crucial piece for an investor nearing retirement. SCHD focuses on companies with sustainable, growing dividends. Many investors ignore it because it doesn’t provide the flashy “tech-stock” returns of the Nasdaq. But for me, SCHD is the “Income Well.” It ensures that even when the market is sideways or down, I have cash flow coming in.
The Rule of 110: A Starting Point, Not a Law
There is a famous guideline known as the “Rule of 110.” It suggests that to determine your optimal stock allocation, you should subtract your age from 110.
The Formula: 110 – Your Age = Equity Allocation %
At 50 years old, the rule suggests that 60% of my portfolio (110−50=60) should be in equities, with the remaining 40% in bonds or safer assets.
However, I view this through the lens of a business owner. My business itself is a massive asset that generates cash flow. Because my business provides a safety net of income, I don’t always feel the need to adhere strictly to the 40% “safe asset” allocation. If you are an employee, you might need to follow the Rule of 110 more closely. But as an entrepreneur, I leverage my business’s success to take a slightly more calculated, aggressive stance in my investment portfolio.
My advice: Use the Rule of 110 as a “sanity check.” If you find yourself holding 90% stocks at age 60, ask yourself if you have the cash flow (from a business or dividends) to survive a 30% market crash.
Optimal Allocation Strategies by Age
Every stage of life requires a different “department” to lead the portfolio. Here is how I adjust the Trinity mix:
| Life Stage | Equity Ratio | Core Focus | The Trinity Mix (Example) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20s – 30s | 80% – 90% | Aggressive Accumulation | 50% Nasdaq 100 / 30% S&P 500 / 20% SCHD |
| 40s – 50s | 60% – 75% | Growth & Preparation | 30% S&P 500 / 30% Nasdaq 100 / 40% SCHD |
| 60s+ | 45% – 55% | Income & Preservation | 20% S&P 500 / 10% Nasdaq 100 / 70% SCHD |
Export to Sheets
At 50, I am currently in the “Growth & Preparation” phase. I keep a balanced 30/30/40 mix. My Nasdaq exposure ensures I don’t miss out on modern tech growth, while my heavy SCHD allocation ensures that I am building a robust “dividend engine” for my retirement at 67.
The CEO’s Edge: Why 10 Assets?
You might remember from my previous posts that I limit my portfolio to 10 total assets (3 ETFs, 1 Bond fund, 6 Individual stocks). This is intentional.
Complexity is the enemy of performance. If I hold 50 stocks, I cannot act like a CEO; I act like an index. By limiting my choices, I am forced to be excellent. When I rebalance my portfolio, I am not shuffling dozens of tickers; I am trimming the winners in my Nasdaq 100 or S&P 500 holdings and pouring those profits into SCHD or my Bond fund to lock in stability.
It is a continuous cycle of harvesting growth and planting stability.
Final Thoughts: Investing is a Business Plan
Do not get distracted by the “S&P 500 vs. Nasdaq 100” debate. It is a false choice. In business, you don’t choose between “Sales” and “Marketing”—you need both to survive. Similarly, you don’t choose between “Growth” and “Income”—you need both to retire.
Use the Rule of 110 as your guide, but don’t be afraid to adjust it based on your personal risk tolerance and your business reality. Build your Trinity, stay consistent, and remember: you aren’t just buying stocks. You are building a system that will pay you long after you hang up your hat at age 67.
How about you? Are you following the “Rule of 110,” or does your business or career situation allow you to take a different approach? I’d love to hear your strategy in the comments below.
Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor. This is a personal strategy based on my specific business situation and risk tolerance. Every investor’s journey is unique, and you should adjust these allocations to fit your own financial goals. Please conduct your own research before making financial decisions.