Advertiser Disclosure

News

10 Money Rules to Break in 2018

Editorial Note: The content of this article is based on the author’s opinions and recommendations alone. It has not been previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any of our network partners.

Written By

iStock

When it comes to personal finance, you’ve probably heard all types of “rules of thumb” to follow. Yet the painful truth is that there is no one-size-fits-all rulebook for financial success.

These rules are good places to start. However, blindly following them won’t lead to satisfying results. The future is unknown and every individual’s goals and circumstances are unique.

What you can do is use the rules as general guidance. Assess your goals and needs regularly, and adjust your strategies for saving, investing, spending and debt payment accordingly.

We’ve summarized 10 common personal finance rules that you can refer to but can feel free to pick and choose based on your own situation:

1. “Save 10% for retirement.”

If you are comfortable enough to start saving, a common rule of thumb is to save 10% of each paycheck for retirement.

Catherine Hawley, a San Francisco-based financial planner, told MagnifyMoney that 10% may too low a bar for many workers, especially those whose incomes may fluctuate.

“[This rule] might be better thought of as a starting place one builds on,” Hawley said. “If you have a high income but anticipate switching careers or if that income is not stable, such as some sales jobs, your long-term savings rate may need to be closer to 50% to keep you on track for retirement.”

By saving more now, you’re allowing yourself a cushion of protection if you were to see a major reduction income.

Another reason the 10% rule isn’t so great is that some people simply can’t afford to go there just yet. In that case, it’s much better to start with 4% or 5% and work your way up than let this rule dissuade you from saving at all.

Instead: If you are earning a lot, don’t let the rule stop you from saving more. If you are early in your career, you don’t have to get up to 10% all at once. At the very least, contribute enough to your company-sponsored retirement plan to capture the full company match, if you are offered one. From there, consider increasing your contribution based on your other financial goals.

2. “Whatever you do, max out your 401(k).”

Financial planners can’t emphasize enough the importance of saving for retirement: The earlier you start saving and the more you contribute, the better. But maxing out your 401(k) isn’t necessarily a good idea for everyone.

The legal maximum amount you can save in your 401(k) is $18,500 in 2018 ($24,500 if you are 50 or over). If you were starting from scratch, you would have to tuck away more than $1,500 a month to max it out by the year’s end.

If you are a high-wage earner, it’s great if you can max it out without much effort. But if you make $50,000 a year, you would have to stash nearly 40% of your salary for retirement. Remember, this is money that, if contributed to a traditional 401(k), can’t be withdrawn until age 59 1/2 without incurring penalties (with some exceptions).

Planning for retirement from an early age is wonderful, but there may be other goals you want to achieve when you are young and need money in the near future. For example, you might want to prioritize paying off high-interest debts like credit cards or auto debt before throwing a good chunk of your paycheck into your retirement fund. And you should definitely save up at least a few months’ worth of income in your savings account so you have money set aside in case of emergencies.

It’s not wise to sacrifice your current life goals if maxing out your 401(k) is a tough task.

Instead: Although there are multiple benefits to saving for retirement, you may want to take a holistic view of your financial situation and review your near-term financial goals before deciding whether or not to max out your 401(k). Read our guidelines on things you should consider before hitting that maximum.

3. “Save at least three to six months’ worth of expenses.”

One common financial planner mantra is that you should have an emergency fund to cover three to six months of expenses.

Clearly, not many people can achieve that goal. The Federal Reserve reported that in 2016, 44% of Americans could not come up with $400 in cash to cover emergencies.

Depending on circumstances, some people probably can make do with a smaller cash reserve, but others may need a bigger one.

Hawley suggested for those who have consumer debt, they may be better off having a smaller emergency fund while prioritizing paying off one’s deficit.

A person who has an unstable income or several mouths to feed may find that three to six months’ worth of expenses may not be nearly enough. For example, if you’re a freelancer or a seasonal worker, you may want to double your savings goal so you can cover any dry spells.

“If you are very conservative or in a volatile industry where you periodically get laid off you may be more comfortable with more cash on hand,” Hawley added.

Instead: An emergency fund is an account you can use to cover necessary expenses in case you lose a job, your car breaks down or you get hit by an unexpected hospital bill. Your non-routine costs like a vacation or a kitchen renovation should not be part of the calculation. Don’t be afraid to go below or beyond the three-to-six-month rule considering your needs and debt situation. In general, the less steady your job is and the more dependents you have, the larger your emergency fund should be.

4. “Subtract your age from 100 to get your perfect investment allocation.”

iStock

One of the most basic rules for asset allocation is to subtract your age from 100 to calculate the percentage of your portfolio that you should keep in stocks.

Under this rule, at age 25, for instance, you should keep 75% of your portfolio in stocks and the rest in bonds and other relatively safer securities. At age 75, you invest 25% of your assets in stocks. The idea is to gradually reduce investment risk as you age, because older people don’t have as much time to wait for a market bounce-back following a dip.

Much research has been done about asset allocation adjustment for retirement. Experts have different conclusions based on different models. David Blanchett, head of retirement research for Morningstar Investment Management, concluded in an 2015 article that declining shares in equity as people grow older is best for retirement planning in an environment of low bond yields and decent market performance.

This 100-minus-age rule is a good place to get people started in allocating their investments, but it has its flaws.

Americans are living longer and retiring later. The average life expectancy was 79 in 2015, five years longer than 1980, according to the World Bank. Retirement savings strategies should be adjusted as people need a bigger nest egg, can potentially grow the money more and recover from a market downturn.

At the same time, the yield on a 10-year Treasury Bill is roughly 2.5%, down from a peak of nearly 16% in the 1980s. But the stock market keeps soaring — the Dow Jones Industrial Average shot up 24% last year and hit 26,000 for the first time the third week of January. It may not make as much sense today to dump a large portion of money into fixed income when you could potentially reap greater gains.

Instead: Rebalance your investment portfolio each year, considering your target retirement age, plans on using the funds at retirement, your risk tolerance and market performance. If you’re feeling more comfortable with risk, use 110 (or even 120) as a starting point to calculate your stock exposure.

Maria Bruno, senior investment analyst at the Vanguard Investment Group, told MagnifyMoney that stocks should be a significant part of a young worker’s portfolio — 80-100% in equity is very reasonable. For people in retirement, it’s better to be more conservative but still not too afraid to take some risks. A ratio of 60:40 stocks to bonds is considered a balanced allocation for them, Bruno said.

“Equities still do play a role for somebody at retirement because they could be looking at a 30- to 35-year time horizon,” Bruno said. “Individuals may think that they are playing it safe by staying out of the market, but actually what they are doing is they are overexposing themselves to inflation risk, because the portofolio can’t grow in real terms.”

5. “Withdraw 4% of your savings in retirement.”

Here is another retirement savings regimen: You start withdrawing 4% from your portfolio in your first year of retirement, increasing your withdrawal each year enough to cover inflation.

If you have $1 million in your retirement account, for instance, you take out $40,000 for the first year. If the annual inflation rate is 2%, then you withdraw $40,800 the following year ($40,000 plus 2%). And you continue on the path for the next 30 years. This rule was created based on historical data by financial advisor William Bengen in 1994.

But this is not how life works; it hardly goes as planned. Your spending in retirement may vary year by year. This rigid rule doesn’t take into consideration of your investment performance, your retirement time horizon nor the current market and economic conditions. It assumes retirees have a portfolio split between stocks and bonds. Bengen later revised the rule himself to 4.5%, using a more diversified portfolio.

Instead: Be flexible. Revise your spending rate annually based on needs, portfolio performance and taxes. If you have a personal financial advisor, discuss with your planner to determine the withdrawal rates that best suit your personal situation.

For early retirees or someone who’s invested much more conservatively and may have a smaller nest egg, they would probably need to withdraw a little under 4% to make sure their lifestyle remains sustainable, Bruno said. On the other end, she said someone with a shorter horizon — in other words, someone who doesn’t think they’ll have much time to enjoy their savings —  or who’s late in retirement shouldn’t feel tied to that 4% rule; instead, they could stand to spend a little bit more.

6. “Spend no more than 30% of your income on housing.”

The 30% rule is a common budget benchmark for housing costs. The idea is to cap your rent or mortgage at under 30% of your monthly income.

This idea stems from housing regulations from the late ’60s. A U.S. Census Bureau study said the Brooke Amendment (1969) to the 1968 Housing and Urban Development Act established the rent threshold of 25% of family income in response to rising renting costs. The rent standard later rose to 30% in 1981, which has since remained unchanged, according to the study.

But the standard crafted almost four decades ago may not be realistic for many today. A Harvard University study shows that in 2015, nearly 21 million renters — that’s nearly half of the country’s renters — spent more than 30% of their income on housing across the country.

Instead: Think of affordability instead of the 30% rule. Depending on how much you earn, how much debt you bear and where you live, rent could be more or less than 30% of your paycheck. Hawley said she encourages people to work on earning more when rent eats away a huge chunk of income, which may be easier than relocating to reduce rent. If you live in a relatively affordable area compared with California or New York, housing doesn’t have to fill 30% of the budget, she said. In that case, you may have wiggle room to save more.

7. “Buy in bulk.”

iStock

Price per unit may be cheaper at club warehouses like Costco than a local grocery store, and buying in bulk saves money for tens of thousands of American families. But bulk-buying won’t necessarily save money if you buy more than what you can consume. Indeed, many shoppers confessed they have always bought more than they needed just because they couldn’t avoid the temptation of “super deals” at those clubs.

In addition, wholesale markets are not a paradise for every family. If it’s a family of two, the quantities of groceries you stocked up from a major trip to a wholesale market are so large that it may take weeks or even months to consume. You are basically paying upfront a lot more for saving money later. Worse yet, jumbo-sized products may go rotten or expire before you remember that they are even there.

A 2014 University of Arizona study found that families trying to buy all their groceries in one major trip, stocking up on discounted items and purchasing in bulk often buy things that end up unused.

Instead: Buy what you need and how much you need now.

8. “Borrow as much student debt as your expected salary.”

Many college students find themselves saddled with an enormous student loan debt today.

When determining how much students should borrow for higher education, a rule of thumb is that you should cap your total student loan debt below your expected first-year annual salary.

But wait a minute, private schools charge far more than public universities. In some industries, wage growth has been in Stagnantville for decades. Graduates may see big wage increases as their careers advance if they are in finance or law. But if they are government workers, their pay raises may not come as often and substantial.

In a MagnifyMoney survey of the 2017 graduate class, 40% of the 1,000 surveyed recent graduates with student loans anticipated that they’d need more than 10 years to repay their student loans.

Aside from the projected initial annual salary, many other factors, including time expected to repay the loan, the school you attend, the industry you may end up entering, should go into the borrowing calculation.

Instead: Figure out how much you actually need to borrow by evaluating the potential costs, including tuitions, fees and living expenses. Adjust your lifestyle and cut down unnecessary expenses. Remember, you want to borrow as little as possible. Find a loan that works for your future lifestyle. Refinance student loans to a lower interest rate can help you save money.

[9 Options to Refinance Student Loans]

9. “Pay off your mortgage before saving for retirement.”

You may be advised to pay off your mortgage as early as possible because debt is a liability. It may feel great to be completely debt-free, but slowly paying off your mortgage early isn’t always the best move, especially if you are not living in your home for the long run.

“If you can pay off the house you plan to stay in for five years or more after the debt is retired, great,” said Kristin C. Sullivan, a Denver, Co.-based financial planner. “If not, keep that money for yourself and invest more in your 401(k) or other assets that have the possibility for growth.”

Homeowners who purchased their homes after Dec. 15, 2017 can deduct mortgage interest paid on up to $750,000 in mortgage debt from their taxes under the new tax law. For those living in expensive housing markets who will itemize their taxes, that’s all the more reason to invest that money elsewhere.

Instead: Before adding extra monthly mortgage payment, you should pay off other high-interest debt first, such as credit card balance. Prioritize your financial goals, for example, ask yourself whether paying off the mortgage or investing for retirement is more important for you, or if you want to save for your children’s education. If you can enjoy the tax benefits or plan to move in the next five years, that money can be well used in other ways.

10. “Credit cards are bad.”

iStock

Many people shy away from credit cards, being fearful that they will spend money they don’t have and later be trapped in debt over their heads. Those people are more likely to rely on debit cards or cash.

But credit cards are not that bad at all if they are used wisely. A cardholder will stay out of trouble if he/she can pay off the balance on time and in full to avoid a high-interest charge.

By steering clear of credit cards, consumers not only miss the opportunity to build credit, but lose rewards, which can come in forms of travel points or cash, that credit card companies give to incentivize cardholders to spend.

Instead: Stick to your budget and spend within your means. Focus on your card balance — not your credit limit. Set auto payment to pay off your credit debt in full, not just the minimum balance, every month. Check our latest review of best credit card offers and how to choose a card that suits your needs.

Advertiser Disclosure: The products that appear on this site may be from companies from which MagnifyMoney receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site (including, for example, the order in which they appear). MagnifyMoney does not include all financial institutions or all products offered available in the marketplace.

Advertiser Disclosure

News

Coronavirus Pandemic Triggers Investing Regrets Among U.S. Investors

Editorial Note: The content of this article is based on the author’s opinions and recommendations alone and is not intended to be a source of investment advice. It has not been previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any of our network partners.

Written By

Reviewed By

As the coronavirus pandemic took a hold of the global economy in early 2020, investors everywhere panicked and sent the stock market plummeting to some of its worst days in recent history. Now that some of the immediate panic has subsided, many American investors are reflecting on recent investment moves that they now regret.

In a new MagnifyMoney survey, we found that many Americans regret their previous investing decisions in light of the COVID-19 crisis. However, many investors are also hopeful for the market’s future, which could make this a perfect time to plan your own future investing moves.

Key findings

  • More than half of investors regret past investing decisions brought to light by the COVID-19 crisis.
    • Younger generations, who are arguably less experienced investors, have more regrets than older investors. A whopping 92% of Gen Z investors admitted to an investing regret in some form or another.
    • Still, 79% of Gen X had regrets, compared to much lower numbers from baby boomers (33%) and the silent generation (24%).
  • About one-third of investors have full confidence that their investments will rebound by the end of 2020, but some have more hope than others.
    • Republicans are about twice as likely as Democrats and Independents to be very confident that their investments will recover by the end of the year.
    • Meanwhile, baby boomers and the silent generation are much less confident in their investments’ recovery than younger investors.
  • Consumers with investment accounts estimate their stock market losses are about $24,400 on average since the coronavirus outbreak slammed the United States in March.
    • Baby boomers and the silent generation lost the most, at roughly $56,000 and $63,300, respectively. Unfortunately, these are the generations likely relying heavily on their investments in retirement.
    • Women estimated they lost about $32,300 through the stock market, while men estimated their investment losses to be around $18,700.
  • More than one-third of Americans think it will be at least a year before the stock market recovers from the pandemic. 
    • However, it’s worth noting that more than 1 in 5 (22%) respondents believe the market will recover in just two to five months.
  • As the stock market shows signs of growth despite the bleak financial picture of many Americans, more than half of respondents agreed that the stock market does not completely depict the financial picture of the average U.S. consumer. 
    • Republicans and those who have investment accounts (including a retirement savings account) are more likely to believe the market mirrors the average consumer (around 35% in each group), compared to Democrats (24%) and those without investment accounts (13%).

The most common investing regrets amid coronavirus pandemic

Among our respondents, the top investing regret was a lack of portfolio diversification, a regret cited by 23% of respondents. Gen X respondents regretted this mistake the most at about 29%, with millennials not far behind at 27%. At 30%, men also cited this regret more than the 13% of women who admitted to making this error.

The second most common investment regret cited (19%) was taking on risky investments. Nearly one-third of Gen Z investors got burned by a risky investment. And while baby boomers and the silent generation were less likely to make this mistake, a quarter of Gen X confessed regretting this potentially costly move.

Some examples of high-risk investments can include initial public offerings (IPOs), structured products and venture capital trusts. You also may take on considerable risk if you’re trying to time the market for maximum returns, which many experts caution against.

The third common investment regret among respondents (13%) was keeping all of their savings in the stock market. Gen Z investors were the most guilty of this mistake, with 27% regretting keeping all of their savings in investments, followed by 15% of millennials, 13% of Gen X, 7% of baby boomers and a mere 2% of the silent generation.

How to avoid investing regrets

Luckily, these investing regrets are easily avoidable. Even if you found yourself regretting your pandemic-induced investment moves, there’s still time to recover.

Diversify your portfolio

For starters, it’s important to keep your assets diversified, or spread among different investments and across industries, whether you’re a beginner or an investing veteran. That way, when one part of the market takes a tumble, the other parts of your portfolio aren’t hit as badly, or at all. Essentially, by avoiding putting all of your eggs in one basket, your investments can be better protected in a downturn.

Cushion your risky investments

Keeping your portfolio well-balanced and diversified can also help mitigate risky investments that you might have taken on. It also helps to invest your money incrementally rather than in lump sums. That way, you’ll invest in both down and up times, balancing out your investment gains rather than going all in now and regretting your risk-taking later.

Acting reactively to the market is also a risk of its own. If you sell your assets just because everyone else is panicking, prices are driven down and you end up losing money because you’re making less on the sale than what you paid when you bought the asset. Instead, ride it out and keep your money invested. The markets will recover, and your assets’ valuation will go back up, too.

Invest toward long-term gains

Due to its nature, investing is a risky business. There’s the chance of losses and there is no guaranteed payout amount waiting for you. Because of these factors, it’s generally a bad idea to place all your savings bets on your investments. If you need cash in a downturn, you’ll be selling at a loss to withdraw from your investment accounts. Even further, selling off assets and turning them into cash takes time, making this a much less convenient method of withdrawing money than, say, heading to the ATM.

Instead, you should keep your investments geared toward the future, establishing more long-term goals for your investment accounts. This is why retirement accounts are often investment-based — it gives your investments time to accumulate, but also to ride out the many fluctuations of the market.

For your more immediate cash needs, keep money in a high-yield savings account. This allows for easier withdrawals and transfers, and ensures your money still grows. You can also open an interest-bearing checking account to make sure your money is growing no matter what account it’s in.

Methodology

MagnifyMoney commissioned Qualtrics to conduct an online survey of 2,008 Americans, with the sample base proportioned to represent the overall population. The sample population included 1,183 investors and 866 non-investors. We defined the generations in 2020 as follows:

  • Gen Z is defined as ages 18 to 22
  • Millennials as ages 23 to 38
  • Gen X as ages 39 to 53
  • Baby boomers as ages 54 to 73
  • Silent generation as ages 74 and over

The survey was fielded from April 28 to May 1, 2020.

Advertiser Disclosure: The products that appear on this site may be from companies from which MagnifyMoney receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site (including, for example, the order in which they appear). MagnifyMoney does not include all financial institutions or all products offered available in the marketplace.

Advertiser Disclosure

News

Study: The Best U.S. Cities for Working from Home

Editorial Note: The content of this article is based on the author’s opinions and recommendations alone. It has not been previewed, commissioned or otherwise endorsed by any of our network partners.

Written By

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to change life across the nation, many workers have shifted to remote work to adhere to social-distancing guidelines. Luckily, working from home has never been easier. Thanks to advances in technology, many professionals have been able to continue plowing through their to-do lists from the comfort of their couch.

However, some cities are better for remote work than others. Cities that are more appealing to telecommuters have higher earning power for the remote workers who live there and more remote work opportunities. Additionally, cities with longer commute times also make it more appealing for residents to choose to work from home.

To determine the best cities for working from home, MagnifyMoney combed through the Census Bureau’s 2018 1-Year American Community Survey (conducted before the coronavirus pandemic began). We examined the 100 largest U.S. cities by the number of workers, classifying them by metrics related to how many people work from home, their earning power and their cost of living.

Key findings

  • Gilbert, Ariz. is rated the best place to work from home, due to a sharp rise in the number of people working from home, which indicates more remote work opportunities, as well as the fact that remote workers there make $1.32 for every dollar earned by the average worker.
  • The second best place to work from home is Atlanta, thanks to factors like a rise in people working from home from 2017 to 2018 and good pay for remote workers. Additionally, local housing costs in Atlanta were equal to just 27% of earnings for the average person who works from home.
  • Aurora, Colo. comes in third, with residents who work remotely skipping out on the 30-minute average daily commute there.
  • The worst city to work from home was Toledo, Ohio, which had a low and stagnant number of people working from home, indicating few remote work opportunities. Those who do work from home in Toledo generally earned less in comparison to average earnings.
  • The second worst city to work from home was El Paso, Texas, followed by Greensboro, N.C.
  • On average, across the 100 cities analyzed, working from home tended to pay better than not working from home.
  • Overall, the number of people working from home is fairly flat, suggesting that the so-called “telecommuting revolution” had yet to come to fruition before COVID-19.
  • Long commutes did not necessarily translate to more people working from home. While New York and New Jersey had the longest average commutes, they did not see much of an increase in the number of people working from home.

Best cities for working from home

Topping our study’s ranking of the best cities to work from home is Gilbert, Ariz. Gilbert, a suburb located southeast of Phoenix, measures just over 72 square miles and has a population of more than 230,000.

Our study found that the average person working from home in Gilbert makes $1.32 for every dollar the average person makes, earning it a tie for the 20th spot regarding that metric. Gilbert also ranked high for two metrics measuring the city’s overall work-from-home climate. It ranked fourth for its share of remote workers, with 4.90% of residents working from home, and sixth for the percent change in the number of people working from home from 2017 to 2018, a 1.20% year-over-year increase. Additionally, the average commute time of a typical worker in Gilbert is 28 minutes, earning Gilbert the 27th spot for that metric as telecommuters are saving nearly half an hour each way.

All of these metrics contributed to Gilbert’s overall top ranking, making it a great option for telecommuters looking for a balanced lifestyle of good pay, a remote work-friendly culture and a decent chunk of time saved from commuting.

Atlanta snags the spot for the second best city to work from home, thanks to the high earning power of remote workers and a culture friendly to telecommuting. Atlanta has a high work-from-home rate, with 4.50% of people working from home, earning it a sixth-place ranking for that metric. Remote workers in Atlanta make $1.13 for every dollar the average worker pulls in, and housing costs accounted for just 27% of a remote worker’s earnings, landing it the 22nd spot for that metric.

Rounding out the top three for our study on the best cities to work from home is Aurora, Colo. Aurora’s rankings were boosted by the fact that remote workers in Aurora make $1.41 for every dollar that the average person makes — earning the city the 11th spot for that metric. The city also boasts 3.50% of people working from home, which landed it in 19th spot for that metric. Additionally, workers in Aurora had an average commute time of 30 minutes, which means, conversely, remote workers get to skip out on a half hour long-commute, earning the city the 18th spot for the commute time metric.

Overall, the best state to work remotely seems to be Arizona — three cities, all Phoenix suburbs, cracked our study’s top 10 best cities to work from home ranking: Gilbert (first), Chandler (seventh) and Scottsdale (tenth). Another state with a strong presence in our study’s top 10 best cities to work from home is Colorado, with Aurora ranking second and Denver ranking sixth.

Worst cities for working from home

The U.S. city falling to the bottom of our study’s ranking — making it the worst city to work from home — is Toledo, Ohio. Located in the northwest region of Ohio, Toledo has a population of around 276,000.

Remote workers in Toledo pulled in far less than the average worker, earning just $0.58 for every $1 earned by an average worker and resulting in the city ranking 99th for that metric. Additionally, remote workers in Toledo spent an average of 51% of their earnings on housing, underscoring remote workers’ overall low earning power. Toledo also had a staggeringly low percentage of residents working remotely — 0.90% — which indicates the poor overall culture of remote work and opportunity in the city.

The second worst city to work from home, according to our study, is El Paso, Texas. Remote workers in El Paso also had dismal earning power, with people who work from home making just $0.81 for every dollar earned by the average worker, and housing costs accounting for 45% of remote workers’ earnings. Like Toledo, El Paso also had a relatively low percentage of remote workers overall, with 1.60% of people working from home, placing the city 87th for that metric.

Meanwhile, our study found that Greensboro, N.C., is the third worst city to work from home. Greensboro ranked last for the metric measuring the growth in the number of people working from home, with 1.90% fewer people working remotely in 2018 compared to 2017, indicating a possible decline in remote work opportunity there. Remote workers also weren’t saving a particularly significant amount of time by telecommuting, with the average commute time for residents in Greensboro being just 21 minutes.

Overall, our study found that there are bad cities for working from home nationwide, from the Northeast all the way to the West Coast.

Advantages and disadvantages of working from home

As is the case with clocking your 9-to-5 hours in a cubicle, many of us have discovered during the pandemic that there are both advantages and disadvantages to working from the comfort of your couch.

Advantages of working from home

  • Potentially higher pay: Our survey found that in many cities, remote workers raked in more money than non-remote workers. For example, in Norfolk, Va., the average remote worker made $1.68 for every dollar earned by the average worker. One reason for this could be that, according to the BLS, the more popular occupations for remote work include jobs in management, business and finance, all of which tend to be higher-paying.
  • Money saved on transportation: The cost of commuting is not something to overlook. Depending on the state in which you live, you could spend between $2,000 to $5,000 a year on commuting costs. Working from home enables you to save thousands of dollars a year.
  • Money saved on childcare: One of the biggest incentives for working from home is the flexibility it allows — especially for parents with kids to care for. For working parents, the cost of childcare can add up to hundreds of dollars a week. If a parent works from home, they might be able to avoid paying for a daycare service or nanny.

Learn how you can maximize your savings with the best online savings account offers. 

Disadvantages of working from home

  • Strain on relationships with colleagues: Working from home could have a negative effect on your relationships with your colleagues. At least one study has found that remote workers were more likely to report that their co-workers treat them poorly and exclude them.
  • Lack of work-life balance: When your home doubles as your workspace, it can be difficult to unplug. Indeed, one survey from Remote.co found that unplugging after work hours is the biggest challenge among telecommuters. Achieving a healthy work-life balance when you work from home can certainly be a challenging obstacle to overcome.

Methodology

For our study, we looked at data from the 2018 Census Bureau’s 1-Year American Community Survey. Metrics analyzed included:

  • The percentage of people who work from home.
  • Earnings for people working from home relative to average earnings of local workers.
  • The percentage point change in the share of workers working from home from 2017 to 2018.
  • The percentage point change in earnings for people who work from home from 2017 to 2018.
  • Housing costs as a percentage of income for people working from home.
  • Average commute time.

To create the final rankings, we ranked each city in each metric. Using these rankings, we created a final index based on each city’s average ranking. The city with the best average ranking received the highest score, while the city with the lowest average ranking received the lowest score. The cities were then indexed based on the best possible score.

Advertiser Disclosure: The products that appear on this site may be from companies from which MagnifyMoney receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site (including, for example, the order in which they appear). MagnifyMoney does not include all financial institutions or all products offered available in the marketplace.