As with most things in life, it depends. Two people at different stages of life and career might evaluate the same investment drastically differently, against the criteria of their own priorities.
The juncture of: time, income, financial timelines, and financial priorities
How doing almost nothing (index funds) can and does outperform active mutual funds; KISS
Success criteria, aka not running out of money in retirement
Needless to say, most everyone would prefer a higher rate of return. But the caveat is how much it will cost. Some higher rates of return are almost without cost, such as switching from a brick-and-mortar savings account (0.01% APY) to an online savings account (~4.30% APY). This is almost a no-brainer.
Other investments have fantastic returns but have opportunity costs: buying into large infrastructure can pay huge dividends but take decades to become profitable, tying up the money and sometimes nearly bankrupting the Earl of Grantham. Even still, this could be advisable when viewed in the long-term.
Likewise, some investments have a paltry rate, but carry (almost) no risk of missed payments. Someone looking for a income later in life might be fairly pleased to have a steady stream of inflation-adjusted money.
Even corporations and governments evaluate investments differently than people, since corporeal legal entities aren’t mortal and death is optional. Indeed, investment priorities are a lot different for sovereign entities, which cannot declare bankruptcy precisely because of their power to raise taxes.
I hope these examples show that the qualities of an investment – independent of quantitative measures like return rate or revenue per share – can be “good” in different ways.
As with most things in life, it depends. Two people at different stages of life and career might evaluate the same investment drastically differently, against the criteria of their own priorities.
Years ago, I read the Bogleheads’ Guide To Investing which thoroughly discussed, among other things:
Needless to say, most everyone would prefer a higher rate of return. But the caveat is how much it will cost. Some higher rates of return are almost without cost, such as switching from a brick-and-mortar savings account (0.01% APY) to an online savings account (~4.30% APY). This is almost a no-brainer.
Other investments have fantastic returns but have opportunity costs: buying into large infrastructure can pay huge dividends but take decades to become profitable, tying up the money and sometimes nearly bankrupting the Earl of Grantham. Even still, this could be advisable when viewed in the long-term.
Likewise, some investments have a paltry rate, but carry (almost) no risk of missed payments. Someone looking for a income later in life might be fairly pleased to have a steady stream of inflation-adjusted money.
Even corporations and governments evaluate investments differently than people, since corporeal legal entities aren’t mortal and death is optional. Indeed, investment priorities are a lot different for sovereign entities, which cannot declare bankruptcy precisely because of their power to raise taxes.
I hope these examples show that the qualities of an investment – independent of quantitative measures like return rate or revenue per share – can be “good” in different ways.