Should you invest first? Or get covered first?
I hear this quite oftenāand it does sound reasonable at first
āSince Iām still young, Iād rather invest first.
If anything happens, I can just use my investments.ā
BUT BUT BUT! What if the āanything happensā comes before your investments have had time to grow?
In our 20s, most people are just starting to build wealth
doesn't have significant savings yet or heavily dependent on their monthly income
Which means our income is actually our biggest asset right now. š° then now imagine being diagnosed with a critical illness....
Would you rather:
A) Sell your investments (maybe at a loss), pause your financial goals, and worry about daily expenses
or
B) Receive a lump sum payout that supports your recoveryāwhile your investments remain untouched
and yes, this is the difference!
Because investments:
ā Fluctuate with the market
ā Take time to grow
ā May not be enough when you need them most
Whereas CI coverage:
ā Provides immediate financial support
ā Protects your income and lifestyle
ā Gives you time and space to recover
Itās not about choosing one over the other. Itās about building the right order: Protect first, then grow. š±
Because the biggest risk to your investment plan isnāt market volatilityā itās losing the ability to earnā¼ļø
If youāve been putting this off or assuming your investments can cover everything, it might be worth taking a second look š
Or if you need someone to review, š¬ me!
