Tepom.com

Personal finance advice for the average American.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Debunking Dave Ramsey's Snowball Plan for Debt Reduction

A reader recently commented on my site,  suggesting that I check out Dave Ramsey's website and learn about some of his suggestions for getting out of debt.  This morning, I performed a detailed analysis of his debt reduction plan which he calls the "Snowball Plan."

First accumulate $1,000 cash as an emergency fund. Then begin intensely getting rid of all debt (except the house) using my debt snowball plan. List your debts in order with the smallest payoff or balance first. Do not be concerned with interest rates or terms unless two debts have similar payoffs, then list the higher interest rate debt first. Paying the little debts off first gives you quick feedback, and you are more likely to stay with the plan.
I should mention that Mr. Ramsey is a faith-based financial advisor and regularly takes into account more than just the numbers.  When speaking on personal finace, he focuses on the "personal" just as much as the "finance."  Though his system has proven to be effective for some, it is not my style.

He urges his readers and listeners to build momentum when reducing their debt and try to feel a sense of accomplishment.  But let me warn you: those senses of momentum and accomplishment may not come cheaply.  Essentially, by "feeling good" about paying down debt, you risk taking more time to do it and thus wasting more of your money on interest payments.

Consider this analysis:
Let's say you have two loans: A student loan for $25,000 and an auto loan for $10,000.  The student loan has an interest rate of 8% and regular payments of $227 for 200 months.  The auto loan has an interest rate of 6% and regular monthly payments of $304 for 36 months.  In addition to your regular payments, let's say you have $100/month extra that you can apply to whichever loan you're currently paying and that once it is paid off, you will take the normal payments of it and apply them toward the other loan until it is paid off.  In this scenario, with minimum payments of $227 and $304 and extra cash of $100, you will be paying $631 per month until both loans are paid off.

Because the length of the student loan is much longer than the auto loan, even if you decide to apply the extra money to the student loan first, by the time it's paid off the auto loan will have been long-since paid off.  The total you will have spent on interest over the life of the two loans will be $10,603.  If you had decided to pay off the smaller auto loan first and then send all of your debt-reducing cash to the student loan, you would have saved $2,262 in interest.  In this case, Dave Ramsey's strategy works.

But let's look at another scenario.
Let's say you marry your college sweetheart.  After the wedding, you decide to merge your individual finances and adapt a joint financial strategy that works for both of you.  Let's say that you have a student loan of $30,000 at 9% for ten years.  Your spouse has less: only $15,000 at 6% for the same 10 years.  Like the previous example, you can pay an extra $100 each month toward the principal on whichever loan you're paying down first.

The terms (length) of the two loans are the same, one is twice the size of the other, and the smaller loan carries a smaller interest rate.  Dave Ramsey would tell you to pay off the smaller $15,000 loan first.  By doing that, you're costing yourself $1,534 in unnecessary interest.  If the difference in the interest rates was greater, this wasted amount would be even larger.  Let's say your loan carried 10% interest and your spouse's carried 5%.  You would then waste $2,058 in additional interest by paying the smaller loan first.

Let's tweak the numbers one more time: Assuming the same rates and balances,  a change in terms so that the smaller loan lasted for 15 years instead of ten would result in a waste of $2,656 in unnecessary interest payments; just because you listened to Mr. Ramsey.

As you can see, there is not a definitive high-level strategy that can accurately determine the order in which you should pay off your loans.  Mr. Ramsey tries to justify his financially flawed plan by adding emotion and human perception to the equation.  Here is my solution:  When considering the order in which you pay off your loans, crunch the numbers.  Once you prove which will save you the most money, set up a regular payment with your bank and forget about it.  You should find satisfaction in the fact that you're paying off your loans in the smartest, cheapest way possible.  Maybe it means paying off the smaller loan and maybe it doesn't. 

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

7 Comments:

  • At September 11, 2008 10:15 AM , Blogger John said...

    This was a pretty good post. I think it is funny how people will pay off the lower debts first without regard to the interest rates.

    In fact, I have had to put off saving for a bit because the interest I am paying on a loan and a no-longer-used credit card that have a higher interest rate than what I could earn though a saving account or a decent investment.

    But my plan is usually "Save First" as long as your savings interest is higher than your debt interest. Then put a bit more to your highest interest rate debt. In the long run, this works out better.

     
  • At September 11, 2008 10:24 AM , Blogger Scott Bliss said...

    Thanks for the comment, John.

    I agree that sometimes it makes sense to pay off the highest interest rate first -- but not always.

    There are ways to go about this: 1) pay the lowest balance first, and 2) pay the highest interest first.

    The point of my post is that neither one of these is always correct when it comes to paying down loans. And we certainly shouldn't use "feel good" emotion to justify one vs the other.

    I created a calculator in Excel that will allow you to input the terms of two loans and show you which you should pay off first. I'll email it to you.

    Another thing to think about is the tax benefits that you may gain from certain types of debt, like student loans and mortgages.

     
  • At September 11, 2008 11:03 AM , Blogger Steve said...

    Scott, you are completely right, but should not dismiss the emotional decision making that the Snowball plan takes into account. The sad fact is that a huge number of people are incredibly intimidated by math and will not even try to understand how interest rates, terms, etc work. These are also probably the people most likely to have a large number of debts - multiple credit cards, payday loans, etc. The feeling of accomplishment that comes with paying off a debt will be more powerful in helping people continue to pay off debts than an understanding of the best way to pay off their debts.

    While it may be a poor way to go about turning around your finances, it gives people a simple, quick way to make a financial decision. It may not be the best one, but at least it is A decision to pay off some debt.

    This might be different if math was taught to be understood rather than memorized and tested in elementary and middle school. But that's another discussion.

     
  • At September 11, 2008 1:00 PM , Blogger FieldingHurst said...

    Nice "detailed analysis", but the point is that this is NOT ABOUT MATH.

    While this may be true for some "Essentially, by "feeling good" about paying down debt, you risk taking more time to do it and thus wasting more of your money on interest payments", there's the other side of that coin too ... paying down the highest interest rate first for a lot of people risks feeling overwhelmed and giving up. This is along the same lines as being on a diet. For most folks, if they don't see any progress immediately, they give up and revert to old habits.

    Nice article, but "debunk" is a tad strong.

    A large % of folks are doing the Rave Damsey plan instead and for these folks, ANY method is better than the staus-quo ...

    http://www.daveramseyguru.com/the-rave-damsey-toddler-steps-to-financial-slavery-anti-dave-ramsey/

     
  • At September 11, 2008 1:21 PM , Blogger Scott Bliss said...

    Thanks for the comment FieldingHurst --

    The notion of Rave Damsey really gave me a laugh. I agree with many of his [anti-]principles about saving and not putting things on credit cards. And the embedded link to the callcash.com Gary Coleman ad was hilarious! I remember stumbling on that site last year. It's places like those that are truly the enemy...

    I understand that for many people, financial management is a very emotional thing; good analogy about the diet plans.

    But for me, it IS about the math. I hope that I can persuade readers of my site that if they do an analysis, they can exceed the value in Dave's plan and save themselves even more cash.

    I enjoy using Mint.com's free financial management software to help me keep track of my budget, my everyday spending, and the balances of my debts and investments.

    By keeping my finances completely quantified, I am able to make objective decisions based on the bottom line -- not how good it will feel if I have my car paid off.

    Thanks again for your thoughts and the link.

     
  • At October 2, 2008 3:36 PM , Blogger FieldingHurst said...

    True. I want to keep my life as simple as humanly possible though and that's part of Dave's approach too.

     
  • At February 16, 2009 3:03 PM , Anonymous Jarret said...

    Scott, some constructive criticism for you. FYI, Ramsey even tells his listeners / readers that his method is "mathematically inferior" practically every other day on his show as well as mentioning it in his books. So I'm not sure what you're supposedly "debunking" here.

    Your examples, while numerically accurate, are a bit deserving of a "debunking" as well. Every one of them depend on you having two very large loans with the larger one having substantially higher rates, and in most of your examples you have the people putting only the most meager of extra money towards debt reduction in order to exacerbate how much longer it would take by doing the smaller debt first.

    In the second example, you have them paying only $100 above the minimum on $45,000 of sutdent loan debt. That is a little absurd. That's only $1,200 / year extra. The problem isn't the interest rate at all in that example. The problem is that the couple is having an income crisis of some sort that needs to be resolved, living on much more than they make, or they are not serious about paying off debt to begin with. $100 extra on $45,000? hah!

    Let's take your example and look at it from a realistic point of view by someone who is attacking their debt:
    - Suppose you net (after taxes) $3000 / month ($36,000 / year). You spend $2000 on the "necessities of life" and other miscellaneous monthly costs, leaving you $1000 extra to deal with your debt.
    - $15,000 over 10 years at 6% yields a $111 minimum monthly payment. $30,000 over 10 years at 9% yields a $380 minimum monthly payment. That leaves $509 extra to use. Quite a bit different from $100, no?
    - Applying that extra $509 pays off the $15,000 loan in 17 months. We then use the full $1000 from month 18 forward to attack the large loan resulting in a complete pay off by month 48.
    - If we had done the larger, higher interest rate loan first, then it still takes us to month 48 to completely pay off both loans.
    - Ultimately, you save $827 in interest over the 4 years it took you ($17 / month).

    This is to say nothing of $36k being pretty low for two college educated people, and $2000 / month living expenses being much higher than necessary. But even when stacking the odds against myself in this ugly example of yours, there was only little more than $800 saved using the "high interest first" method.

    Once people start devoting serious amounts of money to the issue and attacking their debt with a vengeance, then the actual amount of money "lost" is quite insubstantial over the long haul as they'll only be in debt for a couple of extra months at most (if at all).

    In any event, it is pretty hard to "debunk" something that was never claimed to begin with. He openly states his method is mathematically inferior, but is geared towards giving initial emotional satisfaction in effort to help people permanently curb their debt-related habbits. Likewise, I believe I've sufficiently "debunked" your examples as being a very unrealistic picture of someone truly attacking their debt.

    Ramsey's point is that breaking those life-ruining habbits is of FAR greater importance than saving a few hundred dollars over 4 years. Chances are that most people will not even be in this "worst case scenario" you describe to begin with, anyhow. Also realize that most people in these situations are NOT disciplined, so it seems intuitive to take the approach that best encourages them to develop that discipline and break their habbits.

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home