> It's the findings of a statistical analysis of the life and habits of millionaires.

I have not read The Millionaire Next Door, but that seems fraught. Does it avoid survivorship bias? E.g. Playing the lottery is a 'habit' common to all lottery winners, but it's also common to all lottery losers, of whom there are many more. If you only studied the winners though, the lottery might start to look like a wise investment. Maybe the habits common to millionaires are counterproductive for the average person and only helpful to the lucky few.

I have read that book, and survivorship bias is not a worry for most of the recommendations.

They find that most millionaires are quite frugal, have stable families, and live modest lifestyles--they have accumulated wealth but don't flaunt it and don't waste it. These are essentially the lowest risk strategies in life, and survivorship bias favors the exact opposite, i.e. the "lottery ticket" decisions.

The exception to the low risk mantra is that many millionaires run their own businesses, and of course entrepreneurship is risky. The authors do note the effects of survivorship bias here.

I'd summarize the book by saying: "work hard, live well below your means, and invest the difference. Also, don't spoil your kids if you want them to build wealth."

Is there any list of finance/self-help books, filtered by 'survivorship bias'(and possibly other bias)?

I think a key difference is you have a choice to either be a lottery winner, loser or non-participant.

From the "Millionaire" or not game we're all "losers" by default.

I think the objection still applies. Suppose the statistical analysis told us that millionaires mostly get where they are by comparatively risky strategies or investments. Does that tell us we should also pursue high-risk high-yield opportunities? It's impossible to know without knowing how many people acted similarly to the successful millionaires but went bust or ended up in jail.

On the other hand, a low risk strategy might give you a comfortable life with high probability, but almost certainly won't make you a millionaire.

You need to know the base rate to understand whether survivorship bias is a factor or not.

>A low risk strategy might give you a comfortable life with high probability, but almost certainly won't make you a millionaire.

If you invest $5k per year and earn a 7% annual return with a mix of stock and bond index funds, you'll be a millionaire in 40 years. If you don't like my 7% number, then invest $16,500 at 2% (short term government bond type rates), and you'll still get there in about 40 years.

For a sufficiently frugal person on an engineer's salary, getting to a >$1 million net worth is easy, but it takes a while. It's worth noting, however, that $1 million isn't a particularly lavish retirement anymore (and will be much more modest in 40 years).

The easiest way to become a millionaire is to have boring financial habits.

I'm a huge Brandon Sanderson fan, but find that Mistborn is a better entry point for people these days - though it (and the Cosmere) are among my own personal my all-time favorite fantasy books, so perhaps I'm biased in that.

I think Elantris was gateway-Sanderson for me. Read that in a day and have been hooked ever since.

That said, in hindsight a lot of Elantris feels pretty similar to Way of Kings.

I agree with this but feel the need to add that the Stormlight Archives is his best work yet

Wholeheartedly agree that the Stormlight Archive is the best. However, if you can’t stand cliffhangers, you might have a hard time since the series isn’t finished yet. The first Mistborn trilogy is complete—I’d start with that if you want a nice complete series.

Another Mistborn fan here. Should be made into an anime at some point.

I have to agree: Mistborn is an amazing experience.

> The Millionaire Next Door was a game changer for how I though about wealth accumulation. It's the findings of a statistical analysis of the life and habits of millionaires.

So, it's been a while since I dipped into this book, but my recollection was that I read the summary and intro and thought "this sounds like an analysis which suffers significantly from survivorship bias." Did you find with a close read that was/wasn't a problem with the picture it presented?

(Not that I think that the advice I skimmed over was bad, certainly, I don't like to buy depreciating assets like cars on credit, and more people could likely benefit from budgeting investing conscientiously.)

It might be but the book boils down to:

1. Save at least 10% (or 25%) of your income

2. Live frugally. No flashy cars, etc.

3. Choose friends doing similar

I.e how to retire with a million.

I guess given enough income and decent rates on savings, it's not so revolutionary but perhaps hard work.

It documents a lot of the habits that get "normal" people to millionaire status. Drive "normal" cars for 15 years instead of buying fancy cars every 3 years. Clip coupons and shop wisely (2 for 1s, sales, coupons, etc). Live below your means generally. Save.

Basically the opposite of the SV mantra which is raise a ton of money for a shot at the lottery, live in the nicest apartment you can find/afford, eat out at fancy restaurants most nights, drive a nice audi or bmw, etc.