Why Investing in Mutual Funds Has a 99% Failure Rate (and What Actually Works)

Start making passive income here: https://bit.ly/3Xdyhim 

Everyone tells you mutual funds are the “safe” bet for retirement. But what if I told you they carry an almost 99% failure rate when it comes to actually creating financial freedom?


In this solo episode, I separate risk from failure and break down what really works if you want your money working harder for you so you don’t have to work so hard for that money.


I start by defining terms most people mix up: risk is the chance of loss, while failure is the likelihood you’ll hit your goals namely, sustainable income that makes you work optional. A savings account has near-zero risk, but it’s also almost guaranteed to fail at creating freedom. Mutual funds and the S&P 500 might not go to zero and over long stretches they often recover but recovery isn’t the same as success. If you arrive at retirement needing real income and your strategy only “works” on paper, that’s a failure.


I walk through the data most people ignore: industry headlines brag that over 1 million Fidelity clients now have seven-figure balances, yet Transamerica reports that 35% of savers still believe it would take a miracle to retire. Do the math: out of tens of millions of accounts, only a tiny fraction feel genuinely free. Add in taxes, low withdrawal rules (3–4%), and inflation, and you see why traditional accumulation falls short. Even Vanguard’s forward return estimates are sobering yet Wall Street still sells the same set-and-forget plan.


Then I contrast that with alternative investments designed to produce stable cash flow. I don’t sugarcoat anything: certain real estate or syndication deals can go bad. Risk is real. But failure doesn’t have to be. When you understand structures like debt vs. equity, collateral, and conservative underwriting and when you diversify intelligently your odds of success can drastically improve compared to relying on market appreciation and hoping sequence-of-returns risk doesn’t hit you at the worst time.

I also show three side-by-side scenarios using a $600,000 nest egg over 10 years:

• A mutual fund path (even granting a friendlier return and a 4% withdrawal) that still struggles to create meaningful income after taxes.
• A properly structured whole life insurance approach (“infinite banking”) producing tax-free distributions with contractual guarantees and over a century of paid-out performance by the right carriers.
• And a diversified cash-flow investing path targeting ~10% that, even after accounting for setbacks, can deliver 2–3x+ the income of the Wall Street plan without selling off principal.

Bottom line: don’t confuse “lower chance of loss” with “higher chance of success.” If you want freedom sooner not someday you need vehicles built for income, not just accumulation. My mission at Money Ripples is to help you reduce risk the right way while increasing the probability of success. If you’re done gambling your future on hope and averages, and you want predictable cash flow, it’s time to pivot from “set it and forget it” to a cash-flow first strategy that aligns with the life you actually want.

Names & terms to help you find this episode later: Fidelity, Transamerica, Vanguard, S&P 500, mutual funds, 4% rule, infinite banking, whole life insurance, alternative investments, passive income, tax-free income, Central Lending, Money Ripples.