On this note, I'm currently in the process of getting into a dynamic fund at my bank, and it contains about 85% stocks 15% bonds. I guess that's considered really agressive, but the logic was that I won't be needing the money in the foreseeable future (20 y/o student atm with no real costs. Thank you Europe for the education system! ), so that it would actually be the best choice for growth in the long term. Is this reasoning valid?