Starting investing at 25 vs 35: CA warns about common mistake that can wipe out crores from your future wealth

In a time where more young Indians are talking about SIPs, mutual funds, and financial freedom, one basic question still keeps coming up — when should you actually start investing? Many people delay it, thinking they’ll begin once income stabilises or expenses settle down. But as it turns out, that delay itself may quietly become the biggest financial setback over time.

Chartered Accountant Nitin Kaushik recently explained this in a post on X, breaking down how waiting to invest could end up costing far more than most expect. His message was direct and a bit uncomfortable for many: “WAITING IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE MISTAKE you will ever make in your financial life.”

The 25 vs 35 investing gap

To explain the impact, Kaushik used a basic example of a monthly SIP. According to him, if someone starts investing ₹25,000 every month at the age of 25 and continues till 60, they could build a corpus of around ₹17.5 crore, assuming a 12% CAGR.


Now here is where things get real. If the same person delays and starts at 35 instead, the final amount drops sharply. The corpus falls to roughly ₹5.2 crore. That’s not a small difference — it’s a huge gap that many people underestimate in the early years.

The numbers may look like typical projections, but the underlying idea is what matters. The difference is not just about ten years of missed savings. It is about missing the phase where compounding does most of its heavy lifting.

Why delay hurts more than you think

Kaushik pointed out that people often assume they can “catch up later” by investing more. But that’s where the math turns unforgiving. To reach the same ₹17.5 crore goal after starting at 35, one would need to invest close to ₹85,000 every month. That’s more than three times the original SIP amount.

Explaining this, he said, “Delaying that exact same investment by just 10 years doesn’t just ‘reduce’ your outcome—it nukes it.”

This sharp jump shows that time plays a bigger role than contribution size in long-term investing. Early years may feel slow, but they set the base for exponential growth later.

The real loss is in compounding

The most important part of Kaushik’s argument is about compounding, something many people hear about but don’t fully understand in practice. He explained that by delaying investments, investors are not just skipping a few years of contributions. They are cutting off the later stage of compounding, where wealth actually grows at a much faster pace.

In his words, “You aren’t just missing out on ten years of contributions; you are cutting off the exponential tail-end of a 35-year compounding cycle where the real wealth is actually generated.”


That “tail-end” is where small investments made early turn into large amounts. Missing that phase is what causes such a big gap in outcomes.

Summing it up, Kaushik made it clear that no shortcut can fix lost time in investing. He said, “The math is brutal: every year you wait is an opportunity cost that no ‘high-return’ stock pick can ever recover.”

This is something many young earners ignore, thinking they will start later when income increases. But as the numbers show, waiting even a few years can significantly change the final outcome.