Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Si tu saldo es bajo, quizá no sea el mejor momento para hacer una gran inversión. - If your balance is low, it might not be the best moment to make a big investment.

ser bajo with things like salario, precio, saldo, nivel often describes a general level or something seen more as a characteristic:
- Tu salario es bajo. – Your salary is low (in general, as a fact).
- Si tu saldo es bajo… – If your balance is (generally / relatively) low.
estar bajo tends to emphasize a current or temporary state:
- Hoy tu saldo está bajo. – Today your balance is low (right now, temporarily).

In this sentence, es bajo makes sense because the speaker is talking about your balance being low in relation to making a big investment, almost like a general “not enough” level, not just a passing fluctuation. But si tu saldo está bajo would be grammatically correct too, with a slightly more “right now” feeling.

Why is it quizá no sea (subjunctive) instead of quizá no es (indicative)?

Quizá (and quizás) can take either the indicative or the subjunctive:

Indicative (no es): the speaker sounds more sure / more factual.
- Quizá no es el mejor momento. – Maybe it’s not the best time (I kind of think it isn’t).
Subjunctive (no sea): the speaker sounds more tentative or is presenting it as a possibility, not a statement of fact.
- Quizá no sea el mejor momento. – Maybe it’s not the best time (I’m putting this forward cautiously, as a suggestion or warning).

In this context (giving cautious financial advice), quizá no sea is very natural because the speaker doesn’t want to sound too blunt or absolute; they’re softening the statement as a possibility.

Can I say quizás instead of quizá? Is there any difference?

Yes, you can. Both are correct and mean maybe / perhaps:

quizá
quizás

In modern usage:

They are interchangeable in meaning.
Quizás is slightly more frequent in everyday speech, but quizá is also very common.
There is no real difference in formality.

So you could say either:

Quizá no sea el mejor momento…
Quizás no sea el mejor momento…

Both sound perfectly natural in Spain.

Why is it si tu saldo es bajo and not cuando tu saldo es bajo?

Spanish normally uses si for conditions that may or may not happen:

Si tu saldo es bajo, quizá no sea el mejor momento…
If your balance is low (and it might or might not be), maybe it’s not the best time…

Cuando suggests something that does happen (or will definitely happen):

Cuando tu saldo es bajo, te pones nervioso.
When your balance is low, you get nervous. (This regularly happens.)

Here the idea is conditional: on the condition that your balance is low, then maybe you shouldn’t invest. So si is the correct choice.

Why isn’t there a subject pronoun tú in the first part? Could I say si tú tu saldo es bajo?

You cannot say si tú tu saldo es bajo. That would be incorrect because:

tú is the subject pronoun (you).
tu (without an accent) is the possessive adjective (your).

In si tu saldo es bajo:

The subject is tu saldo (your balance), not tú.
tu modifies saldo.

So:

Si tu saldo es bajo… – correct (your balance is low)
Si tú saldo es bajo… – wrong (accent in the wrong place)
Si tú tienes el saldo bajo… – correct but different structure (now tú is the subject: if you have a low balance).

What is the difference between tu and tú here?

tu (no accent) = your (possessive adjective)
- tu saldo – your balance
- tu casa – your house
tú (with accent) = you (subject pronoun)
- Tú tienes poco saldo. – You have little balance.

In the sentence si tu saldo es bajo, we need the possessive tu, because we are saying your balance, not you.

Why is it una gran inversión and not una inversión grande?

Both are possible, but the position changes the nuance:

gran (shortened form of grande before a singular noun) often means big / great / important in a more figurative sense:
- una gran inversión – a large / major / important investment (usually in terms of money, impact, or risk).
inversión grande is more neutral and tends to mean physically big / large in size/amount, with less emphasis on importance:
- una inversión grande – a big investment (size/amount), without necessarily hinting at “big deal” or “major decision”.

In financial advice, una gran inversión is the more idiomatic way to talk about a major financial move.

Why do we say hacer una gran inversión instead of just invertir mucho or some other verb?

Spanish often uses hacer + noun to express actions:

hacer una inversión – to make an investment
hacer un pago – to make a payment
hacer un esfuerzo – to make an effort

Invertir is also correct:

invertir mucho dinero – to invest a lot of money
hacer una gran inversión – to make a big investment

The original sentence focuses on the act of making a big investment as a general idea, not just on the amount:

…no sea el mejor momento para hacer una gran inversión.
“…might not be the best time to make a big investment.”

You could rephrase it as:

…no sea el mejor momento para invertir una gran cantidad de dinero.

Both are fine; the version with hacer una inversión sounds very natural and is widely used.

Why is the no placed before sea in quizá no sea el mejor momento? Could it be quizá sea no el mejor momento?

Negation in Spanish normally goes:

no + verb + (rest of the sentence)

So:

no sea el mejor momento – correct
sea no el mejor momento – incorrect / very unnatural

The pattern is:

no es el mejor momento – it is not the best time
no sea el mejor momento – it may not be the best time

The no always comes directly before the conjugated verb (es / sea).

Why is the verb in the si clause in the present tense (si tu saldo es bajo) and not future (si tu saldo será bajo)?

In Spanish, si-clauses (real conditions) usually take the present indicative, even when you’re talking about the future:

Si mañana llueve, no salgo.
If it rains tomorrow, I’m not going out.

Using future after si (si lloverá) is generally incorrect in this kind of conditional.

So:

Si tu saldo es bajo, quizá no sea el mejor momento… – correct
Si tu saldo será bajo, quizá… – wrong in standard Spanish

The future sense is understood from the context, not from a future tense in the si clause.

Why is it para hacer una gran inversión and not para que hagas una gran inversión?

Both structures are possible but mean slightly different things:

para + infinitive (para hacer)
- More general and impersonal; it talks about the idea of doing something.
- …no sea el mejor momento para hacer una gran inversión.
  “…might not be the best time to make a big investment (in general).”
para que + subjunctive (para que hagas)
- Introduces a different subject and usually expresses purpose or intention.
- No es buen momento para que hagas una gran inversión.
  “It’s not a good time for you to make a big investment.”

In the original sentence, the focus is on “this is not the best time for making a big investment” in general, so the impersonal para hacer is the most natural choice. If you wanted to directly address someone’s personal action, para que hagas would be used instead.