Dynamic Withdrawal Rates: Increase Spending Flexibility, Improve Portfolio Sustainability

Posted on June 11, 2015 // 10 Comments

The WSJ has a nice introduction to dynamic withdrawal methods and managing your portfolio in retirement. They outline a few of the more popular variations – Adjusted 4%, Floor-and-Ceiling, and Guardrail. I like learning about dynamic strategies because I think they are more applicable to the real world and involve good ole’ common sense. When my portfolio is crashing and my dividends are getting cut, I think I’ll be fine with pulling back a bit as everyone else will likely be doing the same. If your investments have a good run and your income stream grows, and then you can spend a bit more.

Here’s an infographic they put together to help visualize one type of dynamic strategy called “floor-to-ceiling” (click to enlarge):

wsjdyn

Vanguard’s Managed Payout Funds are also designed to aid in portfolio withdrawals, using dynamic methods but adding in a smoothing component so that your income won’t swing as wildly from year-to-year. I don’t plan to buy those funds, but I might use their smoothing idea.

I am a conservative investor, so I don’t know about using dynamic withdrawals to justify a 5% average withdrawal strategy, though. It would just make 4% for 30 years less scary. In my case, I’m considering 3% dynamic for 50 years.

Filed Under: Investing, Retirement //

The Affluent Investor by Phil DeMuth – Book for $100,000+ Club

Posted on March 25, 2015 // 6 Comments

affinvestor

This week I’ve been trying to catch up on my book reviews (you should see my “to read” shelf!), and after a good beginner book I thought I’d write about a good intermediate-to-advanced book. You’ve probably noticed there are a lot of starter books out there for novice investors but not as many with more advanced advice ($$$… the potential audience is a fraction of the size). Addressing this deficiency is the goal of The Affluent Investor by Phil DeMuth.

In terms of the title, the industry classifies you as “mass affluent” if you have investable assets between $100,000 and $999,999. From $1 million to $10 million you are “high net worth”. This definition excludes some possibly important stuff – your income, the value of your personal residence, pensions, etc. But in real world terms, I would say this book is for anyone who isn’t living from paycheck-to-paycheck. If you have a $10,000 portfolio and have a surplus each month, sooner or later you will reach $100,000. If instead you have a credit card balance and it just keeps inching up, then you need something closer to a Dave Ramsey book.

The overall tone of the book is that of a close friend who is smart and into finances. DeMuth is already a financial advisor to rich folks so the last part is expected. What I mean is that he will be blunt and isn’t afraid to make stereotypical assumptions in order to rattle off all his tips. At only 200 pages, most things are only touched upon in a concise manner. Here’s a rough outline of the topics covered:

  • Big picture rules. Get and stay married. Make sure you can afford your children. Avoid debt. Save early and invest it. Diversify. Plan ahead.
  • Financial advice based on life stage. He puts you in the basic “affluent” mold of 20-35s have a kid buy a house, 35-55 working hard at professional career making most of your money, 55-65 protect assets and prepare for retirement, and 65+ retire and spend down money.
  • Financial advice based on job. Has special advice for doctors, lawyers, small business owners, and corporate executives.
  • General investing advice and “Can you do better?” investing advice. General investing advice is keep costs low and buy index funds that closely approximate the global market portfolio. “Can you do better?” advice touches on things like value stocks, small-cap stocks, dividend stocks, momentum, low-beta, etc.
  • Asset protection. Being affluent means you have money, and other people will want it. Insurance, buying real estate with LLCs, homestead exemptions, and similar topics are are very complex but his take is condensed into less than a page each.
  • Tax minimization. IRAs, 401ks, Solo Pensions, 529 plans, Health Savings Accounts, etc.

Here are things you might expect from a “book for rich folks” but won’t find inside:

  • You won’t get in-depth, hand-holding walkthroughs of anything. Consider the book as a push in the right direction for researching ideas.
  • You won’t find his secret list of the best hedge fund managers.
  • You won’t find tips on how to get rich with real estate.
  • You won’t find advice on how to pick individual stocks like Warren Buffett.
  • You won’t find him selling his own personal advisory services.

A general problem with all books of this type is that the advice is pretty short and to the point, but it doesn’t provide very much supporting evidence. You’ll either have to do your own due diligence, or blindly decide to trust the author. I’ve read books where the author might sound convincing but their advice is horrible. In my opinion, I think for the most part the advice in this book is good. But I’m just another person on the internet, so again do your own research.

In conclusion, I think this book covers a lot of questions that are commonly asked by the intermediate individual investor. It’s not too long and not too short. Some of the advice won’t fit your own situation, but at this level if you just find one solid actionable idea that makes the entire $18 book worth it. I’m personally going to look into the solo defined-beneift plan idea again, although I may still be too young to take full advantage.

Filed Under: Book Reviews, Investing, Retirement //

The Position of F- You and Financial Independence

Posted on March 5, 2015 // 25 Comments

In the recent movie The Gambler, a loanshark named Frank explains the Position of F- You to gambler Jim Bennett. (Played by actor John Goodman.) Warning: Lots of explicit language ahead!

(Embedded YouTube video above. Direct link.)

If you can’t view the video, here is a partial transcript:

Jim Bennett: I’ve been up two and a half million.
Frank: What you got on you?
Jim Bennett: Nothing.
Frank: What you put away?
Jim Bennett: Nothing.
Frank: You get up two and a half million dollars, any asshole in the world knows what to do: you get a house with a 25 year roof, an indestructible Jap-economy shitbox, you put the rest into the system at three to five percent to pay your taxes and that’s your base, get me? That’s your fortress of fucking solitude. That puts you, for the rest of your life, at a level of fuck you. Somebody wants you to do something, fuck you. Boss pisses you off, fuck you! Own your house. Have a couple bucks in the bank. Don’t drink. That’s all I have to say to anybody on any social level. Did your grandfather take risks?
Jim Bennett: Yes.
Frank: I guarantee he did it from a position of fuck you. A wise man’s life is based around fuck you. The United States of America is based on fuck you. You have a navy? Greatest army in the history of mankind? Fuck you! Blow me. We’ll fuck it up ourselves.

I found this via the ERE Facebook page but saw that Nassim Taleb also commented on it:

This is a critical 1 min lecture to understand independence, antifragility, “f** you money”, selfownership, and many things.

I’ve written about the concept of F- You Money before as discussed by Dilbert and Humphrey Bogart. Here’s that Dilbert comic again.

dilscott

Financial independence, financial freedom, early retirement, whatever you want to call it… Why do some people yearn for it? Perhaps you recall the most common regret on our deathbeds:

#1. I wish I’d had the courage to live a life true to myself, not the life others expected of me.

In my view, that is what it is all about. Having “f-you money” can help. You don’t need a million bucks or anywhere near that. Even a small sum of money tucked away can make a big difference in your mood and outlook on life.

Filed Under: Inspirational, Retirement //

Fidelity IRA Match: Switch and They’ll Match Your Contributions Up to 10%

Posted on February 26, 2015 // 15 Comments

Fidelity has released an infographic [pdf] about the power of saving 1% more of your income:

fido1more

To coincide with this, Fidelity started a related promotion to entice folks to move over their IRA assets to them. The Fidelity IRA Match is designed to mimic the 401(k) contribution matching that many employers offer, where Fidelity will match between 1% and 10% of your future contribution for 3 years if you roll over $10,000+ to them. Valid for both new and existing Fidelity customers, but only for IRAs and not other account types. Here’s the breakdown:

Qualifying transfer* Match rate Estimated max benefit* (age 50+)
$10,000 1% $165 ($195)
$50,000 1.5% $247.50 ($292.50)
$100,000 2.5% $412.50 ($487.50)
$250,000 5% $825 ($975)
$500,000 10% $1,650 ($1,950)

 

* Qualifying transfers must be rollovers or transfers from non-Fidelity IRAs (Traditional or Roth). Rollovers from workplace savings plans are not eligible for this offer. Estimated max benefit is based on $5,500 annual contribution for three years ($6,500 for age 50+). Max benefit is set at $1,950.

It’s an interesting proposal. Keep in mind that many IRA custodians will ding you with an outgoing transfer fee if you move your money out. Also, Fidelity has other deposit promotions going on that offer a little less than the max payout here, but they are more straightforward bonuses.

To participate, you must register at www.fidelity.com/IRAmatch. If you do participate, I would like to point out the availability of their Fidelity Spartan Index funds, their Fidelity Freedom Index 20XX target-date funds which you can now purchase in an IRA, and their commission-free iShares ETFs. Fido has some good, low-cost products on their menu, but you may have to look for them.

Selected fine print:

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Deals & Offers, Investing, Retirement //

Early Retirement Portfolio Income Update, Year-End 2014

Posted on January 6, 2015 // 20 Comments

When investing, should you focus on income or total return? I like the idea of living off dividend and interest income, but I also think it is easy for people to reach too far for yield and hurt their overall returns. But what is too far? That’s the hard part. Certainly there are many bad investments lurking out there for desperate retirees looking for maximum income. If possible, I’d like to invest for total return and then live off the income.

A quick and dirty way to see how much income (dividends and interest) your portfolio is generating is to take the “TTM Yield” or “12 Mo. Yield” from Morningstar quote pages. Trailing 12 Month Yield is the sum of a fund’s total trailing 12-month interest and dividend payments divided by the last month’s ending share price (NAV) plus any capital gains distributed over the same period. SEC yield is another alternative, but I like TTM because it is based on actual distributions (SEC vs. TTM yield article).

Below is a close approximation of my most recent portfolio update. I have changed my asset allocation slightly to 60% stocks and 40% bonds because I believe that will be my permanent allocation upon early retirement.

Asset Class / Fund % of Portfolio Trailing 12-Month Yield (1/5/14) Yield Contribution
US Total Stock
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSAX)		 24% 1.76% 0.42%
US Small Value
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES) 		3% 2.68% 0.08%
International Total Stock
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VTIAX) 		24% 3.4% 0.81%
Emerging Markets Small Value
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS) 		3% 3.17% 0.09%
US Real Estate
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSLX) 		6% 3.60% 0.22%
Intermediate-Term High Quality Bonds
Vanguard Limited-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VMLUX) 		20% 1.68% 0.34%
Inflation-Linked Treasury Bonds
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VAIPX) 		20% 2.24% 0.45%
Totals 100% 2.41%

 

The total weighted 12-month yield was 2.41%, as opposed to 2.49% and 2.31% the previous two quarters. This means that if I had a $1,000,000 portfolio balance today, it would have generated $24,100 in interest and dividends over the last 12 months. Now, 2.41% is significantly lower than the 4% withdrawal rate often recommended for 65-year-old retirees with 30-year spending horizons, and is also lower than the 3% withdrawal that I prefer as a rough benchmark for early retirement. But in theory the total return will be much greater due to share appreciation.

As noted previously, a simple benchmark for this portfolio is Vanguard LifeStrategy Growth Fund (VASGX) which is an all-in-one fund that is also 60% stocks and 40% bonds. That fund has a trailing 12-month yield of 2.09%. Keep in mind that the muni bond interest in my portfolio is exempt from federal income taxes.

So how am I doing? Using my 3% benchmark, the combination of ongoing savings and recent market gains have us at 91% of the way to matching our annual household spending target. Using the 2.41% number, I am only 73% of the way there. Consider that if all your portfolio did was keep up with inflation each year (0% real returns), you could still spend 2% a year for 50 years. From that perspective, a 2% spending rate seems like a very conservative lower bound.

Filed Under: Goals, Investing, Retirement //

Early Retirement Portfolio Asset Allocation Update, Year-End 2014

Posted on January 5, 2015 // 8 Comments

Here’s a final update on my investment portfolio holdings for 2014. This includes tax-deferred accounts like 401(k)s and taxable brokerage holdings, but excludes things like physical property and cash reserves (emergency fund). The purpose of this portfolio is to create enough income to cover all of our household expenses.

Target Asset Allocation

aa_updated2015

I try to pick asset classes that will provide long-term returns above inflation, distribute income via dividends and interest, and finally offer some historical tendencies to balance each other out. I don’t hold commodities futures or gold as they don’t provide any income and I don’t believe they’ll outpace inflation significantly. In addition, I am not confident in them enough to know that I will hold them through an extended period of underperformance (i.e. don’t buy what you don’t understand).

Our current ratio is roughly 70% stocks and 30% bonds within our investment strategy of buy, hold, and rebalance. With a self-directed portfolio of low-cost funds and low turnover, we minimize management fees, commissions, and taxes.

Actual Asset Allocation and Holdings

aa_pie_2014final

Stock Holdings
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSMX, VTSAX)
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VGTSX, VTIAX)
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES)
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS)
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSIX, VGSLX)

Bond Holdings
Vanguard Limited-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VMLTX, VMLUX)
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VWITX, VWIUX)
Vanguard High-Yield Tax-Exempt Fund (VWAHX, VWALX)
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX, VAIPX)
iShares Barclays TIPS Bond ETF (TIP)
Individual TIPS securities
U.S. Savings Bonds (Series I)

Notes and Benchmark Comparison

There was very little activity during the last quarter of 2014. I’ll need to do some rebalancing in the beginning of 2015. I did change my asset allocation tree above to reflect that my bond holdings have a weighted duration of close to 4 years now. It used to say “shorter-term” but really now it is more “intermediate-term”. I’ve been putting my new bond money into VWIUX, which holds intermediate-term high-quality municipal bonds. I haven’t sold any of my limited-term holdings. Overall, it’s a little longer in maturity and a little higher yield, but nothing drastic. I don’t really listen to future rate predictions; they’ve been wrong more than they’ve been right.

I’ve already noted the 2014 performance of each individual fund here along with my overall portfolio total return of roughly 6.5% for 2014.

A simple benchmark for my portfolio is 50% Vanguard LifeStrategy Growth Fund (VASGX) and Vanguard LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund (VSMGX), one is 60/40 and one is 80/20 so it also works out to 70% stocks and 30% bonds. That would have returned about 7.1% for 2014. One reason for my portfolio’s relative underperformance to this benchmark is my inclusions of TIPS bonds which returned 3.5% whereas the Vanguard Total International Bond Index Fund (BND) returned 6% for the year. I’m still happy to hold TIPS. If I had more tax-advantaged space and/or a lower tax rate I’d hold BND instead of muni bonds but I’m still happy with my muni funds as well.

In a separate post, I will update the amount of income that I am deriving from this portfolio along with how that compares to my expenses.

Filed Under: Goals, Investing, Retirement //

How to Win the Loser’s Game: Free Documentary

Posted on November 18, 2014 // 3 Comments

SensibleInvesting.tv recently released a free documentary about the fund management industry and the effect of their high fees on the returns of everyday citizens. “How to Win the Loser’s Game” includes interviews with Vanguard founder John Bogle, Nobel Prize-winning economists Eugene Fama and William Sharpe, author and wealth manager Larry Swedroe, amongst many others. While the publisher is UK-based, most of the concepts are widely applicable to all fund management. The film is broken down into 10 different parts, each about 8 minutes long.

If you are a visual learner and rather watch an educational video than read a book, this documentary is definitely for you. The brief episodes gradually cover the benefits of a low-cost, long-term, low-maintenance, diversified investment strategy. Here’s the trailer, which ends with links to all 10 episodes.

Filed Under: Investing, Retirement //

Scary Longevity Charts for Couples in Retirement

Posted on October 29, 2014 // 5 Comments

It’s time for some morbid Halloween thoughts! Via an AAII interview with William Sharpe, it appears that the Nobel Prize winner and Sharpe Ratio namesake is working on a software project called Retirement Income Scenarios (blog and software site). It’s not very sleek and I haven’t spent much time with it, but one of the features is a longevity chart:

One of the things that people can do using the illustrative software program available through my retirement income blog is to type in their age and sex and their partner’s age and sex and see the probabilities that both will be alive, that one will be alive or that the other will be alive year by year in the future, based on a set of actuarial tables. Most people don’t want to look at such a graph, but I think it’s important to do so. Most who do this react by saying “that’s a long time, a really long time.”

Sharpe wants people to realize they may live a long time and “scare” them into saving more, working longer, and/or being more careful with their portfolios. Here is the example chart given for retiring couple with male age 66 and female age 63. The green bars show the probability of both spouses being alive at a given year in the future. The blue bars show the probability of just the husband being alive, while the red the bars show the probability of just the wife being alive.

male66_720

As you can see, there’s a good chance (roughly 40%) that the woman will live another 30 years after retirement. That is a really long time.

So I started up the software and ran the number for something closer to our situation – both male and female currently 36 years old. Here’s the longevity chart produced:

both36_720

When I examine this chart, I have a different perspective. Being male, I notice that there is a roughly a 10% chance that I won’t make it to age 66. There is a 20% chance (1 in 5) that I won’t make it to 76. The idea of dying before I can actually enjoy retirement – that is scary to me. So yes people can “just” work longer, but also remember that your time on this Earth is limited and not guaranteed. There are many paths out there, but I don’t plan on working hard until 65 or 70 and then hoping I can relax for while before I croak.

Filed Under: Retirement //

Sequence of Returns Risk During Retirement Illustration

Posted on October 27, 2014 // 7 Comments

Businessweek has an article discussing the difficulties when trying to make a retirement nest egg last for the rest of your life. Most people just worry about the average returns of their investments. But another important concern during the withdrawal phase is sequence of returns risk.

Two retirees can start with the same initial portfolio balance and experience the same average return, but if one experiences highly negative returns in the first few years of withdrawals they can end up with very different outcomes. Instead of explaining this concept with a list of numbers, here is a graphical version from the BW article. Both Jane and John start with $1 million, experience 7% average returns, and take out $50,000 a year with a 3% increase each year for inflation.

sor_risk

Jane ends up 20 years later with $700,00 more than she started, and John is flat broke. Although the sequence of returns shown is a bit extreme, they are simply mirrored and it is still entirely possible.

Some people take this to mean that you shouldn’t retire when the market has been on a good bull run, but I think the point is that you simply don’t know what order your future returns will be. The bull run could keep on going and create a bubble, and then pop many years later. Or something like a declaration of war could crush the market even further even if things have already been bad for a while.

Briefly, a couple of options that can help alleviate this sequence of returns risk are a dynamic withdrawal strategy that continually adjusts to actual returns (no set number every year), and also annuitizing part of your portfolio using a single-premium immediate annuity. Finally, don’t forget the traditional advice of holding a sizable chunk of quality bonds in your portfolio.

Filed Under: Investing, Retirement //

Early Retirement Portfolio Income Update – October 2014

Posted on October 20, 2014 // 12 Comments

When investing, should you focus on income, or total return? I like the idea of living off dividend and interest income, but I also think it is easy for people to reach too far for yield and hurt their overall returns. But what is too far? That’s the hard part. Certainly there are many bad investments lurking out there for desperate retirees looking for maximum income. If possible, I’d like to invest for total return and then live off the income.

A quick and dirty way to see how much income (dividends and interest) your portfolio is generating is to take the “TTM Yield” or “12 Mo. Yield” from Morningstar quote pages. Trailing 12 Month Yield is the sum of a fund’s total trailing 12-month interest and dividend payments divided by the last month’s ending share price (NAV) plus any capital gains distributed over the same period. SEC yield is another alternative, but I like TTM because it is based on actual distributions (SEC vs. TTM yield article).

Below is a close approximation of my most recent portfolio update. I have changed my asset allocation slightly to 60% stocks and 40% bonds because I believe that will be my permanent allocation upon early retirement.

Asset Class / Fund % of Portfolio Trailing 12-Month Yield (10/18/14) Yield Contribution
US Total Stock
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSAX)		 24% 1.78% 0.43%
US Small Value
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES) 		3% 2.81% 0.08%
International Total Stock
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VTIAX) 		24% 3.35% 0.80%
Emerging Markets Small Value
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS) 		3% 2.97% 0.09%
US Real Estate
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSLX) 		6% 3.51% 0.21%
Intermediate-Term High Quality Bonds
Vanguard Limited-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VMLUX) 		20% 1.70% 0.34%
Inflation-Linked Treasury Bonds
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VAIPX) 		20% 1.78% 0.36%
Totals 100% 2.31%

 

The total weighted yield was 2.31%, as opposed to 2.49% calculated last quarter. This means that if I had a $1,000,000 portfolio balance today, it would have generated $23,100 in interest and dividends over the last 12 months. Now, 2.31% is significantly lower than the 4% withdrawal rate often recommended for 65-year-old retirees with 30-year spending horizons, and is also lower than the 3% withdrawal that I prefer as a rough benchmark for early retirement. Hurray for zero interest rates!

So how am I doing? Using my 3% benchmark, the combination of ongoing savings and recent market gains have us at 90% of the way to matching our annual household spending target. Using the 2.31% number, I am only 69% of the way there. That’s a big difference, and something I’ll have to reconcile. Consider that if all your portfolio did was keep up with inflation each year (0% real returns), you could still spend 2% a year for 50 years. From that perspective, a 2% spending rate seems extremely cautious.

Filed Under: Goals, Investing, Retirement //

Early Retirement Portfolio Asset Allocation Update – October 2014

Posted on October 20, 2014 // 11 Comments

Here’s an update on my investment portfolio holdings for Q3 2014. This includes tax-deferred accounts like 401(k)s and taxable brokerage holdings, but excludes things like physical property and cash reserves (emergency fund). The purpose of this portfolio is to create enough income to cover all of our household expenses.

Target Asset Allocation

aa_updated2013_bigger

I try to pick asset classes that will provide long-term returns above inflation, regular income via dividends and interest, and finally offer some historical tendencies to balance each other out. I don’t hold commodities futures or gold as they don’t provide any income and I don’t believe they’ll outpace inflation significantly. In addition, I am not confident in them enough to know that I will hold them through an extended period of underperformance (don’t buy what you don’t understand).

Our current ratio is about 70% stocks and 30% bonds within our investment strategy of buy, hold, and rebalance. With a self-directed portfolio of low-cost index funds and low turnover, we minimize management fees, commissions, and taxes.

Actual Asset Allocation and Holdings

1410_portfolio_aa

Stock Holdings
Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund (VTI, VTSMX, VTSAX)
Vanguard Total International Stock Market Fund (VXUS, VGTSX, VTIAX)
WisdomTree SmallCap Dividend ETF (DES)
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend ETF (DGS)
Vanguard REIT Index Fund (VNQ, VGSIX, VGSLX)

Bond Holdings
Vanguard Limited-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VMLTX, VMLUX)
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund (VWITX, VWIUX)
Vanguard High-Yield Tax-Exempt Fund (VWAHX, VWALX)
Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX, VAIPX)
iShares Barclays TIPS Bond ETF (TIP)
Individual TIPS securities
U.S. Savings Bonds (Series I)

Notable Changes

Last quarter, I had sold my PIMCO Total Return fund holdings. Well, that was lucky on my part with all the recent Bill Gross drama. I decided to sell my stable value fund holdings too as I needed rebalance into more TIPS bonds and I was now able to buy TIPS inside my employee retirement plan using the Schwab PCRA brokerage window. All of our tax-deferred space is now taken up with TIPS and REITs, so the rest of my bonds are tax-exempt munis and savings bonds.

Otherwise, not much new, I rebalanced with new money and reinvested dividends. By this, I mean I don’t automatically reinvest dividends into the same mutual fund or ETF that generated them. Instead, they accumulate for bit and then I reinvest them in whatever asset class has been lagging recently. This also makes fewer tax lots for my taxable accounts.

That’s it for portfolio holdings. In a separate update post, I will update the amount of income that I am deriving from this portfolio.

Filed Under: Goals, Investing, Retirement //

Comparing Three Major Levers You Can Pull On Your Retirement Portfolio

Posted on October 15, 2014 // 8 Comments

One of the most popular posts on the Vanguard blog is My one piece of investing advice by Andy Clarke. Let’s start with the following baseline scenario:

  • Investor begins working at 25, but starts saving at age 35.
  • 12% savings rate
  • Moderate asset allocation (50% stocks and 50% bonds)
  • Salary starts at $30,000 but increases with age

Now, imagine there are three “levers” that you could pull in order to try and increase your final savings balance at retirement – asset allocation, savings rate, or time horizon. In each case, everything else in the scenario stays the same.

threedoors3

Which single option do you think has the most impact? Taken from the blog post, the results below are based the median balance found after running Monte Carlo computer simulations based on historical returns.

threedoorsresults

I would look past the absolute values and instead focus on the relative effect of each option. In case you haven’t figured it out, the one piece of investing advice is “save more”. The easiest lever to pull is a more aggressive asset allocation because it doesn’t require the pain of spending less and saving more (though you get more stomach-churning bumps and less reliable results). But here we see that saving just 3% more was equally powerful. If you pulled all three levers, your final balance would have more than doubled!

Filed Under: Investing, Retirement //
« Previous Page
Next Page »