All posts by Jonathan Chevreau

Retired Money: Experts opine on various tweaks to Bengen’s famous 4% Rule

Posted By |
William Bengen, creator of the famed “4% Rule.”

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column is titled The 4% rule, revisited: A more flexible approach to retirement income. Click on the hyperlink for full column.

It goes into more detail on William Bengen’s updated book about the 4% Rule, which was one of three recently published financial books we reviewed in the last Retired Money column.

For that column I had originally planned to focus exclusively on that book, A Richer Retirement, Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More. However, I decided to review two other books at the same time; meanwhile I ended up on a related project on my own site, which involved asking more than a dozen financial advisors on both sides of the border what they think of the 4% Rule and the tweaks Bengen covers in his follow-up book. You can see all responses in this blog that appeared earlier this month on Findependence Hub, but at over 5,000 words  it was a tad long for the space normally assigned to the Retired Money column.

 For the MoneySense version, I focused on the most insightful comments and added a few thoughts of my own. The survey was conducted via Linked In and Featured.com, which has long supplied good content for my site.

Broader diversification spawns a 4.7% Rule

Trusts and estates expert Andrew Izrailo, Senior Corporate and Fiduciary Manager for Astra Trust, says Bengen’s original idea was to provide a sustainable income stream for at least 30 years without depleting your savings. In his new book, Bengen “revisits this concept using updated data and broader asset allocations,” summarizes Izrailo, “He now argues the safe withdrawal rate could rise to around 4.7%, supported by stronger market performance and portfolio diversification beyond the original stock-bond mix.”

For American investors, Izrailo still begins with 4% as a baseline because “it remains simple and conservative. Then I evaluate three major factors before adjusting: market volatility, portfolio performance, and expected longevity.” For Canadian retirees, “I tend to start lower, around 3.5%, due to differences in taxation, mandatory RRIF withdrawal rules, and the impact of currency and inflation differences compared to U.S. portfolios.”

Toronto-based wealth advisor Matthew Ardrey, of TriDelta Financial was not part of the original Featured roundup but agreed with the general view that while a helpful starting point, the 4 Rule is only a guideline. “When I meet with a client, I don’t rely on the 4% rule at all,” said Ardrey, who has worked with clients for more than 25 years “I’ve learned that rules of thumb — like the 4% rule — pale in comparison to the clarity and confidence that come from a well-crafted” and personalized financial plan.  Such a plan should reflect each person’s unique circumstances, priorities, and goals, allowing them to build the right decumulation strategy for their situation.

No one size fits all

Almost all the experts caution against taking a one-size-fits-all approach to the 4% Rule or its variants. Over 20 years with her own clients financial advisor and educator Winnie Sun, Executive Producer of ModernMom, starts with 4% as the baseline, then adjusts it based on actual client spending patterns and market conditions … The biggest mistake I see isn’t about the percentage itself: it’s that people forget about tax efficiency in withdrawal sequencing.”

Oakville, Ont.-based insurance broker James Inwood says the 4% rule is “a decent guideline, but it’s not some magic number you can set and forget. I’ve watched people get into trouble because they didn’t account for medical bills, which are a real wild card here in Canada. I always tell people to build in a cash buffer and check in on that withdrawal rate every couple of years instead of just locking it in permanently.” Continue Reading…

Is the “4%” Rule still relevant for Retirement Planning? What the experts say

Posted By |

Late in October, my monthly MoneySense Retired Money column reviewed three recently published financial books, starting with financial planner William Bengen’s new A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More.

Below we canvassed more than a dozen retirement experts and financial planners in both Canada and the United States about their experiences with the Rule, both the original book as well as the new one.

These experts were gathered by Featured.com, which has been supplying Findependence Hub with quality content for several years now. It has changed its procedure so that editors like myself can request input on particular topics we think will interest our readership. The sources are all on LinkedIn, as you can see by clicking on their profiles below.

Here’s what we asked, followed by their answers, which have been re-ordered by me.

“What do you think of the 4% Rule: CFP Bill Bengen’s guideline about a safe annual Retirement withdrawal amount that factors in inflation? Have you read or do you plan to read Bengen’s just-published followup book: A Richer Retirement : Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More? Do you agree or do you have your own tweaks to the 4% Rule? Looking for both Canadian and American input.”

Here is what these thought leaders had to say.

Adaptive Withdrawals protect Retirement through Market Cycles

The 4% Rule, created by CFP Bill Bengen in the 1990s, remains one of the most referenced retirement withdrawal guidelines. It suggests withdrawing 4% of your portfolio in the first year of retirement and adjusting that amount for inflation each year. The idea was to provide a sustainable income stream for at least 30 years without depleting your savings. Bengen’s newly published book, A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More, revisits this concept using updated data and broader asset allocations. He now argues the safe withdrawal rate could rise to around 4.7%, supported by stronger market performance and portfolio diversification beyond the original stock-bond mix. 

I see the 4% Rule as a reliable starting point, but not a fixed rule. It offers structure for retirees who need clarity on how much to withdraw each year, but real-world conditions require flexibility. For U.S. investors, I still begin with 4% as a baseline because it remains simple and conservative. Then I evaluate three major factors before adjusting: market volatility, portfolio performance, and expected longevity. For Canadian retirees, I tend to start lower, around 3.5%, due to differences in taxation, mandatory RRIF withdrawal rules, and the impact of currency and inflation differences compared to U.S. portfolios. 

My main adjustment to the rule is to make withdrawals adaptive rather than static. If the portfolio declines by more than 20% early in retirement, I recommend reducing withdrawals by 5% to protect capital. If inflation stays above 4% for more than two years while fixed income returns remain weak, I hold withdrawals steady instead of increasing them. Conversely, if long-term returns outperform expectations, withdrawals can rise modestly. These adjustments keep the retirement plan sustainable through changing market cycles. 

The lesson is to view the 4% Rule as a guideline, not a guarantee. Its true value lies in the discipline it introduces. A flexible version of the rule — tailored to taxes, inflation, and market behaviour — helps retirees spend with confidence while protecting their financial future. — Andrew Izrailo, Senior Corporate and Fiduciary Manager,  Astra Trust

Real Estate Investors Outperform Traditional 4% Rule

I’ve always thought the 4% rule is a decent starting point, but it’s really built around stocks and bonds. In my world of real estate, combining rental income with property value growth usually blows past that number. Instead of a fixed withdrawal, you can sell a property or pull out equity when the market’s high. That flexibility often makes your money last a lot longer in retirement. — Carl Fanaro, President,  NOLA Buys Houses 

Balance Freedom and Security in Retirement Journey

Retirement, much like embarking on a long and meaningful journey, is not just about reaching a destination but about learning how to move through each stage of life with purpose and enjoyment.

After reading Bill Bengen’s A Richer Retirement, I found his updated perspective on the 4% Rule both inspiring and practical. He transforms what was once seen as a strict withdrawal formula into a flexible approach that prioritizes experience, adaptability, and peace of mind.

Bengen’s message is that retirement should not revolve around fear or limitation. Instead, it should be about living fully within realistic financial boundaries. By adjusting withdrawals according to personal goals, market performance, and the natural flow of retirement years, retirees can enjoy their savings as a source of freedom rather than anxiety.

The concept feels much like travel: in some seasons, you venture farther, explore more, and spend a bit extra; in others, you slow down, rest, and savor simplicity. This approach is particularly meaningful for those who dream of traveling during retirement. The early, active years can be dedicated to exploring places like Morocco, when energy and curiosity are at their peak. Later on, spending can naturally shift toward quieter experiences closer to home.

Both Canadians and Americans can apply this mindset using tools such as TFSAs, RRSPs, Roth IRAs, or Social Security planning to balance flexibility and security.

In the end, Bengen’s vision reframes retirement as a phase of freedom, not restriction. It invites people to plan wisely but live fully, creating space for exploration, connection, and purpose much like a well-planned journey that leaves room for discovery along the way. — Nassira Sennoune, Marketing Coordinator, Sun trails

Tax-Efficient Withdrawals add 1-2% to Retirement

The 4% rule is a solid starting point, but after 20+ years advising clients, I can tell you it’s not one-size-fits-all. I’ve seen too many retirees lock themselves into unnecessary restrictions because they treat it like gospel rather than a guideline. 

Here’s what I actually do with clients: we start with 4% as the baseline, then adjust based on their actual spending patterns and market conditions. I had a couple last year who were terrified to spend more than their calculated 4%, even though their portfolio had grown 30% and they were skipping vacations they’d dreamed about for decades. We bumped them to 5.5% for two years because the math worked and life is short: they finally took that trip to Italy. 

The biggest mistake I see isn’t about the percentage itself: it’s that people forget about tax efficiency in withdrawal sequencing. I always look at which accounts to pull from first (taxable vs. tax-deferred vs. Roth) because that can add 1-2% to your effective withdrawal rate without touching principal. One client saved $47,000 over five years just by restructuring their withdrawal order. 

I haven’t read Bengen’s new book yet, but it’s on my list. My practical tweak: build a 2-3 year cash cushion in your portfolio so you’re never forced to sell stocks in a down market. That flexibility alone has kept my clients sleeping well through every correction since 2008. — Winnie Sun, Executive Producer,, ModernMom

Canadian Medical Costs require Flexible Withdrawal Rates

Look, the 4% rule is a decent guideline, but it’s not some magic number you can set and forget. I’ve watched people get into trouble because they didn’t account for medical bills, which are a real wild card here in Canada. I always tell people to build in a cash buffer and check in on that withdrawal rate every couple of years instead of just locking it in permanently. — James Inwood, Insurance Broker, James Inwood

Cash Reserves shield Retirees from Market Volatility

I assist clients with retirement and estate planning.  Bill Bengen’s original 4% rule was first published in 1994 and took into account a balanced investment portfolio modeled back to 1926.  At that time, he projected a 4% withdrawal rate, adjusted annually for inflation, would ensure the portfolio was sustainable for a 30-year retirement.  I recommend my retired clients review their portfolio allocation, investment returns, monitor for annual inflation and expenditures and then make adjustments for the next year’s withdrawals.  

 I plan to read Mr. Bengen’s new book published in August.  Mr. Bengen  is now recommending a broader asset diversification to add in small percentages of international equities and small-cap stocks in addition to his historic investment portfolio of 50% U.S. large-cap stocks and 50% intermediate bonds.  He claims with this broader diversification the safe withdrawal rate could now be up to 4.7% under best case scenario, 4.15% worst case.  I agree with Bengen that broader asset diversification can make sense for retirees who are investment knowledgeable and are monitoring annually the data I’ve noted above.

I recommend to my clients that any rule of thumb such as Bengen is simply a data point.  Retirees need to take into account their own risk profile as well as their investment understanding before making any significant adjustments to their rate of asset withdrawal.   Retirees now have longer life spans and are battling a heightened inflation rate.  I recommend my clients have a flexible withdrawal range of 3.5% to 4.5%, monitor assets annually, and continually adjust their annual withdrawal rate as necessary for volatile markets.   

I also recommend that my clients have a cash account established of at least two years’ withdrawals to avoid having to sell assets in a prolonged negative market environment. — Lisa Cummings, Attorney and Executive Vice President at Cummings & Cummings Law,  Cummings & Cummings

Tax Planning Matters more than Withdrawal Percentages

I’ve spent 40 years managing my own law firm and CPA practice, plus 20 years as a registered investment advisor, so I’ve seen hundreds of retirement plans play out in real life. The 4% rule is a decent starting point, but I stopped treating it as gospel about 15 years into my advisory career.

Here’s what I actually saw with my small business owner clients: their retirement income rarely came from just traditional portfolios. Most had business sale proceeds, real estate holdings, and irregular cash flows that made the 4% rule almost irrelevant. One client sold his manufacturing business at 62 for $2.3 million (US) but kept the building and leased it back: his retirement “withdrawal rate” was completely different because he had guaranteed rental income covering 60% of his expenses. 

The bigger issue I noticed was tax planning around withdrawals. I’d have clients rigidly following 4% from their IRAs while sitting on Roth conversions they should’ve done years earlier, or taking Social Security at the wrong time. The sequence of what you withdraw from matters more than the percentage: I’ve seen people save $50K+ in taxes over retirement just by pulling from taxable accounts first while doing strategic Roth conversions. 

My tweak: forget the percentage and work backward from your actual monthly expenses, then layer in guaranteed income sources (Social Security, pensions, annuities) before touching portfolio money. Most of my retired clients ended up withdrawing 2-3% because they structured things right on the front end. — David Fritch, Attorney,  Fritch Law Office Continue Reading…

Federal Budget 2025: Canada Strong

Posted By |

Department of Finance

Department of Finance: Francois-Philippe Champagne

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first federal budget was delivered Tuesday afternoon shortly after 4 pm by Minister of Finance and National Revenue Francois-Philippe Champagne.

Go here for full documents and to find downloadable documents for the 405-page Budget. (The above screenshot is not enabled for downloading.)

Below is one of the first releases released by the Department of Finance website.  It’s followed with headlines and hyperlinks to the most recent Budget coverage in the Globe & Mail and National Post.

This blog may be revised as new updates arrive from various media sources.

 Government of Canada releases Budget 2025: Canada Strong

From: Department of Finance Canada

Canada’s new government puts forward a plan to build, protect, and empower Canada

November 4, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario – Department of Finance Canada 

Canada faces a rapidly changing and increasingly uncertain world. The rules-based international order and the trading system that powered Canada’s prosperity for decades are being reshaped – hurting companies, displacing workers, causing major disruption and upheaval for Canadians.

In the face of global uncertainty, Canada’s new government is focused on what we can control. Budget 2025: Canada Strong is our plan to transform our economy from one that is reliant on a single trade partner, to one that is stronger, more self-sufficient, and more resilient to global shocks. Our plan builds on Canada’s strengths – world-class industries, skilled and talented workers, diverse trade partnerships, and a strong domestic market where Canadians can be our own best customers. We are creating an economy by Canadians, for Canadians.   

We are building Canada Strong. This is a plan to build the major infrastructure, homes, and industries that grow our economy and create lasting prosperity. This is a plan that will protect our communities, our borders, and our way of life. This is a plan to empower Canadians with better careers, strong public services, and a more affordable life. We are building a stronger economy, so that Canadians can build their own future.

To do that, Canada’s new government is delivering an investment budget. We are spending less on government operations – and investing more in the workers, businesses, and nation-building infrastructure that will grow our economy. Budget 2025 delivers on the government’s Comprehensive Expenditure Review to modernise government, improve efficiencies, and deliver better results and services for Canadians. It includes a total of $60 billion in savings and revenues over five years, and makes generational investments in housing, infrastructure, defence, productivity and competitiveness. These are the smart, strategic investments that will enable $1 trillion in total investments over the next five years through smarter public spending and stronger capital investment.

Countries across the world are facing global economic challenges – and Canada is no different. Budget 2025 is Canada’s new government’s plan to address these challenges from a position of strength, determination, and action. It is our plan to take control and build the future we want for ourselves, as a people and a country. It is our plan to build Canada Strong.

Quotes

“The global uncertainty we are facing demands bold action to secure Canada’s future. Budget 2025 is an investment budget. We are making generational investments to meet the moment and ensure our country doesn’t just weather this moment but thrives in it. This is our moment to build Canada Strong and our plan is clear – we will build our economy, protect our country, and empower you to get ahead. When we play to our strengths, we can create more for ourselves than can ever be taken away.”

The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance and National Revenue

Quick facts

  • Canada has the fiscal capacity to meet its ambition:
    • Canada has the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7 at 13.3 per cent according to the IMF October 2025 Fiscal Monitor. Canada also has one of the lowest deficit-to-GDP ratios in the G7, second only to Japan. This strong fiscal position enables us to respond to global challenges.
    • Canada is one of only two G7 economies with a AAA credit rating, making Canada one of the best places to invest in the world.
    • Canada has the best deal of any U.S. trading partner, with 85 per cent of our trade tariff-free. While some sectors remain deeply impacted, overall, Canadian exporters benefit from the lowest average U.S. tariff of any country at 5.4 per cent.
  • Budget 2025 rests on two fiscal anchors:
    • Balancing day-to-day operating spending with revenues by 2028–29, shifting spending toward investments that grow the economy; and
    • Maintaining a declining deficit-to-GDP ratio to ensure disciplined fiscal management for future generations.
  • In addition to the two fiscal anchors, Budget 2025 enables $1 trillion in total investments over the next five years through smarter public spending and stronger capital investment.

 

Here are some headlines with hyperlinks in red to the latest Globe & Mail stories on the budget, for those with subscriptions to the paper.

—————- Continue Reading…

Almost six in ten Canadians worry they’ll run out of money in Retirement: especially women and young people

Posted By |

The majority of Canadians are afraid they’ll run out of money in Retirement, especially women and young people, according to a survey released Wednesday morning by the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB).

The 2025 CPPIB Retirement Survey  (for Financial Literacy Month) says 59% of all Canadians are afraid of running out of money during Retirement, with the percentage jumping to 63% for women, compared to just 55% of men. It also found a whopping two thirds (66%) of Canadians aged 28 to 44 share the same fear. As the CPPIB graphic  below illustrates, those who have a financial plan are slightly less worried.

 

As you’d expect the CPPIB to point out, the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) helps protect retired Canadians from this risk: as it says above, CPP “benefits are payable as long as you live and [are] indexed to inflation.”

Indeed, CPP and the other main government retirement income program, Old Age Security, are both valuable sources of inflation-indexed retirement income. CPP is available as early as age 60 and OAS at 65 but a staple of Canadian personal finance commentary is that the longer you wait to receive benefits, the higher the benefits will be. In the best of all worlds, you’d wait until 70 for both programs to start paying out, even if you have to keep working longer and/or start withdrawing money from your RRSP before it’s mandated at age 71/72. (While the CPPIB doesn’t mention it, retirees with no other savings may also benefit from the Guaranteed Income Supplement to the OAS: and the GIS  is tax-free.)

The second graphic reproduced below is less straight-forward: it appears to present various excuses for delaying the creation of a proper financial plan to help get to Retirement. Roughly half of younger Canadians cite their need to advance their careers and make more money, and to buy their first home as priorities.


While it’s true that if nothing else, the future arrival of CPP and OAS benefits should put minds partially at ease about covering off basic Retirement expenses, it seems to me pretty obvious that at least for those who lack a generous employer-sponsored pension plan (ideally an inflation-indexed Defined Benefit pension), that it will be necessary to maximize savings in RRSPs and TFSAs as soon as possible.

Because of the Time Value of Money and the magic of compounding investment returns (especially when tax-deferred in RRSPs and TFSAs), the sooner you start saving in these vehicles the better. There’s no excuse not to make RRSP contributions from the get-go, ideally as soon as you land your first real job, since it reduces your income tax. Yes, decades from now when RRSPs become RRIFs you’ll have to pay some tax on the ultimate withdrawals, but that’s more than made up by the tax-deferred investment growth. Continue Reading…

3 books I just read that Retirees DIYing their pensions need to read

Posted By |
Amazon.ca

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column looks at a must-read new book on Retirement as well as two related books on DIY stock-investing. You can read the full column by clicking on the highlighted headline: Who you gonna trust: Barry Ritholtz or Jim Cramer?

The must read and main focus of the MoneySense column is William Bengen’s A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More. If that sounds familiar it should: Bengen’s original book on the 4% Rule is considered the bible of retirement, with his famous “SAFEMAX” guideline of 4% a year being an annual amount of withdrawals that should be “safe” for retirees to continue for a full 30 years, even after inflation. The original book,  titled Conserving Client Portfolios During Retirement, was first published in 2006.

Never mind that even Bengen considers 4.7% be a more universal SAFEMAX. The original book was aimed at financial advisors and professionals while the new one ostensibly is aimed at retail investors and retirees. I say ostensibly because I was a little disappointed with it and found the plethora of complicated charts and tables a bit much for lay investors. Still, there’s a lot of common sense there: Inflation is big long-term threat to retirees as are bear markets. Withdrawing too much from portfolios can be disastrous if you are unfortunate enough to retire just as a bear market hits and/or inflation starts to bite.

On the other hand, sticking with the old 4% rule or even the smaller amounts of 3% or even 2% advocated by some cautious souls, could result in you withdrawing less than you really need to enjoy retirement, although the tax department and any heirs might commend your caution and frugality.

How to make money in any market

Amazon.ca

While it’s rare for me to buy new hardcover books because I receive so many “free” review copies of financial books, I actually did buy A Richer Retirement as soon as it was available on Amazon. Plus, unusually, I also bought two other brand new books on the related topic of investing and stock-picking.

One was Jim Cramer’s How to make money in any market, by the sometimes revered but often maligned host of  CNBC shows Mad Money and Squawk on the Street. It’s fashionable for some financial journalists who believe in efficient markets and indexing to diss Cramer but I am not in that crowd. In fact, Cramer recommends that newcomers to investing put the first US$10,000 into an S&P500 index fund or ETF.

However, for seasoned investors and even retirees, Cramer suggests putting half a portfolio in index funds and the other half in individual stocks. Where we part company is his recommendation that the bucket of stocks be restricted to just five names, which would mean 10% in each. For my money, that’s way too concentrated and risky, even though he often brags about how he is often accosted by Nvidia Millionaires who tell him they bought that stock as soon as he announced on air that he had renamed his dog Nvidia.

How NOT to invest

Amazon.ca

Finally, regulars to this site may already have read Michael Wiener’s review of Barry Ritholtz’s How NOT to invest, which appeared here in this blog a few weeks after appearing on his Michael James on Money blog.

To be sure, those who are fond of disparaging Jim Cramer might quip that should have been the title of his own book, seeing as there are actually ETFs out there that try to profit by shorting Cramer’s picks. As of this writing, my copy has arrived but I have not yet finished reading it, as it’s a bit longer than the other two.

But based on the book blurbs and Michael’s review, I have no doubt it will be worth reading, whether for younger investors or seasoned ones and/or retirees.

Finally, while I only just received my review copy, I note that David Chilton is publishing a new edition of his classic financial novel, The Wealthy Barber, which any young person just starting to invest should acquire.  I look forward to revisiting it.