All posts by Jonathan Chevreau

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.

 

 

 

Q&A with John De Goey

Posted By |
John De Goey, courtesy MoneyShow

The following is a question-and-answer session conducted via email with advisor John De Goey following his recent talk at the MoneyShow in Toronto, which we reported here.  Some of the questions and answers also appeared in my recent MoneySense Retired Money column here.

Jon Chevreau, Findependence Hub:  How defensive do you think low-volatility ETFs (i.e., BMO’s, iShares, Harvest) are?

John De Goey: Let’s say the market pulls back by 25%. If you can handle that, then you don’t need a low-volatility ETF. In short, low-volatility products are more defensive than market  (cap)-weighted products, but it all depends on how investors react and behave when things go south.

Chevreau Q2.) Most of those are overweight utilities, consumer staples and healthcare stocks. Do you advocate that investors do this themselves with sector ETFs?

De Goey – I generally don’t recommend buying utilities as a stand-alone product/strategy. That said, if you already own cap-weighted products and want to be more conservative, it would likely be more tax effective to simply add utilities rather than sell cap-weighted products in order to buy low-vol products. Same net result, but less tax on the way.

Jon Chevreau, courtesy MoneySense

Chevreau Q3.)  If U.S. stocks are so richly priced, do you advocate owning a Value U.S. ETF to compensate, or simply sell down some U.S. or and add more International/Canada? Or other factor funds?

De Goey – I recommend getting out of the U.S. entirely. If you cannot do that then, at the very least, I’m worried that there’s an AI bubble much like what we saw with .com a quarter-century ago.

Chevreau Q4.) What range of asset allocation do you recommend for retirees, especially those who are middle-of-the-road and risk-averse?

De Goey: I think all portfolios should have alternatives. Pension plans like CPP, OMERS and HOOP all have over 33% in alternatives. But for MOR retail investors, I’d opt for something like 20% alternatives, 30% income, and 50% equity.

Chevreau Q5.)  Can investors and especially retirees rely on global Asset Allocation ETFs to keep them out of too many over-valued U.S. stocks?

De Goey: I wouldn’t use the word ‘rely.’ Such products will soften the blow, but right now the U.S. represents almost 2/3 of global stock market capitalization. So, if all your stocks were in a single global ETF or mutual fund with a cap-weighted mandate, you’d have massive exposure to a massively over-valued market.

Chevreau Q6.)  What about annuitizing a portion of an RRSP/RRIF? Continue Reading…

Retired Money: Are pricey U.S. stock valuations a threat to new Retirees? Plus David Chilton on retiree market timing

Posted By |

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column looks at the currently near record high valuations of U.S. stocks and the risks that may pose to those in the Retirement Risk Zone. Full column can be accessed by clicking on the highlighted headline: Why retirement planners are getting defensive. 

Retirement Club co-founder Dale Roberts recently posted a typical anxious link to a Globe & Mail column by Dr. Norman Rothery, (CFA) which suggested the current environment of Trump-inspired Tariffs and global Trade Wars, are causing plenty of anxiety for this group.

In the piece posted under Managing Risk in Retirement – and headlined With today’s market, investors close to retirement face precarious times – Rothery said investors on the cusp of retirement are “facing peril from a combination of the unusually lofty U.S. stock market and political uncertainty that’s disrupting world trade.”

U.S. stocks trading at “worrying levels”

The U.S. stock market is “trading at worrying levels,” based on several Value factors, Rothery said: the S&P 500 Index is “trading at a cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio (developed by Robert Shiller) near 39, which is above its peak of 33 in 1929 and it is approaching its top of 44 in late 1999, based on monthly data. Similarly the index’s price-to-sales ratio is approaching its 1999 high. A broader composite measure that includes many different market factors indicates that the U.S. market’s valuation is at record levels. “

Rothery, who also publishes StingyInvestor.com, concluded that it’s “likely that the U.S. stock market will generate unusually poor average real returns over the next decade or so.” Unfortunately, the U.S. stock market now represents about 65% of the world’s market by market capitalization based on its weight in the MSCI All-Country World Index at the end of August. So if the U.S. market flops, “It’ll likely take the rest of the world with it – at least temporarily,” Rothery cautioned.

This could impact recent retirees just beginning to draw down portfolios, due to “sequence of returns risk.” That means that those in the so-called Retirement Risk Zone  who suffer early losses could down the road be in danger of outliving their savings. Rothery also reference the famous 4% Rule of financial planner and author William Bengen: the theory that investors in a 55/40/5 portfolio should be able to sustain retirement savings for 30 years provided the annual “SafeMax” withdrawal not exceed 4% a year (actually 4.7%) after adjusting for inflation. Bengen just released a new book titled A Richer Retirement: Supercharging the 4% Rule to Spend More and Enjoy More, which the Retired Money column plans to  review next month.

What recent Retirees can do to lower their risk

Retirement Club members anxiously posed questions on the related chat room about whether they should be moving to cash and bonds, gold or other alternatives to U.S. stocks. To this, Dale Roberts – who also runs his own Cutthecrapinvesting blog – warned against getting too defensive but agreed a move to a 70% fixed income/30% stocks allocation might work for some nervous early retirees. Personally, he has trimmed back on his US growth stock exposure and added to defensive ETF sectors like consumer staples, healthcare and utilities. He also mentioned a US equity ETF trading in Canadian dollars: XDU.T

Advisors and their clients suffer from Optimist bias

Advisor John De Goey came to a similar cautious stance in a recent (Sept 12) speech at the MoneyShow in Toronto, archived here on YouTube. Titled Bullshift and Misguided beliefs (see this recent Hub blog) De Goey expanded on his usual themes of advisor bullishness and complacent investors, also articulated in his book Bullshift. Continue Reading…

Rob Carrick’s G&M retirement: what he and other retiring PF writers have learned about Retirement

Posted By |
Rob Carrick: Globe & Mail

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column has just been published and features input from Rob Carrick, who just retired from the Globe & Mail after almost three decades covering Personal Finance (PF henceforth). You can find the full column by clicking on the hyperlinked headline here: How financial journalists plan their own retirement.

While some may view this as an exercise in Inside Baseball, the column also features interviews with someone Rob and I agree was the “granddaddy” of Canadian PF writing: Bruce Cohen of the Financial Post. Bruce in effect handed off the PF beat to me a few years after I joined the paper in 1993. For the column, Bruce provided several retirement tips but clarified there were at least two such PF writers even before him (Mike Grenby and Henry Zimmer.). Guess you could call them the grandaddies of Canadian personal finance writing!

Unlike other journalists mentioned in the column, Bruce is one of the few who actually did truly retire: after a 5-year transition he says he fully retired at the traditional retirement age of 65. Now 75, he lives on 50 acres north of Toronto. He cites actuary Malcolm Hamilton’s conclusion that spending/lifestyle in retirement is pretty much the same as pre-retirement: “Ergo, most people did not need a 70% income replacement ratio. That’s been true for me, though I don’t know if it still applies  to the general population as many older people seem to carry significant  debt into retirement and many adult children are living with their parents.”

The MoneySense column also includes input from Garry Marr, another ex Postie who just weeks ago announced he is returning to the Financial Post to write about — you guessed it — Personal Finance.

Retiring from Full-time Retirement Blogging

Retirement Manifesto’s Fritz Gilbert

Meanwhile, south of the border, we got some input from Fritz Gilbert, who announced this spring in his The Retirement Manifesto blog that he is  “retiring” from full-time blogging about Retirement. 

Pretty ironic, isn’t it?

Since Rob Carrick is still only 62 years old, he clarifies that while he is no longer a salaried employee at a newspaper (he formally left on June 30th), he definitely plans to keep his hand in PF writing, including two monthly columns at the G&M: one on traditional PF, the second on his new Retirement experience.

He agrees that Retirement is a bit of an outdated word and that what he is doing is closer to Semi-Retirement, or indeed the term I coined in my financial novel, Findependence Day. Continue Reading…