Victory Lap

Once you achieve Financial Independence, you may choose to leave salaried employment but with decades of vibrant life ahead, it’s too soon to do nothing. The new stage of life between traditional employment and Full Retirement we call Victory Lap, or Victory Lap Retirement (also the title of a new book to be published in August 2016. You can pre-order now at VictoryLapRetirement.com). You may choose to start a business, go back to school or launch an Encore Act or Legacy Career. Perhaps you become a free agent, consultant, freelance writer or to change careers and re-enter the corporate world or government.

Safe Retirement Withdrawal Rate Strategies in Canada

Posted By Financial Independence Hub | October 10, 2025

By Kyle Prevost

Special to Financial Independence Hub

The concept of a safe withdrawal rate (and the 4% rule) is a key planning tool for Canadians of all ages. After all, if you don’t have a general withdrawal plan, how can you know how much you need to save in the first place?

If you have been reading MDJ for years, you already have an idea of how to use a Canadian online broker account to DIY-invest your way to a solid nest egg.

Now you’re planning for retirement (whether it’s 20+ years away or next year) and you’re wondering how to take money out of that nest egg. Perhaps hoping that there is a rule for how much you can take out each year in retirement, and never go broke. That concept is generally referred to as a safe withdrawal rate, and we’ll go into detail on how this works in just a second.

We’ll even look at how to incorporate multiple accounts, such as your TFSA, RRSP, and a non-registered account into your safe withdrawal rate – as well tax rules surrounding the withdrawal of investments from those accounts.

And finally, we’ll seek to answer the question you probably really want answered: How do I turn my nest egg into a usable stream of money that I can depend on and spend as I look forward to retirement?

Surprisingly, when it comes to discussing Canadian safe retirement withdrawal rates, and talking to folks who have retired at all ages, spending their retirement savings represents a massive mental strain for them. I guess (as someone who has never retired or sold investments to pay for retirement) that I always thought that saving for retirement would be the hard part.

Isn’t spending supposed to be more fun than squirreling away?

It turns out that once you get into that savings mindset, it can be hard to flip the switch back to enjoying spending the fruits of your labour. This is especially true for folks who are looking at retirement withdrawal strategies for an early retirement because they are much more likely to have been super-aggressive savers during their time in the workforce.

I didn’t go into the topic of safe withdrawal rates for retirement expecting the topic to be so deep and full of variables! After all, the concept seems simple enough, right?

How much can I take out of my investment portfolio each year, if I need that nest egg to last for 30, 35, 40, or even 50 years?

Is your Retirement Savings on Track?

Each year BMO does a retirement survey that asks Canadians a wide range of questions.

The problem is that most Canadians don’t really understand how their income and expenses will interact in retirement. Are you saving enough? Find out for sure with the first online course for Canadian retirees (click here for more details).

The 4% Retirement Withdrawal Rule

Ok, so let’s maybe start with the rule of thumb that advisors have used when looking at retirement drawdown plans for a while now.

Back in 1994 a financial advisor named William Bengen looked at the last 80 or so years of markets and retirement, did a bunch of math, and arrived at a concept we now call “The 4% rule.”

The basic idea of the 4% retirement withdrawal plan is that someone could safely withdraw 4% of their investment/savings portfolio each year and – assuming a 60/40 or 50/50 split of bonds/stocks in their portfolio – they would never run out of money.

This idea of withdrawing a certain percentage of your portfolio to fund your retirement is called the Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR). The math behind this magic 4% figure means that if you have the nice round $1 Million investment portfolio that we all dream of, you could safely pull out $40,000 the first year, and then adjust for inflation and withdraw 4% plus inflation after that. (So if there was 2% inflation between year one and year two, you could now withdraw $40,800.)

Bengen, and another highly influential study took their rule and retroactively applied it to retirees from every single year from 1926 to 1994. They found that nearly 100% of the time (depending on what was in the investment portfolio) people could retire, and withdraw 4% of their portfolio for 30 years of retirement: and not run out of money.

In fact, over half of the time, if retirees followed the 4% rule, they not only didn’t run out of money, they finished life with more money than when they started retirement!

Keep in mind, these authors didn’t worry about OAS or C P P, or a workplace pension, or even the tax implications of different types of withdrawals. They were simply trying to come up with a useful rule of thumb for how much a person could safely withdraw from their retirement portfolio.

What the 4% Rule Means for your Magic Retirement Portfolio Number

If you can safely withdraw 4% of your portfolio to fund your retirement, then the simple math tells us that if you can accumulate 25x your annual retirement budget, you no longer have to work.

Here’s the breakdown:

Jane looks at her budget and realizes that once she retires she will have a lot less spending demands. She carefully weighs the numbers and believes she’ll need $40,000 per year to quit her 9-to-5.
Consequently, Jane needs the magical “4% of her portfolio” to equal $40,000 per year.
For a 4% withdrawal to equal $40,000, Jane will need a $1,000,000 portfolio.
If Jane reassesses and realizes she needs $60,000 per year in retirement, Jane would need 25 times $60,000 (because 4% goes into 100% twenty-five times) which is $1.5 Million.
Jane might not need anywhere close to $1.5M if she intends to do a little part-time work in retirement, and is willing to use some math + research strategies to help herself out a bit when it comes to managing her nest egg! But more on that later…

4% Safe Withdrawal Rate for Retirement: Potential Problems

Up until the 4% rule became a thing, when financial advisors were asked about safe withdrawal rates, the only thing they could really say is, “it depends.” Continue Reading…

Q&A with John De Goey

Posted By Jonathan Chevreau | October 7, 2025

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.

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 Jonathan Chevreau | October 1, 2025

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…

Bullshift and Misguided Beliefs

Posted By Financial Independence Hub | September 24, 2025

John De Goey, a financial advisor and portfolio manager with Designed Securities, and long-time commentator on the financial services industry, was a keynote speaker at The Money Show recently held at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.

Author of the book ‘Bullshift – How optimism bias threatens your finances’ (Dundurn Press, Toronto, 2023) and host of the popular podcast Make Better Wealth Decisions, De Goey delivered a presentation called Bullshift and Misguided Beliefs.

‘Bullshift,’ the term De Goey has coined, refers to his view about how the financial services industry makes people feel bullish in order to do the industry’s bidding. To make his point, he noted full-page ads appearing in such publications as The Globe and Mail; one of them ran under the headline ‘Be bullish.’

As for misguided beliefs, De Goey says there is ample evidence that Canadian mutual fund registrants believe things which are patently untrue. To illustrate the latter, he referred to Brandolini’s Law.

Alberto Brandolini was an Italian programmer who developed the term in 2013 and his rule goes like this: The amount of energy required to refute BS is an order of magnitude bigger than what was needed to produce it in the first place. Or, put another way, it compares the considerable effort needed to debunk misinformation to the relative ease in creating that misinformation.

American writer and humourist Mark Twain had a take on this at a much earlier time, and De Goey cited that. Said Twain: “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” The point beyond all this, said De Goey, is that people must unlearn what they think they already know. No easy task.

His presentation at The Money Show covered a number of topics including:

The difference between misinformation (an honest mistake) and disinformation (saying something that is deliberately false), and how to unlearn the latter and think for yourself.
How behavioural economics and social psychology affect your investing decisions.
How the industry uses motivated reasoning and tribalism as opposed to critical thinking and evidence.
Why 90% of our financial decisions are based on emotions, not logical thinking.
Why governments and financial advisors like optimism over realism.

De Goey, always a student of history, observed that the market is 30% more expensive now than it was in 1929 just before the stock-market crash that led to the Great Depression. He mentioned the Smoot-Hawley tariffs of 1930 and their catastrophic impact on the U.S. economy, not to mention worldwide economy, and compared this to today’s on-and-off tariffs coming out of the Trump White House. He also noted recent credit downgrades and their effect on the U.S., and, of course, the very real pain of the tariffs which he believes will be much worse in the fourth quarter of 2025. What’s more, De Goey says this will be accompanied by higher inflation.

Bear market looming?

De Goey said the current bull market is “taking its final bow” and the bear market is “waiting in the wings.” In fact, he warned that gains made over the past six years could be entirely wiped out in the next four years if the historical regression to the mean for CAPE occurs. For those who are retired or nearing retirement, this would be devastating news indeed.

One of De Goey’s pet peeves – ‘optimism bias’ – refers to a) people thinking the good times will continue despite blatant warning signs, and b) the very human sentiment that bad things happen but only to other people. Not true, says De Goey. The trouble, he says, is that optimism can sometimes put you in trouble.

Normally, a presentation about money, economics and investing doesn’t get into wisdom imparted by such luminaries as Mark Twain, but De Goey didn’t stop there. He also took a page from Carl Sagan, notably, his 1997 book ‘The Demon-Haunted World. Said Sagan: “If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” Continue Reading…

Challenging Times for Recent Retirees?

Posted By Financial Independence Hub | September 23, 2025

By Dale Roberts, CutTheCrap Investing, Retirement Club

Special to Financial Independence Hub

The following is a special to Findependence Hub. This post is derived from a newsletter from Retirement Club for Canadians, re-shaped and enhanced for this audience.

In the Globe & Mail Norm Rothery offered an article with the title – With today’s market, investors close to retirement face precarious times (sub required). Norman Rothery, PhD, CFA, is the founder of StingyInvestor.com.

Retirees typically face the greatest risk in the first few years of retirement. A severe market correction or bout of inflation can permanently impair retirement plans. In fact, the risk for retirees starts several years before the retirement start date, they’re already in the retirement risk zone.

Norm suggested …

“Planning for retirement is tricky at the best of times because it is beset by uncertainties both known and unknowable. High valuations are one of the known problems but that doesn’t make them easy to deal with.”

While a severe market correction early in retirement is a great risk for retirees who will rely extensively on balanced or growth-oriented portfolios, a longer period of low returns can also create risk. The U.S. stock market is trading at worrying levels based on a variety of value factors.

Norm demonstrated that the S&P 500 Index is trading at a cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio near 39, which is approaching the 44 level that we saw in late 1999 as we approached the dot com crash.

Source: Charlie Billelo / Twitter X

The price-to-sales ratio is approaching its 1999 high.

This ‘everything metric’ says we have the most expensive U.S. market – EVER!

Source: Bloomberg

And we can pile on with the Buffett Indicator …

We certainly can’t just step aside and wait for the next recession. Valuation metrics provide no market-timing opportunity. Nothing provides any market timing opportunity. Valuation tends to be a poor near-term market predictor, but it can ‘predict’ the potential returns over the next several years to decade. The data suggest returns for U.S. stocks could be very low in the range of 1-4% annual or even negative in real dollar (inflation-adjusted) returns.

And keep in mind that Canadian stocks (after a very healthy run) are expensive as well. After their big run-up this year, Canadian stocks now trade for nearly 29 times their average inflation-adjusted earnings of the past decade, according to Citigroup, the historical average is 16, TSX returns over the next several years might be challenged as well.

So, there is a risk of a major correction inspired by the lofty levels. And low returns in the first decade can put a strain on the spending plans. Continue Reading…