Decumulate & Downsize

Most of your investing life you and your adviser (if you have one) are focused on wealth accumulation. But, we tend to forget, eventually the whole idea of this long process of delayed gratification is to actually spend this money! That’s decumulation as opposed to wealth accumulation. This stage may also involve downsizing from larger homes to smaller ones or condos, moving to the country or otherwise simplifying your life and jettisoning possessions that may tie you down.

Why the 4% Rule doesn’t work for FIRE/Early Retirement

Posted By |

 

By Mark and Joe

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

The 4% rule is a common rule of thumb in many retirement planning circles, including the Financial Independence, Retire Early (FIRE) community in particular.

What does the 4% rule actually mean?

Should the 4% rule be used for any FIRE-seeker?

Does the 4% rule really matter to retirement planning at all?

Read on to find out our take, including what rules of thumb (if any) we’re using at Cashflows & Portfolios for our early retirement dreams.

The 4% rule is really a starting point for a safe withdrawal rate

Unlike 2 + 2 = 4, the 4% rule is not really a universal truth for any retirement plan at all.

It is, however, in our opinion, a great starting point to understand the impacts of asset decumulation, related to inflation, over time.

As you’ll read more about in the sections below, the 4% rule is fraught with many problems. None more so than for an early retiree or FIRE-seeker. In some cases, for the FIRE community, we believe the 4% rule should no longer be used at all.

Are any financial rules really rules?

Backing up, here is the source for the 4% rule.

The article from 1994!

4% rule

Despite the geeky photo, by all accounts, Bill Bengen was one heckuva guy and a smart guy as well!

Potentially no other retirement planning rule of thumb has received more attention over the last 25-30 years than Bengen’s publication about the 4% rule. This publication in 1994 has triggered a new generation of devotees and arm-chair financial planners that are using this quick-math as a way to cement some retirement dreams. We believe that is a mistake for a few reasons.

First, let’s unpack what the 4% rule really means.

What does the 4% rule actually mean?

From the study:

“In Figures 1 (a)-l(d), a series of graphs illustrates the historical performance of portfolios consisting of 50-percent intermediate-term Treasury notes and 50-percent common stocks (an arbitrary asset allocation chosen for purposes of illustration). I have quantified portfolio performance in terms of “portfolio longevity”: how long the portfolio will last before all its investments have been exhausted by
withdrawals. This is an intuitive approach that is easy to explain to my clients, whose primary goal is making it through retirement without exhausting their funds, and whose secondary goal is accumulating wealth for their heirs.”

Unpacking this further, for those that do not want to read the entire study, here is something more succinct from Bengen:

Assuming a minimum requirement of 30 years of portfolio longevity, a first-year withdrawal of 4 percent, followed by inflation-adjusted withdrawals in subsequent years, should be safe.

 

“Should be safe”.

Again, the theory is one thing. Reality is something different and the financial future is always subject to change. Furthermore, if you’re blindly following this formula without considering whether it’s right for your situation, let alone putting in some guardrail approach to monitor your portfolio value at various checkpoints, you could end up either running out of money prematurely or being left with a huge financial surplus that you could have spent during your retirement. We’ll prove that point in a bit from another leading author.

Should the 4% rule be used for any FIRE-seeker?

Probably not. For many reasons.

Recently, Vanguard published an outstanding article about the need to revise any thinking about the 4% rule for the FIRE movement – a driver for this post.

Although the 4% rule remains a decent rule of thumb we believe most FIRE-seekers should heed the cautions in the Vanguard post. Here are some of our thoughts based on the article’s contents.

  • Caution #1 – FIRE-seekers should not rely on past performance for future returns

We agree. In looking at this Vanguard set of assumptions below, and based on our own personal investing experiences, we believe historical returns should not be used to guarantee any future results.

 

Source: Vanguard article – Fueling the FIRE movement

While the FP Canada Standards Council doesn’t have a multi-year (10-year) return model in mind, they did highlight in their latest projection assumption guidelines that going forward, investor returns may not be as juicy as in years past.

 

Source: FP Canada Standards Council.

This means for any historical studies, while interesting, may not be a great predictor of any future outcomes.

  • Caution #2 – The FIRE-seeking time horizon is longer

Bengen noted in his 1994 study:

“Therefore, I counsel my clients to withdraw at no more than a four-percent rate during the early years of retirement, especially if they retire early (age 60 or younger). Assuming they have normal life expectancies, they should live at least 25-30 years. If they wish to leave some wealth to their heirs, their expected “portfolio lives” should be some longer than that. “

Bengen goes on to say:

“If the client expects to live another 30 years, I point out that the chart shows 31 scenario years when he would outlive his assets, and only 20 which would have been adequate for his purposes (as we shall see later, a different asset allocation would improve this, but it would still be uncomfortable, in my opinion).
This means he has less than a 40-percent chance to successfully negotiate retirement–not very good odds.”

To paraphrase, Bengen’s study was relevant to 30 years in retirement. Not 35 years. Not 40 years and certainly not 50 years like some FIRE-seekers may need if they plan to retire at age 40 and live to age 90 (or beyond).

This is simply a huge reminder that your time horizon is a critical factor when it comes to retirement planning.

  • Caution #3 – FIRE-seekers may need to live with more stocks

Bengen’s 1994 study was based on the following:

“Note that my conclusions above were based on the assumption that the client continually rebalanced a portfolio of 50-percent common stocks and 50-percent intermediate-term Treasuries.” Continue Reading…

Retired Money: how to prepare for “Transitory for Longer’ inflation

Posted By |

As oxymorons go, you have to love the phrase “Transitory for Longer,” which comes up in my latest MoneySense Retired Money column. It looks at inflation, which of course is in the news virtually every day this summer, and one reason why stock markets are starting to weaken again (along with renewed Covid fears). You can find the full MoneySense column by clicking on the following headline: How might Inflation impact your Retirement plans?

As with trying to divine short-term moves in stocks or interest rates, I view predicting inflation — whether near-term, medium-term or longer-term — as somewhat futile. So the column preaches much the same as it would about positioning portfolios for stock declines or rises in interest rates: broad diversification of asset classes.

Asset Allocation for all Seasons

The ever useful four asset classes of Harry Browne’s Permanent Portfolio I find may be a good initial mix of assets to prepare for all possibilities: stocks for prosperity, bonds for deflation, cash for depression/recession and gold for inflation. Browne, who died in 2006,  famously allocated 25% to each.

That’s a good place to start, although as I point out in the column, many might add Real Estate/REITs and make it a five-way split each of 20%. Some suggest 10% in gold (both bullion ETFs and gold mining stock ETFs), which might be expanded to include other precious metals like silver, platinum and palladium. Some might add to this a 5% position in cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, which some view as “digital gold.”

To the extent stock markets and interest rates will forever fluctuate over the course of a retirement, such a diversified approach could help you sleep at night, as some asset classes zig as others zag. Seldom will all these assets soar at once, but hopefully it will be just as rare for all to plunge at once.

Annuities and new “Tontine” approaches

Another approach to this problem is not so much Asset Allocation but what finance professor Moshe Milevsky has dubbed “Product Allocation.” Continue Reading…

How to generate Passive Income 

Posted By |
Image Credit: Pixabay

By Mike Khorev

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Many of us strive for financial security; luckily, passive income investments open up the opportunity to make extra money on the side. 

All you need is the willingness to put in some fundamental groundwork: you don’t necessarily need savings to kickstart your investment. There are plenty of options when it comes to generating passive income that go far beyond the realms of compound investing. Here are some fresh ideas to get you started.

1.) Investments

Exchange-traded funds (ETFs)

Exchange-Traded Funds, known as ETFs, are a great way to invest in the stock market without needing to research individual companies. Investing in ETFs provides both capital gains and dividends. Diversify your investments to receive the maximum benefit. ETFs are rather low maintenance and yield a lower risk than regular equities.

Dividend-paying stocks

Feel the benefits of dividend stock investments with a range of stocks yielding up to 5% dividends. The hardest part is knowing which stocks are worth investment. The best way to generate larger profits is to choose dividends that come with franking credits. Stock market unpredictability is no secret, be willing to face a sudden rise and fall in value or cut dividends altogether.  

Robo-advisors

If you’re looking for an affordable financial advisor to manage your investments, Robo-Advisors could be for you. They personalise automated trading decisions based on your financial targets, limits and time frames for a fraction of the cost. They are one of the most passive forms of income. 

2.) Real estate

Rental income

Rental yield can be one of the most profitable forms of passive income. Experts state that small apartments containing 1-2 bedrooms have more success on the market generating returns of over 8%. Real Estate Agents will handle legal documentation, rent collection, and advertise your property for a recurring fee of 5-12% of the monthly rent.

Airbnb

Airbnb is a thriving marketplace with host’s estimated monthly earnings sitting at $924 per month. While properties are free to list, hosts are charged a 3-5% service fee and are liable to income tax. Many hosts invest earnings into outsourced housekeepers to maintain passiveness. 

Real estate investment trusts (REITs)

REIT investments are perfect for those who are interested in real estate without the responsibility of sustaining individual properties. Typically, REITs support non-residential buildings such as offices, apartment complexes, and retail centres. Commercial buildings are famous for yielding large profits, passive income will be paid in the form of dividends.

3.) Content creation and advertising

Affiliate marketing

Affiliate links are more negotiable than ever, not only do they support affiliate businesses, they are also a manageable form of passive income. Invest some time into digital content creation that generates healthy volumes of traffic. Aim to recommend products you truly believe in to build a trusting relationship with your audience and boost clicks.  Continue Reading…

Is everyone thinking of Retiring?

Posted By |

 

By Dale Roberts, Cutthecrap investing

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

It’s just a coincidence perhaps. But much of my blog and reads for the week research landed on that retirement theme. Everyone’s thinking of retiring or writing about retirement. And why not? That is a big end goal for most of us; some form of financial freedom. This Sunday Reads post offers a nice slice of retirement thinking, from the emotional to the money side of things. And of course, there’s some non-retirement ‘stuff’ in here as well.

This is a very good topic and post on My Own Advisor – the emotional side of retirement. In fact on this site I wrote an article that offered that waiting for your spouse was the hardest part of retirement.

Mark offers up on that period after the retirement honeymoon stage (after year one) …

At this point in retirement, the honeymoon is over and potentially it isn’t as enjoyable for some as they may thought.

Maybe some folks go back to work – as part of FIWOOT [Financial Independence: Work on own Terms]. There are only so many rounds of golf you can play …

I’ve read feelings of disenchantment can set in for some. Even depression. That’s certainly something I wish to avoid. By maintaining some form of work into my routine (may or may not be daily), it is my hope that I can stay active (socially, physically, cognitively) to support my health in early retirement and far beyond.

We certainly have to take greater care when we design our life in retirement. We need to be busy and we have to have purpose – from my life experience and from many studies. Having the money to retire in some form is just the half of it, or less.

The waiting is the hardest part

In my post link above, I touched on my first taste of semi-retirement experienced alone. My wife still works and will likely work for a a few more years. I also took off down east to be with my daughter as I launched this blog …

That said, I got a good taste of that ‘waiting’. And as Tom Petty (RIP) sang ‘The Waiting Is The Hardest Part’. While I have a very generous amount of loner in me I was surprised at how uncomfortable a feeling that was – that working alone and being alone for many hours on end. I couldn’t wait for my daughter to finish work and head up to the cottage for dinner and a walk along the beach.

I may have got a taste of what if feels like to make that transition.

The Boomers Retire

On the retirement front Jonathan Chevreau takes a look at a new edition of The Boomers Retire. The book is co-authored by Alexandra Macqueen, a Certified Financial Planner who co-authored Pensionize Your Nest Egg with famed finance professor Moshe Milvesky. David Field is an investment advisor and financial planner and co-creator of the CPP Calculator.

From Jonathan’s post on MoneySense …

“That’s just responding to the reality of retirement income planning for the growing numbers of the ‘pensionless’,” Macqueen says. “If you don’t have lifetime income, you’ll need to create it or take your chances. Whatever you decide, here’s a collection of the relevant facts, principles and issues you’ll need to take into consideration when you’re making your plan.”

While the book is written for advisors and planners, it is also a good read for the rest of us offers Jon.

Of course Alexandra is no stranger to this site. A retirement and pension expert Alexandra penned one of the most read (and most important) posts on this site.

Must read: Defined benefit pension planning. Bad advice could cost you your retirement.

And the Maple Money Podcast is on point this week as well with how to design your retirement lifestyle, with Mike Drak. Mr. Drak is a co-author of retirement heaven or hell, which will you choose? Continue Reading…

Lack a DB pension? Pros and Cons of the Purpose Longevity Fund

Posted By |

By Mark and Joe

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Hello readers of the Financial Independence Hub! We are the founders of CashflowsandPortfolios.com,  a free resource dedicated to helping DIY investors in getting started with their portfolio right up to planning efficient withdrawal strategies during retirement.

We are honoured to have been invited by Jon Chevreau to contribute a piece on a new income product for retirees: the Purpose Investments Longevity Fund.

If you are close to retiring or already a retiree, you’ve likely thought a lot about the following questions:

  1. Did I save enough for retirement?
  2. How will I generate sufficient income for my retirement?
  3. How long will my money last?

If you are lucky enough to have worked for a Government entity for 25-30 years, then you are probably not too worried about funding your retirement.  However, for the rest (most) of us, we need to save and invest on our own over the long-term. If that’s not enough, we then need to figure out ways to decumulate our savings as efficiently as possible.

For DIY investors, there is not much in the form of “forever” payments until death, except of course Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS). We consider these as one of the three pillars of retirement income for Canadians.

Another common source of “forever” income that acts like a government defined benefit (DB) pension are annuities: which are guaranteed by insurance companies. With annuities, investors are trading their capital for a steady income stream, which is essentially a DB pension.

Why aren’t annuities more popular? For DIY investors, it’s likely because of the fact that you are giving up your capital for a yield (currently around 4-5%) that can be obtained by your own DIY portfolio (see below for an example).

So what if there was a product out there that would provide:

  1. Income for life
  2. A yield higher than annuities
  3. An option to “sell” the product to regain some of your invested capital if needed?

That’s the opportunity and challenge that Purpose Investments has taken on with the creation of their latest mutual fund: The Longevity Pension Fund.

There has been a lot of buzz about the Purpose Investments Longevity Pension Fund and for good reason:  it solves a number of big problems that retirees face.

What is the Longevity Pension Fund and what are the pros and cons of owning such a fund?

Pros and Cons of the Longevity Pension Fund

At a high level, the Longevity Pension Fund is a cross between a balanced index mutual fund (47% equities/38% fixed income/15% alternatives), an annuity, and a defined benefit pension. While the fund does offer income for investors, a solid yield, and an option to “sell” the product if needed, these potential benefits must be considered with some drawbacks. As always with financial products, the devil is in the details.

With the basics out of the way, what are the PROS and CONS of the fund?

PRO – Reduces longevity risk (i.e., outliving your money) by offering income for life, but without the guarantees

As mentioned, the Longevity Purpose Fund is a mutual fund that any investor will be able to buy. Once purchased, and the investor is 65 or older, the fund will pay a distribution for life (at least that is the plan). Purpose Investments has stated that the 6.15% yield may sound high, but to maintain that yield they would only need to achieve an annual return of 3.5% net, which is well below historical returns for a common 60/40 stock/bond balanced portfolio.

Combined with mortality credits (investors who die sooner than expected, leaving their money invested in the fund for other investors), Purpose Investments has stated that 6.15% is conservative and can possibly go higher in the future.

PRO – You can get some of your investment back

With annuities and defined benefit pensions, you don’t typically get your contributions back. With this Longevity Fund, if you sell the fund you will get your initial investment minus any income payments. For example, if you have invested $100k into the fund, and have been paid out $10k, then you get back $90k if you sell. At a yield of 6.15%, essentially you can get some capital back up to 16 years of being invested in the fund. After that point, co

nsider yourself invested for life.

PRO – The taxation of the distributions will be tax efficient

While the fund is available for all kinds of accounts — including tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) and registered retirement income funds (RRIFs) — potentially the best home for this fund could be in a taxable account. That is because monthly income distributions in the first year are expected to be roughly half a return of capital (RoC) with the remainder from capital gains, dividends and interest. This means that in a taxable investment account, the distributions will be tax-efficient (much more so than a defined benefit pension payment).

PRO – No Binding Contract

A key feature of this Longevity Pension Fund is a script from the annuity playbook: mortality credits. Similar to an annuity, you are participating in a pool of credits: those that die. When you die, your estate gets your initial contribution minus the total amount of income payments. The investment gains generated by your investments over the years stay in the fund and are used to top up monthly payments for everyone else.

Unlike an annuity though, you can get out of the fund: it’s not a one-way binding contract.

From Purpose:

“Unlike many traditional annuities or other lifetime income products, the Longevity Pension Fund is not meant to feel like a binding contract. You can change your mind and access the lesser of your unpaid capital** (i.e., your invested capital less the distributions you’ve received) or current NAV. Your beneficiaries are entitled to the same amount if you pass away. Once your cumulative distributions surpass your invested capital, there will no longer be any redeemable value left. Please speak to your advisor or see the prospectus for further details.”

The fund is also designed similar to many pension plan funds or funds of funds:  a balanced mix of stocks, bonds and other investments that should* meet their income obligations to unitholders.

*Target income is just that. This fund does not offer an income guarantee.

CONS – The fund does not pass onto heirs

As mentioned above, the mortality credits are how this fund will sustain its yield into the future, which also means that the fund and its payout do not pass onto your spouse/heirs. For investors with a spouse/heirs, this is one of the largest drawbacks of the Longevity Pension Fund.

CONS – The distributions are not guaranteed

The monthly payments seem juicy right now but the Longevity Pension Fund is not like an annuity whereby income is guaranteed for life; the 6% or more income target is just that: a target. Continue Reading…