Building Wealth

For the first 30 or so years of working, saving and investing, you’ll be first in the mode of getting out of the hole (paying down debt), and then building your net worth (that’s wealth accumulation.). But don’t forget, wealth accumulation isn’t the ultimate goal. Decumulation is! (a separate category here at the Hub).

15 experts on Alternative Asset Classes beyond the traditional 60/40

Posted By |
Deposit Photos

I’ve noticed a flurry of articles recently about how investors, including nearing or in the Retirement Risk Zone, might consider moving beyond the traditional 60/40 balanced portfolio of stocks and bonds to consider multiple alternative asset classes.

Indeed, here at FindependenceHub.com we have in the past week run two blogs on specific alternative assets classes: Gold and Bitcoin.

Click on the following headlines to read them if you missed them the first time around:

Should you invest in Gold?

Could Bitcoin fall to Zero, which is where this Crypto skeptic argues it belongs?

Admittedly both blogs have a strong point of view that comes from the respective authors. It happens that these two bloggers don’t think much of Gold and Bitcoin respectively. I value their opinion and felt it was worth passing along to readers, who can make their own judgements. Personally, I’ve always believed 5% in Gold or Precious Metals bullion and/or mining stocks is a risk worth taking. I’m a little more skeptical about cryptocurrency but have written in the past that for those inclined to take a flyer on Bitcoin, a 1 or 2% position could work.  That 1% could soar and become 10% or more of a total portfolio but it’s also possible that it might indeed descend to zero.

The rest of this blog canvases a baker’s dozen of financial experts and business owners and you’ll see that several of them take a stance on gold and bitcoin, both positively and negatively, as well as numerous other asset classes, such as real estate, private equity, hedge funds and many more.

With the assistance of Featured.com, which has been supplying Findependence Hub with quality content for several years, we recently polled a number of these experts on LinkedIn, as you can see by clicking on their profiles below.

Here’s how we posed the question:

Beyond traditional stocks and bonds, represented in Balanced ETFs, what, if any, alternative asset classes do you recommend, and in what proportions? For example: precious metals (gold or silver bullion or related stocks, or ETFs holding the same), commodities in general, Bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies, real estate held directly or via REITs or certain publicly traded stocks, or any other alternatives not mentioned here, such as Private Equity or Hedge Funds.

1. I recommend gold primarily as geopolitical and inflation insurance, not as a growth asset. Allocate 5-10% of your portfolio to gold via ETFs like GLD or physical bullion if you have secure storage. Silver is more volatile and industrial, so treat it as a smaller speculative position (2-3%) if at all. Gold doesn’t pay dividends or interest, so it’s dead weight in a bull market, but it’s the ultimate “crisis hedge” when currencies or governments misbehave.

2. Direct real estate ownership is capital-intensive and illiquid, so for most investors, publicly traded REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) are the smarter play. They provide exposure to commercial, residential, or industrial property with daily liquidity and mandatory dividend payouts. I prefer diversified REIT ETFs like VNQ. This gives you inflation protection (rents rise with prices) and income generation without the headache of being a landlord. Avoid over-concentration here; real estate correlates heavily with the broader economy during downturns.

3. Crypto is not an investment; it’s a volatility lottery ticket with a philosophical thesis. I recommend limiting exposure to 2-5% of your portfolio, and only in the “blue chips” (Bitcoin and Ethereum). Treat this as venture capital: money you can afford to lose entirely. Do not buy crypto with debt, and do not FOMO into altcoins. Store it in a hardware wallet (Ledger, Trezor) if you hold significant amounts; exchanges are not banks. This allocation satisfies your urge to participate in the “future of finance” without risking your retirement if it all goes to zero.

4. Commodities (oil, natural gas, agricultural products) via ETFs like DBC provide inflation protection and diversification, but they are mean-reverting and volatile. Allocate 3-5% as a tactical hedge, especially during inflationary periods. Avoid direct futures contracts unless you are a professional; the contango and rollover costs will eat you alive.

5. Unless you are an accredited investor with $10M+ in liquid net worth, private equity and hedge funds are legally and financially inaccessible or impractical. They charge egregious fees (2% management + 20% performance), lock up your capital for years, and studies show most underperform public markets after fees. If you insist, access them via interval funds or publicly traded BDCs (Business Development Companies), but understand you are paying for illiquidity and complexity, not guaranteed outperformance. — Lyle Solomon, Principal Attorney, Oak View Law Group

Alternative investments should represent twenty per cent of an investor’s total portfolio. In terms of specific allocations, I recommend ten percent in physical gold as a hedge against loss or theft, five percent in real estate investment trusts (REITs) for income generation and three percent in Bitcoin for growth opportunities. Finally, I suggest two per cent be allocated to private equity for both capital gains and diversification purposes. A combination of these types of alternative investments will help protect investors from future inflationary pressures and contribute greatly to their long term performance. Geremy Yamamoto, Founder, Eazy House Sale

Put the most money into things you understand best

My bigger principle is this: Put the most money into the things you understand best.

In my case, that has always been real estate and housing because I know how value gets created there. I know what distress looks like. I know where the discount comes from. I know how people get in trouble. That matters. The more removed an asset is from your real-world understanding, the smaller it should probably be.

And one more thing. Liquidity matters. A lot. People forget that. An investment may look great on paper until you need cash and cannot get to it without taking a beating. That is why I like keeping things simple and staying out of anything that locks you up unless the reward is clearly worth it. — Don Wede, CEO, Heartland Funding Inc.

I’ll break the answer into two parts depending on what your goals are. Growing your assets is one thing, turning your capital into a lifetime income that never runs out is another and that is the #1 financial concern of the 50+ age group.

Purchasing Power Protection is the new Growth strategy:

Historically we used to achieve stable growth by balancing a risk-on asset class (equities) with a risk-off asset class (bonds). In good times the equities flew and the bonds did little; in bad times the bond performance offset declines in equities.

The problem is that in inflationary times, both fall. Inflation undermines the economics of established businesses which have to compete for limited resources that are increasing in price. Positioning for scarcity can insulate you against these circumstances. Gold, Silver and even Bitcoin are the most liquid scarce assets on the planet but they don’t move uniformly. Backing a portfolio with a scarce risk-on asset such as Silver or Bitcoin — while having the majority in a reliable, but occasionally boring, asset like gold — now gives you balance over the longer term. A 30/70 split seems to be the sweet spot.

Assets run out, Lifetime Income is forever:

70% of savers worry about one thing above all others. Can I afford my ideal lifestyle now at the risk of poverty if I live 25+ years? Not everyone will live 25+ years but if I spend now then I am betting against my own longevity. Insurers capitalize on this risk by pooling lives together and promising annuitants a fixed income for life. But fixed incomes lock in the loss of purchasing power. Your lifestyle is going to degrade over time.

It wasn’t always this way. Just over a century ago, 50% of U.S. households joined a longevity risk-sharing arrangement called a Tontine. Recent legislation has enabled modern Tontine Trusts which can be backed by assets that can resist inflation. The Tontine Trusts use your preferred assets to pay you a monthly income for life. When a member dies, their leftover assets top-up the trusts of survivors, typically enabling their monthly income to increase.

So the question the reader really needs to decide upon is: What matters most? The balance of the account or the lifestyle that I always want to enjoy. For generations past, the answer was not to play the markets but rather to invest in yourself.

[Potentially there is a far larger article here, contact us if you want to offer readers a $250 bonus and a similar reward for yourself] — Dean McClelland, Founder/CEO, Tontine Trust Europe KB Continue Reading…

Your 12 Good Years: Retirement Manifesto

Posted By |
RetirementManifesto.com

By Dan Haylett and  Fritz Gilbert, TheRetirementManifesto.com

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

On rare occasions, I read something so powerful I have to share it here.

Today is one such occasion.

Dan Haylett is one of my favorite writers, and a heckuva nice guy.  His podcast, Humans vs. Retirement, is the #1 retirement podcast in the UK for good reason. (Sign up for his free weekly email here)

While his podcast is great, I can’t get enough of this guy’s writing.  Every week, I read his email as soon as it arrives.  Recently, he published “Your 12 Good Years” on his Substack feed.  The following comment from a reader is indicative of how good it is:

“Maybe, if not probably, this is the best retirement article I’ve ever read.”

As soon as I read it, I asked Dan if he’d allow me to republish it here.

Fortunately, he said yes.

Prepare to be challenged by some of the best writing you’ll ever read, from one of the best minds in the business….

The healthy, active years you have left are shorter than you think Share on X

Your 12 Good Years

Here’s a number that should change how you think about retirement: 12.

Not 30. Not 25. Not even 20.

12.

That’s how long the average healthy 60-year-old has before their mobility, energy, and independence start to significantly decline. Not before they die… before life gets noticeably harder.

You might live to 90. You might even make it to 100. But the version of you that can hike the Inca Trail, chase grandchildren around a park, travel independently, or even just get through a full day without fatigue? That version has a shelf life.

And it’s shorter than you think.

The Data Nobody Wants to Hear

I want you to be clear about what I’m talking about here. This isn’t about morbidity or scaring you into action. This is about healthy life expectancy, the years you have before chronic illness, disability, or physical limitation becomes a daily reality.

In the UK, a 60-year-old man can expect to live, on average, to around 84. A 60-year-old woman to around 87. Those are the headline numbers. The ones that make retirement planning calculators tell you to prepare for 25-30 years.

But those numbers don’t tell you that most of those later years aren’t healthy years.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that healthy life expectancy (the years lived in good health without limiting illness or disability) ends much earlier. For someone who is 60 today, you’re looking at roughly 12-15 more years before health limitations start to intrude in meaningful ways.

That doesn’t mean you drop dead at 75. It means that by your early to mid-70s, things start to shift. Energy declines. Recovery from illness takes longer. Long-haul flights become less appealing. All-day adventures turn into half-day outings. The body you’ve been living in for six decades starts sending you clearer signals about what it will and won’t tolerate.

Research on retirement spending patterns backs this up. The Institute for Fiscal Studies found that retirees’ spending on travel and leisure increases through their 60s, peaks around age 75, and then declines, not because people run out of money, but because they run out of the physical capacity to do the things that money would buy.

You have more time than you have energy. More years than you have vitality. And if you don’t understand that distinction, you’ll waste the good years preparing for the declining ones.

What “Good Years” actually means

Let me be specific about what changes.

In your 60s and early 70s, if you’re reasonably healthy, you’re still you. You can travel. You can be spontaneous. You can handle long days. You can manage your own life without help. You have the energy to start new projects, learn new skills, and take on challenges.

You’re not invincible (you’re not 30), but you’re still fundamentally capable.

By your mid 70s and into your 80s, things shift. Not dramatically. Not all at once. But gradually, consistently, undeniably.

You might still travel, but not as far or as often. You might still be active, but you need more recovery time. You might still be independent, but you start needing help with things that used to be trivial, like changing a lightbulb, carrying heavy shopping, and navigating airports.

The things you do become smaller. More local. More cautious. Not because you’ve lost your spirit, but because your body has started setting the terms.

And this isn’t pessimism … it’s just biology. Muscle mass declines. Bone density decreases. Balance becomes less reliable. Chronic conditions accumulate. The resilience you took for granted starts to fray.

None of this means your later years are worthless or joyless. Many people find deep satisfaction and peace in their 80s and beyond. But they’re different years. Quieter. More reflective. Less physically expansive.

The good years, the ones where you still have the physical capacity to do most of what you want, are finite. And they’re shorter than the total lifespan numbers suggest.

The Spending and Activity Decline

Here’s where this gets practical.

One of the most robust findings in retirement research describes how retirees’ spending patterns change over time.

Spending is relatively high in the first few years of retirement, the “go-go years.” You’re active, you’re travelling, you’re finally doing all the things you deferred while working. Then it declines through the middle years, the “slow-go years,” as energy and interest naturally wane. And then it potentially rises a bit again in very late life, the “no-go years,” as healthcare and care costs may come into the equation.

But here’s what that misses … the decline in spending isn’t driven by frugality. It’s driven by physical limitation.

People in their late 70s and 80s aren’t spending less on holidays because they’ve suddenly become careful with money. They’re spending less because long-haul flights are exhausting. Because hotels without lifts are a problem. Because they don’t have the stamina for full days of sightseeing anymore.

The spending decline tracks the activity decline. And the activity decline tracks the erosion of those 12 good years.

The Trap of Deferral

The cruel irony is that most people spend the first decade of retirement living as they did in the last decade of work: carefully.

You saved for 40 years. You delayed gratification. You were prudent, responsible, cautious. And that got you here. It built the nest egg. It secured your future.

But if you keep living that way, you’ll waste the very years you saved for.

I see this constantly. Clients in their early 60s, financially secure, agonising over whether they can “afford” a holiday. Whether it’s “sensible” to upgrade the car. Whether they should help their grandchildren with something meaningful.

They’re optimising for a 30-year retirement. Planning as if every year is equivalent. Treating their 60s the same as their 80s.

But they’re not the same.

Your 60s are not a rehearsal for your 80s. They’re the main event. And if you don’t spend (not recklessly, but intentionally) during the years when you can still fully enjoy it, you’ll reach 78 with a big bank balance and a long list of regrets.

The things you can do at 65, you often can’t do at 75. The trip that sounds ambitious but achievable today might be off the table in a decade. The time with grandchildren while they’re young and you’re energetic doesn’t come back. Continue Reading…

Could Bitcoin fall to Zero, where this Crypto skeptic argues it belongs?

Posted By |
AlainGuillot.com

By Alain Guillot

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Every day that passes, Bitcoin gets closer to its true intrinsic value, which is $0.

During October 2025, it reached its highest delusional price of $126,198.07 USD. Today, it sits at $68,038.19 USD: approximately a 46% drop in about six months. And this is just the beginning.

Bitcoin is nothing more than a sophisticated pyramid scheme designed to take money from naive people who have seen too many get-rich-quick schemes on social media. It’s also a fantastic tool for terrorists, drug dealers, and money launderers who need to move money around.

The price of Bitcoin has been maintained by the “Greater Fool Theory.” Someone buys it because they think there is a greater fool willing to buy it later. But guess what? The world is running out of fools. It’s a huge turn-off when Bitcoin investors haven’t seen any gains during the past two years.

Bitcoin drops 46% in six month.

Bitcoin drops 46% in Six Months

The Trading Platforms are Bleeding Out

With the price decline of Bitcoin, fewer people are eager to trade it. That’s a bummer for companies that depend on gullible traders for their profits. The most obvious victims of this decline in Bitcoin trading are Coinbase and Robinhood.

Coinbase is down 54% during the last 6 month.

Coinbase operates much like an online stockbroker, except instead of stocks, users buy and sell crypto assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

It serves two main groups:

  • Retail investors using its app or website
  • Institutional clients such as hedge funds and asset managers

The company earns a large portion of its revenue by charging transaction fees every time someone buys or sells crypto.

This is the engine of the business, because people are trading less Crypto, the revenues are dropping quickly.

Robinhood, down 53% in part due to the decline of Bitcoin
Robinhood, down 53% in part due to the decline of Bitcoin

Robinhood’s crypto business lets users buy and sell assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum directly in the app.

Unlike stocks:

  • Crypto trades are not routed via PFOF in the same way
  • Robinhood earns money through a spread (markup on buy/sell prices) and transaction-based revenue

The key point: crypto is a revenue amplifier

Crypto has historically contributed a large and highly variable share of Robinhood’s revenue:

  • In peak periods (like 2021), crypto generated 40%+ of transaction revenue
  • In quieter markets, it can fall to single digits

This makes crypto:

  • Not always the largest segment
  • But often the most volatile and cyclical driver

Why crypto matters so much to Robinhood

Robinhood’s user base skews:

  • younger
  • more speculative
  • more reactive to trends

Crypto trading fits that profile perfectly. When crypto heats up:

  • trading frequency spikes
  • new users join
  • dormant users return

When crypto declines:

  • engagement drops sharply
  • revenue contracts

When the price stops going up, the “get rich quick” crowd disappears. This creates a liquidity crisis that makes it harder for remaining holders to exit their positions without further crashing the market.

Michael Saylor’s Strategy: A Leveraged Nightmare

The most precarious domino in this collapse is Michael Saylor and his company, MicroStrategy. Saylor has famously bet his entire balance sheet on Bitcoin, but he didn’t just use cash: he used massive amounts of leverage.

The Strategy Math is Failing:

  • Average Cost: Strategy’s average purchase price is approximately $76,052.
  • Current Value: With Bitcoin trading near $68,000, Saylor is officially “underwater.”
  • The Collateral Problem: Strategy’s debt is secured by the Bitcoin itself. As the price drops, the value of his collateral shrinks.

If the Bitcoin price crash continues, Saylor will be forced to sell to meet debt obligations. Because his holdings are so massive, his forced selling would trigger a “death spiral,” flooding the market and tanking the price even further.

Strategy is now down 62% during the last 6 months.
Strategy is now down 62% during the last 6 months.

Strategy is now down 62% during the last 6 months. I be Michel Saylor is having some sleepless nights.

Five years of Underperformance

While “crypto bros” promised generational wealth, the data tells a different story. Over the last five years, Bitcoin has significantly underperformed the S&P 500.

  1. Productivity vs. Speculation: Stocks represent companies that create value. Bitcoin creates nothing.
  2. Criminal Utility: Bitcoin remains the preferred currency for tax evaders and cyber-criminals.

Why you must Get out Now

If you have any holdings in this asset class, the most rational move is to liquidate immediately. The history of financial manias shows that the final collapse happens much faster than the build-up.

Waiting for a “rebound” is a dangerous game when the largest holder in the world is facing a potential margin call. Decent people should stay away from an asset that benefits only the corrupt and leaves the average person in financial ruin.

Summary

The Bitcoin price crash is the natural conclusion of a speculative bubble that lacked fundamental utility. With Michael Saylor’s Strategy underwater and trading platforms in retreat, the floor is falling out.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Why is the Bitcoin price crashing in 2026? The crash is driven by a lack of new buyers, high interest rates, and the looming threat of forced liquidations from major holders like MicroStrategy.

Is Michael Saylor’s company going bankrupt? While not currently in bankruptcy, the company is “underwater” on its holdings, meaning the Bitcoin is worth less than what they paid for it, creating immense pressure on their debt.

Alain Guillot is a part-time blogger and solopreneur based in Quebec. After immigrating to the province, he struggled to find work due to his limited French, which pushed him to create his own path through entrepreneurship. That journey sparked a deep interest in personal finance and investing. Today, he lives a FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) lifestyle and shares thoughtful, opinionated insights on his blog, AlainGuillot.com. This blog appeared first on his blog and is republished here with permission.  

 

Should you Invest in Gold?

Posted By |
Image Unsplash

By Steve Lowrie, CFA

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Should you invest in Gold?

For most investors, no.  Gold does not produce income, has delivered inconsistent long-term returns, and is not a reliable hedge against inflation or market uncertainty. A disciplined, evidence-based portfolio built on equities and bonds has historically provided more consistent growth.

Why Gold gets Attention

I tend to get questions about gold at predictable times:

  • When gold or gold stocks have recently performed well, which triggers greed
  • During periods of political or economic uncertainty, which triggers fear

Both are emotional responses. Neither is a reliable investment strategy.

Is Gold a Good Investment when it is Performing Well?

Not necessarily.

Gold’s price is largely driven by what is often described as the “greater fool theory.” You buy it today hoping someone else will pay more for it later.

Unlike productive assets like stocks or bonds, gold does not generate income. It does not pay dividends or interest, and it does not produce cash flow. In many cases, it also comes with costs such as storage or insurance.

Your return depends entirely on price appreciation, which is unpredictable.

What has Gold’s Long-term Return looked like?

Gold has not delivered reliable long-term returns.

Over extended periods, gold’s return after inflation has been modest and inconsistent. While there have been periods of strong performance, these gains have often been followed by long stretches of little to no real progress.

In contrast, productive assets such as global equities have provided sustained long-term growth.

Investors who try to time gold’s periods of strong performance often take on additional risk and may miss out on the more consistent compounding provided by equities.

Does Gold protect against Inflation?

Not reliably.

There have been periods where gold has outpaced inflation, but there have also been long stretches where it has not.   For example, following its peak in 1980, gold experienced a prolonged period of weak performance, taking almost 20 years to recover in real or after-inflation terms.

More importantly, gold is far more volatile than inflation. Since 1970, gold has been about 10 times more volatile than inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index.

That level of volatility undermines its usefulness as a stable hedge against rising prices.

Is Gold a Safe Haven?

This is a common belief, but the evidence is inconsistent.

Gold may perform well in certain environments, but those outcomes are unpredictable and not dependable. The idea that gold consistently protects wealth during crises is not strongly supported by data.

Much of the “safe haven” narrative is driven more by perception than by evidence.

Does Gold improve Diversification?

Less than many investors expect.

Gold and commodities do not produce income, and their returns depend on price changes. That makes their long-term outcomes less reliable than productive assets such as stocks or bonds.

A well-constructed portfolio should prioritize asset classes with positive expected returns.

Should you hold any Gold?

Only indirectly, as part of the broader market.

For Canadian investors, a material exposure to gold already exists through mining companies within the TSX Index. Unlike gold bullion, these companies generate earnings and may pay dividends. A diversified portfolio naturally includes this exposure without requiring a separate allocation.

Anything beyond that moves from disciplined investing toward speculation.

A simple framework for Decision Making

When evaluating any investment, I encourage clients to ask three questions:

  1. Does it produce income?
  2. Does it have a reliable long-term expected return?
  3. Does it improve portfolio outcomes in a measurable way?

Gold struggles to meet all three.

That does not make it useless, but it does make it difficult to justify as a core holding in a long-term portfolio.

A Real-World Observation

Over the years, I have had many conversations about gold in social settings.

They often follow a familiar pattern. A discussion about markets turns to gold, and someone becomes very passionate about it. These individuals are often referred to as “gold bugs,” and they tend to hold strong convictions about gold as a store of value or protection against the financial system.

In one conversation, I was told quite confidently that I was doing a disservice to my clients by not allocating the majority of their portfolios to gold.

What stood out was not just the conviction, but the certainty. In investing, that level of certainty is often where the risk lies.

What happened next is what matters.

Over the following decade, gold prices were largely flat. During that same period, a globally diversified portfolio delivered strong long-term returns.

The real cost was not just the lack of return from gold. It was the opportunity cost of missing the growth of productive assets.

That experience reinforced a simple truth. In the long run, evidence tends to be more reliable than conviction.

Bottom Line

Gold tends to attract attention during periods of greed and fear.

But when you step back and look at the evidence:

  • It does not produce income or cashflow
  • Its long-term returns have been inconsistent
  • It is not a reliable inflation hedge
  • Its diversification benefits are limited

For most investors, a disciplined approach grounded in evidence and focused on long-term outcomes remains the more reliable path.

Frequently Asked Questions

Should Canadians invest in gold?

For most Canadian investors, no. A diversified portfolio of equities and bonds provides a more reliable way to grow wealth and manage risk over time. Exposure to gold already exists indirectly through the broader market. Continue Reading…

The Best Asset Allocation entering Retirement

Posted By |

By Mark Seed, myownadvisor

Special to Financial Independence Hub

The trigger for this post was some recent reading on vacation in Belize.

Image courtesy Mark Seed/myownadvisor

Our morning view from the villa in Belize, March 2026. 

With retirement just over a month away for me (with my wife already retired since 2025), I’ve been reading a bit more on this subject – more specifically, what might be an optimal asset allocation to enter retirement with – if there is one!?

I examine some options and reference some literature in today’s post, concluding with my own plan good, bad or indifferent.

First, a primer:

Asset allocation is the mix in your portfolio amongst different asset classes — primarily stocks, bonds, and cash for most — to balance risk and reward based on an individual’s goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon.

It is a central feature to portfolio management that helps minimize volatility and align investments to an investor’s personal long-term financial objectives.

That said, asset allocation can change over time, over an investor’s lifecycle and it probably should: including entering Retirement. Consider the following options:

Option #1 – Use a Constant Equity Asset Allocation

One of the simplest strategies to enter retirement with might be using a single, all-in-one, asset allocation ETF across your registered accounts (i.e., RRSP/RRIF, LIRA/LIF) – and continue to maintain that fund for years on end. 

Consider something like a “VBAL or XBAL or ZBAL and chill” approach in a 60% equities and 40% fixed income mix. The idea here is you simply sell off “BAL” units over time to fund your lifestyle at a modest withdrawal rate of 4-5% per year.

I know a few DIY investors that do this, very successfully.

I did a case study on my site about doing just that as well.

Selling off the capital you’ve accumulated is absolutely normal and fine and largely intended: why you saved money for retirement in the first place.

The challenge with this approach becomes what withdrawal rate to sell off at.

  • A withdrawal rate lower than 3-4% is likely too low over many years: your portfolio will just continue to grow and you are likely underspending in retirement.
  • A withdrawal rate in the range of 4-5% is probably just fine.
  • A withdrawal rate higher than 5-6% could put you at risk of outliving your money.
Simple solutions are great but eventually in retirement you need to get more tactical about what your portfolio can really deliver.

I’ll link to how I can help later on…

Option #2 – Use an Age-Based Equity Asset Allocation

Unlike option #1, this one is about using your age as an anchor.

Traditional retirement income planning looks like this:

Source: For illustrative purposes only. T. Rowe Price, August 2025. 

This implies the following:
  • As you accumulate assets, the portfolio is heavily weighted towards equities. As we know by now, equities deliver higher volatility associated with stocks relative to fixed income but that’s the price you pay or have to stomach for long-term gains.
  • As you age, get closer to retirement or start retirement, traditional thinking is you might follow an “age-matches your bond or fixed income” allocation formula. Traditional wisdom also says as retirement continues, the portfolio should glide-down in equities to be more conservative: with less time on your side to recover from bad market cycles.

More conventional thinking turns the tables on this below in option #3.

Option #3 – Use a Rising Equity Asset Allocation

If traditional thinking was about lower equites as you age, a rising-equity glide path is the opposite: more equities as you age throughout retirement.

Because: investing doesn’t end when you retire. 

A rising-equity glidepath has demonstrated that a portfolio that starts out conservative and becomes more aggressive throughout retirement can deliver a few key benefits:

  1. it can reduce the probability of long-term failure starting out with secure retirement spending, since
  2. higher fixed income is available to deliver the meaningful income desired by retirees by avoiding selling any equities at all during any market dips early in retirement, such that, 
  3. by naturally increasing equity exposure over time you will earn greater capital appreciation in the latter, aging years of retirement, helping to combat inflation with any increased life expectancy.

The rising-equity approach works well since if bad returns occur early in retirement (say in the first few years) the portfolio might otherwise be prematurely depleted by equity withdrawals.

So, lower up-front allocations to equities leave retirees less susceptible to a series of bad market returns for a few years. 

Here a deep dive on rising equity glidepaths:

Here are two (2) key things to keep in mind when it comes to asset allocation in retirement, at least what I think about:

1. What do you need the money for, and when?

Saving for retirement is different than saving for a single expenditure like a Belize vacation: a one-time event. Figuring out what your annual retirement spend will forever be essential to income planning.

There is little value chasing a $1.7-million retirement number if you don’t need that much anyhow….   

I’ve envisioned and therefore created a Retirement Income Map for my wife and I to forecast our first five (5) years of retirement-spending needs. Your spending may be different. That’s OK. I would recommend you figure it out though. Continue Reading…