Ok, don't kill the newbie for the stupid question but who is Wade Pfau?

[Totoro]

Sounds a bit like this in here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J'accuse

 

[retire2020]

He is an annuity salesman with an increasingly thin veneer of academic respectability.

+1. He was not like that earlier though. But recently all his article was centered around annuity which turned me off from reading it anymore.

 

[bmcgonig]

Sounds a bit like this in here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J'accuse

I agree. Wimpy name calling versus showing evidence of anything fraudulent.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[bmcgonig]

So do you prefer the fruit punch or grape flavor?

Well either of those would be fine over the very thin soup that you are serving.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[MichaelB]

Let's keep it friendly ..

 

[MBAustin]

It would be very interesting to see the personal portfolios and AAs of all these financial gurus. Then we'd see if they practice what they preach. I tend to believe that Bogle's portfolio is just as he describes it.

Me and My Money: Jack Bogle | Reuters

Excellent point. Thanks for the link to the Bogle article also - so nice to hear from a straight shooter who practices what he preaches. I don't remember hearing about his heart transplant, but that was before I started switching into Vanguard funds.

 

[bmcgonig]

Let's keep it friendly ..

I agree we should be friendly. But accusations of fraud against someone not obviously fraudulent aren't very friendly. The accusations should be backed up, not casually swatted aside with sarcasm.




Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[bmcgonig]

I agree we should be friendly. But accusations of fraud against someone not obviously fraudulent aren't very friendly. The accusations should be backed up, not casually swatted aside with sarcasm.




Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

I'll add one thing. Pfaus work on comparing fixed income to annuities has enticed me to consider changing my AA to reflect that. And many others on Bogleheads are the same, as he came on there to discuss it. So this is not just a pissing contest here, it's a serious question for many if they have been convinced by someone who is a fraud as Brewer says.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Sarah in SC]

I don't have anything in particular to prove one way or another about Pfau, but when you know what the annuity industry looks like and how they are marketed and sold by folks like Pfau, it doesn't take much to just take a pass on his form of "gospel".

Like Brewer, I may look at annuitizing at some point in the future, but it won't be on the advice of Pfau, but rather would be after reading research from those not in the pocket of the insurance/annuity industry.

 

[brewer12345]

I agree we should be friendly. But accusations of fraud against someone not obviously fraudulent aren't very friendly. The accusations should be backed up, not casually swatted aside with sarcasm.




Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

if you want to slobber all over the guy's shoulder, feel free. He is obviously tainted via funding, so I have no interest in anything he says.

 

[rodi]

I agree we should be friendly. But accusations of fraud against someone not obviously fraudulent aren't very friendly. The accusations should be backed up, not casually swatted aside with sarcasm.




Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

I think we can all agree to disagree and keep it friendly. However sarcasm can make a point.

Clearly you are a fan of Pfau's work. Other's question his motivation. The reasons for questioning have been stated. Feel free to talk about the positives of his work to countermand those statements.

But we don't need to get unfriendly.

 

[bmcgonig]

if you want to slobber all over the guy's shoulder, feel free. He is obviously tainted via funding, so I have no interest in anything he says.

Well the "slobber" part clearly wins the argument, so on that I will concede and bow out.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[2017ish]

I don't have anything in particular to prove one way or another about Pfau, but when you know what the annuity industry looks like and how they are marketed and sold by folks like Pfau, it doesn't take much to just take a pass on his form of "gospel".

...

Could you elaborate on this? My understanding, as a layperson, is that you look for a good insurance company (likely through the vanguard site), pay them $X and you get so much per month until death beginning immediately, or in a deferred annuity, beginning on a date certain (if you are alive, or if you/spouse in case of joint annuitant). These are the two types that Pfau has espoused, at least in the papers that I've read that were published both before and after he became affiliated with the American College. Seems pretty straightforward, unless I'm missing something? (I'm ignoring guaranty fund issues for this....)

Agree that the Cr*ptastic variable annuities, which are held out as "investment" accounts with an annuity sidecar, are another story entirely--and that the business of marketing/selling those beasts is a travesty.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

They've all got their products to sell. I am not sure why Pfau gets picked on in particular. How many advisers ever recommend commission and expense free TIPS or I-Bonds even though for some investors they might be the best fit for their risk tolerance and objectives?

 

[ERD50]

They've all got their products to sell. I am not sure why Pfau gets picked on in particular. ...

Maybe he's getting 'picked on' in particular in this thread, because the OP asked about him by name?

-ERD50

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Maybe he's getting 'picked on' in particular in this thread, because the OP asked about him by name?

-ERD50

He has been picked on in other threads, while advisers associated with mutual funds who recommend mutual funds to the exclusion of all other investment types (not naming any person in particular) do not seem to suffer the same level of scrutiny.

 

[nun]

Most people on here have a good idea about the issues with annuities of various stripes and have started to criticize Pfau because he has included annuities in his research and has concluded that they are beneficial in some circumstances. I get the feeling that he would be criticized for the conclusion even if he wasn't receiving some funding from the insurance industry. So those that either claim fraud or simply dismiss his papers because they include annuities and come to some conclusions they dislike need to start by arguing why his results or wrong.

Accusations must be backed up by argument and evidence, not just supposition and prejudice against the insurance industry and their products.

 

[MichaelB]

Most people on here have a good idea about the issues with annuities of various stripes and have started to criticize Pfau because he has included annuities in his research and has concluded that they are beneficial in some circumstances.

Some members may share that view, but i would avoid characterizing all views as just one thing. I do not disagree with the view that annuities may play a supporting role in a portfolio but take issue with his projection of low future equity returns, which he uses to suggest annuities as an alternative. That comes across to me as self-serving.

 

[nun]

Some members may share that view, but i would avoid characterizing all views as just one thing. I do not disagree with the view that annuities may play a supporting role in a portfolio but take issue with his projection of low future equity returns, which he uses to suggest annuities as an alternative. That comes across to me as self-serving.

....and that's what's been missing from previous comments. Up to now there's been no argument with Pfau's actual results or how he got to them, just unsubstantiated statements of fraud. He has abandoned historical average returns and projected current returns into the future and used historical data to derived the standard deviation. Using these low returns (particularly for bonds) can produce some results that are favorable for annuities. I won't question the calculations used in the peer reviewed publications so it's really an argument about the inputs and assumptions of the model. Pfau could well have used low rates to produce good results with annuities, but he could also objectively believe them to be better numbers for a retiree to use. Without more information we should simply look at the work and critique it objectively and hold our fire on the author's motivation.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Pfau is certainly not the only one predicting low bond and equity return rates going forward. Shiller, Bogle and others have made similar predictions for the coming decade and they have logical, math based reasons for their projections.

Bogle's predictions here:
John Bogle says you won't make much money from stocks - MarketWatch

Shiller's here:
The investing golden age may be over: Robert Shiller | Watch the video - Yahoo Finance

We took our pensions as annuities. I don't think the commercial equivalents were quite as good a deal but I do think annuities can have a place in a diversified portfolio. We have our non-COLA pensions matched with a fixed rate mortgage.

 

[Al in Ohio]

And more importantly, is it pronounced Wade Pifow, Wade Fow, or Wade Pow?


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[braumeister]

And more importantly, is it pronounced Wade Pifow, Wade Fow, or Wade Pow?

In German, Pfau means "peacock" and is pronounced pfow (rhymes with now).

 

[nun]

I don't have anything in particular to prove one way or another about Pfau, but when you know what the annuity industry looks like and how they are marketed and sold by folks like Pfau, it doesn't take much to just take a pass on his form of "gospel".

Like Brewer, I may look at annuitizing at some point in the future, but it won't be on the advice of Pfau, but rather would be after reading research from those not in the pocket of the insurance/annuity industry.

Everyone's solution is different and opinion and personal philosophy mean that there's no objective "best" solution to generating retirement income. If you are risk averse you will gravitate to some of Pfau's results and gurus like Bernstein. Other's will follow Bogle's advice, some might just go with a balanced or income fund and some might just keep going like they did in accumulation. There are many paths.....Grasshopper.

 

[Mulligan]

Everyone's solution is different and opinion and personal philosophy mean that there's no objective "best" solution to generating retirement income. If you are risk averse you will gravitate to some of Pfau's results and gurus like Bernstein. Other's will follow Bogle's advice, some might just go with a balanced or income fund and some might just keep going like they did in accumulation. There are many paths.....Grasshopper.

I agree. I will never have a use for an annuity due to my pension. But after 6 fruitless years of talking money with my GF, we are thinking the best path for her will be a deferred annuity. Probably purchasing in late 50s and drawing between 65- 67. Between it, a modest pension, full social security, and a paid off house I would give her, she will be set month to month the rest of her life.
She has no interest or understanding of withdrawal rates, 4% rule, investment strategies etc. She can run the clock out and not have to worry about finding an old geezer to take care of her. If I outlive her, she can be a kid in candy store blowing everything she has on a month to month basis with this money.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[samclem]

He has been picked on in other threads, while advisers associated with mutual funds who recommend mutual funds to the exclusion of all other investment types (not naming any person in particular) do not seem to suffer the same level of scrutiny.

Are you kidding? The posts/threads that criticize brokers and high-fee FAs must number in the thousands, and they can be much more harsh than the treatment Pfau has received.