Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-07-2014, 07:48 AM   #21
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
But wouldn't buying deferred annuities in your 40s (starting paying at age 62 for example) and buying SPIAs after age 75 (where mortality credits are highest) have a better outcome than a modest:fixed income AA?

This assumes we factor out heirs, married or single, etc.
You need only compare your approach to the chart in post #10 above to know. However don't overlook the fact that annuity payouts include return of principal, they are not "returns."

I am not criticizing a (very) conservative approach like yours, but it's (equities) not an either or decision - which you usually forget to note. The less risk you take, the larger your portfolio has to be relative to spending, substantially larger without equities - 40-60% is not trivial. Not including the caveat could mislead a novice member...
__________________

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-07-2014, 08:13 AM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
OAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Central, Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,598
Much like OBGYN we are 100% CD's (in a 7 year ladder) and, more or less, mostly more, have been since about 1976. The majority of long term CD's are at PFCU (including both tIRA's and ROTH IRA's) or at NFCU. No real need to "rate chase" at other financial institutions. We do have a COLA'd pension, almost a matching combined SS benefit, and a great MEDICARE supplement for health care. Frankly at our mid-70's we like the term "won the game" as baring BOTH of us needing long term nursing care I think we have.
__________________

__________________
Vietnam Veteran, CW4 USA, Retired 1979
OAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:08 PM   #23
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
You need only compare your approach to the chart in post #10 above to know. However don't overlook the fact that annuity payouts include return of principal, they are not "returns."

I am not criticizing a (very) conservative approach like yours, but it's (equities) not an either or decision - which you usually forget to note. The less risk you take, the larger your portfolio has to be relative to spending, substantially larger without equities - 40-60% is not trivial. Not including the caveat could mislead a novice member...
There are other alternatives to having a comfortable retirement to having a huge portfolio. As you mentioned, one would be to just have low expenses in relation to the size of your portfolio. The other would be to have income streams besides stocks and fixed income products - rental income, hobbies that make money, pension and spousal/partner pensions, royalty income, two higher end SS benefits, etc.

I can control my hobby job income and expenses, but I can't control the stock market. Personally, I would rather have my income and expenses at least somewhat predictable.

I guess everyone has different goals and priorities, but I am often a bit surprised here at how many threads focus on SWR and rates of return compared to reducing expenses, finding fulfilling part time work or legally paying zero income taxes.

I have started calculating how much our laundry detergent costs per load. Just saving $100 a year on laundry detergent is $5K over the rest of our probable maximum lifespans, and we have hundreds if not thousands of little costs like that we can chip away at. In total cutting all these little expenses is really adding up to a lot of money we do not need to make up in investment returns. Finding a way to cut $20K a year without impacting quality of life means needing $1M less in nest egg draw down / retirement income money.
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:29 PM   #24
Full time employment: Posting here.
bjorn2bwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Western US
Posts: 690
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post

I have been searching and searching for projected interest rate forecasts for the next 5 years and they seem to be rare as I need to make a decision by Feb 20th.

If anyone has any please post a link.

Thanks
I posted this link in the "how long can the bond rally continue" thread. Not exactly a forecast, more a fundamental argument for persistent low bond yields. Remember that forecasts are often wrong.

http://hoisingtonmgt.com/pdf/HIM2013Q4NP.pdf
__________________
How's it going to end..............
bjorn2bwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:30 PM   #25
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Huston55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: The Bay Area
Posts: 1,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort View Post
There are other alternatives to having a comfortable retirement to having a huge portfolio. One would be to just have low expenses in relation to the size of your portfolio. The other would be to have income streams besides stocks and fixed income products - rental income, hobbies that make money, pension and spousal/partner pensions, royalty income, two higher end SS benefits, etc.

I can control my hobby job income and expenses, but I can't control the stock market. Personally, I would rather have my income and expenses at least somewhat predictable.

I guess everyone has different goals and priorities, but I am often a bit surprised here at how many threads focus on SWR and rates of return compared to reducing expenses, finding fulfilling part time work or legally paying zero income taxes.

I have started calculating how much our laundry detergent costs per load. Just saving $100 a year on laundry detergent is $5K over the rest of our probable maximum lifespans, and we have hundreds if not thousands of little costs like that we can chip away at. In total cutting all these little expenses is really adding up to a lot of money we do not need to make up in investment returns. Finding a way to cut $20K a year without impacting quality of life means needing $1M less in nest egg draw down / retirement income money.
Of course steady income beyond one's portfolio or lowering expenses changes the 'demand' on the portfolio. However, I think the (unstated) premise of the remark is that, 'all other things being equal'..."The less risk you take, the larger your portfolio has to be."

I don't view this as a judgment; I view it as a fact...one that we must all deal with in our own way based on our circumstances.
__________________
You may be whatever you resolve to be.
Huston55 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:49 PM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
That was mentioned in my earlier post, but edited above to repeat it.
Sorry, you are right. I put in your full post in my post and corrected my comment on it.
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 03:42 PM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
John Galt III's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,285
If you have a 401K, and a Stable Value fund available in it, you can get anywhere from 1 to 3 percent return per year. And the 401K is very safe from creditors.
__________________
John Galt III is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 12:23 AM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
But wouldn't buying deferred annuities in your 40s (starting paying at age 62 for example) and buying SPIAs after age 75 (where mortality credits are highest) have a better outcome than a modest:fixed income AA?

This assumes we factor out heirs, married or single, etc.
I don't see how deferred annuities would be preferable. Annuity writers invest in the same fixed Income securities and then reduce it for expenses and profit/cost of capital in determining crediting rates vs fixed Income expense ratios.

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk HD
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 06:45 AM   #29
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,976
KFJWI = Kindle Fire HD 8.9 WiFi evidently, in case anyone else wonders...I didn't know.

Sent from my (old) iPad2 64GB using my index fingers
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 08:21 AM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,575
A portfolio that was mostly bonds, CDs and bank deposits would scare the $@### out of me.

With a potential time horizon of 50+ years, inflation in our cost of living worries me a lot more than market volatility. The bottom line for me is that there is no possible way to avoid all possible risks to a retirement portfolio - you can choose your risks (including diversifying to select exposure to different types of risk), but there is no such thing as a "no risk" portfolio.
__________________
Budgeting is a skill practised by people who are bad at politics.
traineeinvestor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 08:42 AM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,620
I'd like to see how to save $100 a year on laundry detergent.

I just looked at Amazon and name-brand Tide is less than 25 cents a load. So one hundred dollars of laundry detergent will let one do 400 loads of laundry a year. If one did 4 loads a week, that would be $50 of laundry detergent a year. If one used half the detergent amount, that would be $25 of laundry detergent a year. If one used an off-brand, I am sure one could save even more.

Anyways, I hope folks can see that saving $100 a year on laundry detergent was probably the wrong metaphor to use on a forum based on dryer sheets.
__________________
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 09:00 AM   #32
Recycles dryer sheets
Earl E Retyre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
I'd like to see how to save $100 a year on laundry detergent.

I just looked at Amazon and name-brand Tide is less than 25 cents a load. So one hundred dollars of laundry detergent will let one do 400 loads of laundry a year. If one did 4 loads a week, that would be $50 of laundry detergent a year. If one used half the detergent amount, that would be $25 of laundry detergent a year. If one used an off-brand, I am sure one could save even more.

Anyways, I hope folks can see that saving $100 a year on laundry detergent was probably the wrong metaphor to use on a forum based on dryer sheets.
LOL, you really lived up to your name. That post made me laugh out loud. Hilarious! I happen to agree with the daylatedollarshort's points. But agree that laundry detergent savings (LDS) was probably not the way to go.
__________________
Earl E Retyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 10:17 AM   #33
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
Well with all due respect - is there something you know about the OP that I don't? Unless I am missing something from previous posts, maybe the OP has $3m or $4m, and lives on $40k or 50k a year, in which case he does NOT have to take any risk at all. He wants to take no risk and maybe has no heir. If he does not want to leave any legacy to anyone, I really don't see why a caveat is needed to my post. If a caveat is needed to my post, then a lot more caveats are needed :-)

Your graphs in post 10 do not answer my question. I would like to see concrete, verifiable evidence that those using deferred annuities their 40s and SPIAs in their 70s or later lose out compared to those investing in equities. I will try to find a couple of papers from W. Pfau on this topic. He seems to favor the use of SPIAs and even the superiority of deferred annuities over SPIAs.

Please read this : http://www.advisorperspectives.com/n...over_SPIAs.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
You need only compare your approach to the chart in post #10 above to know. However don't overlook the fact that annuity payouts include return of principal, they are not "returns."

I am not criticizing a (very) conservative approach like yours, but it's (equities) not an either or decision - which you usually forget to note. The less risk you take, the larger your portfolio has to be relative to spending, substantially larger without equities - 40-60% is not trivial. Not including the caveat could mislead a novice member...
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 10:18 AM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
What are crediting rates?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post

I don't see how deferred annuities would be preferable. Annuity writers invest in the same fixed Income securities and then reduce it for expenses and profit/cost of capital in determining crediting rates vs fixed Income expense ratios.

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk HD
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 10:45 AM   #35
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
Well with all due respect - is there something you know about the OP that I don't? Unless I am missing something from previous posts, maybe the OP has $3m or $4m, and lives on $40k or 50k a year, in which case he does NOT have to take any risk at all. He wants to take no risk and maybe has no heir. If he does not want to leave any legacy to anyone, I really don't see why a caveat is needed to my post. If a caveat is needed to my post, then a lot more caveats are needed :-)
I think you should also be adding the caveat that your financial planning is underpinned with pensions because in the past you have asked on threads about any ways to avoid your SS being reduced because of WEP.

I am in a similar situation with a combination of pensions, 3 of them COLA'ed, so that if my retirement investments get burned either by poor market returns or by inflation I have a secure income that I can live on. I include SS and the UK equivalent of SS when I say pensions.
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 01:16 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL! View Post
I'd like to see how to save $100 a year on laundry detergent.

I just looked at Amazon and name-brand Tide is less than 25 cents a load. So one hundred dollars of laundry detergent will let one do 400 loads of laundry a year. If one did 4 loads a week, that would be $50 of laundry detergent a year. If one used half the detergent amount, that would be $25 of laundry detergent a year. If one used an off-brand, I am sure one could save even more.

Anyways, I hope folks can see that saving $100 a year on laundry detergent was probably the wrong metaphor to use on a forum based on dryer sheets.
I wasn't buying low priced commercial detergent on Amazon. I used to buy hypoallergenic, no caustic chemical detergent at the local grocery store in a high rent zip code in a high cost of living area. Plus I probably do a load a day of laundry.

I am not sure what your point is, that I don't know what I spend on laundry detergent, or that hundreds of little recurring expenses added up over 50 years do not result in big savings?

My point is that we had hundreds of little items like that we were overspending money on. If you already have every expense in your budget optimized, including buying low cost brands of every product from low cost stores, then logically you would not have any additional expense cuts to make.
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 02:00 PM   #37
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I don't see how deferred annuities would be preferable. Annuity writers invest in the same fixed Income securities and then reduce it for expenses and profit/cost of capital in determining crediting rates vs fixed Income expense ratios. ...
Bu the annuity writers do have the advantage of risk pooling. I do not know if the costs outweighs the advantage for the annuity buyer though.

I've never tried putting these into FIRECalc, I guess there are on-line quotes for annuities, shouldn't be too hard to get some general ideas (not today for me, will be busy with other things). I suspect that the non-cola affect is likely to be a downer.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Risk averse retirement investing
Old 02-09-2014, 03:46 PM   #38
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 522
Risk averse retirement investing

Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Bu the annuity writers do have the advantage of risk pooling. I do not know if the costs outweighs the advantage for the annuity buyer though.



I've never tried putting these into FIRECalc, I guess there are on-line quotes for annuities, shouldn't be too hard to get some general ideas (not today for me, will be busy with other things). I suspect that the non-cola affect is likely to be a downer.



-ERD50

Since we are experiencing the Pineapple Express here in the Bay Area I had time to play with this.

I got a quote from fidelity for a deferred annuity for a single man aged 60 deferring until age 70. And then determined the IRR, I hope correctly.

Investing 100000 at age 60 one would receive 13272 per year from age 70. The IRR of course depends on when you die. But if you are a conservative investor concerned with longevity, the results are quite good:

If you live to 100 the IRR is 6.468%
At 95 it's 6.117
At 90 it's 5.536
At 83 which is the life expectancy for a 60 yr old, it's 3.9
And of course goes down from there to a neg number if u die soon.

So if you are worried about longevity the deferred annuity allows you to swap a large positive IRR if you live a long time for a large negative one, if you die early.

If you have good genes and your parents lived to a ripe old age , and you're healthy, then, for me anyway, there's a good case to be made that this is way better than a conservative income portfolio...unless I screwed up the calculation

I'd welcome opposing opinions or someone seeing holes in this as I have severe longevity in my family
__________________
bmcgonig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 04:29 PM   #39
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
Well with all due respect - is there something you know about the OP that I don't? Unless I am missing something from previous posts, maybe the OP has $3m or $4m, and lives on $40k or 50k a year, in which case he does NOT have to take any risk at all. He wants to take no risk and maybe has no heir. If he does not want to leave any legacy to anyone, I really don't see why a caveat is needed to my post. If a caveat is needed to my post, then a lot more caveats are needed :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
I am not criticizing a (very) conservative approach like yours, but it's (equities) not an either or decision - which you usually forget to note. The less risk you take, the larger your portfolio has to be relative to spending, substantially larger without equities - 40-60% is not trivial. Not including the caveat could mislead a novice member...
I don't need to know more about the OP to make the statement in blue, which is much the same as your statement in blue.

The graphs do provide a good indication of how risk and return relate.

Re: the caveat: Just my opinion, but if you're going to recommend investing in CDs, annuities and fixed income without any equity allocation (esp to newbies), you should also note that very conservative approach will require a much larger portfolio relative to spending. There are many inexperienced readers who may not realize how substantial that difference is.

Beyond that we've had this discussion many times, no need to repeat ourselves.
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 04:44 PM   #40
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I don't see how deferred annuities would be preferable. Annuity writers invest in the same fixed Income securities and then reduce it for expenses and profit/cost of capital in determining crediting rates vs fixed Income expense ratios.

Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk HD

Is it the idea that if one outlives fellow annuity holder, one can also collect part of their income? Not that I recommend an annuity, but the idea is that those who die early allow bigger payments for the remaining folks. But are the payments big enough?
__________________

__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
risk averse


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
mid-40s, risk averse, low-ish income, way behind you guys shorn Hi, I am... 29 03-21-2013 09:53 AM
Risk Averse Boomers mickeyd FIRE and Money 2 07-03-2011 06:51 AM
So what is a risk averse investor to do? brewer12345 FIRE and Money 87 04-03-2011 02:02 AM
suggestions for my risk-averse mom kevink FIRE and Money 29 08-09-2007 08:17 PM
Risk? What risk? REWahoo FIRE and Money 3 08-16-2006 09:39 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:20 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.