What is your Asset Allocation if you have no pension?

[tdv2]

58/42

[jkern]

40/40/20

Age 62, no pension, just started SS.

[Which Roger]

The "right" answer can vary a lot, depending upon (among other things) the extent to which one's pension and SS will cover expenses. If they cover all or nearly all expenses, asset allocation isn't nearly as important as it is for someone will require a high withdrawal rate to meet expenses

[CountryBoy]

70/20/10 with the 10 equal to 3-4 years of expenses... ER'd 4 years ago, another 4 years before I plan to take SS.



And the more posts I read on this thread, the more I worry that 70% in equities is too high. Ulp...

[enjoyinglife102]

30/69/1. Missing potential equity returns that wouldn't significantly make my life better is fine with me. Missing or delaying a fun, active life waiting for a stock market recovery is not.

[aja8888]

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoyinglife102 30/69/1. Missing potential equity returns that wouldn't significantly make my life better is fine with me. Missing or delaying a fun, active life waiting for a stock market recovery is not.

That's about where I am but with more cash and CD's than bonds. But I am going on 77 with a disabled DW. No debt, no pension, but a good amount of SS. SS covers about 2/3 of annual spending.

[jebmke]

We started retirement 12 years ago at 40/60 facing 10 years with no pension and no SS. I have never paid CG tax since I harvested massive losses in 2008-09. Those are gone and my pension and SS have started. So I plan to not re-balance on the upside until I get to at least 70/30.

[unclemick]

Up to ER pretty much 60/40. Early ER, 1993 to 2006 still pretty much 60/40. After age 62 (2006) went close to full auto Target Retirement. Let The computers re balance. Ballpark at age 76 going on 77 about 40/60.

heh heh heh - thoughts of buying 'a few good stocks' with excess RMD money but I haven't picked winners in the playoffs/wildcard rounds yet so my confidence level is down. Sooo - ? maybe index on and 'blow that dough' while above ground.

P.S. Non - cola 11k pension at 55 (1998) and SS at 62 (2006).

[24601NoMore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aja8888 That's about where I am but with more cash and CD's than bonds. But I am going on 77 with a disabled DW. No debt, no pension, but a good amount of SS. SS covers about 2/3 of annual spending.

Same here, also - but significantly younger @ mid 50s.

I also am more than happy to trade potentially higher equity returns that I don't "need" to be able to sleep better at night. But to determine that, I had to project out income and expense year by year through age 95, also (with a good buffer)..that's the only way IMHO to determine what one truly "needs"..and of course, any assumptions can and will go out the window at any time, so contingencies are also important.

Was very confident in the "high cash (CDs)" approach a year and a half ago when CD rates were higher, but with rates dropping and bond funds likely under pressure going forward due to the current very low yield environment, it does make it a bit tougher for sure. That said, I don't have a lot of confidence in equities over the next 10 years or so, either, given the extremely high stock valuations (eg: CAPE 10, forward P/E, etc). So there's very few good options at this point, and it's pretty much a "pick your poison" time..maybe increasing international equities or dividend-paying Value stocks over the next few years is a good option..hmmm..

[Skyward1]

50/25/25 and plan to ER in 2 years. Bought my first bonds last year from equities and plan to stay in this range for the foreseeable future unless there is a significant market drop and then I will up the equities moderately.

[Steeler75]

40/45/15 with pensions that meet 85% of budgeted expenses. FIRE’d last year at 54, using cash to pay for annual Roth conversions before taking SS at 62. Rest of cash to be used as dry powder for any bear or pull back that may come along. I sleep well.

[FlaGator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CountryBoy 70/20/10 with the 10 equal to 3-4 years of expenses... ER'd 4 years ago, another 4 years before I plan to take SS. And the more posts I read on this thread, the more I worry that 70% in equities is too high. Ulp...

I'm with you-70/30, up from 60/40 a few years ago. Long time to play, heirs are young. Now five years in, pushing 60. Glad to be in this position

[PatrickA5]

45/55. Down from 60/40 at start of 2019. Plan on leaving at this level going forward.

[kgtest]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jebmke We started retirement 12 years ago at 40/60 facing 10 years with no pension and no SS. I have never paid CG tax since I harvested massive losses in 2008-09. Those are gone and my pension and SS have started. So I plan to not re-balance on the upside until I get to at least 70/30.

A stark reminder that the timespan of an ER...spans multiple down and up cycles. Always want to have the appropriate flexibility for each cycle...buying low on a dip of +10 or +20 is always a good idea!

[teejayevans]

Technically I’m not sure, I’ve been told high yield bonds should be treated as stocks, not bonds.

[Perryinva]

I like this thread. Such varied responses!

[CRLLS]

No pension here. All were rolled over into IRA's years back. DW now collecting SS and I am collecting spousal. Will for a few more years before collecting on my record. We do not rebalance. It is what it is. I do have a small (very small) annuitized LI policy at ~ $2800/ yr.

79/16/5

[CaliKid]

No pension
Approximate allocations:
50% real estate (90% of that being investment and 10% being personal residence)
40% stocks (broad based - nothing too aggressive)
10% cash/misc. (CD's, emergency fund, small amount of gold, etc...)

[NW-Bound]

With conventional wisdom, you would think that if one has pension he can go high stock AA because he can withstand the market vagaries, and high stock AA gives you a better return over a long time.

But is that really true? Yes, 100% stock AA would get you beaucoup money if you throw it all in the ring in the last 10 years, but if you look out over 20 years or more, a balanced fund like Wellington with 60% stock can hold up very well against 100% stock. That's because Wellington does not crash hard like a 100% stock portfolio. It's the race of the tortoise and the hare.

And so, even though my WR is sufficiently low before I even draw SS, I do not care to go high stock AA. I am not afraid of volatility, but still want a higher return. However, a high-stock AA does not guarantee a high return.

[HI Bill]

85/8/7 at FIRE minus a few months.