% Cash in asset allocation

[Tailgate]

A forum search took me to a 2009 poll that showed 21% of folks responding that they had 30+ months of expenses in cash. That was during the downturn so it might be skewed differently now.

I just moved some cash to Vanguard in their MMF. My AA is now 15% cash, 42% bonds and 43% stocks.

Question is: Since pensions and SS currently cover basic expenses, should I keep less cash and keep my AA 60/40 (age 65) or should I keep the cash to take advantage of any downturns?

 

[mrfeh]

A forum search took me to a 2009 poll that showed 21% of folks responding that they had 30+ months of expenses in cash. That was during the downturn so it might be skewed differently now.

I just moved some cash to Vanguard in their MMF. My AA is now 15% cash, 42% bonds and 43% stocks.

Question is: Since pensions and SS currently cover basic expenses, should I keep less cash and keep my AA 60/40 (age 65) or should I keep the cash to take advantage of any downturns?

Don't try to time the market. Keep your money working for you.

 

[RunningBum]

IMO, it's an individual choice.

First, if you're a market timer, keep cash when the market is high, but if you aren't a market timer this doesn't apply. I'm not going to say you should be one or the other.

The comment about holding 30+ months cash during a downturn (and I know you didn't say that was you) doesn't make sense though. In a downturn you would be putting cash back into the market unless you thought it was still going lower. Most likely this is a factor of illogical thinking, that when the market is down you are afraid of it and won't buy low, instead waiting for it to get higher before getting back in. Not a strategy to replicate.

The other factor is how likely you are to need ready money. Do you foresee any big expenses coming? Kids who might need help?

A lot of people talk about emergency funds, but I don't think those have to be cash. Have enough for the more common emergencies if you have them, but if the unexpected happens you can always sell stocks when the market is high, or bonds when it is low. I have so few emergencies that I'd rather have my money working for me and take whatever hit, if any, to sell funds if I have to. Sounds like you're retired so you don't have to worry about replacing income due to job loss.

If it makes you feel better to have some cash in place of bonds, go ahead, it probably doesn't have that much impact.

I'm actually probably close to 15% cash myself right now, but a lot of it is tied up in CDs as an alternative to bonds. I don't even think of this as "cash" though, since it's not readily accessible without penalty.

 

[Tailgate]

IMO, it's an individual choice.

First, if you're a market timer, keep cash when the market is high, but if you aren't a market timer this doesn't apply. I'm not going to say you should be one or the other.

The comment about holding 30+ months cash during a downturn (and I know you didn't say that was you) doesn't make sense though.

FWIW, here is the link to the poll I was referencing

 

[RunningBum]

FWIW, here is the link to the poll I was referencing

Ah, didn't realize that was an e-r.org poll, not a general one, even though I should've since you mentioned finding it in a forum search. There is a contingent here who use CD ladders, which would mean a higher % cash. And some do just choose to have multiple years of cash. I suspect many of those don't have pensions, at least not enough to cover their needs along with SS.

Really, I think you have to access your own needs and comfort levels and do what's right for you, not what the majority do whether or not it's right for you. No two situations are the same.

 

[audreyh1]

A forum search took me to a 2009 poll that showed 21% of folks responding that they had 30+ months of expenses in cash. That was during the downturn so it might be skewed differently now.

I just moved some cash to Vanguard in their MMF. My AA is now 15% cash, 42% bonds and 43% stocks.

Question is: Since pensions and SS currently cover basic expenses, should I keep less cash and keep my AA 60/40 (age 65) or should I keep the cash to take advantage of any downturns?

I have 5% cash in my allocation for my retirement fund. This cash is for rebalancing.

But I also have cash outside of my retirement fund. This is for near term expenses and for funding years where I come up short, as well as funds earmarked for splurges or special (one-time) expenses. This cash is not factored into my AA.

 

[hnzw_rui]

A forum search took me to a 2009 poll that showed 21% of folks responding that they had 30+ months of expenses in cash. That was during the downturn so it might be skewed differently now.

I just moved some cash to Vanguard in their MMF. My AA is now 15% cash, 42% bonds and 43% stocks.

I have 3 months expenses in cash and another 3 months in bonds as emergency funds so if you count those in the AA, that's 1/3 cash, 1/3 bonds, 1/3 stocks. I don't count them in my AA though as they are my "helps me sleep better at night" funds rather than actually being part of the investment portfolio. I do plan on growing the emergency fund to 12 months expenses but will likely hold 20-30% of it in stocks as inflation hedge (I-bonds may be tied to CPI but they don't really keep up with medical costs).

Funds earmarked for retirement are at 90/10 (the 10 being either cash or bonds depending on whether I use mutual funds or ETFs in that specific account).

 

[Lsbcal]

1% in cash and half of that is in an interest bearing account. I think of Vanguard short term investment grade as near cash.

Can get it to my bank in a few days. Example, sell VFSUX and it gets to checking account in about 2 days. I guess to really spend this I'd have to wait a bit but this is just for topping off the account so their is always available cash there.

 

[tulak]

Right now, over 10%. But that's because I'm tax loss harvesting.

Normally I'm at 0% cash, which is where I'll be at the beginning of November. This might change when I'm retired, but probably not.

 

[Whisper66]

Agree with those that say the amount of cash really depends on your situation and what you can be comfortable with. In my case, I keep 3-6 months worth of expenses available as cash but also keep a minimum of 3 yrs worth of combined cash+bond funds. Normally I plan to rebalance my bond / stock allocation yearly to a set target. But if the market was in a severe correction right when I wanted to sell some stock, I plan to use some of the bond money to hold me over until the market settled down a bit before I rebalance. Nothing magical here, just what makes one guy comfortable.

 

[Live And Learn]

The question is an excellent one and one that I struggle with. For OP, since pension and SS cover basic expenses I'd probably keep less cash; probably enough for a "normal" emergency (20k ?). I have zero secure income right now, so I am keeping 4 years expenses in cash / near cash. I struggle with that however since I feel like that cash isn't working for me and may in fact be harming me. I'd deploy half of it if the S&P 500 ends up 25% below its high --- which sadly, makes me a market timer. Right now that cash helps me to sleep at night since I ER'd 3.5 months ago and then almost immediately had a portfolio drop.

 

[Animorph]

My official AA is 98% equities/2% cash. It's handy for rebalancing (simultaneous buy and sell instead of waiting a day in between), transferring assets to different accounts, and emergency cash if I run low in checking without noticing it. Not really intended for buying more equities.

 

[Cobra9777]

Question is: Since pensions and SS currently cover basic expenses, should I keep less cash and keep my AA 60/40 (age 65) or should I keep the cash to take advantage of any downturns?

If your expenses are covered, then I see no reason for cash in the AA unless you want to do some opportunistic buying. However, you said "basic expenses." So I'm guessing you should probably hold enough cash to cover the "non-basic" spending for whatever period of time makes you comfortable.

We have pensions and rentals that cover 70% of expenses. When I retired 2 years ago, the original plan was to hold enough cash in the AA to cover that 30% gap for 2-3 years. However, we now take cash dividends in the taxable account which cover about half the gap. So in reality, we were holding 4-6 years of real cash need. I've also done some reading recently (Kitces and others) that challenges the conventional wisdom about holding cash at all. So I'm in the process of working it down through a combination of: (1) simply not replenishing as planned after spending, and (2) some opportunistic buying during the recent volatility. We'll still hold some cash in the AA, but probably more like 2 years of the "real" need after cash dividends. This drops the target allocation from 5% to about 2%.

 

[mickeyd]

Right now we have about 3 years of expenses in what I call "cash reserves". It's not all in cash or cash equivalents, but I can easily convert it to cash in a very short time frame. It's still a small portion of our investable assets.

 

[jebmke]

Personal choice. I keep almost no cash -- maybe 2-3 weeks of expenses on average.

 

[jebmke]

Right now we have about 3 years of expenses in what I call "cash reserves". It's not all in cash or cash equivalents, but I can easily convert it to cash in a very short time frame. It's still a small portion of our investable assets.

What is the rest invested in that can't be converted to cash?

We use VG mutual funds. They can be liquidated in 24 hours.

 

[scrabbler1]

I keep about $2k (often a little more than that) in my local bank's checking account, well above the minimum balance to avoid monthly fees. This is my first layer of emergency funds. Just yesterday, I needed about $260 of fast cash for something important so it was no big deal to withdraw it from a nearby ATM. My next layer of EF is about $40k in an intermediate-term muni bond fund which I can tap into via check or electronic transfer to my local bank's checking account.

 

[pb4uski]

...Question is: Since pensions and SS currently cover basic expenses, should I keep less cash and keep my AA 60/40 (age 65) or should I keep the cash to take advantage of any downturns?

I would reduce my cash allocation if my pension and SS covered my expenses.

Currently not collecting either and I target 6% cash, which is about 2 years of spending.

 

[marinauser]

Also, don't forget to take into account the cash held by any stock or bond funds that you own. This can impact your cash allocation although it isn't readily available as cash. If you are not careful, you can end up with an over allocation to cash. This may not be an issue for someone using only index funds.

 

[dallas27]

Don't know the percentage, but the dollar amount is less than a share, otherwise i would buy another share.

Holding cash is like holding gold, unless you are a trader and need powder.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[RockyMtn]

right now sitting on 11% cash as had a recent home sale and haven't moved that money anywhere given the market turmoil. Have another home for sale that will close in a month which will probably put me closer to 15% cash.


Live off interest and dividends so will probably DCA it into the market once I have a bit more comfort level on where things are going...can anyone tell me?


Like to be at about 5% cash just because I do!! Always looking for bargains in the market to take advantage of. Probably never slide below 5% so that I have a couple of years emergency fund for house, cars, etc sitting in cash.

 

[papadad111]

With CD and bonds earning near zero, I hold my "bond" portion of portfolio in cash these days.

85/15 AA.
FIREd

No guaranteed sources of income - No pension, no SS yet. Must Live off of withdraws and dividends.

I just like cash and the liquidity to help me sleep at night. If needed, that cash can get me through 3 years without having to liquidate any other holdings ..

As a total aside . I also keep 10 Benjamin's in my wallet at all times - it's amazing the leverage one can have when paying in cash. cash is king !

 

[marinauser]

Maybe I wasn't clear about the cash. Most mutual funds, if you look at a Morningstar breakout of a fund's actual holding, hold some cash. Sometimes 10% or more of the fund's assets are actually in cash. Bond funds for instance actually hold some cash. Stock funds also hold some cash to allow for redemptions or because they just don't see stocks that they believe are worth investing in. This cash has nothing to do with any cash balance in your account that you can direct to buy more shares. If I look at my overall portfolio, direct cash holdings - cd's, bank balances, money market funds - is about 4% of portfolio but if I run the portfolio through Morningstar X-ray, total cash is actually about 7%.

 

[pb4uski]

Also, don't forget to take into account the cash held by any stock or bond funds that you own. This can impact your cash allocation although it isn't readily available as cash. If you are not careful, you can end up with an over allocation to cash. This may not be an issue for someone using only index funds.

I don't think what you suggest is a valid way to view your cash allocation.

Why would you count cash held by stock or bond funds that you own as cash?

You cash allocation is to provide your liquidity... cash held by funds you own to provide their liquidity doesn't count. The cash funds hold to provide for their liquidity is typically modest and any impact on return is a akin to a phantom fund expense.

 

[marinauser]

Differences of opinion are what makes the world interesting. But I would point out that if you want a 60-35-5 equity to bonds to cash asset mix and you are wondering why your performance is not what you expected, I would suggest that if the true split is really 57-33-10- then accounting for the cash held by mutual funds may well explain benchmark underperformance. I also think that if you want to compare your performance to a benchmark, then the benchmark needs to be as close as possible to your actual asset allocation, not some assumed allocation that is incorrect. Now, if all you own is a total stock market index fund, cash there is less than 1% and has less impact, but if you own Harbor International - a fairly popular international fund, its 3.5% cash holding may be important to your analysis. Or, for instance, Loomis Sayle Bond fund that was actually holding 16% cash in its more recent report. For the funds that some people hold, it may not make one bit of difference but for others, it could be significant.