That's why I find these sorts of polls useful rather than intrusive. ...
How can they be "intrusive" if they are voluntary? I mostly skip them (unless they are just for fun).
By seeing how our financial situations compare to our fellow forum members we can get an idea whether their RE experiences will be germane to our own.
That's extremely questionable. Most of these polls don't include enough info to be meaningful. Someone with pensions/SS greater than their expenses don't need
any NW beyond cash flow. I don't think anyone's RE experiences are all that useful to our own, w/o a FULL understanding of theirs, and a means to adjust to ours.
As has been pointed out, a pension of $40,000 COLA is equivalent (to the retiree - not their heirs) to $1M in net worth @ 4% WR. Most polls don't take that into account.
While I would hope we all make our own RE decisions based on our own individual criteria it provides a substantial degree of reassurance to see that we (mostly) fall somewhere the comfortable center of the bell curve when it comes to all these financial parameters.
Again, w/o knowing everything that makes up that curve (COL, pensions/SS, and expectations of a retirement lifestyle), very little can be gained, IMO.
Conversely it's a useful warning signal if one finds one's financial situation departs too drastically from these averages.
There are a few posters here who I'm certain are far from these norms, who seem to be very satisfied with their retirement (and I truly do not think they are just 'rationalizing', though some others might) . Numbers don't tell the whole story.
If a person can manage an enjoyable life on $42K per year, why in the world would they delay retirement until they saved
twice as much, just because some amateur polls showed that poll respondents here spend 2x that amount?
And conversely, if your idea of a nice retirement is lots of travel, or other expensive activities, why limit yourself?
Time for people to think for themselves, and not play "keeping up with the Joneses".
-ERD50