What is your mutual fund breakdown?

[LXEX55]

At age 63 I am probably going to go with 60% total bond fund, 40% total stock fund from Vanguard. Ben Stein recommends an even 50-50 split.

 

[sengsational]

There's a whole lot of discussion about asset allocation on this board! I'd say do a google search of this board for "asset allocation" or "efficient frontier", which balance risk and reward. You can search "marotta gone fishin" or "couch potato allocation", and tons more. An expansive topic.

 

[pb4uski]

60/35/5 stocks/fixed income/cash... 62 been retired for 6 years.

 

[Ronstar]

At 62, 50-50.

 

[Scuba]

At 57, 50% equities, 25% hard money loans, 20-24% fixed income, 1-5% cash. Currently living off deferred comp payouts from prior employer plus a small withdrawal from taxable portfolio. Have a non-COLA pension I can start anytime but will probably wait a few more years. Not sure when we'll start SS. DH is 58 so we don't have to decide for a while.

 

[RobbieB]

62 for me,

69, 21, 10 - stocks, bonds, cash

 

[Montecfo]

70-30 stock, st bonds and cash at 58.

 

[sheldon cornped]

At 63.75, I'm 50/15/35 stks, bnd, csh

 

[Eastbayboy]

At 62, I’m have 60, 28, and 10

 

[Lsbcal]

At 69, 60/38/2. Stocks/bonds/cash
The bonds have 50% in short term investment grade

Caveat: some market timing in the above

 

[aja8888]

At 74:

66% equities, 22% Bonds, 12% Cash

Will be re-balancing to a lighter equity position (50%) after 1/1/18.

 

[gerntz]

Mine aren't broken down. Just fine.

 

[Sunset]

About 90% stock.
Slowly fixing that too high allocation, but have 4 years cash or more if you add dividends to withstand a market plunge.

I would like to be 70% stocks 30% interest things.

 

[gayl]

Mutual Funds = 0

Investments: (primarily index ETFs)
90% stocks
6% bonds
4% cash + other
Last category may be too high IMHO. But only drawing off a few dividends at this point

 

[RockyMtn]

at age 59....

70/26/4 Stock/Bond/Cash

 

[OldShooter]

I am uncomfortable with these "rules of thumb" and recommendations said to be universal. Consider two hypothetical widows, both 70YO, both receiving SS and needing supplemental income to support their chosen low-expense life styles.

Widow #1 has a portfolio of $200,000

Widow #2 has a portfolio of $10,000,000.

Should these two identical widows have identical asset allocations? I don't think so. Widow #1 needs to be very conservative in order that she not outlive her money. Widow #2 has wildly more money than she will ever need; she can safely choose to invest aggressively, attempting to maximize the estate she leaves to family, charity or both.

We've debated buckets before here and there are some impassioned arguments on the subject but I still believe that thinking about a conservatively invested bucket of 1-5 year needs and a more aggressively invested bucket for the longer term is a good paradigm. Widow #1 might have only one bucket with $200K in it, a 0/100 allocation, where Widow #2 might have $300K in her short term bucket and $9.7M in the long term bucket, a 97/3 allocation. And both might be right.

So I personally think that comparing anyone's net allocation with SGOTI is unproductive. Many factors affect a choice of allocation strategy.

 

[gayl]

So I personally think that comparing anyone's net allocation with SGOTI is unproductive. Many factors affect a choice of allocation strategy.

+1

 

[frayne]

At age 66 just reset mine to 50-50. Only have one index fund, Total Stock Market Fund with FIDO that makes up the brunt of the 50%. The other 50% is CDs (all laddered), bond fund, MM funds and cash.

 

[pb4uski]

....So I personally think that comparing anyone's net allocation with SGOTI is unproductive. Many factors affect a choice of allocation strategy.

I agree, but that is not the question the OP asked.... he asked what ours is.

 

[mickeyd]

Ben Stein recommends an even 50-50 split.

Are you Ben Stein? Why would Ben's AA recommendation be of interest to you?


I'm sitting at about 50/50. Age 73.

 

[jebmke]

We set ours at 40/60 when I retired 10 years ago. This year I start my pension and in 5 years, SS. I think I will just let it drift up if the market keeps going up and perhaps even buy up if the market tanks. Now that we have skated past the first 10 years where we had no income I can let it ride. Also, I have no more losses from 2009 to offset gains so re-balancing back to 40/60 would cost me money.

 

[ziggy29]

We're at about 60/40 and we'll probably stay there for a few more years.

 

[DEC-1982]

63/37 equity/fixed income allocation, with a 42-year spending period planned.

 

[travelover]

Agree, an appropriate allocation is dependent on a number of factors. I have a non-COLAed pension that meets all my current needs, plus I will have near max SS when I take it. Plus, I don't care if I leave a legacy. Would my AA be the same as someone with no pension or SS or that wants to take care of kids after I'm gone?

From age 54 to 65, I've slid my stock holdings from 100% to 60% which is probably overly conservative.

 

[ziggy29]

Agree, an appropriate allocation is dependent on a number of factors. I have a non-COLAed pension that meets all my current needs, plus I will have near max SS when I take it. Plus, I don't care if I leave a legacy. Would my AA be the same as someone with no pension or SS or that wants to take care of kids after I'm gone?

True. The thing about your situation is that you can be about as aggressive, or about as risk-averse, as you are comfortable with -- or anything in between. You could be 90/10 or 20/80 and it would not substantially affect your daily finances in your lifetime (most likely).