Fidelity RIP tool

[bUU]

Okay I'm finally taking a look at the new RIP. It seems very slick - much better put together than many other similar tools. There are some problems. We have a Fidelity Cash Management Account, and so its balance appears as two separate accounts, therefore that money is appearing and is counted twice (though I set both to Unassigned, since it isn't intended for retirement).

My RPN is 91 (with underperforming market). It still shows a shortfall long before the end of our plan (using their crazy-long longevity estimates). We'll be 84 and 93 years old, respectively. I'm not sure if my expense estimates are good enough though. It'll be another few months before I can refine them (since we just moved here 11 months ago).

 

[nwsteve]

I am traveling and only have access to the tool on my iPhone. It seems clunky, and they did not link my IRA account which is by far the largest account I have at Fidelity. Maybe they'll have the bugs out by the time I return home. If not I will call them and set up some time with one of the advisors to take me through it. I really liked the old RIP. If this isn't just as good or better I'm going to be bummed.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

TrueNorth,
All you need to do to get any account included is be sure it is designated on your asset page as part of your "retirement" goal.
Nwsteve

 

[UpAnchor]

TrueNorth,
All you need to do to get any account included is be sure it is designated on your asset page as part of your "retirement" goal.
Nwsteve

I've tried that multiple times but it doesn't seem to "stick". As 80% of our retirement assets are outside of Fido and thus not being included in the calcs, our supposed readiness number-while in double digits-turns out to be less than my age!

 

[truenorth418]

TrueNorth,
All you need to do to get any account included is be sure it is designated on your asset page as part of your "retirement" goal.
Nwsteve

Thanks. Actually, my Fido account isn't even listed so I can't designate it. Meanwhile, all my other accounts from other institutions that I had included myself in the old version show up just fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[jkern]

I'm looking at the FRIP through my 401K, and it seems to be the same old one, as someone else mentioned.[/QUOTE]


When I login via my 403b portal (former employer), the old RIP is there. When I login via www.fidelity.com, the new RIP is there.

 

[chemist]

I am seeing the same thing as jkern. When I log in through NetBenefits (former employer plan), I see the old RIP.

When I log in at Fidelity.com, I see the new tool.

New tool seems to be working fine once I convinced it to count all my assets.

I like the visual interface, especially the ability to do everything in real dollars.

 

[bUU]

I am seeing the same thing as jkern. When I log in through NetBenefits (former employer plan), I see the old RIP.

I can get to the old RIP using the old URL which I had bookmarked.

 

[mathjak107]

right now inflation is fixed at 2.50% but they are going to eventually let you enter what you want .

 

[MRG]

I can get to the old RIP using the old URL which I had bookmarked.

For now. They will remove the software as soon as they are all rolled out. No one wants to build their own gallows, "this product says X but the old one said Y". Not that I've ever heard that before.

 

[nwsteve]

For now. They will remove the software as soon as they are all rolled out. No one wants to build their own gallows, "this product says X but the old one said Y". Not that I've ever heard that before.

When I activated the new RIP, I lost access to the old RIP the next day even though I had a bookmark url to go direct. If you still have access print off/save anything you think is of value--budget sheets, cash flow summary etc.
Nwsteve

 

[otodd]

I can get to the old RIP using the old URL which I had bookmarked.

Can you supply the bookmark?

With my old bookmark, I log-in and momentarily it displays "preparing" like the old one, but it immediately takes me to the new planner.

I would like to access the old one to at least get my real estate figures with mortgage rates, purchase dates, etc. and other assets that didn't come across.

 

[nwsteve]

Can you supply the bookmark?

With my old bookmark, I log-in and momentarily it displays "preparing" like the old one, but it immediately takes me to the new planner.

I would like to access the old one to at least get my real estate figures with mortgage rates, purchase dates, etc. and other assets that didn't come across.

Suggest you clean your cookies and browser history before you try to use your old bookmark. Maybe you will have better luck than me. Like the previous poster, using my old bookmark I got rerouted to the new one after briefly seeing the old one. Since my Fido rep told me even she can not get back to the old one, I did not bother trying again after cleaning my browser. Good Luck!

 

[otodd]

Thanks. I cleared al Fidelity cookies, and browser cache. I still get the new page.

I'm hoping if enough people complain, they may re-enable access to the old RIP for a period of time, say a month to two.

 

[MRG]

Thanks. I cleared al Fidelity cookies, and browser cache. I still get the new page.

I'm hoping if enough people complain, they may re-enable access to the old RIP for a period of time, say a month to two.

Not likely.

IT management's bonuses are many times tied to getting a new product built AND the old code base retired. Sounds harsh but there are costs associated with keeping an old code base around(support $).

 

[Fred123]

Ugh, I think the new UI is terrible. Too much white space, buttons in random places, no natural flow to this tool. Would have been much better with some sort of side menu so you can easily move around to change parameters.

And while I'm grumbling, one thing I noticed is that it always gives the same results if you look at the detailed income and expenses analysis. For example, in the worst case scenario I always see a 15% market drop in the first year. This should not be the case if it is truly running a new MC simulation each time you do an analysis. There also should be variances/error bars to indicate the range of outcomes.

So there.

 

[nwsteve]

Ugh, I think the new UI is terrible. Too much white space, buttons in random places, no natural flow to this tool. Would have been much better with some sort of side menu so you can easily move around to change parameters.

And while I'm grumbling, one thing I noticed is that it always gives the same results if you look at the detailed income and expenses analysis. For example, in the worst case scenario I always see a 15% market drop in the first year. This should not be the case if it is truly running a new MC simulation each time you do an analysis. There also should be variances/error bars to indicate the range of outcomes.

So there.

Agree with your comments re UI and need for more user centric info. Based on my convo with the Fido rep, they have a lot of "refinements" coming.
I also have a drop in my first year every time I run the model. Finally figured it has to be the deduction of the full annual expense spend with no adjustment for portfolio growth. Clearly a conservative view. Another nit I found and was told it is being corrected, is the RMD amounts are off a year if your birthday is in the last half of the year, which pushes RMD off until the ext calendar year when you actually turn 70.5.

Nwsteve

 

[bingybear]

I've tried that multiple times but it doesn't seem to "stick". As 80% of our retirement assets are outside of Fido and thus not being included in the calcs, our supposed readiness number-while in double digits-turns out to be less than my age!

you can include outside accounts by linking them using Full View. Or if you don't like electronic linking (or have issues with Full View), then you can manually load the missing accounts into the RIP assets.

 

[UpAnchor]

Thanks, bingybear, but I do have my non-Fido assets manually entered and it even brings them in from the old RIP program. Problem is that it doesn't classify them as "retirement" and although I've done that reclassification multiple times, that's the part that doesn't "stick".

 

[bUU]

Can you supply the bookmark?

https://incomeplanner.fidelity.com/planner

 

[bUU]

Ugh, I think the new UI is terrible. Too much white space, buttons in random places, no natural flow to this tool.

A big part of my job is user experience. The new UI is significant superior to the old UI in at least one of the specific ways you've mentioned. The old UI was far too crowded. Most human beings need the whitespace to help them better process what they're seeing. Also, other than putting the data in (see below), there is a pretty decent natural flow. The flow seems to be optimized to support review of the analysis, not data entry. My own experience is that trying to achieve two different consumption objectives with the same UI is bad UX. My own software does the same thing - it was just far too expensive to consider the correct answer: Creating two independent UIs, one for data entry and one for review, analysis and such.

There are some unfortunate button placement choices, but I'm not sure yet whether they're actually misplaced or if instead I'm allowing my familiarity with the old tool to color my perception. More specifically, the Accounts & Income Sources button is very poorly placed. Personally, I think there should be a tab prior to "Savings Rate" that lists "Accounts & Income Sources", with a button on that tab to add/remove/change the data. I also think that the Hypothetical Detailed Income/Assets drop-down and the Underperforming Market/Average Market drop-down should be alongside the gear and show tabular data hotspots in the chart, the gear hotspot really should be a "Today's Dollars/Future Dollars" drop-down to match the drop-downs I'd put aside it. I also think the tool, itself, is buried too far deeply into the Fidelity website structure. Other than that, I believe Fidelity made substantially correct UX choices.

Now: What does it mean if you don't agree with my criticisms of the UX? Even though I'm trained in this stuff, and do that work on a daily basis, I'm not willing to say "I'm right and you're wrong." Most likely, it means that we're both wrong and Fidelity got it right. A lot of this work involves applying some basic theories (as I alluded to above) but then watching a lot of real people of different sorts using the system, and learning from things as subtle as what order their eyes move about the page (much less what buttons they try in what order...)

Would have been much better with some sort of side menu so you can easily move around to change parameters.

That's an idea. The old RIP didn't do a good job in that regard either.

 

[bingybear]

Thanks, bingybear, but I do have my non-Fido assets manually entered and it even brings them in from the old RIP program. Problem is that it doesn't classify them as "retirement" and although I've done that reclassification multiple times, that's the part that doesn't "stick".

Interesting. I use to have that issue every now and then with the old one. I tried the new and changed inclusions of some accounts and did not seem to have any issues with that.

 

[bUU]

Interesting. I use to have that issue every now and then with the old one. I tried the new and changed inclusions of some accounts and did not seem to have any issues with that.

That's my experience as well... external accounts in the old tool were generally the ones I had trouble with changes "sticking". I haven't noticed that in the new tool.

 

[sengsational]

After this chat about the updated tool in Fidelity, I went in and ran through it again. Again I realized why I'm not a huge fan: like most tools, it's calculations are opaque.

Some of the things I ran into...

* The 2015 expenses are significantly higher than 2016 and onward. I didn't see anything within the expense inputs where a one-time expense would have been lurking. The PDF report didn't provide any clues that I could find.

* I liked that they allow you to put medigap expense in with start/end dates...that's good feature.

* Roughly aligns with my spreadsheets and i-orp.

* Chunking in a single federal tax rate seems a little crude.

The bottom line for me is that the user must simply have faith that it's working right, and that it's not doing anything dumb. I did click on the report, and it shows values calculated, one row per year, but the values they show are not enough to explain what's going on behind the scenes. A nice addition, but I wouldn't make it my primary tool.

 

[bUU]

There is a separate PDF outlining the methodology, but I believe that mostly addresses the simulation parameters. Beyond that, I suspect that providing more details may reveal too much of the IP underlying the tool.

 

[onno]

I've three Scwabb investment accounts that show in Full View that aren't going over to the new tool. Other investment accounts that are in Full View go over.

Real Estate accounts in Full View also aren't going over.

I spent 35 minutes mostly on hold with Fidelity. The first rep didn't know what Full View was. The supervisor said there are often problems with Full View passing data to the Planner, and he was certain the tech support already knew about the problem. He said no Tech Support staff can talk to customers, because they aren't licensed. Crazy!

When from the Planner I go to add or link accounts, a window comes up with accounts from Full View that have been added to the Planner. Guess what, Schwabb accounts show as already added. Yet, they don't show up in the Planners list of accounts, the proper window.

Has anyone spoken with a person at Fidelity that knew of both Full View and of this Planner? What number did you call?

Thanks.