Quantcast
Channel: Bogleheads.org
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2814

Personal Investments • Re: Why is this NOT a BogleHead Retiree Income strategy ?

$
0
0
1) Goal:
A person 65 YO (on Medicare and $3000/mth Social Security) has $2,000,000 liquid cash and wants to live comfortably (defined as $125,000/yr after tax) without touching Principal.
2) Investment:
Invest $250K in 8 different Bank CD's currently paying 5.25% (FIDC insured) ... then in 5 years, re-evaluate the financial landscape. Wash/Rinse/Repeat...or adjust as needed.

What am I missing in this simple "Retirement Income" thinking?
1) In order to avoid touching the principal you need earnings of 6.25%/yr to draw $125K, or 4.45% if the $125K is offset by SS ($36K). The formers seems tough as it probably requires some stocks, so it's not risk-free, which it seems like you're after if you're looking at a ladder of CDs. The latter (4.45%) is likely possible with a mixed ladder of 10 year T-bonds (avg of 5.2% ± 7.7% from 1982-2017) and 3 month T-Bills (3.4% ± 3.0%). A ladder avoids principal fluctuation that a bond fund would have (the price does fluctuate until maturity but that doesn't matter if you hold until maturity). If the price fluctuation doesn't bother you that much, a bond fund would be much simpler than a ladder.

2) The "8 different CDs" investment plan is biased by recent history. Do you not recall when interest rates were near zero and CDs were barely paying 1%? Vanguard's own Prime Money Market paid almost nothing for a good long stretch. Inflation sparked because of the pandemic; interest rates rose in response to gov't spending and fall in payroll tax revenue. You shouldn't expect 5.25% CDs to persist for the next 30 years (or however long you plan to be "living comfortably" @ $125K/yr). The other problem is inflation, which you recognize in later posts. That's best addressed by a percentage of portfolio allocated to stocks, but that adds volatility, which you seem to want to avoid (again CD ladder as your plan).
A KNOWN $ amount that will be available at the end of a specific time period.
If your #1 priority is on leaving a minimum dollar amount legacy to heirs/friends/charity, then it's best to simply put that amount aside. You have to recognize that while you're in retirement and have a risk-tolerance appropriate for someone in retirement that needs to draw on their assets to live, that your heirs have a vastly different time-frame and therefore a different risk tolerance.

The crux is that you have two conflicting goals. A) Leaving a minimum legacy dollar amount vs B) The need to draw $125K/yr to live now, with adjustments for inflation in years between now and when you pass. Because these goals are in conflict they can't both be top priority; you have to pick one or the other. If the legacy is #1, then you have to live on less because you'll be setting aside that minimum dollar amount you want to leave to others. If the $125K/yr (+inflation in out years) is #1, then your heirs will have to settle with whatever happens to be left. There are compromise solutions in between the extremes. Pick a weighting between the two goals and plan accordingly.

Statistics: Posted by bonesly — Fri Dec 22, 2023 2:12 am



Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2814

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>