Zero Stocks In Retirement

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
lessismore22
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:02 pm
Location: USA

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by lessismore22 » Thu Feb 13, 2020 10:29 pm

Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
Yes, if you're going to use an example of the less than 1% of people that will retire with 10M, then my argument doesn't make sense. But for the other 99% of the population a 0/100 portfolio is risky.

Ari
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:59 am

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Ari » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 am

All in, all the time.

User avatar
celia
Posts: 10047
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:32 am
Location: SoCal

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by celia » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:37 am

There are a lot of seniors who have no assets (no stocks) and live on SS only. But you will not likely see them posting here. Occasionally someone here posts on their behalf about something other than stocks (or not).

user9532
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 10:08 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by user9532 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:52 am

Think about a retired federal employee who lives on his FERS pension and social security and moved his entire TSP into the G fund.

User avatar
jfn111
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 10:42 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by jfn111 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 am

My sister survives on an AA of 0/Social Security/jfn111. :shock:

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:30 am

Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
I find it kind of amusing that we could be concerned about a couple with 10,000,000 running out of money :D
The simple reality is that most people do not have to have stocks in retirement. Based on historical returns is it most likely to produce more money,yes of course, unless you have really bad luck with a sequence of returns disaster.
This is mostly an investing forum that attracts people that have much greater wealth than most Americans, so naturally it is a little removed from most people’s financial situations. When you are talking about people that spend a lot of money,stocks become more important.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 21935
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Grt2bOutdoors » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:38 am

lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 10:29 pm
Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
Yes, if you're going to use an example of the less than 1% of people that will retire with 10M, then my argument doesn't make sense. But for the other 99% of the population a 0/100 portfolio is risky.
No it's not, depending on income streams, a 0/100 portfolio is not risky if there are sufficient other sources of income that is not totally reliant upon the portfolio or if your longevity is limited.
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions

Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 21935
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Grt2bOutdoors » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:38 am

hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:30 am
Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
I find it kind of amusing that we could be concerned about a couple with 10,000,000 running out of money :D
The simple reality is that most people do not have to have stocks in retirement. Based on historical returns is it most likely to produce more money,yes of course, unless you have really bad luck with a sequence of returns disaster.
This is mostly an investing forum that attracts people that have much greater wealth than most Americans, so naturally it is a little removed from most people’s financial situations. When you are talking about people that spend a lot of money,stocks become more important.
Ah yes, first world problems! :D
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions

wriley4409
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:41 am
Location: Little Rock,AR

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by wriley4409 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:43 am

A 100% bond allocation is more risky than an 80/20 bond/stock allocation, based on the number of years of loss from 1926 through the present time. https://www.financialsamurai.com/histor ... eightings/

Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 21935
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Grt2bOutdoors » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:48 am

wriley4409 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:43 am
A 100% bond allocation is more risky than an 80/20 bond/stock allocation, based on the number of years of loss from 1926 through the present time. https://www.financialsamurai.com/histor ... eightings/
Yes, very risky since most people alive in 1926 have expired. :oops:
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions

User avatar
lthenderson
Posts: 4513
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:43 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by lthenderson » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:56 am

White Coat Investor wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:59 pm
I know lots of people who invest it all in real estate. No stocks or bonds.
+1

Just finished settling my mom's estate a couple months ago and it was 100% real estate (farm land). Interestingly enough, she did nearly as well as my stocks did in the same time frame. Since it is now in a trust, it will become a significant part of my portfolio in the future.

michaeljc70
Posts: 6205
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by michaeljc70 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am

hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?

csm
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:52 am

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by csm » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:11 pm

We retired two years ago (me at age 60, husband at age 51) and when I was tweaking our portfolio, I was very tempted to go 0% stocks. But I saw a link here (not the one a few posts above this post, but another than I wish I could find again), that showed a 30/70 allocation being less risky than 0/100 (similarly that a 70/30 outperformed a 100/0). We are at about 35% stocks right now.

I have a stable, defined benefit, COLA-adjusted pension (with survivor benefit) that exceeds our current expenses. We have a mortgage-free home, no debt, and investments that would permit nearly as much again as our annual pension to be withdrawn at 4% withdrawal rate. We haven't touched the investments since we retired, living on the pension (with money left over). We have no children, heirs or legacy.

I do think we'd be ok at 0% stocks, but at the same time, we can survive a drop in our portfolio if stocks took a hit since only a third of our investments are in stocks.

michaeljc70
Posts: 6205
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by michaeljc70 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:19 pm

It is interesting to hear different thought processes. Some people think that because their expenses are covered by SS/pensions 0% stocks is okay while I would think the opposite. If I don't need to rely on the portfolio I'd take more risk (well, risk is a fairly nebulous term but in this case meaning more stocks).

Presintense
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 1:58 pm
Location: "Somewhere in the middle of America"

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Presintense » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:20 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Congratulations. Sounds like you have what you want and it’s working. Possibly you’d have done better by including the stock market, but the enemy of “good” is “better”.
Performance = Potential - Distraction

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm

michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am
hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?
Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

1130Super
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:59 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by 1130Super » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:22 pm

lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 10:29 pm
Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
Yes, if you're going to use an example of the less than 1% of people that will retire with 10M, then my argument doesn't make sense. But for the other 99% of the population a 0/100 portfolio is risky.
Yes I would still consider it riskier what happens if if you have a period of hyperinflation?

michaeljc70
Posts: 6205
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by michaeljc70 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am
hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?
Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:28 pm

Presintense wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:20 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Congratulations. Sounds like you have what you want and it’s working. Possibly you’d have done better by including the stock market, but the enemy of “good” is “better”.
Thank you.There is no question I would have a LOT more money if I had been heavily in the stock market. In all honesty I do sometimes think about what might have been,but I achieved my goal. Right or wrong, the certainty was more important to me and more importantly to my wife.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:31 pm

michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am
hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?
Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".
Well everything but the Muni’s which are GO California bonds paying 5 and 4.3 pct. I do not like my odds of being around to re-evaluate those :D
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:32 pm

1130Super wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:22 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 10:29 pm
Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:55 pm
lessismore22 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:33 pm
0/100 seems much riskier than 30/70 or even 50/50. Would hate to see someone give up all that potential growth.
It's all relative. Here is an example, a couple is age 65, accumulated a portfolio of $10 million, their annual expenses are $150,000. Their income in retirement will be Social Security of $60K, requiring $90K to be taken from the portfolio.

Do you still consider a 0/100 portfolio to be riskier? It's all about how you think about things. A 100% portfolio in fixed income could earn anywhere from 2-3% over the next 10 years. Still think it's risky? Dividends can be cut, contractually owed monies are a different animal altogether. The chances are nearly 99% that there will be plenty of money available for someone else to spend after the couple moves on to the next world.
Yes, if you're going to use an example of the less than 1% of people that will retire with 10M, then my argument doesn't make sense. But for the other 99% of the population a 0/100 portfolio is risky.
Yes I would still consider it riskier what happens if if you have a period of hyperinflation?
What happens if we have another 2008 that lasts 10 years this time?
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

michaeljc70
Posts: 6205
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by michaeljc70 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:45 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am
hoops777 wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:11 pm
I am retired at 68. We have zero stocks. No mortgage. A good LTC policy. 66,000 in HSA. About 50,000 in free travel rewards points.
We have CD’s,Ibonds,individual Muni’s,bond mutual funds and some high quality individual bonds,like Microsoft.
When I take my full SS at 70,our combined SS will pay all of our day to day expenses, including a little travel.
Our interest from investments will provide an additional 50K per year as currently invested.
We have 2 1/2 to 6 years left on our current CD’s and individual Corp bonds and 26 years on the Muni’s.
In hindsight, we could have made a lot of money in stocks, but I wanted to be guaranteed to have x amount of dollars when I turned 70 and my spouse is 72. No real regrets and very happy that we will achieve that goal.

We will re-evaluate when everything matures, but plan is to be 30/70 down the road,with the 70 being more than adequate for all of our expenses. In a weird way it is very satisfying that I did it without the stock market. I had my own little business and did it the hard way.
Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?
Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".
Well everything but the Muni’s which are GO California bonds paying 5 and 4.3 pct. I do not like my odds of being around to re-evaluate those :D
Thanks for the clarification. I was generically alluding to inflation risk in a 0% stock portfolio. It also doesn't have to be a time of high inflation. In 2019 inflation was around 1.8% yet the 10 year treasury was yielding below that.

User avatar
Johnsson
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2017 2:28 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Johnsson » Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:53 am

michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:19 pm
It is interesting to hear different thought processes. Some people think that because their expenses are covered by SS/pensions 0% stocks is okay while I would think the opposite. If I don't need to rely on the portfolio I'd take more risk (well, risk is a fairly nebulous term but in this case meaning more stocks).
+1
'In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.' Yogi Berra

carolc
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:45 am
Location: New Hampshire seacoast

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by carolc » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:09 am

I am in my 60’s and retired. I like 30% stocks max because I believe that I have enough principle to live off of. I have no children to leave an inheritance to so intend to spend (mostly on travel) what I have. The only wild card is the need for long term care...so I keep that in mind.

carolc

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 15988
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by willthrill81 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:04 pm

michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:45 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:59 am


Is that after inflation or will that $50k be less and less in real terms each year?
Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".
Well everything but the Muni’s which are GO California bonds paying 5 and 4.3 pct. I do not like my odds of being around to re-evaluate those :D
Thanks for the clarification. I was generically alluding to inflation risk in a 0% stock portfolio. It also doesn't have to be a time of high inflation. In 2019 inflation was around 1.8% yet the 10 year treasury was yielding below that.
The risk of bonds' real returns being very low has been historically quite high. Far too many here have their views of bonds' performance greatly impacted by their performance from 1982-2012, probably the biggest bull market for bonds in U.S. history. But according to the Simba dataset, intermediate-term Treasuries had a real annualized return of just .5%, which was accompanied by periods of significant real drawdowns (e.g. 1940s, late 1970s).

Investors don't necessarily need stocks in order to get a reasonable real return on their capital, but it's historically been very difficult to achieve that goal with only fixed income.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

hoops777
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by hoops777 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:23 pm

willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:04 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:45 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:21 pm


Does it really matter? They will be spent in the next 3 years or so.
It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".
Well everything but the Muni’s which are GO California bonds paying 5 and 4.3 pct. I do not like my odds of being around to re-evaluate those :D
Thanks for the clarification. I was generically alluding to inflation risk in a 0% stock portfolio. It also doesn't have to be a time of high inflation. In 2019 inflation was around 1.8% yet the 10 year treasury was yielding below that.
The risk of bonds' real returns being very low has been historically quite high. Far too many here have their views of bonds' performance greatly impacted by their performance from 1982-2012, probably the biggest bull market for bonds in U.S. history. But according to the Simba dataset, intermediate-term Treasuries had a real annualized return of just .5%, which was accompanied by periods of significant real drawdowns (e.g. 1940s, late 1970s).

Investors don't necessarily need stocks in order to get a reasonable real return on their capital, but it's historically been very difficult to achieve that goal with only fixed income.
Not to be argumentative and I realize it was quite unusual,but if one invested in the SP 500 the first ten years of this century they earned nothing. I say this only to remind people drunk on stock performance the last ten years,that they are not a sure thing. Anything can happen. I believe the odds of stocks doing pretty well over time is much greater than the opposite,but for a person with a small margin of error and bad timing in the year of retirement.... :oops:
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 15988
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by willthrill81 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:33 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:23 pm
willthrill81 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:04 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:45 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:23 pm


It says you have 26 years on the Muni's....and "We will re-evaluate when everything matures".
Well everything but the Muni’s which are GO California bonds paying 5 and 4.3 pct. I do not like my odds of being around to re-evaluate those :D
Thanks for the clarification. I was generically alluding to inflation risk in a 0% stock portfolio. It also doesn't have to be a time of high inflation. In 2019 inflation was around 1.8% yet the 10 year treasury was yielding below that.
The risk of bonds' real returns being very low has been historically quite high. Far too many here have their views of bonds' performance greatly impacted by their performance from 1982-2012, probably the biggest bull market for bonds in U.S. history. But according to the Simba dataset, intermediate-term Treasuries had a real annualized return of just .5%, which was accompanied by periods of significant real drawdowns (e.g. 1940s, late 1970s).

Investors don't necessarily need stocks in order to get a reasonable real return on their capital, but it's historically been very difficult to achieve that goal with only fixed income.
Not to be argumentative and I realize it was quite unusual,but if one invested in the SP 500 the first ten years of this century they earned nothing. I say this only to remind people drunk on stock performance the last ten years,that they are not a sure thing. Anything can happen. I believe the odds of stocks doing pretty well over time is much greater than the opposite,but for a person with a small margin of error and bad timing in the year of retirement.... :oops:
100% agreed. Stocks and bonds can both have poor returns.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

averagedude
Posts: 904
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by averagedude » Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:47 pm

Being an average dude, I know alot of people who have never owned stocks. Most of these people only invest in FDIC products only, were blue collar, very frugal, grew up in the depression era, only married once, and had jobs that had pensions. These same people had plenty and probably never touched their nest eggs. If these same people had invested heavily in stocks, they would had been millionaires, if not multi millionaires in today's dollars, but would had never spent it and would just leave it for their heirs to spend. Could possibly be some of us bogleheads grandparents.

User avatar
willthrill81
Posts: 15988
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:17 pm
Location: USA

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by willthrill81 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:51 pm

averagedude wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:47 pm
Being an average dude, I know alot of people who have never owned stocks. Most of these people only invest in FDIC products only, were blue collar, very frugal, grew up in the depression era, only married once, and had jobs that had pensions. These same people had plenty and probably never touched their nest eggs. If these same people had invested heavily in stocks, they would had been millionaires, if not multi millionaires in today's dollars, but would had never spent it and would just leave it for their heirs to spend. Could possibly be some of us bogleheads grandparents.
You've just described my maternal grandparents and my in-laws very well except that none had pensions.
“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” J.R.R. Tolkien,The Lord of the Rings

Pierre Delecto
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:45 pm

Re: Zero Stocks In Retirement

Post by Pierre Delecto » Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:25 pm

These posts make me more bullish on stocks. Lots of negative sentiment and people still sitting on sidelines with historically low fixed income options. Bullish.

Post Reply