As pensions have continued to be a less common source of retirement income, it has become necessary to develop alternative retirement income approaches. Ask 100 people how much income your retirement nest egg can generate in retirement, and you will get 100 different answers. However, while there are different strategies and approaches, one rule of thumb is usually the basis from which all others are built, the 4% Withdrawal Rule.
But is Bengen’s 4% safe withdrawal rate still safe?
The 4% Rule
In October 1994, William Bengen published an article in the Journal of Financial Planning entitled “Determining Withdrawal Rates Using Historical Data.” His article set the stage for a debate many financial professionals still have today.
The study determined how many retirees could withdraw from their retirement nest egg without running out of money.
Bengen’s research concluded that for a 60-65-year-old retiree, a 50/50 allocation between stocks and bonds with a withdrawal rate of 4% of the initial portfolio value, adjusting annually for inflation, could generate retirement income for 30 years.
Today, however, researchers are beginning to rethink Bengen’s 1994 research. For example, many researchers believe that a safe withdrawal rate isn’t 4%, but rather 2.8% or 2%, or even as low as 1.49%.
Simply put, Bengen’s research assumes that your retirement portfolio was invested in stocks and bonds, and Bengen’s assumptions did not consider today’s long period of historically low bond yields. His research also did not account for taxes, fees, or increased longevity.
The low yields drag down the potential performance of the bond portion of your portfolio lower than what Bengen assumed. And before you think that simply reducing your bond holdings will be the answer, increasing your exposure to stocks will simply increase your exposure to volatility, which adds a whole new level of risk to your retirement.
Challenges of Withdrawal Rates
In 2013, Morningstar published a report entitled “Low Bond Yields and Safe Portfolio Withdrawal Rates.” Its goal was to look at the impact historically low bond yields would have on the success rates of different withdrawal rate strategies. Morningstar concluded that withdrawal rates would need to be significantly lower than 4% to have a high probability of success.
Alternatives to The 4% Rule
Fixed index annuities (FIAs) may be one potential solution to address lower withdrawal rates. FIAs, and annuities in general, can potentially provide more guaranteed income when compared to a pure withdrawal rate strategy.
The 4% Rule vs. Annuities
To see how you can potentially address this issue, consider Bill and Jill. Both Bill and Jill have $1 million saved and need $40,000 a year for retirement.
4% Withdrawal Rate
Bill was planning on withdrawing 4% of his portfolio to generate the $40,000. However, based on recent research published by Morning Star, Bill would only have a 50% chance of having his money last 30 years. Alternately, to have a 90% chance of having his money last for 30 years, he would have to lower his retirement income to $27,000.
On the other hand, Jill elects to incorporate a fixed index annuity into her retirement strategy.
By using a portion of her $1 million to purchase a fixed index annuity, she can still reach her retirement income goal of $40,000. Plus, the income generated by the fixed index annuity can be guaranteed to generate lifetime income.
The key is that to address the many retirement risks, you may need to consider retirement products that you may not have contemplated when you were saving for retirement.
Annuities are just one of these types of products that are specifically designed to help generate retirement income.
Contact us to determine if a fixed index annuity is right for you.