Close Close
Popular Financial Topics Discover relevant content from across the suite of ALM legal publications From the Industry More content from ThinkAdvisor and select sponsors Investment Advisor Issue Gallery Read digital editions of Investment Advisor Magazine Tax Facts Get clear, current, and reliable answers to pressing tax questions
Luminaries Awards
ThinkAdvisor
Jamie Hopkins

Retirement Planning > Spending in Retirement > Income Planning

Here's What Beats the 4% Rule: Jamie Hopkins

X
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

What You Need to Know

  • Americans are taught about saving but not spending, so they have little clarity about income planning.
  • Carson Group’s Jamie Hopkins says there is a particular overreliance on the 4% safe withdrawal strategy.
  • He says advisors and their clients can achieve superior results by engaging in income planning that better reflects people’s lives in retirement.

Financial planners who want to help clients successfully (and comfortably) navigate the retirement process must expand their thinking about income planning — and emerging tools and new ways of thinking can help, says Jamie Hopkins, managing partner at Carson Group,

As Hopkins recently explained in a video he posted to the social media platform X, there is a clear consensus among researchers that Americans are facing a retirement income shortfall — and they are worried about it.

“One of the things that I am often asked to talk about is the fact that so many Americans are facing a retirement income gap,” Hopkins says. “While it’s true there is an income challenge facing older Americans, many people are actually in better shape than they realize, and many retirement income plans that ‘fail’ can actually be fixed with minor adjustments.”

According to Hopkins, the basic disconnection at work here is that so much of the income planning that is done today by financial planners is based purely in Monte Carlo simulations that generate binary success and failure metrics. These are useful as far as they go, Hopkins says, but they also fail to capture so much of the nuance that comes into play during the retirement income planning effort.

Specifically, traditional income analyses built around Monte Carlo simulations fail to distinguish between different levels of failure, Hopkins says, and that’s a big shortcoming. Another issue is that Monte Carlo simulations provide only a single snapshot in time, and they are only as good as the inputs and assumptions fed into them.

Income Confusion

“Why is this such a big deal? Well, the reality is that Americans are taught about savings but not spending, so they have very little clarity about income planning,” Hopkins says. “People don’t learn about spending when they are saving for retirement. Instead, they learn about budgeting and living below their means.

“But when we get to retirement and the working income stops, we need to put a new strategy in place,” Hopkins continues. “The traditional places to start are flooring strategies, bucket strategies and systematic withdrawals approaches, like the 4% safe withdrawal strategy. These are powerful and they help tell different stories, but I think we can do a lot better.”

Hopkins says there is a particular overreliance on the “4% safe withdrawal strategy.”

“And I’m saying ‘strategy’ on purpose — because it’s not a rule,” Hopkins says. “Really, the 4% ‘rule’ is just a finding that shows us a potential strategy to use for income, one that is based on what market returns looked like in the past.”

While better than spending in an uncontrolled and unconsidered fashion, Hopkins says, the 4% framework has another problem: People don’t actually follow the rule even when they say they will, because life is just much more complicated than that.

“They don’t spend exactly 4% per year adjusted upward to account for inflation,” Hopkins says. “Real-word spending data shows a much more variable experience, with spending often starting higher earlier on in retirement before trending down in the middle period and then often spiking up again towards the end of life.”

Taken all together, these facts suggest financial planners should look beyond pure Monte Carlo simulations and rules of thumb during the income planning process with their clients.

“Traditionally, we might look at someone’s savings and their investment approach and we run the numbers and we can tell them they have a 75% chance of success, and we frame the outcome entirely around binary success or failure,” Hopkins says. “To me, that’s the wrong way to do it. We have to adjust the way we think about retirement income planning to better fit our actual lives.”

A Better Approach

According to Hopkins and others, a better approach that is emerging is to focus on the need to regularly adjust spending up or down during the retirement period. This is often called a guardrails approach.

“The reality is that we can create a more sustainable retirement by making adjustments over time and keeping your clients within the guardrails,” Hopkins proposes. “And guardrails aren’t just about safety — that’s the cool part. They are also about taking advantage of any extra abundance you might have.

“When you look beyond the simple binary success or failure framework, you start to see that small adjustments can make a big different to the projected outcomes,” Hopkins explains. “You could work six months longer or a year longer, for example, and comfortably fix a failing plan. Or you could factor in more tax-efficient withdrawals and the opportunity to make Roth conversions. Or you could draw Social Security later.”

Combining these strategies with the guardrails approach will result in superior outcomes for many clients, Hopkins concludes, and the best part is that today’s advisors can turn to a rapidly growing stable of tools and solutions to help them with this work.

For his part, Hopkins urges advisors to play around with the tools that are now available online from the Income Lab, but there is a wealth of online resources to consider.

“I urge all of my industry peers to start working with these tools,” Hopkins says. “They can help you and your clients to view retirement income planning not as a static thing. It’s about making adjustments to achieve both safety and abundance.”

Pictured: Jamie Hopkins 


NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.