It may be time for retirement savers to give a thrown-out rule of thumb a second chance.
Smart savers have long understood that the closer they get to retirement age, the less money they should probably have in stocks. This concept gave rise to the "100 minus your age" rule—an easy way to estimate what percentage of your portfolio should be allocated to stocks.
At first, the math made sense. When you’re 25, you can afford to have 75% of your savings in stocks because you won’t need the money for years. But if you are 75 and already living off your retirement savings, it’s safer to have only 25% of your money invested in stocks—with the balance stashed away in bonds, annuities, money market funds, certificates of deposit, and other fixed-income products that offer reliable income with less volatility.
Over time, however, the income in fixed income started to disappear. From 2010 to 2020, the yield on five-year Treasury bonds averaged a measly 1.5%—a far cry from the 7% average that fixed-income investors had enjoyed from 1970 through 2010.1 This decline in rates made fixed income products less attractive for retirees or near-retirees who needed investment income to live off. “Lower interest rates ended up forcing people into riskier parts of the market,” explained Michael Sowa, senior director for investment product research in TIAA’s Investment Management Group.