Rethinking the 4% Withdrawal Rule

Financial professionals often suggest a 4% annual withdrawal rate for retired workers living off accumulated assets, but one service provider is pushing a more sophisticated approach.

In a new study called “Breaking the 4% Rule,” researchers from J.P. Morgan argue that retirees—and the service providers supporting them—should take a more dynamic approach to managing retirement account withdrawals. The study finds that more rigid, percentage-based withdrawal rules can expose retirees to an increased chance of outliving their retirement assets or leaving too much wealth untapped, mainly because these strategies ignore the specifics of a retiree’s financial situation.

Greg Roth, a vice president for media relations with J.P. Morgan Asset Management, tells PLANADVISER his firm has crafted a new withdrawal strategy based on the outcome of the study. He says the strategy can be personalized for each retiree and is designed to incorporate shifts in people’s age, financial circumstances, personal preferences and market conditions as they move through retirement years. The goal, he explains, is to improve the likelihood that retirees will be able to maintain their standard of living in retirement while simultaneously reducing longevity risk.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

As a first step, the study identifies potential shortcomings of conventional and more rigid withdrawal methods, especially the well-known “4% rule.” On J.P. Morgan’s analysis, more rigid strategies are inferior because they do not consider “lifetime utility” or retiree satisfaction in recommending spending levels—nor do such strategies respond to real-world events that can have a big impact on markets and investment performance.

Instead, J.P. Morgan says a portfolio-based solution using a more robust withdrawal framework should help investors better address their retirement funding needs by embedding market risk, longevity risk and evolving personal investment criteria in a way that a cash-flow-based approach simply cannot.

Key findings in the study show the following:

  • Maximizing expected lifetime utility (i.e., potential derived satisfaction) serves as a more effective benchmark of retirement withdrawal success than typical measures, such as probability of failure. Focusing on utility offers a way to quantify how much satisfaction retirees receive from their portfolio withdrawals. This approach allows retirees to increase spending when they are most apt to enjoy their retirement dollars, while still avoiding the risk of premature portfolio depletion, as retirees would presumably slow their withdrawals if perceived longevity risk increased, pushing down satisfaction.
  • Adapting to changes in economic and market environments (and to investors’ specific situations) over time can help maximize the expected lifetime income generated by retirement assets. This type of dynamic strategy may help provide greater payout consistency and reduce the likelihood of either running out of money or accumulating excess wealth that is unlikely to be used by the investor.
  • Age, lifetime income and wealth all provide key insights into how to adjust investors’ withdrawal strategies throughout retirement. Holding all other factors constant, higher initial wealth levels suggest individuals can afford to lower their withdrawal rates, as income should still be sufficient to meet day-to-day expenses, while also increasing their fixed income allocations to protect larger account balances. Greater availability of lifetime income streams, whether through Social Security or a pension annuity, allows retired individuals to increase both their withdrawal rates and equity allocations. Increasing age allows individuals to increase their withdrawal rates, while also suggesting decreased equity exposure. All of this should be factored into withdrawal rate plans.

Based on those findings, the J.P. Morgan “Dynamic Withdrawal Strategy” incorporates five distinct factors: personal preferences for the amount and timing of withdrawals; wealth and “lifetime retirement income,” which the study defines as guaranteed income, such as Social Security, pensions and lifetime annuities; age and life expectancy; the randomness of markets and extreme events; and the dynamic nature of each retiree’s decisionmaking process.

“When all these factors are combined into a single, cohesive methodology, we can calculate an optimal withdrawal rate and asset allocation based on each retiree’s unique profile,” explains Abdullah Sheikh, a vice president and research analyst for J.P. Morgan Asset Management’s Asset Management Solutions-Global Multi-Asset Group.

Roth says the approach is patent-pending, and should help retirees smooth out the unpredictable nature of future expenses and personal circumstances. He also explains the dynamic withdrawal strategy requires consistent communication and planning between a retiree and an adviser.

To read the executive summary of the report, click here. The full research report can be accessed here.

Refunds Earmarked for Basics, Not Frills

More than half of Americans (52%) say their annual tax refund is slated for necessary expenses such as loans, credit cards and other household expenses, a survey says.

According to Edward Jones, the financial services firm, a third will put the money into savings, and just 8% say they will invest it.

The closer people get to retirement, the likelier they are to save the money. Respondents age 55 to 64, who are within 10 years or so of retirement, are likeliest to save their refund, with almost half (43%) saying that’s how they’ll use the money.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

Those between the ages 45 of 54 are less likely; just one in four of this age group plans to save. And 12% of the fun-loving 18- to 34-year-old demographic say the refund check will be spent on fun things such as clothes, entertainment and restaurants, compared with 5% of those 65 and older who plan to use the money for fun.

Respondents with the lowest household income (less than $35,000 a year) are the most likely to spend their tax refund on necessary expenses (61%). Just over one-third (37%) of those with the highest household income ($100,000 or more a year) plan to put their tax refund toward necessary expenses.

Those with household incomes between $50,000 and $75,000 are most likely to invest their refunds. 

Americans with no children are the most likely (10%) to spend their refund on something “fun,” whereas only 1% of those with children ages 13 to 17 are willing to splurge.

Americans living in the Northeast are the most likely to invest their tax refund (11%). Those in the West are the most likely to simply save their refund (35%).

“As the economy continues its recovery, it’s no surprise many Americans also are focused on their own recovery, paying down debt and improving their current situation.” says Scott Thoma, investment strategist at Edward Jones.

«