Sentences with phrase «high stock allocation»

Both strategies call for high stock allocations when prices are at low or fair - value levels.

I kept getting the same high stock allocation for conditions that applied in the past, but not today.

Also, I've seen a number of studies which argue that those near retirement should maintain high stock allocations in order to maximize their expected wealth.

He suggests that it may be used in response to very high stock allocations, with limits of + / - 15 %.

They all beat the 4 % (plus inflation) for 30 years that was claimed (incorrectly) to be safe with optimized high stock allocations.

But while higher stock allocations help on that score, there's a limit to what they can do.

My view is that it is excessively high stock allocations that cause huge hits (VII investors are to a large extent protected from them).

You may choose an initially high stock allocation that emphasizes a growing dividend income stream.

Higher stock allocations produce higher dividend amounts, which grow faster than inflation.

You need to go with lower stock allocations when prices are high and higher stock allocations when prices are low.

The primary problem with high stock allocations is volatility.

The optimal portfolio had a very high stock allocation.

Millions of middle - class investors have placed their trust in investing experts who have advised them to go with high stock allocations at times when stocks were selling at prices that insured they would receive poor long - term returns on their money.

Valuation Informed Indexing often had high stock allocations after Year 15.

When P / E10 is below 20, the averages favor high stock allocations.

And, in fact, if you go to a lower initial withdrawal rate, say, 3.5 % or 3 %, you see much the same effect — that is, very high stock allocations don't boost the probability that your savings will last and may even slightly reduce the odds (although, of course, the chances of one's nest egg lasting at least 30 years are higher all around at lower withdrawal rates).

My further guess is that the typical investor can afford to take on higher stock allocations as the both the long - term AND short - term risk profile of stocks diminishes in the mind of that particular investor.

7) SWR Research has revealed the danger of high stock allocations when valuations are high (such as they are today).

The worst years for retirees with high stock allocations included 1965 - 1973, but not the years of the Great Depression.

No matter how compelling the case may be for a rising equity glide path — and it is compelling — I think it would be a mistake to stick to a system that called for ever - higher stock allocations if doing so would require you to take on more risk than you can actually handle.

It's called It's Irresponsible Not to Urge Higher Stock Allocations at Times of Low Stock Prices.

Valuation - Informed Indexing encourages high stock allocations.

Still, the reality is that this is one of the big risks of strategies of going with high stock allocations at times of high valuations (when the risk of big price drops is greatest).

Low TIPS interest rates and high terminal value percentages also favor high stock allocations.

It drives me crazy that most experts in this field were advising investors to go with high stock allocations in 2000, when the P / E10 value was so high that a regression analysis of the historical return data showed that the most likely 10 - year annualized return on stocks was a negative 1 percent real and when Treasury Inflation - Protected Bonds were offering a risk - free return of 4 percent real for time - periods of up to 30 years.

I have had conversations with thousands of middle - class investors that tell me that most of us have little idea how rocky a road it is that we are traveling by going with high stock allocations today.

At the highest stock allocation, there is a chance of losing almost all of your nest egg by year 10 even at a withdrawal rate of 3.0 % (plus inflation).

Compare this with a traditional portfolio with a high stock allocation.

This last calculation doesn't make a traditional portfolio with its high stock allocation look nearly as attractive as is claimed.

To reach 4 % required an optimal, high stock allocation.

Later, they switch to high stock allocations to extend the portfolio lifetimes and to increase income.

Even better, you could change to a fixed, high stock allocation (80 % stocks and 20 % TIPS at a 2 % interest rate with rebalancing) when P / E10 falls to 8.7 and increase your 30 - year Safe Withdrawal Rate to 8.4 %.

Higher stock allocations can, however, significantly improve the chances of your money lasting a long time, if you go with a higher withdrawal rate, say 4.5 % or 5 %.

Switching to the fixed, high stock allocation when P / E10 = 8.7 increases the Safe Withdrawal Rate to 8.4 % and 8.4 % of $ 477K is $ 40068.

They are comfortable with a high stock allocation after a long period of price increases, and they are comfortable with a low stock allocation after a big drop in stock prices.

It turns out that a fixed, high stock allocation should be better than switching when P / E10 is 8.7.

Later, after your portfolio has grown, you might change to using a fixed, high stock allocation.

If you assume that the lowest Historical Surviving Withdrawal Rate equals the Safe Withdrawal Rate, you will conclude that it is best to have a high stock allocation (close to 80 %) and that the 30 - year Safe Withdrawal Rate is 4 % of the original balance (plus inflation).

These results are comparable to the 30 Year Reasonably Safe Withdrawal Rate (see Year 30 SWR button on the left) with a high stock allocation.

This picture shows what happens to 30 - year Historical Surviving Withdrawal Rates with a high stock allocation.

That advice was to withdraw 4 % of their original balance (plus inflation) from a portfolio with a high stock allocation.

My Latch and Hold investigations showed that it has been a good idea to maintain a high stock allocation during the upward trend of a long lasting (secular) bull market.

Easing into a high stock allocation makes a lot of sense at these valuations.

A much better choice would be to retain a high stock allocation after the initial drop in a Bear Market.

Switching C has a high stock allocation at mid-range valuations.

Portfolios with high stock allocations have NOT ALWAYS lasted beyond year 30 when withdrawing 4.0 % of the initial balance (plus inflation).

A higher stock allocation does better if the final balance needs to equal the initial balance.