We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

How much U.S. percentage?

13»

Comments

  • bostonerimus
    bostonerimus Posts: 5,617 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 9 December 2022 at 3:27PM
    I have not come across materials advising 100% bonds towards retirement.  But if they do, availability of state pension becomes irrelevant; it would not change the recommended 100% number.  But as Boston says, US state pension/social security is larger than UK’s.

    If its a reference to target date or “lifecycle” funds, then such funds tend to keep a meaningful allocation to stocks. 
    My apologies for the exaggeration, but I had in mind things like the Aviva retirement fund where their "My Future Universal Investment Programme" moves you from "My Future Growth" to "My Future Consolidation" over the 15 years to retirement date when you'd be 100% in the latter fund, the lions share of it consisting of bonds & gilts.

    This default planning would cater for someone who wanted to purchase an annuity, but, in my opinion, derisks you too early in your retirement with the very high risk then of running out of money.

    https://www.trustnet.com/factsheets/P/i6zg/aviva-pension-mym-my-future-consolidation-pn/
    If you compare US and UK Vanguard target retirement funds they have very similar asset allocations, the 2020 funds have the largest bond percentages at 56%. Both are designed for drawdown where you should balance growth with some less volatile income producing assets. The percentage of bonds will increase as you get further into retirement and you need less growth.
    “So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
  • I have not come across materials advising 100% bonds towards retirement.  But if they do, availability of state pension becomes irrelevant; it would not change the recommended 100% number.  But as Boston says, US state pension/social security is larger than UK’s.

    If its a reference to target date or “lifecycle” funds, then such funds tend to keep a meaningful allocation to stocks. 
    My apologies for the exaggeration, but I had in mind things like the Aviva retirement fund where their "My Future Universal Investment Programme" moves you from "My Future Growth" to "My Future Consolidation" over the 15 years to retirement date when you'd be 100% in the latter fund, the lions share of it consisting of bonds & gilts.

    This default planning would cater for someone who wanted to purchase an annuity, but, in my opinion, derisks you too early in your retirement with the very high risk then of running out of money.

    https://www.trustnet.com/factsheets/P/i6zg/aviva-pension-mym-my-future-consolidation-pn/
    Frustratingly presented breakdown but as far as I can tell the “future consolidation” fund has 65% bonds.  Not what I would pick for myself but not unreasonable in many circumstances. 
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.4K Life & Family
  • 261.3K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.