Today the math is solidly against bonds contributing sufficiently to a 4 percent annualized return, much less a positive return at all. Chart 5 shows that the 10-Year Treasury bond could drop to zero (which would imply much bigger problems for investors), and investors would still only make 6 percent a year for five years. That is how low rates are and how tough a climb it is. Don’t count on bonds getting you to your retirement promised land for a while. Let’s face it, the current interest rate environment is a lot more like 1953 than 1983.
Great article despite a few complaints posted. Clearly the point was not to discuss the 4% rule in any detail but the effect of bonds in a portfolio on retirement distributions.
I would offer the solution I have found for replacing bonds. We have been using private mortgages (first trust deeds) for the past 4 years and have averaged better than a 7% net yield (net of ALL fees/costs) and the worst year was 6.9%. www.wjcca.com to buy TDs for your client.
As for cpowell's comment about holding bonds "bought at a discount" to maturity...there are no bonds available at a discount which are safe to purchase! Every bond (unless issued in the last couple years) is trading at a premium. IF your client is actually holding a bond today which they originally bought at a discount then SELL IT at the premium it's at today! Going forward the loss created from holding a premium bond to maturity is why the YTM has been removed from virtually all custodial statements. Because advisors and custodians don't want their client to see their "5% bond" really has a YTM of 2.9%. cpowell you better do some research soon!
Again, excellent article.
CPowell
9 years ago
You do not include holding your 10 year bonds, bought at a discount, to maturity, and receiving par value in your return calculation. Keep trying.
Honestly, if you are going to publish an article about the 4% Rule, you should at least find someone to write it who knows what the 4% Rule is....
Bradengl
9 years ago
Having read so many articles concerning the 4% rule I speed read this one but did not see any reference to the "actual rule" being 4% indexed for 3% inflation. I also did not see any discussion on one of the biggest issues in doing retirement planning..... that being social security and to a certain extent any sort of defined pension plan payments being considered part of the bond/cash portion of the allocation. If they are not considered then the allocation set up for the client ends up being too conservative. I also set up a "cash bucket" with up to 15 months SUPPLEMENTAL INCOME so that the equity portion of the allocation is not liquidated after markets have gone down for more than 90 days and then refill the bucket for the next time as equity markets improve. I don't have any Monty Carlo simulation data to support how much this concept improves the survivability of the assets but logic says it is significant based on historical data.