What’s your number?

No, I’m not planning to ask you out on a date. I’m sure you’re a lovely person, but my wife has a South American temper and is definitely the jealous type.

Rather, I’m referring to the single most common question I see in retirement planning:

“What’s your retirement number?” Said another way: What size nest egg do you need to quit working?

It sounds like a reasonable and straightforward question.

The problem is, it’s completely useless.

Like so many things in the financial planning business, the question takes something complex and full of nuance, and effectively dumbs it down to the point where it doesn’t mean anything. And that’s because it misses the bitter truth about retirement: you never know how much you’re going to need.

Think about it. Who wants to spend their golden years slowly depleting their nest egg hoping they don’t outlive it?

Some say that to retire successfully you should multiply your final salary by a factor of 10. So if in your late 60s you expect to be earning $150,000, you’d need $1.5 million to retire.

But does that actually work? Using the standard “4% Rule,” which means you withdraw no more than 4% of your portfolio value per year, that would give you an annual income of $60,000. That might be just fine.

Or it might not.

What if you need more than $60,000 to pay your bills? What if the stock market has a major setback early in your retirement and your $1.5 million gets chopped down to $750,000 or less?

You might roll your eyes now, but that’s exactly what happened to millions of people that retired or were planning to retire just before the last two bear markets.

The bigger, more fundamental problem with the “number” approach is this: it makes no consideration of market valuations or expected returns.

Let’s say stocks are cheap and priced to deliver returns of 10% per year or more. Taking out 4% per year in retirement would be perfectly prudent and reasonable. In a raging bull market like we’ve enjoyed for the past couple of years, it wouldn’t have hardly made a dent in your portfolio.

But today, using common valuation metrics like the cyclically-adjusted price/earnings ratio (CAPE), stocks are priced to lose money over the next 5 to 10 years. That means that even a 4% withdrawal rate risks depleting your nest egg early in retirement.

This is no way to plan for your golden years. It’s income that pays your bills, not a big ol’ fat nest egg full of assets. Focusing on an asset number rather than an income stream is like putting the cart before the horse.

If I was confident that this bull market still had several more good years to run, it wouldn’t make a difference. In that scenario you could reliably sell off assets along the way to meet your income needs. But in today’s market, that’s a risky proposition.

I’m not willing to leave my retirement to the whims of chance. Are you?

This is what I recommend you do…

Step #1: Grab a piece of paper. Write down a yearly income number you think you can live on in retirement. Try to be honest and reasonable and let your current monthly expenses be your guide.

Now, once you have that number… add 20% to it. You know as well as I do that expenses always seem to find a way of turning out to be more than you expected. That’s just life.

Step #2: OK, now that you have your “real” income number, start subtracting any “guaranteed” income sources. This includes things like Social Security or any pensions you have.

So, let’s say you need $100,000 to live every year (after adding in your 20% cushion). And let’s assume you expect to get $40,000 per year from Social Security, and another $20,000 from a private pension.

That just leaves you with $40,000 to come up with every year to meet your $100,000 goal. And that’s Step #3.

Of course, with bond yields scraping along near all-time lows, securing a safe $40,000 (or whatever the figure is for you) may seem easier said than done. But it’s really not difficult if you know where to look.

Some people prefer annuities. I’m really not their biggest fan as a savings vehicle, but as an income vehicle it’s an entirely different story. With an immediate annuity, you give a block of cash to an insurance company, and they in turn promise you a guaranteed monthly income for the rest of your life. Or, if you’re the “do it yourself” type, you can try a rental property or two.

As a better alternative, I’d recommend you give my income newsletter Peak Income a read. The investments in the model portfolio yield between 5% and 10%, and we have strict risk management in place to limit losses. If you’ve been looking for investments to fill an income gap, Peak Income is a solid option for you.

Click here to learn more.

Once you’ve secured a high enough income to secure your basic living expenses, you can afford to have a little fun.

Take a little risk, or try an active trading strategy. Or really swing for the fences and buy Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency. With your basic income needs met, you can use any trading profits for little luxuries like travel or as gifts to your kids and grandkids.

I, for one, am busy planning a ski trip to Colorado. So your next Economy & Markets might be delivered on a postcard!

charles sizemore helicopter money

Charles Sizemore
Editor, Peak Income

CEOs Are Earning 335x MORE Than Their Own Employees!

What if I told you up to 95% of companies currently trading on the stock market today are essentially stealing money right out of your pocket!? This includes some of the biggest names in the corporate… Read More>>
Charles Sizemore
Charles Sizemore is the editor of Peak Income, a monthly newsletter focusing on income and retirement strategies.